Let's Get Serious About Energy

Why do we keep on this chimera of “energy independence?” Ever since the oil shock of the 1970s the government has been talking about it.  And as Charles Krauthammer notes,

By my count, 24 of the 34 State of the Union addresses since the oil embargo of 1973 have proposed solutions to our energy problem.

Now we have another call for energy independence—to switch to ethanol, of all things, ethanol made from switchgrass.

[T]he happy talk displaces any discussion about here-and-now measures that would have a rapid and revolutionary effect on oil consumption and dependence. No one talks about them because they have unhidden costs. Politicians hate unhidden costs.

There are three serious things we can do now: Tax gas. Drill in the Arctic. Go nuclear.

Oh dear.  We wouldn’t want that now, would we?

Now, let’s do a quick analysis to see who is serious about energy in the United States.  Who opposes these serious things?

• Tax gas—conservative oppose
• Drill in the arctic—liberals oppose
• Go nuclear—liberals oppose

So that means that conservatives win in the seriousness stakes, 2 to 1.