Your Subtitle text
Energy Policy
What does Andrew Clack think is the best way for the U.S. Government to help fulfill the country's energy needs?
"Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them." - Ronald Reagan
"All the waste in a year from a nuclear power plant can be stored under a desk." - Ronald Reagan
"If the federal government had been around when the Creator was putting His hand to this state, Indiana wouldn't be here. It'd still be waiting for an environmental impact statement." - Ronald Reagan
Short Answer:
Get out of the way.
Long Answer:
The first thing we need to do is reduce the amount of regulation that prevents the construction of oil refineries, and then provide tax breaks/incentive to companies who are willing to develop these facilities. Environmental regulations have prevented the construction of refineries for the past 32 years; the last having been constructed in Garyville, LA in 1976. If we increase our capacity to refine oil, we can reduce the amount of finished product (gas, diesel, etc...) that we import from foreign nations to zero, and create jobs at the same time.
The next step is to open ANWR and our Coasts to drilling companies. This will increase our supply of domestic crude oil, create jobs, and increase our energy independency. We have some of the worlds largest oil reserves, unfortunately, environmental regulations are preventing access to these supplies. We now have the technology (developed by the "evil oil companies") to drill and extract oil with little temporary environmental impact, and zero long-term environmental impact; however, Liberalism does not seek harmony with nature (that is a lie used to perpetuate itself). Liberalism seeks control and power. Even if we could magically remove every drop of oil and no-so-much as disturb the snow from a pine tree, they would still fight to prevent drilling.
A third step that must be taken is to reduce the amount of Nuclear Power Plant regulation, and then provide tax breaks/incentives to build these facilities. The United States has not developed a single nuclear facility since 1996, giving us only 104 total. It is absurd that as our energy needs grow and expand, we are allowing environmentalists to regulate our infrastructure into ruin. With existing nuclear technology, we are capable of increasing our electricity supply until the costs are reduced to nothing short of a pittance; however, as with all other advancements, environmentalists have been preventing the expansion of domestic Nuclear Facilities. There is no reason that we should be utilizing resources that could be better implemented in other sectors for the production of electricity (example: coal would be better utilized in the steel industry).
A fourth step is to provide tax breaks/incentives for the development of new sources of energy - not subsidies. We are the richest, most powerful nation in human history because of Capitalism. The free market should determine which "alternative" energy sources are to be developed, not government handouts. If an energy source is unable to be developed through the mechanisms of free trade, it is not a viable energy source.
Over the last few years, every new "Energy Bill" has been centered around the expansion of subsidies, aimed at conservation, and completely ignored our ever growing demand for energy. Conservation is wonderful for an individual that wants to save a little money - it is Death for a Nation that chooses to "create" energy though conservancy.
For you and I, "a penny saved is a penny earned". On the world energy market, "a penny saved is a penny that will be purchased by China or India at an ever expanding rate". Conservation can only work if every single nation, company, and individual in the world were to capitulate; this is not logical. If we focus on conservation, our ability to produce goods/services (a derivative of, and the purpose for energy) will decrease while the total cost of energy will continue to rise (because the world market will still be absorbing the energy supplies); id est, The United States will pay more to consume and produce less while China's economy will grow exponentially. This is not to say that Conservation should be wholly ignored; it is simply that conservation without expansion is folly.
Andrew Clack
