Drill, Baby, Drill: A Pragmatic Approach To Energy Independence

.

In the cacophony of contemporary political discourse, few phrases resonate with the visceral immediacy of "Drill, baby, drill."

This slogan, emblematic of a robust conservative approach to energy policy, has been both vilified and venerated.

However, in the quest for a balanced perspective, it's imperative we dissect not just the slogan but the philosophy it represents.

Here, I argue for a nuanced understanding of drilling that acknowledges economic imperatives while not wholly dismissing environmental considerations.

.

.

Economic Realities

.

Firstly, let us confront the elephant in the room: energy is the lifeblood of modern economies. wind, solar, hydro, and nuclear cannot produce the feedstocks chemical plants, drug plants, etc., need for making tens of thousands of products we need every day

The U.S., despite its advancements in renewable energies, gets 82% of its energy from coal, oil and gas, not out of antiquated loyalty, but from an acute awareness of economic necessity. This is especially true for developing countries

The slogan "Drill, baby, drill" is less about environmental insensitivity and more about economic pragmatism.

The transition to renewables is very slowly and expensively happing, with many subsidies to nurse it along.

.

Most people do not understand, each additional TWh of energy produced by wind, solar, costs exponentially more in capital cost than the prior TWh, and it produces more expensive electricity..

And while these cost increases are happening, the world is consuming more energy; like pushing a ball getting heavier, up a slope getting steeper.
.
At some point, people will say, with riots to support it: SCREW IT
Germany, the UK, etc., have reached that point
Others are getting there
.
Just look at the statistics over the past 30 years of Germany and the UK
.
The economic/financial wall is hit at about 35% wind/solar, depending on the physical conditions of the country; some countries are more lucky than others.

.

Consider the jobs

.

The energy sector doesn't just mean exploration, transportation, production and refinement; it involves many supply chains using coal, oil and gas, and the tens of thousands of products that are made from them.

Tens of millions of jobs are involved

When we talk about drilling, we're discussing real livelihoods, not just abstract energy policies.

The economic argument for drilling isn't merely about filling gas tanks cheaper; it's about sustaining industries, supporting small towns, and maintaining national economic health.

We need to liminate all subsidies of any kind to all industries, and sttop subsidies for all so-called CO2 reduction schemes, and drill, baby drill.

.
We need to build, on a fast track, at least 100 standardized nuclear plants, each with 2 or more 1,000 MW units
We need to conserve, not export, our precious fossil fuels to produce the tens of thousands of products that cannot be produced by hydro, nuclear, wind and solar.

We need to stop the export of US fossil fuels, as advocated by the Deep State, to increase their geo-political war-mongering, to enable the US military/industrial/intelligence complex to rule the world.

.

The Misnomer of Climate Neglect

.

To label "Drill, baby, drill" as climate denialism is to misunderstand its intent.

This isn't an all-or-nothing approach to energy, but a call for a balanced strategy where fossil fuels and renewables co-exist, in fact wind and solar cannot exist without traditional fossil fuel plants

.

Regarding wind and solar, the real question is, would you want to use such a power system that virtually never worked when needed, and, when it did work, would continuously change its output, so that it had to be supplemented with other power systems, to achieve the desired effect/meet demand, 24/7/365?”

And, if you did want such a power system, how much economic pain would you be willing to endure/inflict to have it anyway?

Ancillary benefits of wind and solar: Subsidies? Votes? Prestige? Keeping up with the Jones? Political command/control?

.

High Costs/kWh of Offshore Wind

Utilities are forced to pay 15 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from fixed offshore wind systems, and forced to pay 18 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from floating offshore wind systems, is suicidal economic insanity.

Excluded costs, at a future 30% wind/solar penetration on the grid, the current UK level: 

.  

1) Grid extension/reinforcement to connect remote W/S systems to load centers, about 2 c/kWh

2) A fleet of quick-reacting power plants to counteract the variable W/S output, on a less-than-minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365, about 2 c/kWh 

3) A fleet of power plants to provide electricity during low-W/S periods, and during high-W/S periods, when rotors are feathered and locked, to provide the electricity not produced by W/S systems, to meet demand, about 2 c/kWh.

4) Output curtailments to prevent overloading the grid, i.e., paying owners for not producing what they could have produced, about 1 c/kWh

5) Disassembly at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites, about 2 c/kWh

.

Moreover, the environmental narrative around drilling often overlooks advancements in technology. .

.

Modern drilling techniques, like precision drilling and enhanced recovery methods, are less invasive and more efficient than in the past.

The focus should be on regulating these practices to minimize environmental impact, not on demonizing the industry wholesale. 

.

Strategic Autonomy

.

Energy independence isn't merely an economic issue; it's a matter of national security.

Dependence on foreign oil has geopolitical ramifications, influencing international relations and sometimes compromising national interests.

"Drill, baby, drill" in this context becomes a mantra for strategic autonomy.

In an era where energy can be weaponized, the ability to produce your own resources isn't just about saving at the pump; it's about securing your nation's future.

.

A Balanced Approach

Here, the conservative viewpoint isn't dismissing climate change; it's about a strategic, phased approach. If we compare energy policy to a chess game, "Drill, baby, drill" is not a checkmate but a necessary move to fortify our position. It's about leveraging what we have now to fund and stabilize the transition to what we need for tomorrow.

.

This balanced approach involves:

- Regulation, Not Prohibition: Implementing stringent environmental regulations that ensure drilling is done safely. This means investing in technology and oversight to prevent disasters like Deepwater Horizon, ensuring companies internalize the environmental costs.

- Innovation Incentives: Encouraging innovation in both fossil fuel extraction and utilization technologies. This includes supporting research in cleaner refining processes.

- Economic Diversification: While drilling provides immediate economic benefits, the future lies in diversifying energy portfolios. This means mainly supporting coal, oil and gas, nuclear and hydro. 

- International Leadership: Instead of isolating ourselves, we should lead by example.

By showing how a major economy can balance growth with environmental stewardship, the U.S. can influence global energy practices positively.

.

Conclusion

.

"Drill, baby, drill" should not be seen as a war cry against the environment but as a call for pragmatic balance in energy policy.

It's about recognizing that while we must move towards sustainability, we must do so without crashing our economic engine.

The real challenge is not in choosing between drilling or not, but in how we drill, how we innovate

This op-ed isn't just for conservatives; it's for anyone who understands that solutions to our global problems need to be practical, not just idealistic.

"Drill, baby, drill" is the essential part, provided we drill wisely, with an eye on the future, not just today's benefits.

Let's refine the slogan to "Drill, and innovate," ensuring that our path to environmental stewardship is economically sound, because it we end up with an uncompetitive economy, all it lost