I find it astonishing to see members of the current version of the Republican Party posing for pictures next to hybrid vehicles and touting the virtues of conservation. It is equally disturbing to hear the president talk of increasing the CAFÉ standards as a way of reducing demand. Where were these people six years ago? Do they only come out of their cave in a crisis and then try to fool the American people into believing they really care with an insulting $100 check?
I think everyone has forgotten what Vice President Cheney said about conservation nearly six years ago. He said that conservation was a nice virtue, but not part of a sound energy policy. Can any statement be more ignorant of the facts and documented science?
I am not and have never been a tree hugger, but politicians who dismiss conservation as part of a sound energy policy are as foolish as the conservationists who refuse to allow wind farms to be built for fear that migratory birds will be killed. One extreme is as bad as another. An energy policy must include, exploration, technology, government intervention via tax incentives and disincentives, as well as conservation and behavior modification.
A $100 bogus pandering by Senator Bill Frist aside, there is no short term fix to this issue. The crisis is not $3.00/gallon gas; it is our dependency on foreign oil and on oil itself. The high price of gas may, in the short term, help to curb waste and reduce demand as well as give the oil companies a pot of cash to use for exploration.
President Bush is only now talking about our dependency, but the issue goes back many decades. While Al Gore did not and does not have all the answers on this issue, nor does anyone else, he has been talking about it throughout his political life, as have others. While I don’t believe either President Bush or Vice President Cheney could be accused of collusion, they are simply old oil men who are dedicated to protecting the status quo. They believe only in finding additional supplies and ignore the science and behavioral virtues of conservation. They need only to look as far as the New York City water crisis of the late 80s and 90s where through conservation, the urgent need for a new pipeline was able to be delayed. Conservation is not a fad or pseudo science. It is or should be part of any real energy policy.
They tout ANWAR as the holy grail of their energy policy and blame the democrats for now allowing the drilling in this region. Both are wrong. We do need to continually find new sources of oil and I, for one, feel we can drill anywhere safely and with little disruption to the environment. Until we begin to flatten or reduce our demand for oil, we have to find new areas to drill.
If it were up to the tree huggers, we would never build a wind farm, a nuclear power plant, a new refinery or ever drill anywhere again. Even Edward Kennedy does not want a wind farm off shore form his home. I don’t know what form of energy they want us to use, but a compromise has to be part of a sound energy policy.
These two extremes must give way to a multi-faceted long term approach. We need a Manhattan Project of sorts. This nation needs to declare war on our dependency on foreign oil. We are at our best when at war, but it has to be a war that all Americans can relate to and see the need to wage it. The Brazilians have done it. Why can’t we? As the world’s largest consumer, we should have been way out in front of this issue instead of being well back in the pack. As the world’s technology leader, this is just an embarrassment and leads other nations to feel that we just don’t care until the problem blows up in our face.
A Common Sense Energy Policy:
1. The government must lead the way through incentives and disincentives to both business and the people of this nation. There are some things so important that our government must intrude into both the marketplace and into our daily lives to bring about needed change. This is one of those times and issues that cannot be left up to the pure capitalism or the whim of the populace. The government can chart a new path for this nation. It will only take a president with a clear and persuasive vision and a congress to do the right thing for our nation and to have the strength to say no to special interests. You can bet that the special interests will be out in force from both ends of the political, business and environmental spectrum to wage their own war against any change to the status quo.
a. Tax incentives to the automotive industry to produce more fuel efficient vehicles. There must be additional incentives to individuals to buy those vehicles.
b. Agricultural incentives for farmers to grow “Energy Crops”. We pay farmers not to grow crops. Why not pay them to grow crops that can be used to make ethanol?
c. Tax incentive to power companies, business and individuals to use solar, wind, geothermal and other technologies to produce electricity. Every federal building should have solar panels to produce electricity and new construction could easily use Ground Source Geothermal heating and cooling.
d. Government grants to colleges and universities to explore new technologies and to improve on what we now use. As an example; my own car gets 40mpg on regular gas and it is 10 years old with 125,000 miles. There is not a single vehicle today aside from a few hybrids and diesels that have improved on this. Why Not? Every other product has been improved over the past 10 years and is barely recognizable from its decade old predecessor. I can’t believe the internal combustion engine can’t be improved.
I know the question will come up as to how to pay for these incentives and the politicians will laugh when I mention the word waste and earmarks, but each of those $100,000 chunks of pork and those $50,000,000 bridges and the like add up to billions of $$. Government has grown larger in the past six years than at any time since LBJ. From the Dept. of Homeland Security to the Directorate of Central Intelligence, from the Prescription Drug Plan to the war in Iraq, and finally to the recently approved Transportation spending bill, I think we can all find enough in just a few years to fund an explosion of new technologies and incentives.
Ronald Reagan would turn over in is grave to see what the Republican Party has turned into. The national treasury has become the play money piggy bank for every wasteful project anyone can think of to buy votes back home. The lobbyists buy the politicians, not with envelopes, but it is damn close to it. (Duke Cunningham aside) The politicians find wasteful earmarks to buy votes with and place them in major spending bills at 2am. Why fix the thousands of bridges that need repair when you can build a new one to nowhere? Reagan vetoed a bill with only a handful of earmarks. Bush never met a spending bill he didn’t like. It must be like a sugar high. The more you eat, the more you want. I know I digress, but it just makes me sick to see conservatism disappear.
The republicans and democrats used to be different coins with completely different ideals and visions. As of 2006, neither has a vision for the future of this nation and they are simply different sides of the same coin, lacking in ethics, vision, dedication and conscience.
4. There must be a national campaign for conservation. We don’t want to restrict freedoms, but we do need to change behavior. Every other developed nation as well as many developing nations attempts to change behavior when it is in the best interest of the nation. Just a small drop in demand will have a huge impact on the price of oil/gas. We know based on the ever increasing demands of the major developing nations, namely China and India, that unless we do something revolutionary, our world supply of oil will tip to a critical point. Depending on which expert you talk to, may have peaked or be close. Even with increased exploration and production, we can only hope to keep pace with demand. Conservation must have a place at the table. It all adds up.
5. Finally, we do have to continue to find new sources of oil for many years to come until we can flatter and later reduce our demand from current levels and we have to untie the hands of the fuel distribution network by reducing the dozens of regional blends of gasoline.
a. Develop the untapped Gulf of Mexico, ANWAR, Oil Shale, Tar Sands, etc. As the price goes up, the alternative sources become cost effective.
b. There is a two-fold benefit to higher oil prices: The energy companies will have the needed capital to find and develop new oil fields as well as to explore new technologies for producing oil synthetically. Additionally, behavior will shift as Americans switch to higher efficiency vehicles and use less fuel.
c. There are so many blend of gasoline that when there is a regional shortage, we can’t simply ship more to the affected area as we do with the power grid. It has to be refined locally. Reducing blends will reduce costs and ease the supply shortfalls.
d. A renewed push for public transportation. We could have high speed rail lines between many major urban areas, but we don’t. Only the government can do this. Again, every other developed nation has.
We have been spoiled and complacent about energy, but as the price of gas goes up, our awareness of the remedies available will increase also. Politicians are feeling the heat when they should have been looking out for our interests all along. Keep the $100 bucks Senator Frist. Try having a “Unique for Washington” vision for America. Instead of wasting time trying to keep the Delays of the world in power, do what is right. I know it takes courage to stand alone, and few have what it takes these days, but there are some visionaries out inside the Beltway. Speak Up.
