Lets first agree on 2 premises: natural disasters occur, and humans interacts with the earth.
With that said:
The natural disaster tsunami in Japan was made up of 100 trillion gallons of water and took less than an hour to create its destruction.
The man-made “disaster” of world oil consumption is made up of 140 million gallons an hour.
That means that the “destructive” nature of oil consumption is only 14 millionths of one percent as destructive as the tsunami on a per gallon basis.
Conclusions: the extreme environmental dogma that believes man is responsible for destroying the earth is not even of discussable statistical significance.
As such, it would be prudent to stop the absurd belief that Americans should stop drilling for oil and produce “renewable green energy” to “save” the planet.
The belief that man has the power to impact much of anything in a global sense can only be categorized as an arrogant attempt to inflate the human condition by those who are incapable of humility or basic math.
It’s time to produce our own domestic oil supply and become energy independent to mitigate the security threat we face in regards to foreign oil dependence.
Dean Kalahar
I have to say I both agree and disagree with your post. basically, everything following the phrase "basic Math" I can agree with. Everything above on the other hand, I just can't support.
ReplyDeleteFirst, the difference between the devastation of the Tsunami that struck Japan, and the consumption and pollution caused by oil consumption is immense, in that one is a fossil fuel that has caused numerous conflicts, was involved in the rise of commercial interests becoming the order of the day over the needs of citizens (ie our Masters at Halliburton having DC by the balls) we are going to eventually run out of that is a high pollutant and toxic for animal and human life, and the other is an uncontrollable, unpredictable, and unstoppable force of nature that killed thousands of people.
To compare the two, taking specific notes of the words highly toxic, commercial interest, and unstoppable and uncontrollable force of nature. One we can control and mitigate the damage for, the other we can not. To use the two as a comparison is foolish because Mother Nature is not a deity controlling the tectonic plates and woke up one morning and decided to stick it to Japan. The damage that is caused to the environment by oil drilling and consumption is however something that is monitored and then forgotten by the people that are supposed to be regulating it. I point to the most recent news today of 3200 oil wells that are degrading and are uncapped and have been slipping through loopholes in our laws for years. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110421/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_abandoned_wells_5
Not to mention, the conflict for the resource has also led to numerous wars and territorial conflicts, high cost, negotiations with terrorism(Lockerbie Bomber freed allows oil companies access) and the funding of terrorism.
I'd say there are still significant dangers associated with our oil consumption, and that alternative energies still need to be looked into.
That being said, I do agree that our dependence on foreign oil is only going to lead to problems down the line, especially in regards to diplomacy and high costs as the dollar value per barrel continues to rise
AS ALWAYS, IT IS THE "LITTLE" PEOPLE WHO WILL GET HURT THE MOST. THOSE WITH MONEY AND CONTACTS, WILL SURVIVE AS HEADS OF THE LITTLE PEOPLE.
ReplyDelete