Just how much does America depend on gas?

[MaxVance]

Along with several other areas in the South, Middle Tennessee has been in an uproar this past week or so. Why? Many oil refineries have slowed down their gasoline production after Hurricane Ike struck. Most of the gas stations around here are completly empty, and the few that have fuel to sell are completly rushed by panicked commuters. Though much of this can be attributed to the South's tendency to panic (try going to a grocery store down here when snow is forecasted), it's still scary to see how we react.

So I propose this: What if America were invaded, and the attacking country struck our oil refineries? If we go this crazy when the refineries just reduce production, imagine what would become of us if they were destroyed. Combine fear of invasion with a fuel shortage and America would be swiftly brought to its knees.

[Mr. Wiggles]

If our remaining domestic oil refineries were seized/destroyed, America will sink.

Our economy is completely dependent on petroleum oil. Alternative energies (despite how envoirenmentally safe they claim they are) are essentially spun off from oil. Our banking system depends on the availability of this stuff. Oil is practically the blood of America.

It wouldn't surprise me if resource wars break out in the next 30 years. However, we do have the strongest military in the world so I doubt just any country can land here and invade us. That's why we have been keeping our eyes on North Korea for some time now, since they're quickly catching up to us in terms of economic influence and power. There's also Russia and Venezuela, whose leaders have both made it clear that they don't like us, at all.

[PaperLuigi]

Yes, our dependence on oil is quite frightening. No one in the current office seems all that interested in moving us over to alternate sources of fuel either.

[Glorb]

It makes me laugh with great sadness when candidates brag about how pwnsome they are since they plan to drill more than the other guy. "Screw alternate fuel, we'll think about that once all the oil's gone."

[CrossEyed7]

We need nuclear power.

[The Chef]

We need solar power.

[BP]

To answer the question, far too much. Solar power should be far more popular than it is.

[TEM]

There's only one answer.

But seriously, we need to figure out how to contain the energy created by fusion.

[Glorb]

The world's already powered that way, you just don't know it.

[CrossEyed7]

Nuclear power plants with solar panels on top. And tax breaks for homeowners who put solar panels on their roof (and even the possibility of selling their power to the city if they produce more power than they consume). And windmills in lots of places. And hydroelectric dams (although they're not as brokenly powerful in real life as they are in Sim City 2000, sadly). But still mainly nuclear power. Because we can't let France have cleaner air than us.

[PaperLuigi]

All of those are great alternative sources of fuel. Oil sucks and is contributing to both the environmental (globally) and economic crisis (in America).

[Chupperson Weird]

Nuclear plants would be okay if they weren't falling apart, didn't create nuclear waste, and didn't leak radiation (yes, they do).

Also, the entire Champagne region of France has contaminated ground water thanks to their nuclear plants.

In conclusion, we need more windmills and solar panels. Some places already have set up selling power to the city with your own solar panels, also.

[CrossEyed7]

Nuclear plants in America are falling apart mostly because we haven't been allowed to build new ones in so long. In France, leaking is much more the exception than the rule. And even so, there's more than enough unoccupied, government-owned land in the U.S. to safely put them if we're worried about that (For example, like 90% of the land in Nevada. Other states have more reasonable amounts, but still a pretty good percentage.). Windmills and solar panels are good, and should be integrated throughout the country, but we can't expect them to carry the brunt of the power grid, especially in places that never really get much wind or sun.

[Chupperson Weird]

Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas get enough wind for a good chunk of all our energy. The problem, I suppose, is distributing it to the rest of the nation, and the fact that big businesses like the NRC don't want you to know that it's feasible in the first place.
You didn't address the issue of nuclear waste (or the contaminated ground water), either. Blowing pieces out of Yucca Mountain to put waste there is not a good idea. Having trucks transport it on the highway is just plain dangerous. Some companies want to import even more waste from Italy, I guess because Italy has nowhere to put it.
There are reports of correlation between birth defects and proximity to nuclear plants. Of course, this can't imply causation, but I don't see anything else that would do that. What I'm getting at here is that I don't believe shielding is adequate. On top of this, I know of plants that are run in such a manner that attempts in reporting problems with the plant results in the firing of the person who reported it. They might work in a perfectly controlled situation, but the power companies are too greedy for that to happen.

[Turtlekid1]

What I'm getting at here is that I don't believe shielding is adequate.

Scientists being the smart people they are, if they wanted to, they could easily create new methods of shielding.  Instead, they waste their time trying to solve a non-existent "climate crisis".