It is so depressing to see stories about energy. The primary if not sole focus is on prices going down again and pumping more oil into the economy. If a TV station interviews one more consumer at the pump, I will scream.
There’s almost no discussion about mobilizing around the development of alternatives fuels such as hydrogen, batteries, electric vehicles or even conservation. Such stories are sideshows to the main bar. Fuel efficient vehicles are selling better, but the story always seems to be about gas guzzling pickups and SUVs selling poorly. Duh! The person in front of me driving a GMC Yukon on nthis morning’s commutelooked so retro and out of step. Vehicles like those are getting "who could be driving that" stares now and they deserve it.
This weekend, the Saudis agreed to put 200,000 more barrels a day into the worldwide market, and even they are saying the U.S needs to conserve and examine how traders speculate on oil. President Bush’s answer? Reverse the ban on off-shore drilling so we can continue feeding our addiction. NY Times columnist Tom Friedman writes a column this morning lambasting Bush’s "fradulent" energy. His analogy goes this way: The oil is the heroin, the Saudis are the pushers, and Bush’s answer is more heroin. The analogy really works, doesn’t it?
We need oil for sure, but we need less not more. Why isn’t how we get to "cold turkey" the story?