Kind of screwed in the near term, because there’s no way to quickly ramp up production beyond getting OPEC to do it, which seems unlikely.

So, dems will take it on the chin in the mid terms, but that was likely anyway just based on fickle voting patterns where parties in control usually take hits in the next election. Question really is, are we going to learn the lessons about reliance on the dysfunctional regimes responsible for meeting so much demand internationally?

I agree with the goal of switching energy use off fossil fuels as soon as can be done. Reality is, that ain’t happening soon. Oil and gas are in the mix for decades to come. As the article says, we need a dual path. Drill baby drill while pushing towards alternatives, which may involve some of those unpopular subsidies it referred to, because it’s an odd course. Pursuing production aggressively in an industry that we’re simultaneously trying to make obsolete ASAP.

Everyone should remember - OPEC and Russia will benefit from global demand to an extent no matter how much we drill baby drill, because we can’t meet 100% of global demand. So strategically, the sooner oil is reduced to a lubricant, the better.