OK, perhaps I've missed something amongst the arguments and debate. But why NOT go green? I hear lots of arguments that are either for or against drilling, but no one seems to have an answer for why we should NOT go green. Kermit said it best, it's not easy being green. Darn right. But WHY?

Here's my logic... tell me where I'm wrong.

We've been stuck on oil for well over 100 years now. It's a fossil fuel and that ultimately means it's a finite resource - in other words, it's going to run out, and likely sooner than later (within 100 years by most solid estimates). We also know that despite any global warming debate that it does put Carbon back in our atmosphere, and a lot of it. Most (note I said most) scientists now agree it's unnatural and likely is causing global warming, mostly in polar regions. It's complete effects are unknown, and it's up for a lot of debate. Regardless, we can all agree it puts Carbon (a known GHG) in our atmosphere at an unnatural rate. We know oil is becoming more and more expensive to both find, drill, and extract from the ground and deep ocean reserves. We also know for a FACT that if we did start off shore drilling and/or drilling in Alaska, it would take a MINIMUM of 5 years and as long as 10 years. Plus, there's plenty of folks on the oil business who say it's the lack of refineries that is the problem. Where do these suddenly pop up from? We build those too? The cost of such an endeavor (drilling, extracting, and refining) would be very costly, and who knows what the world economy will be in 5-10 years, and thus the demand and price of oil. You don't think China will be using more oil in 5-10 years? Are you kidding? Is that in our equation of supply and demand?

Oil also clearly requires our dependence on OTHER nations - and a lot of them are in the middle east. Look, it isn't a secret we're not making tons of friends there at the moment. Everyone seems to agree that we need energy independence, but it also seems a blatant fact we would not have anywhere near the oil needed to be self-sufficient, even if we drilled endlessly around this nation. Our demand is much larger than our supply (even our theoretical supply). There simply isn't enough oil in the ground to support our energy needs TODAY much less 30 years from now. Our energy needs will grow by up to 45% within 30 years; and that may be a conservative guess. We say we can increase our efficiency, but we've had 30 years to do it since the 70's and we didn't. Oil is old news. The United States in the Brer Rabbit and guess what the tar is?

In the middle of oil and true green there is nuclear. But many agree we only have so much space to put spent nuclear fuel (and no one wants it). Who can blame them, it's radioactive for MILLIONS of years. What happens when a big earthquake breaks open one of those underground vaults? Impossible? Worth the risk? We also know for a fact that penny for penny, nuclear is the most expensive energy to make per Watt. Nuclear plants also pose a huge security risk. I live within 40 miles of one, and honestly, it's scary even though I'm well outside the immediate danger zone.

So... with all that in mind. Lets look at true green energy (take your pick of solar, geothermal, wind, tidal, etc). We know for a FACT these sources of energy are INFINITE - or that they will not run out. We know for a FACT they produce NO emissions; so there would be no need to even debate environmental impact (other than a few environmentalist who have issues with the exact methods of each; i.e.; birds killed by wind turbines). We also know that we can start using green energy IMMEDIATELY. We also know green energy would make us truly independent with our energy needs, and that our oil/coal reserves could become a backup only. We'd never have to rely on foreign countries again for energy. If we spent the same money developing and installation green technologies as it would cost to drill and refine the oil we THINK is offshore and in Alaska, there's a good chance we could fuel the bulk of this country. With better technology, maybe ALL of this country. Many wind/solar proponents argue that the sun beat deserts of the southwest and open prairie of Montana and the Dakotas could power the United States TWICE. There's nothing out in these remote areas, and there likely never will be - so there's no sacrifice to real estate. The real issue is transporting that power over long distances. Again, one would assume like any good investment - that through time you discover new ways of doing things and ultimately hone them to a precise skill. In other words, we could likely find a lot more efficient ways to produce green power if and when we start using it more. Let good old capitalism play out in that market for a change, where everyone has a chance - not just big oil companies or foreign governments.

So what am I missing? I don't want any more argument about why oil is better. I want to know why green energy isn't the solution. What's the problem with it and why is it NOT a smarter choice than oil?