Patriotic answer to $4-a-gallon gas: Drive less, and slow down

The Christian Science Monitor ^ | Tue Jul 15 | John Dillin

[300magnum]

Washington - Three decades ago, during an earlier energy crisis, Ronald Reagan strode into an Atlanta hotel for a political meeting. As he approached the auditorium, someone asked:

"Governor Reagan, as a conservative, don't you think the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit imposed by the government to save gas is a violation of our freedom?"

In his amiable manner, Reagan chuckled quietly and, as I recall, he replied something like this:

"Well, that could be. But, speaking just personally, I think it's not a bad thing if we all slow down just a bit and enjoy the scenery a little more."

We could all use that kind of common sense today as gas rises past $4.

Many ideas are being put forth to ameliorate an energy-price crisis that threatens job security and economic growth in the United States.

Famous oilman T. Boone Pickens wants to build huge turbines all over the Midwest to harness wind energy.

Many members of Congress want to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) where – at today's prices – there is probably $1 trillion worth of oil waiting to be pumped.

In California, moves are afoot to make the state the renewable energy capital of the nation.

But – and there always seems to be a "but" – all of those ideas take time. Five years to build substantial wind farms. Ten years to tap Arctic oil.

Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal has published predictions that a barrel of oil could reach $200 as soon as the end of this year. If that happens, gasoline would hit $6 a gallon.

Woe is us.

Or maybe not.

Instead, the time may be ripe for individual citizen action – like the Minutemen of 1775. After all, isn't that how we got this great country started ...

[nikos1121]

John Warner wants to mandate the 55 speed limit. That’s stupid.

The time is now to dedicate us to being self sufficient with renewable energy sources within the next years...

[PeteB570]

I don’t look good in a sweater and to me time is money.

[bert]

Driving less and slowing down will produce the recession the rats want so badly.

[RightWhale]

Oil down 7.35
Gasoline down 20 cents.

Electric cars! Thank GM.

[ikka]

Ten years to tap Arctic oil.

It doesn't take 10 years, it can be down in 5 or less.

[autumnraine]

I don’t understand that 55 mph will save gas. Maybe in 1975’s automobiles, but with today’s engine, one tap of the pedal can bump you up 10mph. Now if it takes 15 minutes longer to get somewhere because you are going slower, aren’t you using up the saved gas?

[dead]

If I drive 85 on the NJ Turnpike (and I do) I get home much quicker, which means less time in my car running the engine and air conditioner.

To conserve momentum, I never use my brakes.

[WOBBLY BOB]

Hey Warner,

people who want to drive 55 can already do so in the right lane.

thanks for your brilliance.

[RetiredArmy]

They NEED to slap up wind mills all over D.C. Also place them on the grounds of every liberal cable TV station. With all the stinking hot air that comes out of those places, we would pay 15 cents per month for electricity.

[krb]

the time may be ripe for individual citizen action – like the Minutemen of 1775.

Hmmm.

[Tex Pete]

“John Warner wants to mandate the 55 speed limit.”

John Warner also doesn’t live in Texas, and I would suspect that most people who think 55 mph is a good idea don’t.

It takes me at least 4 hours to get out of the state in any direction, even at 70+ mph.

[Devilinbaggypants]

Exactly...another useful idiot!

[Tijeras_Slim]

As long as your horn works, go for it.

[sauropod]

Ain’t nothing like a little erosion of freedom, eh, Mr. Dillin?

After all, it’s the “common sense thing to do.”

/retch

[Obadiah]

The 55 MPH speed limit is a stop-gap measure that does nothing to solve the problem. In fact, once again as in decades past, this speed limit "debate" only causes us to take our national attention away from the real problem. We must drill now and develop alternative fuels. We have had decades to develop a real energy policy and still we haven't.

[Bob Buchholz]

There is a HUGE difference between the current high prices and the embargoes of the ‘70s. There are no gas lines and the gas that I burn is not depriving someone else of the gas needed to fill their tank. When there was actually not enough to go around then it made sense to attempt to limit what one person used. Now if I want to pay more for gas and drive a bit faster it is my own decision and only affects my bill, if you want to slow down and conserve gas then that only affects your bill.

I think the choice should be left with the person paying the bill.

[nevergore]

No to 55!

[Jeff Head]

Ten years for oil is environmentalist, DNC, defeatist Bravo Sierra. If we cut away all the rediculous red tape, which has been engineered to make it take longer and cost more, we could have that oil in two years.

We have more reserves than OPEC if you take what's off our coasts, the ANWR, and the oil shale into consideration...far more than enough to bridge us to the new technologies that are 10-15 years out.

That's what we need, and we need patriotic Americans demanding it of our elected officials and getting it...or throwing the bums out on their ear and getting representatives who will.

In that spirit, and in the mean time, THIS is my answer to theefeatists, naysayers who would keep us beholden to foreign oil and interests while keeping our own resources bottled up.

[DuncanWaring]

Ten years to tap Arctic oil.

The Manhattan Project went from an idea to the Trinity explosion in 5-and-a-half years.