Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    April 2024
    S M T W T F S
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    282930  
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘energy’

Arctic oil and gas bonanza

Posted by Richard on June 3, 2009

The American Association of Petroleum Geologists is meeting in Denver next week. One of the featured sessions looks at a recent re-appraisal of arctic oil and gas potential that significantly increased previous estimates:

The session will be co-chaired by Don Gautier and David Houseknecht, both with the U.S. Geological Survey, and will follow-up on a USGS report released in late May that said 30 percent of the world's undiscovered gas and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil are estimated to be located north of the Arctic Circle.

The study, presented by Gautier and colleagues, is the first detailed, peer-reviewed and geologically based assessment of natural resources in that region. Most of the undiscovered oil and gas will be found underwater, on continental shelves, the researchers said.

The USGS study was recently published in Science magazine, but is only available for free to AAAS members/subscribers. There's a brief overview (heavy on concern for the poor creatures of the Arctic and somewhat dismissive of the value to us humans) at ScienceNow

Some of the richest Arctic oil fields are likely to be off the Alaskan coast in the Bering, Beaufort, and Chukchi Seas. A lease auction last year in the Chukchi area brought in over $2.6 billion. Many of the promising parcels there are comparable in size to the North Slope field (Prudhoe Bay) that's fed over 15 billion barrels of oil down the Trans-Alaska Pipeline in the past 30 years. 

Unfortunately, on April 17, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Appeals Court vacated the Alaskan leasing program and ordered the Interior Dept. to "conduct a more complete comparative analysis of the environmental sensitivity of different areas…" Fortunately, the ruling was fairly narrow, and the court dismissed plaintiffs' arguments that Interior needed to consider the "climate change" impact of burning any oil found. Interior Secretary Salazar is at least giving the impression that he wants to "move forward and fix the shortcomings," not scrap Alaskan offshore development completely. No suggestion that they might appeal, though. I suspect he's delighted by the ruling and won't seriously try to reverse it.

With oil (and gas) prices on the rise again, it's high time the government stopped standing in the way of increased domestic oil production. That's especially true in the Alaskan Arctic, where — as Investor's Business Daily pointed out — if we don't go after those resources, others will:

It ought to be reassuring to Americans that energy can be developed here. Americans are environmentally conscious, and Palin herself has a good record on balancing development with ecology.

The alternative isn't reassuring: If we don't drill, the Russians will. Situated over on the eastern end of the Chukchi Sea, they have global ambitions of dominating the energy trade and no qualms about muscling in on the U.S.

Drill Chukchi. Drill now. Pay less.  

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Shovel-ready stimulus

Posted by Richard on March 1, 2009

Investor's Business Daily can't understand why the Obama administration and Congress are moving quickly to prevent off-shore drilling when supporting more drilling should be a no-brainer for our purportedly "pragmatist" president. After all, there are lots of new jobs, new tax revenues, and economic stimulus out there:

Vast amounts of energy lie right off our shores. Conservatively tallied, government data show 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in continental U.S. waters — enough to replace 20 years' worth of oil and gas imports.

This is also enough to insulate the U.S. from a potential energy shock or 1970s-style oil embargo. But here's the great part for Obama: It's shovel-ready stimulus.

As noted in a recent study by the American Energy Alliance, an industry research group, developing our offshore energy resources would create in the coming years:

• $8.2 trillion in additional GDP.

• $2.2 trillion in total new state and federal tax revenues.

• 1.2 million new jobs at high wages.

• $70 billion in added wages to the economy each year.

All this for doing nothing other than letting oil companies do what they do best: Find and develop potential energy sources.

But they make money. Oil companies sometimes rake in big profits — can't have that.

And they produce carbon dioxide emissions. Algore says those are destroying the planet — can't have that.

And they create private-sector jobs which people take in order to serve their own needs and goals, rather than to serve the "public interest" — can't have that.

And they equip those getting the new jobs with self-sufficiency and independence instead of dependence on government — can't have that. 

The Prez has declared several times over the past few weeks that he wants to create "not just any jobs – jobs that meet the needs we’ve neglected for far too long" — specifically jobs that meet the need for more government workers, government projects, government funding, and government goals.

The Prez is one of those politicians who, in the words of Howie Rich, "rhetorically extol the virtues that once made this country great while they systematically remove brick-by-brick the incentives needed to make it great once again."

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Obama’s coal plan threatens us all

Posted by Richard on November 4, 2008

It's not just residents of coal-producing states like Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, North Dakota, Montana, and Colorado who ought to be concerned about Barack Obama's threat to destroy the coal industry. His radical plan will, by his own admission, cause electricity prices across the country to "skyrocket." Are you ready for that? Is our economy ready?

Investor's Business Daily outlined what's at stake:

Speaking to the San Francisco Chronicle on Jan. 17, Barack Obama singled out new coal plant construction for big taxes. The scheme, part of the cap-and-trade energy policy he wants to implement as president, is meant to tax coal producers straight out of business.

"So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can," Obama said. "It's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted."

Isolated gaffe? No. On his own Web site, Obama declares:

"Once we make dirty energy expensive, the second step in my plan is to invest $150 billion over the next decade to ensure the development and deployment of clean, affordable energy."

In other words, Obama's plan is confiscatory taxes to first destroy America's domestic energy producers, and once that bridge is burned, force the U.S. to rely on alternative energies that haven't been developed. The big-government plan might make ideologues happy, but in the real world, it won't work. …

America is the Saudi Arabia of coal, with the world's largest demonstrated reserve base of 489 billion short tons, the Energy Department says. About 93% of it is used to produce electricity, and it provides about half of U.S. electricity needs. As the nation's economy expands, that need for coal is projected to grow about 20% by 2030.

If that need can't be met, consumers will be hit with high prices brought on by shortages. Meanwhile, America's 80,000 miners and 1.6 million workers in coal-related and coal-dependent industries would suffer from Obama's taxes on new plants.

"Under my plan of a cap and trade system," Obama said in another interview, "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." He added that because "I'm capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to the consumers."

The biggest problem with Obama's plan is that it taxes productive companies, and offers nothing but "hope" to replace the missing energy. He does not propose using our current resources as a bridge to cleaner energy. He'd rather stop their use cold. No nuclear power, no offshore drilling, no new coal plants, and if consumers have to pay more, too bad. Obama's attack on coal use surely will leave us poorer.

And that's only one of the hundreds of Obama plans to "fundamentally transform" this country that will make us all poorer. He's not going to redistribute wealth so much as he's going to redistribute misery. There will be lots more of that for everyone.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

American Energy Freedom Day is coming

Posted by Richard on September 18, 2008

October 1 is being called American Energy Freedom Day because that's the day on which the current bans on oil shale and offshore drilling expire. Congressional Democrats are between a rock and a hard place on this one. That's why, as Investor's Business Daily noted, they hurriedly threw together an "energy bill" and rammed it through the House the other day:

The move won them misleading headlines declaring that Pelosi's Democrats had "eased offshore drilling ban" in what the press described as "a stark reversal." 

But Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling, the Republicans' Study Committee chairman, correctly called the bill "a sham" with no provision addressing the dire need for construction of new oil refineries, "no clean coal, no energy exploration in arctic Alaska, no nuclear energy and — if you read it — no exploration in the Outer Continental Shelf for energy in their bill." 

Behind this bill to drill that doesn't is radical environmentalist ideology.  "They look at our oil and gas reserves and see toxic waste sites," Hensarling quipped.  "Republicans look at our oil and gas reserves and see vast and valuable natural resources that will ease pain at the pump and lessen our dependence on foreign oil."

The bill appears to have no chance in the Senate and would almost certainly be vetoed if passed. IBD pointed out that this presents Republicans with a terrific opportunity, since an overwhelming majority of Americans favor more drilling: 

Republicans could take that Oct. 1 deadline and act like a winning football team — by running out the clock.  President Bush and Sen. McCain could lead the chorus counting the days to American Energy Freedom Day. 

Then once the clock has run out and the drilling ban is gone, McCain and other GOP candidates can spend the final month of the campaign basking in the credit they'd get from the American people — especially since oil prices are sure to drop in reaction to the ban's expiration.

There's just one complication: As is usually the case when the GOP is about to win one, members of their own party have tried to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Ten Republican senators have joined with ten Democrats (the "Gang of 20") to propose a "bipartisan compromise" that would cost $84 billion, increase energy taxes (which you and I will pay) by $30 billion, and only pretend to increase access to more new oil supplies. Colorado's Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer quite accurately described it as "40% tax increase, 10% energy and 50% snake oil."

Chris at My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy totally demolished the five key parts of this plan in a must-read post, concluding:

This is a disaster. If it doesn’t pass the media and democrats will light up with “Republicans kill increased drilling”. If it does pass, the republicans lose an issue to beat Obama up. Even worse is if it gets stuck in committee. Here’s that scenario. Mr. Representative wanna-be, where do you stand on drilling? “I support the ‘American Energy Act’ sitting in congress. I’ll make sure it’s passed”. Bam. Good bye issue. Of course, when he wins and the dems keep control, it will never come up and we’ll be stuck with high oil and gas prices as Nancy Pelosi tries to save the Earth.

The other problem is that even if it passes, it won’t increase supply. Two years from now, people will be wondering what the heck happened to all that drilling they had heard was coming. They won’t remember that it provided no incentives for the states to drill. They’ll just blame those evil oil companies and their republican allies.

We have the chance to win with this issue. If we do nothing over the next 2 weeks, the ban ends and the democrats will have to vote to re-instate it. The gang of idiots needs to be stopped before they can disarm the only issue that the republicans can win with.

According to The Hill, the Gang of 20 has now decided not to introduce a bill until after the election, instead issuing a "statement of principals (sic) outlining their agreement on a host of divisive issues, including expanded offshore drilling." Which makes it clear that the gang — Republicans and Democrats alike — are simply gutless, unprincipled opportunists who put this sham plan together so they could talk out of both sides of their mouths to the voters back home (9 of the 20 are up for reelection). 

Call and/or email your senators and congresscritter and tell them to let the ban expire. Tell them we don't need new taxes or massive new porkbarrel spending, we just need Congress to stop blocking access to energy.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Energy industry claims more victims

Posted by Richard on August 18, 2008

By now it's a familiar story: Another rural community torn apart by conflicts over energy development. Father pitted against son, brother against brother, and neighbor against neighbor, as some celebrate the influx of money and jobs, while others rail against the destruction of their peaceful way of life, the noise and pollution, and the damage to their pristine surroundings.

But the story of the Tug Hill plateau near the village of Lowville in upstate New York is a bit different:

"Is it worth destroying families, pitting neighbor against neighbor, father against son?" asks John Yancey, whose family have farmed Tug Hill for generations. "Is it worth destroying a whole way of life?"

Similar questions are being asked across the state and the country as more and more small towns grapple with big money and big wind.

Yep, she said "big wind."

Shouldn't that be capitalized? Big Wind. Like Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big Tobacco. 

I guess wind power was all green and cool when only a few aging hippies and their starry-eyed, Gaia-worshipping offspring were involved. But now it's becoming a big industry. So the usual suspects are beginning to express doubts, view with alarm, and wring their hands with worry and concern. 

I guess some people won't be happy until there is no energy industry at all. No industry of any kind, for that matter. I guess they want us all to live in primitive huts, subsistence farm, and huddle around dung fires.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Drilling in the suburbs

Posted by Richard on August 5, 2008

In Colorado, environmentalists are suing to stop oil and gas drilling, Gov. Ritter and the Democratic legislature are pushing for tight restrictions on the industry, and residents in some areas are complaining about the despoiling of their land and poisoning of their water.

And yet, Texans somehow have figured out that gas wells can coexist with upscale suburban neighborhoods. Maybe Texans are a lot smarter than Coloradans (or Congress). Or maybe they're just more immune to environmental hysteria: 

In the 1980s, Houston wildcatter George Mitchell drilled the first well into the Barnett Shale formation that stretches through north and central Texas. He tapped into what would turn out to be one of the largest onshore natural gas reserves in the United States.

It would take nearly two decades and millions of dollars to develop the horizontal, hydraulic technology necessary to bring that gas to the surface. But today there are about 7,500 gas wells in the Barnett Shale — many located in the city limits of Fort Worth, and some a stone's throw from suburban homes and schools.

If there is an energy crisis in this country, it is because too many states and too many lawmakers in Washington are too timid about allowing entrepreneurs to bring to the surface what is buried right below us. In Texas, we're not timid. …

What I've seen is that while Congress balks at drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska out of fear of disturbing a few caribou, we've moved ahead to safely tap into an energy reserve located underneath suburban homes. And there is no better example of how Texas gets the balance right between energy and the environment than the development of the Barnett Shale.

As for the ANWR caribou, I suspect they'd be no more disturbed by a few wells than the residents of suburban Ft. Worth. The caribou around nearby Prudhoe Bay certainly aren't:

Caribou at Prudhoe Bay

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Liquid hydrocarbons on Titan

Posted by Richard on August 1, 2008

Scientists analyzing data from the Cassini space probe have discovered that it rains on Saturn's moon Titan, and there's at least one large lake. According to Saturn Daily, the precipitation (and thus the lake) consists of complex liquid hydrocarbons:

"We are quite certain that there is at least one large liquid-filled lake on Titan", stated Professor Ralf Jaumann of the DLR Institute of Planetary Research (DLR-Institut fur Planetenforschung) in Berlin.

"The measurements carried out with the VIMS spectrometer on board the Cassini space probe are all point in the same direction: Close to Titan's south polar region, we have discovered a lake filled with liquid ethane: The lake contains natural gas in a more or less liquid state."

It is likely that the ethane is mixed with other liquids, such as methane or other light hydrocarbons from the alkane series. The newly-discovered lake is called Ontario Lacus, in reference to the 300-kilometre long Lake Ontario near Niagara Falls on the US-Canadian border, because of the similarity in shape between the two.

Complex hydrocarbons. Liquified natural gas. You can make virtually any kind of petroleum product from those raw materials.

Brings to mind a bumper sticker I've seen: "Earth First – We Can Mine the Other Planets Later" 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

DNC promotes another carbon credit scam

Posted by Richard on July 29, 2008

If you could generate electricity from political correctness and self-righteousness, the Democratic National Convention would be powering a small city even before it starts. For months now, we've heard stories about how green this convention will be. Everything's going to be recycled. No fried foods are allowed (isn't that discriminating against certain ethnic cultures?). Caterers have to use mostly organic and locally-grown food. 

The DNC has contracted with a company to provide "carbon offsets" for the unavoidable fossil fuel consumption associated with the convention. Delegates are being urged (cajoled? nagged?) to buy these carbon credits to offset the environmental sin of their travel. But Face The State has discovered that one of the carbon credit recipients isn't doing much carbon offsetting:

WRAY – The eastern Colorado wind turbine tapped for the Democratic National Convention's carbon-offset program has one problem: It doesn't generate any electricity. Convention organizers are now being questioned for their eagerness to market those credits to delegates.

The DNC has contracted with Vermont-based NativeEnergy to offer delegates "Green challenge" carbon offsets to soften the environmental impact of convention travel. That money is then invested in carbon-free "green" energy sources around the country, including a wind turbine installed this year by the Wray School District RD-2. But a Face The State investigation reveals the district's turbine has never produced marketable energy due to massive equipment malfunctions.

It took a blog to expose this boondoggle. Newspaper reporters these days seem to think their job is to recycle press releases and take what politicians and bureaucrats tell them at face value:

In a feature story in Saturday's Rocky Mountain News, reporter Jerd Smith claimed that 20 percent of Wray's power is generated by what it calls "a windmill that toils day and night producing clean electricity." Smith's report professed that the Wray project is "at the heart" of the DNC's carbon-credit program.

The Rocky report also described the school wind turbine as "a project that generates thousands of dollars for the region's cash-strapped schools," but provided no financial data regarding any energy sales to date.

The Rocky story may be right about the windmill generating cash, but it's not from generating energy. It's from hawking worthless "carbon offsets" to the gullible Gaia-worshipping Democratic delegates, who will tell themselves how caring and conscientious they are as they jet across the country to Denver for what amounts to an extended infomercial.

UPDATE (7/30): See comment #3 for some good counter-arguments by an anonymous citizen of Wray. See comment #4 for my response to those.   

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 8 Comments »

Oil in abundance

Posted by Richard on July 26, 2008

On Wednesday, the U.S. Geological Survey released a petroleum resource appraisal for the Arctic region that estimated it contains 90 billion barrels of recoverable oil, 1.6 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 44 billion barrels of natural gas liquids (PDF factsheet). At least a third of the oil is under U.S. territory (Arctic Alaska).

Investor's Business Daily put this study into perspective by noting that:

the U.S. "official" estimate for total oil reserves is 21 billion barrels. So by putting our Arctic resources into play, we would more than double our reserves overnight.

What's more, there could be more oil up there — much more — according to Donald Gautier, who wrote the report.

"Most of the Arctic, especially offshore, is essentially unexplored with respect to petroleum," Gautier said. "The extensive Arctic continental shelves may constitute the geographically largest unexplored prospective area for petroleum remaining on Earth."

That phrase stuck in our mind — "essentially unexplored." How much of the rest of the U.S., including the oil we have offshore, is likewise "essentially unexplored"? And this study only counted oil that could be retrieved using current technologies. So Arctic reserves may ultimately prove to be much larger.

IIRC, at Prudhoe Bay we've already pumped several times as much oil as the original estimate. 

Let's put this in perspective. That 90 billion barrels of Arctic crude is enough to run the entire world economy for three years. And it could fuel the U.S. alone for 12 years.

Using a conservative estimate, let's say we pump 3 million barrels a day after developing these Arctic resources. That would boost total U.S. crude output of 8 million barrels a day by 38%. It would shrink the trade deficit, saving us roughly $137 billion a year in money we now send to Mideast and South American oil potentates, some of whom use the money to train and equip terrorists.

This latest report, by the way, means there are now about 938 billion barrels of oil available for us to take from the Outer Continental Shelf, Alaska and shale-rock formations in the West, based on current technologies and prices of less than $100 a barrel.

That's a century's worth of oil. But the Democrats won't let us drill. And Al Gore wants to leave it in the ground forever, destroying our economy in order to abandon fossil fuels in a decade (an utter pipe dream). 

In a rare instance of unanimity and cojones, on Friday Senate Republicans (sans Olympia Snow and Susan Collins, who understandably have no cojones) blocked Harry Reid's attempt to push through an "energy bill" that does nothing to increase energy supplies. Now the question is: will Congress take meaningful action before their August vacation?

Keep the pressure on — sign those petitions and send those faxes (I chose the $50 fax option, so I'm not asking you to do anything I haven't done).

Drill here, drill now. Let us drill, dammit! 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Dems feeling heat over energy bill

Posted by Richard on July 24, 2008

Judging by Harry Reid's hissy fit today, Democrats are beginning to buckle under the pressure to do something useful about oil and gas prices — like let us drill here and drill now. Have you helped apply that pressure by signing the petitions I posted about last week, or by contacting your senators and representative directly?

Here's another step you can take: for $15, Grassfire.org will fax your personal message to Harry Reid, key House and Senate leaders, and your senators and representative. For larger donations, they'll send your fax to additional senators who need to feel the heat.

Tell them you're not impressed by Democratic efforts to shift the blame to "speculators" when those "speculators" have just spent the last week bidding down the price of oil. Tell them you're not impressed by grandstanding about the two or three days' worth of oil in the strategic reserve, you want long-term solutions. 

Tell them to stop locking up our vast domestic oil supplies at the behest of environmental extremists. Tell them to pass the Gas Price Reduction Act (S.3202).

Tell them that you're mad about the Democratic convention committee getting cheap, tax-free gas for the last four months, and the least they can do is enact McCain's gas tax moratorium so that you get a bit of a price break, too.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Demand an end to the OCS drilling ban

Posted by Richard on July 19, 2008

After President Bush lifted his daddy's executive order banning off-shore drilling, the price of crude oil dropped three days in a row. On Thursday, it closed below $130, an 11% decline. Some people quickly suggested a causal connection, but I thought that was premature.

For one thing, Nigerian production went back up about the same time (or a day or two earlier). Nigeria is the #5 source of U.S. oil imports, and its output has been reduced significantly by attacks on pipelines and other infrastructure. So maybe the good news from Nigeria triggered the declines?

Well, it may have been a factor. But on Thursday, a new pipeline attack further disrupted Nigeria's output, and today the price only rose about 1%. 

I'm thinking that Bush's action, although theoretically only symbolic until Congress acts, really did affect traders' views of the long-term outlook. It — together with recent polls and other signs of increasing pressure on Congress — made future domestic supply increases much more likely, and that exerted downward pressure on the current price. 

Now is the time to increase pressure on Congress further and try to get a vote on drilling in the outer continental shelf before the August recess. Did you sign that Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less petition I wrote about last month? Did you donate $10 or more to get the bumper sticker? It's not too late. The first 1.3 million signatures have been delivered to Congress, but they're still collecting more. 

Don't stop there, though. Freedom's Watch has a petition to Congress, too. It'll take you only a few seconds to sign it here.

Then there's the Grassfire.org emergency petition to Congress, which lets you choose up to five calls to action to include (ANWR, oil shale, etc.).

Finally, on a different but related matter, GreenWatchAmerica is petitioning John McCain to reconsider his position on global warming.

Sign them all, please.

(Yeah, you'll get some email from the sponsoring organizations, but they're all pretty reputable, don't sell your address to spammers, and provide an unsubscribe link on their emails. So you can opt out of each as soon as you get the first email, if you want.) 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Dems oppose increasing Iraq’s oil output, too

Posted by Richard on July 2, 2008

Democrats in Congress, who seem to believe they can wave a magic wand and convert the country to solar planes and trains and wind-powered cars and trucks, don't just oppose more domestic oil production. And they don't just want to micromanage and regulate every aspect of the U.S. energy industry. Democrats in Congress are now working to limit Iraq's oil output and dictate Iraq's energy policies! From Investor's Business Daily:

Baghdad has invited foreign oil firms to bid on contracts to increase production in eight lagging oil fields.

Thanks to our liberation of that country, which cost the U.S. and Iraq so much in lives and resources, Baghdad is now able to begin to make full use of its oil reserves of as much as 112.5 billion barrels — after Saudi Arabia, the largest petroleum deposit in the world.

But Iraq needs private companies because they have the kind of know-how and resources the country needs to rebuild its energy infrastructure and revive oil production after suffering under Saddam Hussein for so long. Baghdad's goal is to improve output from the current 2.5 million barrels a day to 4.5 million barrels by 2013.

Last week, Democratic Sens. Charles Schumer of New York, John Kerry of Massachusetts and Claire McCaskill of Missouri sent a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice calling on her to get the Iraqi government "to refrain from signing contracts with multinational oil companies" because Iraq "currently does not have in place a revenue sharing law" to divide the proceeds between the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.

According to the three Senate Democrats, allowing the Iraqi government to enlist foreign help to maximize its oil production "would simply add more fuel to Iraq's civil war."

Of course, there is no civil war in Iraq today because President Bush refused to listen to the likes of Schumer, Kerry and McCaskill, who wanted the U.S. to resign itself to what some called "defeat with dignity."

The three also complained of it being uncertain that oil revenue-funded "reconstruction efforts would be targeted equitably to all the major ethnic groups in Iraq." What do these liberal Democrats want, an Iraqi version of their own failed affirmative action laws?

How wondrous to behold: High-ranking Democratic senators, who on so many occasions have condemned the president for interfering in Iraq, now insisting that Washington dictate to a freely elected government what its policy will be regarding its people's most valuable domestic resource. Apparently, Democrats aren't satisfied trying to wreck the U.S. energy industry; they want to wreck Iraq's, too.

Most senators and representatives are spending this Independence Day week in their home states and districts, meeting constituents, attending parades, etc. If you get the chance to meet your Congresscritter, ask him or her to support increased oil production in both the U.S. and Iraq (signing Rep. Lynn Westmoreland's pledge would be a good start). Or call their local office and convey the "Drill Here, Drill Now" message to the staff there. 

And speaking of "Drill Here, Drill Now," over 1.2 million people have signed the petition. Have you? Sign up at AmericanSolutions.com, and contribute $10 or more to get this cool bumper sticker: 

 Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less.

Resolve to do something this holiday weekend to push for a more rational energy policy that will allow additional supplies to be brought to market. To help you get motivated, here's Newt Gingrich's 3½-minute YouTube video, "3 Ways to Lower Gas Prices," which over 1.4 million people have already watched:

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Failed policies of the past

Posted by Richard on June 21, 2008

Republican and right-wing pundits are beside themselves because Sen. Obama broke his earlier promise to accept federal matching funds and abide by the campaign spending limits that go with them. I applaud him for rejecting the failed policies of the past: government funding of candidates and campaign finance restrictions.

It's a shame he doesn't reject more of the failed policies of the past.

Like the failed policy of treating Islamofascist terrorism as a law enforcement problem — which, contrary to Obama's attempt to rewrite history, convinced our enemies (according to bin Laden himself) that we were weak and could be destroyed, and led to a series of ever bolder attacks culminating in 9/11.

Like the failed policy of pouring billions in subsidies down "alternative energy" ratholes, while prohibiting drilling in ANWR, prohibiting drilling in the outer continental shelf, prohibiting drilling on 85% of federal lands, and erecting a mountain of regulatory barriers — enough to make a New Delhi bureaucrat blush — that prevented the building of even a single new refinery for the past 31 years.

Like the failed policy of socialism, which more and more Obama supporters are now embracing openly, and which appears to be the ideology embraced by every person who has had a significant intellectual influence on Obama, starting with his father and mother.

Regarding the Democrats' recent clamor for nationalizing the oil industry, Stop the ACLU had the best comment I've seen: "It’s starting to feel like I’m in an Ayn Rand novel for real!" Does that mean if Obama's elected, we should just shrug?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

McCain rethinks offshore drilling

Posted by Richard on June 18, 2008

Sen. John McCain has kinda, sorta, maybe decided that drilling in the outer continental shelf (OCS) just might be OK:

Sen. John McCain called yesterday for an end to the federal ban on offshore oil drilling, offering an aggressive response to high gasoline prices and immediately drawing the ire of environmental groups that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee has courted for months.

The move is aimed at easing voter anger over rising energy prices by freeing states to open vast stretches of the country's coastline to oil exploration. In a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, nearly 80 percent said soaring prices at the pump are causing them financial hardship, the highest in surveys this decade.

"We must embark on a national mission to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil," McCain told reporters yesterday. In a speech today, he plans to add that "we have untapped oil reserves of at least 21 billion barrels in the United States. But a broad federal moratorium stands in the way of energy exploration and production. . . . It is time for the federal government to lift these restrictions."

Let's be clear about what we're talking about. The "vast stretches" of "coastline" in question are the OCS areas 50 to 200 miles off the Atlantic, Pacific, and Florida Gulf coasts — well beyond the horizon, so no one on a beach anywhere will have the slightest inkling that there are drilling rigs out there.

Oil spills? There were exactly none among the many platforms off Louisiana and Texas that were destroyed during the devastating 2005 hurricane season. The risk of spills from tankers bringing foreign oil to our ports is far higher than the risk from offshore drilling.

And the untapped reserves in the OCS are probably more than five times what McCain stated.

Nonetheless, McCain wants to leave it up to the states. I thought he was really fond of international law. The states have no jurisdiction beyond the 12-mile territorial limit. Under the international law of the sea, the federal government can control this kind of development out to the 200 mile "economic zone" limit. The only reason the states are involved in the OCS issue at all is because Congress chose to give them this power.  

Oh, well, at least McCain's taken a step in the right direction. What could have precipitated his change of heart? Maybe it was polls like this one (emphasis added):

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey-conducted before McCain announced his intentions on the issue–finds that 67% of voters believe that drilling should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other states. Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided. Conservative and moderate voters strongly support this approach, while liberals are more evenly divided (46% of liberals favor drilling, 37% oppose). [46-37 is evenly divided? – Ed.]

Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters believe it is at least somewhat likely that gas prices will go down if offshore oil drilling is allowed, although 27% don't believe it. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of conservatives say offshore drilling is at least somewhat likely to drive prices down. That view is shared by 57% of moderates and 50% of liberal voters.

According to the new survey, 85% of Republicans are in favor of offshore drilling as opposed to 57% of Democrats and 60% of unaffiliated voters. Those who call themselves conservatives favor such drilling 84% to 46% of liberals and 59% of self-designated moderates.

African-American voters are less supportive of such drilling than whites – 58% to 71%.

Let's see — two-thirds of all voters favor off-shore drilling (and I suspect that's without the pollsters explaining how far off-shore such drilling would actually be), and fewer than one in five are opposed. Republicans, conservatives, and moderates all strongly support drilling. A clear majority of Democrats and African-Americans are in favor. Even a plurality of self-described liberals support the idea!

McCain isn't exactly taking a big risk by changing his stance. In fact, I have to wonder what Obama and the leading Democrats are thinking when they continue toeing the enviro-whacko line on this issue. 

Clearly, most Americans agree with the nearly 900,000 who've signed Newt Gingrich's petition to drill here, drill now, pay less. Have you signed? Have you contributed $10 or more so that you'll get a bumper sticker?

What about your Congresscritter? Has he or she signed Rep. Lynn Westmoreland's pledge to support more land-based drilling, more offshore drilling, and more refineries? The list of signers is here. If your representative isn't on it, call or email their office and ask them to sign. If your representative is on the list, extend your thanks.

 Drill here. Drill now. Pay less.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Celebrate Carbon Belch Day!

Posted by Richard on June 12, 2008

Today is Carbon Belch Day. Did you register, like I suggested on Monday? As I noted then, increasing your carbon footprint could help protect our forests.

Using the Carbon Belch Calculator, I determined that my one-day carbon belch will emit about 129 pounds of CO2 (the average American's daily output is 41 pounds). Why not calculate your carbon belch? Then, be sure to register your belch by taking the Carbon Belch Day Pledge. Pledgers have already registered over 110 million pounds of CO2 to be released this day! 

Finally, if you can afford it, buy some carbon debits:

Perhaps the most absurd aspect of the entire Climate Alarmist agenda is the burgeoning "carbon credit" industry. To offset our green guilt, we are told to "buy" carbon credits to supposedly neutralize our CO2 footprint. Somehow, this bogus idea of environmental indulgences has become accepted as a real and valid way to deal with our Carbon Guilt.

That's why we've "created" Carbon Belch Debits (CBDs) — a meaningless term that will have just as much impact on Al Gore's "planetary emergency" as the carbon credits.

To increase my carbon belch, I'll be taking a longer lunch so I can run some errands (in an SUV! by myself!), and I'll eat beef. When I get home, I'll mow the lawn. It could wait until the weekend, but what the heck — it's for a good cause. Then I'll spend the evening doing about what I did on March 29 in protest of Earth Hour: maximizing my home energy consumption. (Now that I think about it, that 129 pound calculation is probably an underestimate because the Carbon Belch Calculator has no place to enter all the extra energy consumption I plan.)

As I said back in March, "My ancestors didn't survive the Black Plague and Dark Ages, create the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution, and bring about the past two hundred years of astonishing scientific and technological progress so that we could huddle in the dark."

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »