Say No to the internal combustion engine! No the Enviro-wackos haven't taken over the Phalanx, the mantra however, should serve as a call to arms for all to value our national security.

In a speech that could just as easily have been given 30 years ago, President Bush, in his State of the Union address, warned the nation of the dangers of continued energy dependence. Tell us something we don’t know Mr. President. The era of cheap oil in the late 80s and 90s is behind us. Today resource rich nations like Venezuela, Russia and the nations of the Middle East are exerting greater influence over global energy markets, with dire consequences for the developed and developing worlds. Continued dependence upon foreign oil will be disastrous for our economy in the not too distant future.

"America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world," Bush warned. Sadly, we have heard this message before in the 1970s and failed to act. There simply is no excuse for our continued reliance on such outdated technology as the fuel driven internal combustion engine. In what other facet of society are we dependent on technology that’s over 150 years old? With the rapid progression of science and technology in this century and the last, we must do more to develop alternatives to foreign oil.

As we at the Phalanx have stated time and time again, both political parties have failed in this effort. The GOP has but one solution: drill in Alaska. And while Alaskan oil may offer a tempered and limited amount of relief to our oil addicted society, it is not a long-term solution, nor will it offset the fact that a vast percentage of our oil needs come from overseas. The Dems, however, offer no solutions whatsoever, they simply oppose the Republican plan, which is the typical leftist position on most issues, like Iraq, Social Security and terrorism.

Such partisan wrangling has crippled the US economy and left American industry hopelessly dependent upon some of the most volatile, expansionistic, totalitarian parts of the world. The US must explore both long and short-term alternatives to America’s energy crisis, and that is exactly what this is, a crisis. The US must pursue greater fuel efficiency standards, for cars and trucks. The US must increase domestic oil production, whether it be in Alaska, the Great Plains or anywhere in between. We must also pursue alternatives to petroleum, such as ethanol, hydrogen, fuel cells and synthetic liquid fuels (SLF or Synfuel). Such technologies have existed for decades. The Nazis developed synthetic liquid fuels to power their war machine in the 1930s and 40s, as they faced oil shortages. The US space program as used fuel cells to power spacecraft since the 1960s.

Why then with technology already in existence are we dependent on oil? Quite simply there has been no incentive for industry to innovate, even in the wake of sky rocketing oil prices, automakers, the oil industry and other business are slow to react. The government must therefore offer incentives to industry, and consumers to fuel the growth of oil alternatives. Industry must be given incentives to produce and market alternative fuels and alternative fuel technology. The government must also provide incentives for consumers to purchase such products, if this can be accomplished energy dependence could become a thing of the past. Such efforts can only be accomplished through foresight, which today’s politicians sorely lack.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/31/D8FG3FP80.html
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.04/hydrogen_pr.html
http://www.fuelcells.org/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_fuel