Energy Independence is a matter of National Security, and should be treated as such.
Nationally, we have plenty of refinery capacity and are exporting motor fuels and refined products--we were even before the restrictions on exporting crude oil were lifted.
What
@roamer_1 and I refer to is more a regional thing, where it might be good if ND/MT/WY/SD could produce all we need and more from our own feedstocks, locally. If the US balkanizes, some blocs will better off than others in terms of the basics. We (the four states above) produce enough of most of the basics (food, water, energy) to stay alive when other areas, frankly, would starve in the dark.
Other regions in the same shape would include the western part of the intermountain corridor, roughly the 'heartland' west of the Mississippi, From the Northern Plains to New Mexico and East to the River. (Red States, for the most part, with a few urban enclaves which vote blue).
I can't speak for anyone else, but imho, there is no harm in strategic planning for the future, where regional autonomy and economic independence is emphasized as a possible necessity. Consider it hedging, politically, in that if needed it will be vital, if not, no harm done.
