McCain's Drilling Program Runs Into Trouble

Concerns about environmental damage are undermining support for McCain's plans to expand offshore drilling

A recent poll indicated that while a slight majority of Americans want more areas to be opened for oil drilling, around 3/4 of Americans think that we should focus our efforts on investing in new energy technology, rather than on expansion of drilling. Since John McCain has made support for more drilling a centerpiece of his campaign, that result would seem to favor Obama.

Also, most Americans don't think that more drilling will significantly lower gas prices (they're right), and they think that the Bush/McCain proposals to expand drilling are more likely to enrich oil companies than to lower the price of oil.

As if that wasn't bad enough news for John McCain, some recent events demonstrated the folly of opening up more territory for drilling. First, new information became available that further discredits the global warming skeptics. A highly-touted documentary that purported to debunk global warming was cited by British media regulators and climate scientists for lacking objectivity and balance. Also, the American Physical Society reiterated its position that global warming is real and primarily man-made, putting to rest the rumor that the APS had reversed itself. Clearly, global warming continues to be a critical problem, one that is exacerbated by choosing more drilling over developing alternative fuel and conservation technologies.

More importantly for the McCain campaign, congress took up debate on a bill that would force oil companies to use the oil leases they already have, or abandon their rights to drill on that land. The measure would also bar them from selling oil from their offshore drilling operations overseas. McCain and his fellow Republicans oppose the bill, and Bush has threatened to veto it. But if the purpose of granting offshore leases is to reduce the price of gas, shouldn't the Republicans be in favor of this measure? Why wouldn't they want to force oil companies to drill on existing leases and to sell their oil in the United States, unless the real purpose of expanding offshore drilling is to enrich the oil companies?

***

Luck was on John McCain's side earlier in the week. McCain had planned to try to upstage Obama's gigantic rally in Berlin by speaking in front of reporters on an offshore oil well, but that plan was doused by Hurricane Dolly. Just imagine how that would have looked: Obama burnishing his foreign policy credentials by wowing our closest allies while McCain speaks of the need to expand offshore drilling... on a day when there was a major oil spill in the gulf of Mexico.

(cross posted at Liberal Avenger and appletree)

Gore: 10 Years to Oil Independence

While Gore was working on his renewable energy plan, the Bush administration was covering up evidence that global warming is caused by human activity.

Former vice president Al Gore challenged the nation to convert to 100% renewable energy by the end of 2018, an effort that he said would require a commitment of between 1.5 and 3 trillion dollars. Gore pointed out that the sacrifice would pay huge dividends in the future:

"This is an investment that will pay itself back many times over," Gore said. "It's an expensive investment but not compared to the rising cost of continuing to invest in fossil fuels."

"I hope to contribute to a new political environment in this country that will allow the next president to do what I think the next president is going to think is the right thing to do," Gore said. "But the people have to play a part."

It's hard to argue with the notion that the effort would be well worth the cost. In terms of the environment, the US is in a unique position in terms of its ability to impact the problem. The US emits far more carbon than any other developed nation, and California alone consumes more gasoline than any nation on earth, save the US as a whole. Meanwhile, the windy Great Plains and sunny deserts of the Southwest could make it the Saudi Arabia of renewable energy. And the technology developed during the 10 year effort to wean the US off of oil could then be used to help other nations reduce carbon emissions.

An effort to become oil-free would be a tremendous boon to the American economy. Think of the billions that would have been saved in the past 10 years if the US used only renewable energy. There would have been no war in Iraq, and quite possibly, no 9/11 attacks. We would have had a much smaller trade deficit, which would would have produced a much stronger dollar. Lower world fuel prices may have averted or at least ameliorated the current worldwide economic slump, and might have made recent airline bailouts unnecessary. Perhaps most importantly for the American economy, Gore's plan would quickly make America the world leader in alternative fuel and conservation technologies, which might usher in a tech-driven boom similar to the information technology boom of the 1990s. The American auto industry may not survive the current wave of high energy costs, but if Ford and General Motors can become the world leaders in emissions-free vehicles, they could once again become the world's most profitable companies.

There would be benefits in the realm of international politics as well. There would no longer be a reason for the US to kowtow to the most brutal and corrupt regimes in the Middle East. Recall that our associations with those regimes are regularly cited by terrorists from the region as a primary reason for their attacks on Americans. Mitigating the effects of global warming would help ease the tensions brought about by famines and droughts. And lowering demand for oil would go a long way toward neutering petrodollar-fueled militant groups like al Qaeda and Hezbollah.

So Gore's plan represents a big investment, but it's an investment with a huge upside. Compare the potential economic and security gains to those garnered from the Apollo and Star Wars projects, or the virtually non-existent gains from our development of stealth technology. The question isn't whether or not we can afford to invest in renewable energy, but whether we can afford not to invest.

***

It's so frustrating to recall that Gore actually won the most votes in 2000, and would have won Florida as well were it not for the disenfranchisement of eligible voters. Compare Gore's bold vision with Bush's record of incompetence and venality. Compare Gore's science-based global warming strategy to Bush's deliberate inaction:

Climate change will pose "substantial" threats to human health in the coming decades, the Environmental Protection Agency said yesterday -- issuing its warnings about heat waves, hurricanes and pathogens just days after the agency declined to regulate the pollutants blamed for warming.

The strong warnings highlighted the contorted position that the EPA has staked out on climate change. Last week, the agency decided not to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, at least not until after President Bush's term ends.

A former EPA official told a House panel this week that senior administration officials and several Cabinet members supported regulating the emissions before the White House changed course and barred the EPA from concluding that they endanger public welfare.

In a closed interview Tuesday, former EPA deputy associate administrator Jason K. Burnett told the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming that Joel D. Kaplan, Bush's deputy chief of staff for policy, originally signed off on the decision to regulate emissions from both vehicles and stationary sources such as power plants and refineries. The decision came in response to a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that instructed the administration to determine whether carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases should be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

"There was a general belief that moving forward with a challenge and establishing a precedent in channeling regulation would serve the country better than leaving the challenge to the next administration," Burnett said in the interview, according to a transcript obtained by The Washington Post. "The chief of staff's office then appears to have changed its mind."

Instead of looking forward to an oil-free economy, Bush pursued the interests of the largest oil companies to the exclusion of any other consideration, including national defense. When Bush took office, he put Dick Cheney in charge of both energy policy and anti-terrorism policy. Cheney's energy task force met several times during the early months of the Bush administration, but Cheney's terrorism task force did not meet a single time before the 9/11 attacks.

But while Bush's policies have been exasperating, the circumstances surrounding his "election" are infuriating. Because if Bush had won in 2000, we could simply say that a democratic nation gets the leadership it deserves. But in this case, America and the world deserved a lot better.

(cross posted at appletree)

The real reason for high gas prices

There you have it. Insecurity about the oil supply brought about by war in Iraq, tension in Iran, and unrest in Africa pushed prices up, but the reason they've continued to spiral out of control is the deregulated market in energy futures. Naturally, John McCain's top economic adviser was the person most responsible for deregulating the market.

It really goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway: a vote for John McCain is a vote for more of the same.

(cross posted at Liberal Avenger and appletree)

Again ... Another Abject 'Absence' Apology

*
Sorry to take so long in getting back to everyone, and thanks again to good old Gordo for holding the fort for us.

But, boy, doesn't time just darned well fly when you're having fun?

It's a already fortnight yesterday since we arrived here in Fethiye, Mugla, right on southern Turkey's beautiful Mediterranean coast - and the tan's coming along quite nicely thank you.

Biggest bits of international news we've been made aware of - merely verbally - are as follows:

(a) Britain's recent local elections saw New labour being battered and beaten into THIRD place nationally, by both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. This was the greatest British political slaughter of a socialist party for over four decades. Talk about sending Gordon Brown Co a strong signal, eh?

(b) Hilary Clinton's still stone cold dead & buried (providentially speaking) but still won't lie down.

(c) Although it may not seem much to none Brits, the Conservative party's professional buffoon Boris Johnson has beaten Ken Livingstone in the latest poll for the position of Mayor of London. Our bewildered minds are still in a state of bogglement.

Okay, if any one's at all interested in what's happening locally here in Fethiye, one of the jewels in this particular region's famous 'Land of Lights' area, here's what's grabbed our attention over the last fortnight.

Three US senators whose names escape us ( a quick google should help) have been visiting this lovely, hot-spot for foreign tourists -- as has an official representative of the US's 'NASA'. And, yep, you read that right.

(Don't even ask us.)

Once again, maybe good old Google can enlighten anyone curious enough to want to find out out more.

More big news here is that although the tourist trade is still (just) managing to stay out of reverse gear, as it were, not to put too fine a point on it the Turkish economy (like many others) is getting pretty close to falling flat on it's arse.

The one exception is the housing/construction sector. This is due largely to the increasing numbers of foreigners (like my brother), wanting their personal sunny spot in 'Paradise' -- while they're still alive (and well heeled) enough to enjoy it.

However ... the Government have just placed restrictions on the number of future homes which are being allowed to be bought by foreigners.

Hmm.

We wonder if the obvious upcoming supply and demand 'opportunities' this situation seems bound to present is in any way connected with the recent official American interest being shown?

Well, right now your guess is as good as ours.

As for NASA ... like we said earlier ... don't even ask.

Oh, by the way, as elsewhere across the globe the price of rice has suddenly rocketed. That's bigger news than you may imagine, as it's the Turks 'staple' - especially for the regular man, woman and family in the street. In one month it's price has doubled.

Also, after being close to claiming the undisputed, outright title for for quite a while now -- Turkey is now the dearest place in the world in which to buy petrol.

What a weird old world we're living in today, eh?

Especially since Turkey has borders with both Iraq and Iran.

Special 'Short, Sharp, Shock' Sorta-Semi-Sacred Supplement ...

*
Here's the shortest, torturous thousand word picture post we've ever published.

And we give TEN thousand thanks to Gordo across at Appletree, for originally writing the remarkably wonderful words which inspired us.



So, we wonder if the phony, self appointed & anointed, pontificating prick, Tony Blair will be teaching this particular parable when he takes up his (latest) 'God-given' (well paid) position at America's Yale University?

Yeah, sure he will.

As surely as we're touch-typing this article on an ancient abacus, with our respective pairs of black & blue big toes. Which, by the way, have both been bound tightly behind our backs, since our last (shared) Sunday supper in September 07.

And incidentally (as well as almost miraculously), we're accomplishing all these amazing acts as we're actually 'ascending'.

Here endeth the lesson.

*

Mehdi Shahbazi Dead:Shell & Exxon Price Protestor Pays The Ultimate Personal Price ...

*

Sad to say, another one of the good guys has gone.

Just another no account whistle-blower bites the dust, eh?

Just one extra entirely expendable victim of a big-oil war, eh?

Well, whatever...

May this old Iranian born American, Mr Mehdi Shahbazi rest in perfect peace - since he's certainly earned it.

Gas-station owner dies after fast against oil giants

Liver failure claims the life of Mehdi Shahbazi

By Sharon Noguchi -- Mercury News

Mehdi Shahbazi was a man who championed the consumer and listened to his own counsel as he waged a years-long battle against Exxon Oil and then Shell Oil.

The conflicts cost him his eight service stations - from Salinas to San Jose - his home, his health and his life.

Shahbazi, 65, died Wednesday at Stanford Hospital due to a fast of more than four months to protest the power of oil companies - and as gas prices approach record highs in California.

At his former Marina station - where two years ago he posted a sign that read "Consumers' pain is Big Oil's unearned profit!" - customers have erected a memorial of flowers, cards and signs proclaiming love and appreciation.

Until a court decision last month that gave Shell legal control over his final station, Shahbazi was positive he would prevail, said his nephew, Kaz Ajir of Marina.

But the news devastated him, and his health dramatically declined.

Read the heartrending rest of Mr Shahbazi's sad story.

*