Explaining why additional offshores drilling is a good thing for Republicans and Democrats

Much of the time we see gasoline, oil and other types of energy discussed in very partisan ways on TV. That is, in no small degree, effected by the election, as well as other partisan issues attached to concerns over energy. As a person that has worked in energy, oil and gas to be specific, for nearly a decade, I feel that I would be wrong to not offer some insight. You see, as complex as this issue is, there are some very simple things that need to rise to the top in making our decisions on where we go in the future, in my opinion. 1. Oil is not our long term answer. I work in oil, several people on this blog do, but it is not the best fuel for our continued use. Not for ecological reasons or political reason but for physical reasons. There is a finite amount and it's currently non-renewable. I have heard of low-carbon oil creating microbes being researched and I consider that a brilliant thing, if true, but until that becomes a viable reality we need to operate with the understanding that oil has a limited supply. We will run out one day. 2. Oil is our best fuel right now. I know that environmentalist and liberals don't want to hear that but it's a physical and chemical fact. It's the best exothermic reaction we can use to power our vehicles, transportation and electric power that is currently supported by our infrastructure and available in mass quantity today. I totally agree that we need to work to better harness the free energy that enters the earths contained system but we are just are not there yet. 3. Alternatives must be phased in. We need to quit using mobile fuels for electric generation. Natural gas is the only fuel that has the portability of oil for power generation. Replacing it's use in producing electricity with wind, solar and nuclear needs to be a priority. We have more gas domestically, it's cleaner and it's cheaper than oil. By focusing our efforts on freeing gas from generation of electricity and replacing it's load with alternative energy we decrease overall emissions, burn cleaner fuels in transport and are steps close to allowing any future innovation in electrically driven transport or all alternative electric generation to happen while removing the burden of making alternative power generation be engineered to be mobile, which is typically more difficult due to size and wiegth restraints in engineering transportation. 4. Engineering needs to be pushed to maximize the efficiency of the modern engines. If we can find a way to better conserve the lost energy of combustion reactions in modern engines we will decrease usage. If we can find a way to maximize the electric engine we can eliminate the need for combustion altogether. We need our mechanical brilliance to help decrease the chemical energy needed to make work happen. 5. Reality insists we maintain current energy standards to make this work. We have to give this effort the best tools we have today and the best tools developed in the future. That means we need to supply the current energy we need as well as the energy we will require in the future to alter the type, transmission, containment and creation of other sources of energy. That means we need more of the fuels that work now in order to have the assets in place that we will need to work to replace them. I know that both parties have people that give money to them and ideologies to defend. This, however, is an issue that trumps that concern. If we decrease our abilities in the name of global warming or resource management or economic control, we lose our edge in the most brutal of races. Regardless of what a country or party a person follows, humans are in a race against extinction and in a race for adaptation. The fossil record plainly tells us that 99.999% of all species to ever exist on this planet are extinct. Expending energy to preserve the environment is noble, as long as one understand that the environment won't extend you that same courtesy. We have achieved a natural dominance and flourished, as a species, due to our cognitive ability to adapt to our environment. If we discard that, we will eventually be wiped out. The climate will change, with out without our help, as will species die. Whether or not we choose to join them relies on our ability to separate the politics from the reality of the consequences of self-limiting advancement of the tools we use to adapt. If we are worried that our tools hurt the enviroment, then let's build better ones, but if we stop using them we can expect to die. For these reasons, we are confronted with the reality that oil is still our best positioned asset to take care of our energy needs today. Ironically, the high price of oil also makes it the best mass used fuel to push us to evolve our energy supply and strategies. Additional drilling will help in terms of economic relief and provision of energy, but I believe that the culture shock of oil prices has been strong enough that it has grabbed the mass attention needed to push governmental action on real alternative energy work. More importantly, it has placed the market in a position to see the money available for those who now have a much higher price window to develop the things that will be cheaper and work better. That is where we will get our next big push of invention that will hopefully push us closer to the sole usage of free energy technology.