This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Pakistan's Islamic Schools Fill Void, but Fuel Militancy

Sciros's Avatar Jump to comment 24 by Sciros

When you buy a gallon of gas, some of that money goes to Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are well known for funding these radical madrassas around the islamic world.
I think technically by then the Saudis will already have the money for that oil. Whether the US will buy less oil from Saudi Arabia (and other less-than-awesome nations) if people start using less gasoline in their automobiles... I really don't know how those contracts work.

We get more oil from Canada than from Saudi Arabia, interestingly. Also the most gains in the fastest time stand to be made in the airline industry and shipping industry, where there is already infrastructure in place to make widespread changes quickly. If the airline industry wanted to, it could go from using jet fuel to hydrogen fuel cells far quicker than the automobile industry could go to either hydrogen fuel cells or go fully electric.

The energy used to generate that electricity and create those fuel cells... I really don't mind going all-out nuclear.

Anyway there have got to be smarter, more effective ways to bring about change (and hurt the Saudis' bottom line a bit in the process) than pushing for more and more people to go to hybrid vehicles, etc. The latter doesn't hurt, provided the people can afford a new car at all, but the gains are woefully small in the grand scheme of things.

What I find confusing is why BP/Exxon/Marathon/etc. are not pushing for a technology shift themselves, while they are in the best position to do it. If the energy giants orchestrate the shift, they will remain energy giants. Perhaps they are waiting to see what energy tech will make the most sense to invest in on a global scale. But anyway I think where we should focus is airlines and shipping.

Mon, 04 May 2009 11:42:00 UTC | #356108