Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleSun Editorial:
Bush’s same old rhetoric
President presses Congress, again, to allow oil drilling in Alaskan refuge
Friday, May 2, 2008 | 2:09 a.m.
This week President Bush dusted off his calls for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, saying it would help lower the nation’s skyrocketing gasoline prices.
Speaking from the Rose Garden on Tuesday, Bush said if Congress “is truly interested in solving the problem” it could “send the right signal” by increasing oil exploration on U.S. soil, starting with ANWR — a move that “likely will lower gas prices.”
What’s more, the president said opposing drilling in the nation’s largest wildlife refuge means “you don’t care about the gasoline prices that people are paying.”
In reality, energy experts say pumping the refuge’s estimated 11 billion barrels of oil could take at least a decade and would not result in lower gasoline prices — now or in the future.
Bush also said to control rising energy prices, the United States should be building new oil refineries and nuclear power plants and ease environmental restrictions that require power plants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
These policies are nothing new, of course; Bush has been promoting them since entering the White House in 2001. As he trotted them out again this week, oil companies BP and Royal Dutch Shell announced they had turned a record $17 billion in profits in the first quarter of the year.
“Only President Bush could allow Big Oil to write our nation’s energy policy,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said.
After nearly eight years of unsuccessfully promoting these shortsighted approaches — they failed even when Republicans controlled Congress — it would seem that Bush would get the message. The United States needs an energy policy that provides affordable alternatives that don’t pollute and destroy our land, water and air.
Discussion: comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
No trusted comments have been posted.
Post a comment
Everything Under the Sun
Blogs
The Kats Report
Las Vegas Philharmonic says search for new music director to begin 'immediately' (1 Comment)
With Shenandoah project stalled, Wayne Newton hits back legally (7 Comments)
Where does a Playmate play when she turns 21? Vegas! (3 Comments)
Ice Ice Billy
The road to six-toed cats and Mayor Bubba
The Kats Report
David Itkin tells L.V. Philharmonic officials he's on his way out (14 Comments)
Diamond Dave sells it well as Van Halen pours out the power at MGM Grand (2 Comments)
Entering debut at Tryst, Nick Hissom is a model for a rapid rise to prominence (3 Comments)
- Locally owned and independent since 1950; Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, best news website in the nation & DuPont Award for broadcast journalism
Warmed over socialist pablum. As false and destructive then as it is when warmed over.
Choking free-world economies is the main goal of the eco-socialist these last several decades. Shared misery and shared poverty the objective.
Bush is more than correct in this. To be held hostage to foreign entities who hate our guts - then - doing actively standing in the way of trying to allieviate this huge issue IS the issue underLYING this slow corrosion of our way of life.
With the "man-made destruction of the planet if we use oil" propaganda falling apart by the week, oil remains IT as an energy source. The rest of the world knows it and is drilling as if there is no tomorrow.
If the American liberal has their way, there will be no tomorrow for our success, freedoms and way of life as oil is IT, in the absence of other clean technologies undeveloped to take over.
The Democrats don't care about high gas prices only bashing Bush who happens to be right on this issue. We can't expect gas prices to go down when we haven't built a refinery since the 1970's. They also mandated the 25% alternate fuels as well as farmer subsidies which has skyrocketed the cost of gasoline and food.
We are sitting on the largest oil reserves in the world but we can't drill because of these idiots. Remember that when you fill your tank this week. Just imagine the gas prices with Hillary or Obama and Dina Taxus and the Democrats in power. We'll be a third world country in one term when they allow millions of illegals to come in and register to vote.
WAKE UP DEMOCRATS, YOU'RE GIVING YOUR COUNTRY AWAY!!!
Oil remains IT as an energy source because we haven't done anything to replace it. The Europeans are far ahead of us in this regard and will be much better able to handle the coming storm.
The future of energy does not lie in the continued use of fossil fuels regardless of how you feel about global warming. Fossil fuels are finite, and the supplies are running out. Further, the supply of oil is largely not to be found in the US.
Helen,
Where did you get the idea that we are sitting on the largest oil reserves in the world? Where would those be, Iraq?
The people who are giving this country away are those who continue to insist that we rely on oil as our primary energy source. More and more of our national security is being given over to the people who control the oil. Would we be in Iraq if we didn't need Middle Eastern oil?
We need to embark on a crash program of national energy independence. But national energy independence doesn't mean relying on domestic oil reserves; that supply is finite. Drilling domestically may or may not help us in the short term, but it doesn't protect us against the day the oil runs out, and it does very little, if anything, to postpone that day. Energy independence means using renewable sources of energy that we can create for ourselves. Sources of energy that do not pollute, hopefully. Certainly no one alternative will replace oil by itself, but a number of them together will. We need to get started now.
As China and India compete with us more and more for the oil to be found throughout the world, our national security is diminished. Look at what's happening now with the price of a barrel of oil. China holds hundreds of billions of dollars of our debt. They have the capability to do serious harm to the value of the dollar. The current oil price situation is a direct result of the fact that the dollar has diminished in value dramatically. Imagine what would happen to our ability to compete with the Chinese for world oil supplies if they started dumping t-bills.
We need to get off of oil now.
John, you're ignoring the fact that the Republicans are innately selfish, and don't care about any future consequences, or the world they're creating for their children.
They don't care that oil is finite, since it will last throughout THEIR lifetime. Screw future generations, they need to get theirs.
Discounting scientific fact as socialist propaganda is easy when your dogma mandates you profit without consequence.
We're all consumers, but the Republicans are shamelessly greedy. Give me more! Tax me less! They never seem to total that equation to discover it equals another debt.
The final oil grab has just begun. With the Chinese and Indian economies ramping up, we're nowhere near the international peak demand. By the time we could dump the infrastructure into ANWR to start pumping the oil, the demand will have increased so much that there will be no net reduction in the cost of oil. The citizenry of China and India have just begun to purchase cars. In three years, we'll look back on $3.50 a gallon with fondness.
We would be smart to look at economies like Brazil, who have no dependence on foreign oil because 72% of the cars produced last year can run on ethanol.
Leaving "oil in the ground" while choking off America's economy, livlihoods, national security and our very future as a nation IS the aim of the eco-socialist, in league with those very nations and terrorist groups who would love to see america die.
"JF": Educate yourself on the new oil / shale / sand finds in North America. Iraq has already sold their main oil futures contracts to entities other than America for the most part. We need to start using what the liberal has shamed and guilted and lawsuited America away from, exploration and refining our own resources. Anything else in lieu of having green-tech ready and on board is asinine and corrosive.
"Thebs": There is absolutely no one who can identify how much oil the world holds still. No one. Finds are happening all the time. The rest of your screed is simply blaming Republicans for what the DemocRAT has been doing for decades = usual liberal dogma of the first order. It is people like YOU who are "screwing future generations". For sure!
thebs: I forgot = the Brazil comment is (also) misleading and bogus because Brazil is drilling enough OIL off its own shores to feed its needs. The comment that the reason Brazil is "independent" is because "72% of its cars CAN run on Ethanol" = is irrelevant to the independence of Brazil re: energy.
It's OIL which runs Brazil, while the chasing of the holy grail of Ethanol is skyrocketing food prices around the globe = especially in the poorer American and Latin American world = hurting the poor the liberals claims to wanna be there for, lol......
NVMakz, you can continue to suckle at the teat of a dead technology. According to you, diversifying our energy resources will only lead to "choking off America's economy, livelihoods, national security and future as a nation."
That reminds me of a passage from a book I once read. "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" That rings true for one thing alone: the oil companies. Their economic livelihoods and future hang in the balance. They've had a century to expand the scope of their business plans and they've failed.
Yes, you continue to say that if we don't use oil, we're all going to die poor. In reality, you're funding the very people who seek to attack us. If anyone is "in league with... terrorist groups" it's the sycophantic Republicans who work fervently to increase our dependence on oil.
Wasn't it Bush who was holding hands with Crown Prince Abdullah as they strolled through the garden?
Brazil is able to be independent because their vehicles are flex fuel which can run either ethanol or gasoline, or a combination of both. Ethanol currently accounts for more than 40% of fuel used in Brazil. So no, the fact that 72% of the cars sold last year in Brazil can run on ethanol is not irrelevant. It's the reason they're independent. And as the oil supply dwindles, they're uniquely positioned to transition to other fuels. They also use sugar cane-derived ethanol, which is plentiful in Brazil an have worked to identify drought and pest-resistant cane to utilize as the source.
As for your ill-conceived connection between Brazil's ethanol and food prices, let me let you in on a little secret: the price of oil skyrocketing has almost exactly coincided with the price of food increasing. With the increased cost of oil comes an increase in the cost of shipping, which then effects the cost of transporting food from farms to supermarkets. Again, basic economic principles here.
Only by diversifying our energy supply will we truly be insulated from radical market shifts. I thought the Republicans had a better grasp of basic economic principles. Obviously, I overestimated them.
You also still fail to realize John's point, NVMakz. Oil is finite. That means it runs out. If oil is IT, as you claim, and you make no headway in reducing demand or diversifying the source, you are dooming future generations. At some point, demand will outstrip supply. At some point beyond that, the supply will cease to exist.
Using your own words, "absolutely no one can identify how much oil the world holds still." Doesn't this scare you to death? It's akin to driving through Death Valley in a Hummer that lacks a gas gauge. We may make it out, we may not. No one knows. Instead, you just want us to keep hoping that we'll go another 10 or 50 or 100 miles. Eventually the tank runs dry.
You're taking an irresponsible and illogical risk. It doesn't follow basic logic. But again, I overestimate...
What you didn't get of what I posted, you simply warped and twisted.
If oil IS finite, how much - exactly - is there?
I didn't equate Brazil's independence to world-wide ethanol prices.
The Death Valley thing is just infantile and sad debating. 'Nuff said.
If we drill and develop - that kills your "point" about being so beholden to foreigners who - aligned with the American liberal - wish our way of life dead. Corroders of a feather, I guess.
The risks liberals take IS getting new tech on-line before our economy weakens and possibly crashes = while ignoring 30-100 billion barrels (in No. America) of what we have - and the liberal makes we all "suckle at the teat of a dead technology" = Meanwhile, consistently financially enriching those who wish we were dead. Good going, liberal.........
Drill, refine and damm the eco-libfacist to a fiery hell, fueled by oil closer to there than here....
NVMakz,
Are you saying, then, that the supply of oil is infinite? Certainly that can't be the case.
The course the conservatives want us to take is one we know will fail at some point or another because we know the supply of oil is finite. We know this becasue it isn't infinite. Therefore, we will not only run out of oil at some point in the future (and you're correct to the extent that nobody can say when that will be), but we will come into increasing competition with other countries for the supply that exists. Further, as the economies of India and China develop, the day our oil runs out gets closer at an exponential, rather than linear, rate.
Shale oil is not new; only expensive to extract and extremely dirty. In any event,extracting it only delays the inevitable. And yes, I get it that delaying the day when we have no oil is advantageous, but Republicans (for the most part) are opposed to even exploring the possibility of alternative sources of energy. Certainly our President and his cohorts haven't spent any time looking for alternatives. Their course of action has been to invade another country to establish a permanent American presence in the heart of the Middle East. Don't you think our long-term national interests would be better served by exploring ways to keep us from invasions and competitions with the Chinese and the Indians over what must be a finite resource?
Certainly as the price of oil continues to climb (and don't believe that more domestic drilling or use of shale oil will do anything to alleviate that) what were once considered unrealistic alternatives to oil are becoming much more attractive. Our current economic hardships have been brought about, in large part, because we are over-reliant on oil. We need to start getting ourselves off of this addiction. Every day we wait puts our national security more and more at risk.
1. "IF oil IS finite, how much - exactly - is there?"
If it's finite? Are you kidding me?
2. "I didn't equate Brazil's independence to world-wide ethanol prices."
I didn't say you did. YOU said the "chasing of the holy grail of Ethanol is skyrocketing food prices around the globe." I answered that by arguing that the price of oil is increasing food prices around the world.
3. "If we drill and develop... blah blah liberals think like terrorists."
If we drill and develop we're still dependent on a finite resource. If you truly want to be independent, oil will never be the answer. Instead, the Republican Party fights every bit of progress. Higher CAFE standards? Took a Democratic congress to deliver, and even then Bob Lutz wouldn't stop whining about it.
4. "Risks liberals take IS getting new tech on-line before... doom and gloom cause we have no oil."
No, my suggestion is to take all that money that you would see put to oil exploration and refining and put it toward a national infrastructure of hydrogen refilling stations. We're already seeing cars like Honda's FCX Clarity or GM's Hydrogen Equinox that can take advantage. Couple those with plug-in vehicles like GM's upcoming Volt, or Honda's Civic GX which runs on natural gas and can be refilled at home. This is technology that is already in use. It would not be difficult to mass market if the infrastructure was there.
The point is: you have no idea how much oil is left. First you argue that NO ONE can tell us how much oil is left, then you make a dramatic statement that we have somewhere between 30-100 billion barrels of oil in North America. Those statements directly contradict each other. (Not to mention that by saying "how much is left" you're agreeing that it's finite.)
And if you don't know how much is left, it's inane and reckless to continue on our current path without planning a massive shift away from a petroleum-based economy. Get your head out of the sand and recognize reality.
I argue it's a moot point because we should be moving beyond oil, it's a dead, inefficient technology that has left us beholden to the very terrorists and evildoers that you think liberals somehow idolize. Oil is the technology of terrorists.
Meanwhile you have the leader of the Republican party holding hands with the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, yet you think the liberals are aligned with the terrorist mindset? That, like your entire line of reasoning, makes no sense.
But I guess you equate hydrogen cars and other green technologies with an assault on our way of life. Stop being so melodramatic. A Prius is not 9/11.
Thebs:
1) You said oil is finite. How much is there??
2) Corn and wheat prices are skyrocketing around the world. Basic foodstuff acquisition prices always mean more than the gas expenditures in determining prices. By a long shot.
3) By not drilling, da liberal keeps us dependent on those who hate our guts. Stopping America from drilling to get our own is more proof of liberals keeping us tied to those who want us dead. Oil is IT, until others come on line. Unplugging oil is irresponsible - the basic hallmark of da liberal.
4) The increased price paid for gas, when not attempting to increase supplies = are an unnecessary tax on our society = tying up capital which could be used for development. Liberals love taxes, but government has never been a wealth generator.
5) The rest: My study of the latest estimates of actual oil finds of 30-100 billion barrels in No. America doesn't contradict at all the fact that no one knows how much is available world wide. Simply your logical fallacy.
There are plans to develop alternatives. Thing is, they are nowhere near replacement status. Choking our life re: oil is treasonous and the usual undermining da liberal is a pro at.
What's insane and reckless is to keep us bowing before America's enemies, financing terrorism and the rise of a "religion" which wants us dead. This is the province of da liberal. "Oil IS the technology of terrorists", and da liberal keeps them more involved with us than we can be if we develop our own. Face facts on this point: you lose.........
Holding hands is a common way, in the Middle East, of showing friendship or agreement in some context. It was symbolic, but da liberal always misintreprtes this. This short sentence makes no sense at all. You must be running out of gas.
Keep guessing about what I equate with whatever. Green is great. I wish it was an adequate replacement right now. BUT, with da liberal interfering with our own abilities to help ourselves, well, that simply isn't the "American Way".Stop being so corrosive and undermining. i like the Prius. There will be another 9/11 if da lib has their way.