MyDD :: Bush, drilling, and renewable Republicans

Bush, drilling, and renewable Republicans

by Jerome Armstrong, Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:00:28 PM EST

In another push to deal with soaring gas prices, President Bush on Monday will lift an executive ban on offshore drilling that his stood since his father was president. But the move, by itself, will do nothing unless Congress acts as well.

So much for the decider.

I continue to see the best course of action here for Democrats is to use the drilling as a bait to switch our nation's course onto renewable footing. Everything I've read from Congress watchers says that the pro-drill offshore votes are there, both in the Senate and the House. At the least, they'll lessen it from 200 miles to 50, and leave ANWR off limits. Likewise, its very doubtful that there will even be any exploration of oil done there anytime soon. It's nothing but a political bludgeon for Republicans to use against Democrats.

So the options are, stick to a "no offshore drilling" principle for the US (and watch it still pass), or give in on that 'nothing' in order to get 'something' bigger.

I say 'nothing' because for all the NIMBY clamoring I read on these threads, there's certainly not much of a noise being made about all the offshore drilling that's being done in Venezuela, or out elsewhere in the Gulf but besides the US, and the Gulf shore is where the bulk of the 'hypothetical' offshore drilling would be (and Alaska)-- Congress can just as easily attach a opt-out feature for states like CA & OR (and there's very little off of VA).

The 'something' could be whatever we can get, throw it all in there (higher CAFE standards, renewable funding, conservation efforts...) the 'compromise', which would be the biggest 'get' by the US environmental backers in decades, is there for the taking.

I'm convinced that Republicans are going to go whole-hog on bilking the government for funding of renewable exploration. The Pickens Plan is just the tip of the iceberg. Yes, renewable fuel is going to be a big business too now.

This has been a strong Democratic position over Republicans for decades. Democrats have a lot of capital in the bank over environmental issues, but now that the chips are down, and $4 gas is here, its the time. Peak Oil is here, and the Republicans are changing their tune:

For more than two decades, conservatives have put up almost every conceivable roadblock to a sane energy policy. They have essentially said to peak oil -- and catastrophic global warming, for that matter -- "Bring it on!"

No one should be surprised we are now mired in a tar pit of growing dependence on oil imported from unstable or undemocratic regions, oil prices over $100 a barrel, a trade deficit in oil alone approaching $500 billion a year, and, of course, the very serious threat of catastrophic climate change from burning an ever-increasing amount of fossil fuels.

Its a dangerous strategy for Democrats to be cast as playing the 'blame game' while Republicans promote a 'solution' to the energy problem. Because no longer is the Republican position going to be to just be about fossil fuels either, there's money to be made.

Tags: 2008 election (all tags)

Permalink :: 15 Comments :: Post a Comment

There (2.00 / 1)

is no ban on offshore drilling. This is simply a complete mistatement of facts.

According to the EIA, the federal agency responsible for analyzing energy policy, there are 59 million barrells offshore, of which 40 are in areas that are currently leased. Read that sentence again. Over 70% of offshire oil could be drilled TODAY. THERE IS NOT BAN ON OFFSHORE DRILLING.

The other 30% includes oil off the coast of California, Florida and the Atlantic States.

The oil that is the primary subject in this debate, the oil off the coast of Florida, is only 7% of the total estimated reserves off the coast of the United States.

The fact that liberals fall for this absurd discussion proves they don't understand the issue, and are simply inept at even rebutting the "offshore drilling" charge.

by fladem on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:43:10 PM EST

Re: There (none / 0)

Its offhand, referring to the 200 mile's from shoreline ban.

by Jerome Armstrong on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:47:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are buying into the GOP (none / 0)

frame of this issue, which is a misrepresentation of reality.

by fladem on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:59:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There (none / 0)

But you are correct about the framing of it, which is part of the problem. And that the oil off of FL in the Gulf is the bulk of the extent of it just points to the gist of the nonsense that has been propagated over its impact.

by Jerome Armstrong on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:49:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The reason (none / 0)

is they HAVE NO POLICY.

There two narratives on energy - the issue which will define this election.

Narrative One: We have all the oil we need and it is the enviromentalists fault we don't have it.

Narrative Two: We are near peak oil. Prices are not going down, and the oil that is offshore will not make a difference in the price of oil. The offshore issue is just a cover for the GOP's usual role: apologizing for the oil companies who haven't even developed what they have access to (which we support doing).

The only answer is to invest in a crash program in new technologies.

by fladem on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 03:17:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Refine" (none / 0)

Interesting. Jerome makes a front page post and within the first three responses, someone is trolling Obama supporters.

Telling.

Let's elect a Dem President!

by SpanishFly on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:50:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Refine" (none / 0)

I hope he does, and get some real solutions in return.

by Jerome Armstrong on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:51:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So the Dems should strategically crater again? (none / 0)

Sounds like FISA. And all the other BS the spineless Dems have done for the last 2 years.

Time to grow some balls and act like the country is is smart enough to get it.

Let's elect a Dem President!

by SpanishFly on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:45:19 PM EST

Re: So the Dems should strategically crater again? (none / 0)

2 years? Hello, where have you been this decade?

by Jerome Armstrong on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:52:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Dems should strategically crater again? (none / 0)

True.

I like your idea of tacking something on it to actually get something out of it but I suspect W would veto it and ultimately the Dems would kiss his butt and we'd get nothing and the oil companies would get a ton more shoreline... That they don't need!

Let's elect a Dem President!

by SpanishFly on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:58:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush, drilling, and renewable Republicans (none / 0)

We've got even T. Boone Pickens saying we can't drill our way out of this mess. Remember Pickens? The guy gave a couple million to the swift boaters.

But the fact is that the technology is now here for renewable energy that is competitive with oil.

It almost doesn't matter what the government does, renewable energy is the future. But the government can make the transition smoother and easier.

Companies like First Solar and Nanosolar can produce solar panels with a far cheaper lifetime cost per kilowatt than coal.

LS9, a company in California, can produce oil at $125 a barrel from bacteria that ferment sugars and turn them into oil.

Sapphire Energy, also in California has a method of producing oil from algae that is competitive with fossil fuels. These bio-oils are carbon negative, clean, and can be refined into actual gasoline by existing infrastructure with no modification.

These algae actually eat the CO2 coming out of coal plants and so lead the way to clean coal technology.

Finally, don't forget Pickens' wind farm and the "Saudi Arabia" of wind that is the midwest prairie states. We can generate 20% of our energy from wind.

So it is all there and with oil the price it is, it is going to happen. Doesn't really matter what the government wants, the market will take over.

by dMarx on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:54:35 PM EST

I see it's another pragmatic day today (2.00 / 2)

I wonder how many more of these we'll have before we get back to a principled streak like we had over FISA last week.

The oil drilling idea is a lose/lose situation. It will have no practical effect on prices, and it's not even politically expedient. Rather than cede the frame to the Republicans again, why don't we change it?

All it will take is some education to make the public polls swing the other way. Then the Blue Dog cowards will see that they don't have to vote for the drilling to stay in office.

Proud member of the Wikipedia Generation of American politics

by BishopRook on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 02:58:38 PM EST

Re: I see it's another pragmatic day today (none / 0)

This election will be more about gas prices than any other single issue.

I'm sorry, what?

This election will be about the economy more than any other single issue, certainly, but gas prices are only a small portion of that. People pay more for healthcare than they pay for gas, and they can't pay for anything if they don't have a job or their house is in foreclosure or they're buried in credit card debt they can't get rid of.

And if 67% of Americans support drilling offshore, that means we only need to convince 18% of Americans to change their minds.

Proud member of the Wikipedia Generation of American politics

by BishopRook on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 04:21:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I see it's another pragmatic day today (none / 0)

Right, but the idea is that people as a whole are simply too stupid to understand where their money is going. They can't tell the difference between 2000$ in gas, and 20000$ in health care. It's just not within their capacity.

And that, As we've been told again and agan, is why the Republicans will win.

I mean, it's obviously complete bunk, or they'd, you know, be winning..

by mrrara on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 04:25:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

US exporting record amts of oil & gas: (none / 0)

http://www.reddit.com/info/6rq5c

by nouseforaname on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 04:50:38 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.