It’s scary to think how the U.S. has only five percent of the world's oil reserves, but consumes a quarter of the world's oil. Even if we drained every oil field in America, we would still depend largely on imports. The same with offshore drilling - according to the Department of Energy, offshore drilling in the outer continental shelf couldn’t begin until around 2017 and wouldn't reach peak production until about 2030, when it would produce only 200,000 barrels of oil per day. This would supply a meager 1.2 percent of total U.S. annual oil consumption – a drop in the bucket.

All the more reason to support a climate bill that solves our oil addiction and reduces imports. It shifts our economy away from oil consumption, toward more fuel efficient cars and airplanes, greater energy efficiency in our factories, more energy efficient buildings, expanded use of clean energy like wind and solar, and much more. The less oil we burn, the less oil we have to import.

I just hope that the Senators in the Appalachian states will take action to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels by supporting the climate bill as it passes through the Senate this fall.

Great. Now let the EPA separate the "good" coal mines from the "bad" coal mines, the "good" cases of mountain top removal from the "bad" cases of mountain top removal.

It's like how the Justice Department is going to look at "good" torture techniques vs. "bad" torture techniques.

This is good news!!!

We still have a long way to go, and we must not stop, but at least this is good news for a change.

I'll believe when it doesn't happen. I have alsolutely no hope that Obama won't grab his ankles on this issur as he has on all of the others.

There seem to be a few people in the government who are trying to do a good job. The President won't let them.

q

79 mountains, gawd. What are we doing? Future generations will know that we were insane. Now India is fighting multinational coal companies wanting to blow up their mountains. May the mountain gods all over the world rise up and defend their domain! If anybody believes that changes in weather patterns and flooding are not related to mountain top removal (which in many cases would more accurately be termed "mountain removal"), then they are in denial of reality.

I doubt that we can look to Obama for any real change in the practice of mountain removal, not while profits can be made on the dirty coal that is thereby produced. I'm on an email pipeline from www.Ilovemountains.org for actions and updates.

Where will the greed and need for fossil fuels end? When there is no more outdoors to enjoy? When there is no food left to eat that isn't grown in a test tube in a laboratory?

Already trees in North Carolina, among many other places, are dying from acid rain caused by burning coal in Tennessee.

The large fish in the ocean are nearly too toxic with mercury to even eat. One of the earth's major primary food sources is polluted for hundreds, if not thousands of years.

Tell me, even with all their wealth, what will the wealthy eat when the soil is too toxic to grow plants and water is too polluted to drink or grow fish?

Plankton? Preliminary studies of the plastic buildup in the northern Pacific Gyre indicate that as it beaks down into smaller and smaller pieces it is being consumed by smaller and smaller species, and having the same effect as it has on larger sea birds and animals. So, there is a good chance that eventually, plankton, the base of the food chain, will be affected. And the plastic buildup in the southern Pacific is even larger.

The only answer is too think differently, now. Consume less, use sustainable methods and stop the population explosion.

The truth remains that you can't stop using fossil fuels till you come up with replacement energy sources. Its truly as simple as that.

View the Cap and Tax bill and you will see it does absolutely nothing. Nothing but raise profits for the companies involved and taxes for government. It is NOT an enviornmental bill.

Since you, Common Dreams, have not given any attention to President Obama's plans for "preventive detention" I will use this posting to warn what is afoot, namely the possible passage of a law that will allow "preventive detention" by our government which is the same as "permanent detention without trial". The health-bill hullabaloo completely masks what else is brewing in Washington. Thus far only Senator Feingold has stated publicly that such a law is potentially unconstitutional.

"Preventive detention" is not a new concept in the Western World. Chancellor Bismark introduced it in Germany in the 19-th century. It was called "Schutzhaft". When Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933 he did not have to invent "preventive detention" because he could legally arrest and detain indefinitely any person he deemed a danger for his government. Ironically "Schutzhaft" which means "protective detention" pretended to protect the incarcerated person from the anger of the public which might harm or even kill him/her.