How Energy From Space Relates To Fighting Terrorism

>>> Still, if we improved the fuel efficiency of our vehicles by a
>>> small percentage, we would not have to import oil, and we
>>> wouldn't have to dig up Alaska.

>> This is completely false.

Well, I don't *think* I'm wrong, but I find myself unable to back
this statement up with good refs, so I won't argue the point. I
could even be wrong; it's been known to happen.

> I'm afraid so. While making our cars more fuel efficient is
> laudable, and it's better to drive a car that gets 35 miles to the
> gallon rather than 15,

I was thinking more along the lines of 45 to 80. Maybe I
shouldn't've said "a small percentage," but 45 to 80 is doable.

> we would still be completely dependent on foreign oil to keep gas
> prices as cheap as Americans insist that they must be.

To keep gas below $2/gallon, yes. But it's OK for gas to cost more
if you don't need as much of it. If your car gets 25 mpg, and gas
costs $1/per gallon, you are getting 25 mp$; if gas costs $3 per
gallon, and your car gets 75 mpg, then you are still getting 25 mp$.

And surely, we wouldn't have to import *as much* if we upped
efficiency.

> This is also true regardless of whether we drill in Alaska. We
> need a complete paradigm shift in thinking about energy if we are
> to become independent from foreign oil, and that's where something
> like SPS fits in.

Well, now, that I won't argue against, because I think you happen to
be right. And this has a great deal of truth whether 75mpg cars
would make foreign oil unnecessary... or not.

> --Justin

Xenophile (I read that thing someplace... maybe I heard it on TV??
In that case, it MUST be true, right? ^_~ )