A reader has posted a comment to my previous post wherein he mentions the amount of energy used in pleasure boating and flying private aircraft. He also advocates nuclear power and burning coal to produce electricity.
I thank him for the thoughtful post. He makes some good points about the fuel use involved in
recreational boating and private aircraft. The problem there is that the rich don't care - they have plenty of money to go boating, flying in their private planes, and to continue to drive their gas guzzlers down the highway. That's one reason why I would favor much higher taxation on the initial purchases of pleasure boats, small planes and
SUVs.
On nuclear power, however, I am not convinced that it is the way to go. I still consider it too dangerous and ecologically problematic.
Should we burn coal to generate power? Can we do it without contributing to greenhouse gases and global warming? I doubt it. We must face the harsh reality that we have to wean ourselves off of our dependence on foreign
oil, and we must find ways to reduce our use of fossil fuels before we destroy the planet.
Our national leaders may not be able to control the price of oil, but there is a lot that they could do to foster conservation and the development of alternate forms of energy, both of which have been ignored under "
Dubbya."
Americans are in for a rude awakening and a shock that might make the energy crisis of decades ago, with the
large lines at the gas pumps and purchases limited to several gallons, pale in comparison.
The president should address the nation now on the looming crisis, to start with, except that he doesn't care as long as his big oil buddies are raking in the profits. I've written before that we need a "Marshall Plan" focused on our energy situation, but we'll never see it with Bush. He is a disgrace, and our do-nothing Congress is no better.
Jim
General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner has announced that the company will shut four plants that build gas guzzlers and shift production to more fuel efficient cars:
