Why does Barack Obama oppose oil drilling, nuclear power, and coal expansion?

Question

Does he really think that he can make us energy independent quickly by putting up costly windmills and solar panels?

Answer 1

Then he'd want to tax the c**p out of "Big Wind" and "Big Solar".  What's left could possibly power a hair dryer.

Answer 2

because the largest contributors of the dem party are tree huger hollywood types

Answer 3

It's just like n**i Pelosi said, "I'm trying to save the planet." It's total bull.

Answer 4

Obama's energy plan is just sunshine and hot air.

Russia, China and Iran are not building wind turbines and solar farms; they are only interested in nuclear and carbon based energy.

Answer 5

Because he is going to solve the problem by taxing the h**l out of everything.  How that will work is totally and completely beyond me.  He must be hitting the crack pipe again.

Answer 6

Yes. And it's been happening already. Unfortunately, all of our money is being put into oil and nuclear energy that we really can't mainstream it.  

Answer 7

Obama lacks common sense...

he wants raise capital gains taxes...which will make America less attractive for investing and push capital elsewhere...

He wants to rid the world of nuclear weapons...sounds great...but realistically it's not feasible...because we can never confirm that fellow nations will not have nuclear weapons..

the guy is really a joke...

I'm sorry guys...but he is.

Answer 8

He does'nt. He opposes expanding these resources as an answer to the current energy crisis. He has the vision to UNDERSTAND that these things are not the answer for the future, that the answer means developing renewable sources of energy, you know, like solar, wind and hydrogen......Its time to move forward, not to step backward.

Answer 9

Inexperience and overly idealistic

Answer 10

Do you really want to hear the truth?

Obama does not oppose any of these in general and has never said he does. What he has said he opposed was drilling for oil in specific locations where more harm would be done to the environment than good from the oil we got from drilling in that environment. He is not opposed to nuclear power plants and has never said he was. He has only expressed concerns about the lack of better safety standards and the locations of the plants and the disposal of nuclear waste.

I can't honestly say how he feels about coal mining.

As to alternative fuels, he champions the use of natural gasses, which we have enough of to last five hundred years, and solar and wind and other alternative fuel sources like ethanol.

EDIT: Every auto in this country could be converted to natural gas and we would have enough to last five hundred years. Many larger cities are already using natural gas buses for public transportation. And natural gas doesn't pollute like gas from petroleum.

Answer 11

In 200 years there will be no oil. Coal will be looked at as Gas has been, and nuclear power.... well fission will be gone and we will be cleaning up that nasty mess. Fusion is where we should be focused.

Today nuclear reactors are all fission. They are not a good source of energy compared to their radioactive waste byproduct.