Dana1981 asked in EnvironmentGreen Living · 1 decade ago

Do you agree with McCain that we can't achieve energy independence without increased offshore drilling?

Barack Obama put forward a broad energy plan Monday designed to end U.S. reliance on imported oil within 10 years and shore up his standing amid a tightening White House race and high-anxiety over gas prices.

McCain again advocated more oil drilling off the U.S. coast. "Anybody who says that we can achieve energy independence without using and increasing these existing energy resources either doesn't have the experience to understand the challenge that we face or isn't giving the American people some straight talk," he said.


Do you agree with McCain that we can't achieve energy independence without increased offshore drilling?

And what do you think of the fact that just a few months ago he opposed increased offshore drilling? At the time was he not "giving the American people some straight talk"?

18 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    No... It just helps to give profits of oil companies already showing historically high record profits.

    Drilling off shore is like opening another can of bear... sure it gives you another can of bear to drink... but it doesn't help the alcoholic to stop drinking... The U.S. will not be helped by "one more bear" of drilling...

    But just like alcoholics the U.S. lies to itself ... makes excuses for itself... and keeps going back for "one more bear".... the whole time each "one more bear" has promised to help... but the next morning you just wake up with a hangover when you face the results of your one more bear thinking.

    One more only puts off the truth that you have to quit...

    The US has as much if not more Renewable energy available for harvesting in this country domestically than just about any other country and we are among the most technologically advanced countries... we would just rather spend our billions in hollywood and TV escaping from our lives than facing the truths of our lives.

    But go ahead... have your "One More Drink" and after your done... you will just have more problems that get hard and harder to drink away.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Well I think it needs to be a part of a bigger system. We have to utilize as much alternative fuels as possible. This includes the renewables as well as any new technologies that can come into fruitation in the near future.

    The problem with off shore drilling or drilling in the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge is that I fear it will work too well. People will see a drop in prices (maybe) and the idea of conservation will fly out the window, again. I fear that if we start off shore drilling the other things like renewables and alternative fuels will take the back seat again. I also fear that even a false promise of lower prices at the pump and a boost to economy will have people turn their backs on the environmental and ecological risks and damages that are sure to follow the start of these processes. They have come a long way and as has the public's opinion on them so I hope that they stay front row center like they do.

    As part of a smart energy portfolio off shore drilling can work, but it can not be our end-all solution because it is a dieing technology. Oil is a dieing resource. Whether its in 20, 50, 100 or 150 years it is dieing and the reserves will run dry. Other countries like Brazil and most of Europe have leap frogged the US by going right to green and renewable energy sources so to take another step back would be catastrohic.

    Integrate it, dont rely on it.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Yes. While solar, wind, and all other alternatives should continue without delay, I know enough about the oil futures market to understand that prices would experience downward pressure if increased offshore drilling is in the works.

    Greens have this choice before them: either the U.S. drills in an environmentally friendly way, or countries like Russia, Venezuela, and other governments will do it -- they won't be as friendly to the planet.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Yes I agree that we need to drill offshore to achieve energy independence. It's just common sense.

    And would you please elaborate on Obama's "broad energy plan" to end US reliance on imported oil?

    All he ever said is that we need to inflate our tires and get tune ups to save gas. He's never come up with one idea that will increase our supplies of oil. He wants us to take from reserves that were filled by drilling, but he won't let us drill for more. And this empty talk about "alternatives" is fine, but until we have some viable ones, it makes no sense. We can't throw out all our current sources of energy before we find new ones.

    And giving us all $1000 from taxing the oil companies is no solution at all. As far as I can tell, nothing Obama has said will provide one drop of new oil for our needs.

    Since Obama has no solutions, and McCain does, I think most people would prefer real solutions instead of make believe ones.

    McCain may have been against offshore drilling before, but at least he listens to the American people and is now open to drilling to help us.

    Since 80 percent of the population want to drill immediately, Obama is losing popularity by siding with the anti-progress democrats in the house and senate.

    He'll soon have 90 percent disapproval rating just like Pelosi if he doesn't change his anti-America, anti-oil, anti-progress rhetoric.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    I don't think we can become energy independent if we as individuals continue to use energy at the rate we use it now. If we don't change our wasteful practices and develop alternate energy sources we will never be able to get off of foreign oil no matter how much we can drill for domestically.

    I disagree that McCains plan of drilling off our coast will gain us energy independence. I do agree that to become independent that drilling may need to be part of the solution. I hope we are able to get more fuel efficient cars, and alternate fuel cars as well as rapidly investing in wind, solar and other clean sources of energy. If we do that quick enough and couple it with education and financial incentives for people to make lifestyle choices that will reduce the amount of energy we use we are likely to be able to reduce or eliminate our dependence on foreign oil without drilling off the coasts.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Off shore drilling is only temporary. It is a make money plan for the American oil companies. Once the oil is used up or they can't extract it fast enough, then the independence is gone again.

    Didn't McCain just jump on the global warming band wagon? And now this! Can he make up his mind or does he just agree with whatever party of people he is addressing?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Karen
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    He flip-fopped because it became politically expedient to change his mind. For such an environmentalist and maverick in he's party he's really turned out to be a hypocrite and a coward. It's not going to have huge longterm effects except on the environment. Even if the US drilled all over the country we'd only have 2-3% of the needed national supply.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • BB
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    McCain is on top of this one! That Pelosi chick refused to have the drilling issue come up for vote before the August vacation because of partisan crap. She doesn't need to worry about high fuel prices because she married a millionaire. She needs to spend more time with the 'common' people and less at the plastic surgeon's office.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    No, I do not agree. I wonder what companies he has a stake in, don't you? I figured it was common knowledge by now of the conflict of interest between Big Oil and the Republicans.

    We have long had the technologies to use hybrid, solar, ect, but us little guys can't just afford to run out and get a Prius, for goodness sake. We can't all run out and convert our homes to solar. It is completely inpractical to switch out our plastic goods for wood, natural fabrics and metals.

    I think Obama's plan is unrealistic, but I agree with the core of it--we need to use less S***. We need to stop buying disposable crap.

    I have no problem with politicains changing their views to reflect more learning of the issues and the opinions of the public they will eventually represent.

    And as for energy independence? From the rest of the world? Read that as: they want America to become an oli exporter, rather than an importer. We need to become *self-sustaining*, not "independent."

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Let's be clear, we're practically independent when it comes to power.

    Petroleum is a transportation fuel in the US. Petroleum and refined product imports really took off in the mid-1990s, when the land-based wells started drying up.


    So I would suggest that at least in the short term, yes, the way to reverse this would be to allow more offshore drilling.

    If you have environmental concerns with that, then OK that's a separate discussion.

    But as to the limited point of energy independence, yes, McCain's quote that you provide is accurate.

    As for his flip-flopping, he is a politician, and a Republican who has made a career out of fence-sitting (a trait he calls reaching across the aisle). I don't want to reach across the aisle. I want there to be two aisles. I do not vote Republican. I admire Mitt Romney and thought he was a good governor of Mass., and I like the fact that he understands the economy and has actually created jobs. If McCain picks Romney for VP then they have a small chance of pulling me away from the Libertarians for whom I have voted, with the exception of Romney, for eight years. But otherwise I have no intention of voting for McCain. I am not fully knowledgable of his various positions held at various times on drilling, other than to note that more than a few years ago, and before the development of efficient and less risky drilling technology, the cost/benefit test might not have favored drilling.

    The quote you provided is accurate, that is all I can definitively say.

    Source(s): Used to analyze the energy industry for a living. No that doesn't make me biased in favor of the industry. I could just as easily recommend against doing a deal as doing it.
    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.