I believe, is useful for two reasons.

1.)  Keep our foreign dependency limited.  W/o any new exploration, foreign dependency will grow beyond 33% by 2030, whereas with increased domestic production, it would decrease 4-7% less.    

2.)  Keep the economy from struggling.  W/o any new domestic production, the price for crude may spike over $200 and even $300/bbl.  With increased domestic production, who knows, it may only top out at $200 by 2030.  

I embrace the clean energy revolution full throttle, but I just can't imagine it getting accomplished with oil prices soaring to unconsciousable levels, all while OPEC gains influence over our economy, equal to that of the Federal Reserve Bank.  

World demand may decrease and American consuming habits may drastically change, but running the risk of those two aspects not tipping in favor of lower oil price, will impede our nation's ability to sustain our economic demands to afford the clean energy revolution.  If your everyday consumer is having probles with $4 gasoline, how are they going to afford cleaner automobiles, home weatherization, and new energy effiicent appliances equipped with smart switches?  The changeover by consumers will be slower and push the goal-line farther out.

It also seems that when a hurdle for more clean energy is overcome, the environmentalist throw up another hurdle.  For example, Al Gore believes all electricity should be carbon-free by 2018.  How is this possible?  He hasn't said how has he?

Certain states like the industrial midwest and the mid-Atlantic have a heavy dependency on coal of 50% or greater, and switching off those generation sources to renewable one's, means not only an incredible capital investment, put new land purchases through condemnation, new transmission, ontop of a massive capital investment to backup that power, because renewables in these regions, have a strong tendency to be intermittent.  It just baffles me.  How can we have higher goals with no strategy in place?  

Also, we are criticizing McCain on exploring in the OCS, why are we including video clips of Mark Warner, Webb and Kaine?  All three of them agree on renewed exploration for offshore drilling.  

you just wrote, including the words "and" and "the" (ha), but this in particular seemed very odd to me:

"I embrace the clean energy revolution full throttle, but I just can't imagine it getting accomplished with oil prices soaring to unconsciousable levels."

Are you saying that high oil prices (and high energy prices in general) historically haven't been the greatest impetus BY FAR behind energy efficiency gains?  Do you really think that Americans will embrace the "clean energy revolution" if gasoline costs $1 per gallon?  Please explain...this goes against everything I know about economics, energy, history, etc.

it will wreck our economy and empty the pocketbooks of your average American consumer.  Look at what $140 per barrel of oil is doing now.  The cascading affects are reaching nearly everything.  

Demand for natural gas is headed in the same direction.  This in turns puts more pressure on coal as demand is forecasted to soar.  Electricity prices at the end of summer alone, will rise by 35% in Dominion's service area.  Maryland electric consumers will see even more.  In 2009, rate caps come off and everyone can expect rates to increase by 10-20%.  And if energy and construction prices continue to soar, another 20-35% rate increase isn't out of the question shortly thereafter.    

If this type of pressure continues, we will see a double of electricity rates and gasoline at the pump within 10 years.  Higher prices will lead to economic depression.  If this is our way to conserve energy, it isn't going to win any votes, as every middle class American and below, will be unable to afford investments to upgrade their homes to become more energy efficient thru weatherization and smart energy efficient home & building appliances.  They won't be able to get rid of their gas-combustion vehicle for a plug-in, and/or it will be considerably delayed, and how many homeowners will be able to afford a shiny new pv solar roof?

Main Street is talking recession and Wall Street is talking secular bear market, and this is only with $4 gas and OPEC's level of influence in American markets is currently what, 21%?  What's the picture for a clean energy reality going to look like if by 2018, gas is $8 and OPEC's influence is approaching 25-30%?  That's an ugly picture Lowell.  

And what guaranty do we have that a terrorist state will not take over in Nigeria, or in some Arab emirate or if Chavez or Iran goes bezerk?  

We're in a transition period from dirty to cleaner, and the transformation isn't obtainable at the flip of a switch.  We need some new fossil to sustain the economy while the industry and society transforms itself.  If today was 2030, I would agree and would be against new oil/gas exploration.  Btw, I'm against touching ANWR simply because it should be for the next generations to debate over if they see their own energy emergency.  While we have other means to solve our current energy problems, ANWR should be left for the future.  

Our generation has now seen the energy shortage of the 70's and now the energy crisis of today.  We'll have another one if we aren't careful and keep all resource options on the table.  We will accomplish true energy independence, once the pieces of our clean energy revolution are put in place ~ 2025-2030, therefore I strongly favor a healthy economy, so we can afford this without question and without delay.

I can sum it all up: crash national program for energy efficiency, renewable power, and to get us off our "oil addiction."  Let's get moving!

Soaring price of oil will wreck the economy and impede the clean energy revolution, pushing the goal-line farther in to the future.  Let's not do that.  Keep all options on the table at our disposal to prevent imbalances in consumption and prices as they appear, for the sake of the economy; afterall, its the economy which is the means to make the clean energy revolution doable.  

"By handing out $4 billion in tax breaks to the biggest oil companies and proposing gimmicks like offshore drilling that won't produce a drop of oil for seven years, Senator McCain's energy plan fails to provide short-term relief to consumers or long-term independence from foreign oil. Barack Obama's comprehensive solution to our energy crisis would force the oil companies to drill in the areas they've already leased, provide every American family with an immediate energy rebate and a middle-class tax cut worth $1,000, and invest $150 billion in renewable sources of energy that will create 5 million jobs and replace the oil we import from the Middle East by 2025," said Obama campaign spokesman Hari Sevugan.

Big oil operations need large areas to operate in.  Even though technology has improved, drilling is never a sure thing.  While some existing leases are large, merely holding the lease doesn't permit the owner to drill.  The owner has to file for a permit and what alot of drillers are complaining about is, these permit approvals have not been issued in full because of regulatory and environmental factors.  The result is that they are left with permits to drill within only parts of the leases they hold.

Like a major developer, such as for a town center, suburban housing complex, etc., the developer will seek to purchase all of the land they need, then plan and build.  The developer will not have a plan ready for a large project w/ only a portion of that land under purchase.  

This is not something we hear about but its what the drillers are complaining about before Congress, in trade articles, and in the media, especially on Bloomberg & CNBC where pro-energy/drilling views are discussed.  I'm sure there are truth to boths sides, which means the current system is no match for our changing times.  More than likely, a compromise is what is needed.