Oil shale

Moss's mention of oil shale got me reading... here is a relatively well-balanced article from the WSJ. Now, commies like me still think it's a) a pipe dream and b) going to ruin the environment to ever be cost-effective

But hey - decide for yourself:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121633718791563829.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

And, while I'm still not 100% convinced we can't develop this technology, I just think NIMBY will crush this from ever happening. Extracting oil shale can produce acid rain, kill plant life, etc. And, for the record, NIMBY suggests that - even if people believe China and Cuba are stealing our oil and they generally believe in off-shore drilling - they still would not vote for it. Great example - despite overwhelming support for nuclear power in polls, no local governments can ever get them approved. Plus, your own RAND report cites this as a reason why this shit will never happen. (on ANWR, the point is not one about NIMBY - you are right, but that is because 75% of them would vote for it anyway. ANWR is a separate debate anyway)

So, instead of complaining about Congress, take your fight to the Streets my friend.

PS - Your point about economics is fair - my argument is wrong, as I re-read it. I would not advocate free-market economics in this case, as there is a market failure: an unregulated economy would yield no incentive for environmentally safe products - we learnt that the hard way. Now, if the debate is that this level of environmental protection is not worth oil prices, that's different - but you at least got to discuss it. Now, this Parcells plan - let's talk about that.