If we agree (and it's doubtful that we ALL agree) that energy is currently a CONSUMPTION problem (worldwide demand skyrocketing). Consumption up (demand) = price increases. So some politicians propose conservation (use less energy) & energy alternatives that may or may not be viable. That ignores a basic fact - we can produce more energy, including petroleum, but we have CHOSEN not to.
Why has the US chosen not to produce more petroleum? Not much drilling as well as restricted refining capacities? That's a good rant, have no time for it now, and besides usually it generates the yadda yadda we are gonna destroy the damn planet with greenhouse gasses and other semi-funny religiously inspired follies from uber religious eco-
naughtsnuts. Producing more oil does NOT solve the problem, but it DECREASES the trade deficit and keeps more dollars at home instead of building CASTLES IN THE SAND abroad (just heard the Hendrix tune so it's on my mind). Plus, we get more oil which is at a minimum a PARTIAL solution.
So until I get a reasonable answer on the no drilling religious mantra, I remain convinced the Repubs as well as Dems benefit from the current situation as much as the oil companies do. Besides, I just got my electric bill (electricity here generated by natural gas - 100%). Looking into do-it-yourself nuclear reactors but wonder about the zoning on those here......