[clue-talk] oil...

[Brian Gibson]

Yes I understand those things.  That still doesn't rebut my statement.  That our dependence on oil is our greatest national security threat.  Our foreign policy has been, let's secure more of it (making enemies along the way) rather than let's use less of it and let's use more of something else.  Economics certainly plays a part, but then you start getting into the influence of money over government.  For the same reason, people advocate drilling now (even though it will not meet our needs), we should diversify now.  Yes it'll be 10 years out, but it will always be 10 years out until the day you start.



----- Original Message ----
From: Grant Johnson <grant at amadensor.com>
To: CLUE talk <clue-talk at cluedenver.org>
Sent: Monday, November 3, 2008 8:23:24 PM
Subject: Re: [clue-talk] oil...


> I just don't understand this love affair with oil.  This singular dependence of a homogeneous energy mix is a far greater national security and economic threat than all the other security theater initiatives against drugs, terrorists, and the other boogeymen out there.  Because our recent dealings with Iraq and Georgia are really about exporting democracy and securing the rights of non-US citizens.
> 
>  
Liquid fuels are easier to deliver to the engine than solids, and easier to store than gases.   Look at energy density as well.   Petroleum is great for that.   You have a lot less miles per gallon with anything else.   It also has the advantage of not being food, and being available on demand, and being possible to store long term.
_______________________________________________
clue-talk mailing list
clue-talk at cluedenver.org
http://www.cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-talk