LET THE ENERGY GAMES BEGIN
Submitted by New Energy News Blog
Congress is back in session and the fight over drilling will soon come to the floor of the House and Senate, the pointless fight over meaningless drilling by surreptitious politicians primarily interested in energy as a political issue. New Energy and the nation’s real future remain in limbo.
Republicans in the House kept up a drumbeat throughout the August recess for a vote on drilling, endlessly repeating the mantra that the American people want more domestic oil production, an anticipation of the “drill baby drill, drill baby drill,” chant at their convention.
Democrats are scrambling to figure out how to fight back. More drilling in protected areas is essentially meaningless in the big energy picture yet polls show 2/3 to 3/4 of the public, fixated on gas-pump-prices, are convinced drilling is the solution. With the November elections rapidly approaching, the public’s opinion matters.
The Democrats dilemma: They have to convince the child the ice cream will only spoil its appetite for a nutritional supper without upsetting the child and the Republicans have been telling the child it should have all the ice cream it wants.
Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif), a longtime opponent of drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and in the protected offshore areas of the outer continental shelf, now says she will put it on the table.
Democratic presidential nominee Senator Barak Obama (D-Ill) tried fruitlessly to hammer home the message: “George Bush’s own Energy Department has said that if we opened up new areas to drilling today, we wouldn’t see a single drop of oil for seven years…”
After seeing the way the public’s inclination was developing, Obama sensibly shifted his position: “I am willing to consider it if it’s necessary to actually pass a comprehensive plan . . . particularly since there is so much good in this compromise that would actually reduce our dependence on foreign oil.”
The “good” Senator Obama referred to is funding for New Energy incentives that is included in proposed legislation permitting more drilling.
The Democrats real (and hard) choice: (1) Compromise and get a bill that extends the vital New Energy tax credits but also allows extended drilling in protected areas or (2) take the risk of avoiding a vote on the issue this year and face the public in November, using the issue as a rallying cry the same way the Republicans are using it against them.
Option number 1 takes an issue away from the Republicans and saves 2009 for the New Energy and Energy Efficiency industries at the cost of support from environmentalists and potential harm to the ANWR and coastal waters. It also risks creating the appearance of flip-flopping.
Option number 2, because polls show the electorate is so convinced the Republicans are right about drilling, risks success in November. Success in November, and it looks like the Democrats could achieve it, means control of Congress and the Presidency. Risking the loss of that is a serious risk indeed.
As the House reconvened, Republicans held another of their press conferences on the steps of the Capitol Building. Coming off the jubilation of the McCain-Palin nominations, it was a triumphant moment for the congressional representatives who have been staunchingly proclaiming “dril baby drill” through the heat of Washington’s summer.
Tennessee Republican Representative Marsha Blackburn hit exactly the right note: “This is one of the few times the American people are excited to see Congress back in session…”
House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio): “The first opportunity we get, we are going to try and force a vote on our proposal…”
The proposal he referred to is H.R. 6566, the American Energy Act. It would open the ANWR and offshore areas on both coasts to oil exploration and drilling. The Republicans describe the bill as their “all of the above” bill because it includes the incentives for New Energy.
The question of funding for the New Energy incentives remains. Even if the House Democrats accede to a compromise, it is not clear Senate Republicans or the White House will allow fossil fuel industry subsidies to be sacrificed in order to fund New Energy subsidies. Any effective action will, of course, require all these players to line up.
Throughout the recess, the Republicans have had the stage to themselves, repeatedly making the case for passage of extended drilling rights. What made the last, triumphant press conference newsworthy was an exchange that took place between the Republican sponsor of the bill, Minority Leader Boehner, and members of a crowd that crashed the event near its end. The moment provided a clear signal that recess is over and a new fight over the issue has begun.
Boehner repeated his tired diatribe about how much the American people want drilling, concluding with “The American people have spoken…”
“No we didn’t,” came a sudden, unexpected answer from one of a barrage of some 100 environmental protestors who had crashed the scene.
Chants from the crowd picked up in intensity.
A serious confrontation is taking shape. The Democrats are expected to present their answer to “drill, baby, drill” this week.
click to enlargeProtestors Crash GOP Press Conference
Daniel W. Reilly, September 8, 2008 (Politico via CBS News)
and
Drilling for a ‘comprehensive’ energy plan
Derrick Z. Jackson, September 9, 2008 (Boston Globe)
WHO
Nancy Pelosi (D), Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives; John A. Boehner (R), Minority Leader, U.S. House; Representative Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn); Environmental Groups (Environment America, the League of Conservation Voters, etc.)
WHAT
Protestors against drilling in protected areas interrupted the press conference that has been a daily “drill, baby, drill” performance by Congressional Republicans during the summer recess.
click to enlargeWHEN
- August 2008: The Republicans’ call for drilling went on almost unanswered throughout the House of Representatives August recess.
- September 8, 2008: The Republican press conference was held on the first day of “Wilderness Week,” a week dedicated to the lobbying of Congress by environmental organizations.
- A few weeks in the fall of 2008: Because of the November election, the current congressional session is not expected to last more than 3-to-6 weeks.
WHERE
The press conference and protest to it was on the west front steps of the U.S. Capitol Building, where the Republicans had previously been able to hold their calls for extended oil drilling uninterrupted.
WHY
- In response to the Republicans’ “all of the above” energy policy, the Democrats have begun describing a “comprehensive” energy plan that could include extended drilling.
- Polls show anywhere from 62-to-74% of the U.S. public wants more oil drilling.
- More than a decade ago, the Democrats formed the position of a permanent moratorium on oil and gas drilling in protected areas but in recent weeks have been inclined to recognize changes in technology that could warrant a new approach to drilling.
- Republican presidential candidate John McCain has taken $1.4 million in campaign contributions from the oil and gas lobby.
- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has taken $400,000 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas lobby.
click to enlargeQUOTES
- George W. Bush, President, U.S. of Oil Addicts: “This is their final chance to take action before the November elections…If members of Congress do not support the American people at the gas pump, then they should not expect the American people to support them at the ballot box.”
- Speaker Pelosi: “We’ll put it all on the table, comprehensive, offshore drilling, if that is worth it, but renewable energy resources so that we do not get in this situation again..As speaker, I have to put everything on the table. . . . I don’t think it’s a good alternative, but if they can prove that it is, and they want to pay royalties to the taxpayer, let us use these royalties to invest in renewable energy resources.”
September 11th, 2008 at 2:05 am
Please give me a reference to the statement that “George Bush’s own Energy Department has said that if we opened up new areas to drilling today, we wouldn’t see a single drop of oil for seven years…”
I want authoritative facts so I can warn others that it is not a quick fix to the high gas prices as republicans want to mislead them to believe.
September 11th, 2008 at 4:51 am
Written by Michael Vass
Rick,
I did not write this post, but I am very aware of the issues it discusses. And I wanted to take a moment to address what has been said so you have a full understanding of what is before all Americans.
It is a fact that crude oil prices have increased roughly 1000% since 1972. It is a fact that oil usage in the U.S. has increased dramatically over that same time period. And it is also a fact that Democrats have long sought to prevent domestic drilling.
But to say that only Republicans are at fault for the current, and future, dependence on oil would be a lie. Inaction by both Republicans and Democrats since the 1970’s are the cause of the crisis. Neither side has effectively presented a plan of action, nor explained to the general public the cost of failing to seek a new alternative.
Currently America will spend some $700 billion on foreign oil. Part of that reasoning is due to the idea of using up foreign sources of oil while maintaining reserves for the future – ensuring the continuation of the American quality of life. That reasoning was solidly in place 30 years ago, and far less so today.
Another reason has to do with ethanol. The U.S. chose to use corn as the base for ethanol, whereas other nations have chosen and effectively use grass and sugar. All these bases for ethanol result in a fuel that is only 75% as useful as gasoline, thus requiring more fuel to be burned. In addition there is a debate on whether ethanol production is amplifying the dead-zones found in the Gulf of Mexico. Lastly by using corn as the base food prices have been forced higher, which is a core inflation factor.
Oh by the way, there is currently a glut of ethanol, with a mandate from the Government to increase that glut by 60% next year. Ethanol is currently available only in 5 states, of which only 2 allow its sale to the public (those 2 being Illinois and Michigan).
Solar energy, geothermal, wind, biomass, oil shale, and all other alternative sources at this time are either ineffective or inefficient.
Because of these facts, the only options that will effectively provide the energy that America requires to maintain it’s current quality of life and allow for research and development of new energy sources are coal, nuclear, and oil.
Coal is available, and starting to gain greater interest though many ecologically sensitive groups are against its use because even the latest developments create too much carbon dioxide and residue.
Nuclear has long been an energy source that Democrats oppose. Fear, without regard for advances in science and safety, and political preferences have held back the development of any new nuclear plants since the 80’s. This is in the face of significantly greener nations like France that use this as an energy source.
Thus we are back to oil. If we are to maintain current energy usage oil is the only logical and constant source. Since dependency on foreign oil is expensive and unreliable domestic drilling makes sense. The money saved can be used to fund alternative sources of fuel.
But will domestic drilling tomorrow cause oil prices to drop tomorrow? Yes and no.
Crude oil is priced like a stock or more accurately an option. Thus the price reacts in advance of actual events most of the time. When OPEC cuts production the price of oil rises long before the supply is affected. When a nation that produces or ships oil is under strife or war the price fluctuates whether production is affected or not.
So on that basis the knowledge that domestic drilling will decrease the demand by the largest buyer, prices will drop for a period of time until other buyers step in to make up that difference. If OPEC does not just reduce production to maintain current prices.
But more importantly if nothing is done today, as it was not in the 70’s, 80’s, 90’s, and on then you are guaranteed to have higher prices 2 years from now as well as 10. And where will the alternatives be then? As more money, maybe $1 trillion dollars a year or more, goes to foreign nations, where will America get the extra money to fund the 2nd, or 4th, or 7th year of research?
And lastly I want to inform you of something that many Democrats, particularly Speaker Pelosi have not made public. Nancy Pelosi makes money every time alternative energy is funded. She owns a substantial position in alternative energy stocks. It’s to her benefit to not allow domestic drilling. It fills her pockets with money every time that the debate lingers.
How is Nancy Pelosi different than the charges made of Republicans when she is in the pocket of Big Wind?
So to answer your question is oil going to resolve all America’s fuel needs forever? Of course not. Will domestic drilling drop the price of crude oil significantly tomorrow, or short-term? Not overly likely, though some effect will happen. Do Republicans understand this, and the alternative? More than you are giving credit to.
But the real question should be this, what alternative is being proposed by Democrats that will ensure the energy needs of America now, and provide any hope of reduced cost and increased energy in the next 2 years? Or 4? Unless you don’t mind not heating your home during the winter, or being unable to use the internet when you wish.
Oil is not the answer, we can all agree on that. But by using oil, particularly domestic oil, we improve our ability to create new sources of energy.