McCain on Offshore Drilling - a Sad (and Costly?) Saga
| Tue Jun. 17, 2008 11:03 AM PDT
The easiest point to make about John McCain's recently declared support for offshore drilling is that it is a flip-flop. When McCain ran for president in 1999, he supported the current moratorium on offshore drilling, slated to last until 2012. But speaking in the Washington area on Monday, McCain said, "There are areas off our coasts that should be open to exploration and exploitation, and I hope we can take the first step by lifting the moratoria." McCain added that drilling "would be very helpful in the short term in resolving our energy crisis."
It's hard to blame anyone for changing his or her positions on energy issues over the past eight years — markets have changed, America's energy needs have changed, and prices have certainly changed. Even many Democrats have altered their positions on energy; most are much more supportive of climate change legislation than they once were.
You can blame McCain, however, for switching to the wrong position. Controversy over offshore drilling originated in the United States in 1969, when a cracked sea floor created a huge oil spill near Santa Barbara, California. The danger of a reoccurrence still exists, as do risks associated with having oil tankers routinely servicing offshore rigs. More important, offshore drilling is a band-aid. According to the federal Energy Information Administration, lifting the offshore drilling moratorium would have a minor impact on production and prices:
Mean estimates from the [Minerals Management Service] indicate that technically recoverable resources currently off limits in the lower 48 OCS (Outer Continental Shelf) total 18 billion barrels of crude oil and 77 trillion cubic feet of natural gas....
The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017. Total domestic production of crude oil from 2012 through 2030 in the OCS access case is projected to be 1.6 percent higher than in the reference case, and 3 percent higher in 2030 alone, at 5.6 million barrels per day. For the lower 48 OCS, annual crude oil production in 2030 is projected to be 7 percent higher—2.4 million barrels per day in the OCS access case compared with 2.2 million barrels per day in the reference case (Figure 20). Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.
At America's current consumption rates (20.8 million barrels of oil per day), the oil resources made available from lifting the moratorium would last this country less than two and a half years.
This shouldn't come as a surprise. The United States has just 3 percent of the world's oil reserves but consumes 25 percent of the world's oil. It should be clear we're not going to get out of this problem on the backs of our own oil rigs. Temporary solutions such as lifting the moratorium and drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (which McCain opposes) only bolsters the illusion that America's long-term energy problems can be solved through achieving fossil fuel-based energy independence. That's a pernicious myth, and one that inhibits real progress.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
This isn't the only way John McCain's environmentally friendly rhetoric ("Our environment [is] in peril," begins a recent McCain ad on global warming) is undermined by his actions. While he has pushed legislation that would curb emissions, he has skipped votes that would raise fuel standards for cars, and in July 2003 he voted against a Democratic proposal that sought to raise mileage standards on cars and some trucks to 40 mpg by 2015. He has repeatedly opposed tax breaks that would encourage the development of alternative energies, and once missed a vote that would fund tax credits for renewable energy by eliminating massive tax breaks to oil companies. For these reasons and others, environmental groups give him miserably low ratings.
McCain obviously believes that supporting offshore drilling will help his campaign among voters struggling with high gas prices. But there might be a political cost: Florida. No Republican has ever been elected to statewide office in Florida, where offshore drilling is unpopular, without endorsing the moratorium. That includes Governor Charlie Crist and Senator Mel Martinez, both McCain supporters. Any liberal advocacy group with a few extra bucks and a desire to push a crucial swing state toward Obama just got hand-delivered an attack ad.
And this isn't the only position McCain has taken that is going to hurt him in Florida. When he visited the state recently, he was attacked by Democrats for voting against a bill that supported hundreds of water projects around the country, including billions of dollars for everglades restoration. McCain argued that he voted against the bill because it was laden with pork, but that he would support a everglades-specific bill. And earlier this month Florida Democrats unveiled www.hurricanemccain.com, a site devoted to publicizing McCain's opposition to a national catastrophe fund. The fund, supported by both Florida Democrats and Republicans, would relieve the insurance burden borne by residents of states hit heaviest by natural disasters like hurricanes.
McCain's support for offshore drilling isn't just the wrong choice for the environment and for America's long-term energy policy. It's politically stupid. John McCain had every reason possible to make the right choice and he made the wrong one.
Comments
Is there a pattern with McCain? He's negating every positive thing he's done in the past, then sending out advertising that harks back to the 'old' McCain, without citing the 'new' McCain.
Will the real John McCain please stand up? Oh, yes, he has. Drill offshore, ignore CAFE standards, take money from the oil/gas/coal industries, then put out gauzy ads telling us how he likes the environment.
The 'compassionate' conservative gambit. Part II of that scenario.
Well DUH!!! What can you expect from the presumptive Rethuglican that repeatedly denies he is running for Shrub's 3rd term?!?! He has never denied that he isn't running for Cheney's 3rd term though now, has he?
Much like Shrub (thanks to Molly Ivins for that), this pandering dirt clod is nothing more than a tool for lobbyists and special interest groups. Especially those dealing in the weapons and oil bidnesses. If elected, it'll be like uncle Dick, Halliburton, big oil, and the Carlyle Group, never left the White House. These guys have been in bed so long, they won't even to bother to change the sheets.
Hey People,
I grew up in S. CA, and LOVED looking at the oil rigs at night, and even liked them in the day.:-) OUr oil problems come from you tree hugging libs not letting ANY new refineries be built in over 25 yrears, and no new drilling off our shores..!!!
Drill away, most people who live here support drilling..!!!
Bill
Hey audrey,
I think you don't know what the heck you are talking about. I have lived for 45 yrs in S. CA, and there has NEVER been an oil spil from any drilling platform off Huntington Beach..:-)
You beleive anythign you hear from wing nuts..HUH..?
BIll
Bill....Dont you think bleeding the earth dry is a bad idea? I mean oil was supposed to be a last resort for humans. Instead we hogged up the supply and are out greedy for more. Its long overdue to find other ways. I know someone like you doesnt really care about this planet so try this perspective. Its in our best interest to not wait for the last minute to worry about...the "now what do we do?" What about our kids and their kids and so on and so on? Better to have a jump on the problem and a solution. Get a crowbar and try to pry your mind open...just a little.
The environment always takes 2nd, 3rd & 4th place, which is why the medicine business is doing so well for allergies. The RIGHT WING usually persist to get their way, so if there is drilling along the coasts of the United States, it should not be private drilling that will mess up the coast, but be nationalized, any oil that is drilled on any coastline needs to belong to the people of the United States, and be handled by the government of the United States, so that any oil found would lower the cost of gasoline for the citizens and not just make exorbitant profits for CEO's of the oil corporations at the expense of the average citizens.
All oil, gas and natural resources should be nationalized to minimize exploitation of the earth.
More oil rigs won't solve the energy problem or lower the price of gas. As India and China consume evermore petroleum products, demand for oil will increase worldwide and so will price. The oil-rich nations know it's a finite resource.
Obviously, the future is alternative energy sources like solar, wind, wave motion, tide motion and so on. Atomic power comes with the nuclear waste problem. What do you do with something that remains radioactive for ten thousand years? I've read about a plan to send nuclear waste to the sun, but the cost of doing that is enormous.
What about these so-called "clean coal" strategies? America has more coal than just about anybody, but can burning coal ever really be clean? I'm skeptical...
One thing I know is that John McCain was pandering to billionaire oilmen down in Texas yesterday. Yet another one of his many flip-flops. The question is, what will he do if he becomes president? Only his corporate lobbyists can answer that one.
Bill, I know you are a troll but I have to post this - if you lived in So Cal for 45 years you probably heard about this, right?
http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/~jeff/sb_69oilspill/69oilspill_articles.html
Keep on trollin'
Submitted by lokywoky bitter hussein (not verified) on Wed Jun. 18, 2008 12:16 PM PDT.
I for one hope McSlime continues doing just what he is doing. If he loses Florida - so what? More power to Obama. I hope he continues alienating all sorts of constituencies and states and whoever else he can by his idiot mouth and stupid lies, pandering and flip-flops.
Go McSlime! Keep up the excellent work (on behalf of the opposition!)
Hey, let's drill EVERYWHERE. Let's get rid of ALL our environmental protections. Let's compete with China on who can do the most damange to the planet the quickest. They've taken the lead, but I'm sure we could catch up quickly. Voting in McBush would be a good first step. Let's be #1 once again.
Bill, what planet are you on?? Oh wait, probably one that ISN'T going through man-made global warming. If you're a right-winger, what the hell are you doing here anyway? Go back to your hole. The rest of us want the planet to be here for our grandchildren.
Here's another for your smart mouth Bill:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE1DA1230F937A25751C0A...
We don't have to drill off the coast because China and Mexico are doing it for us and they don't have epa restictions. We will just continue to buy oil from our shores at their jacked up prices. Everyone just get ready to go back to 70's style economy. Obama is the next Carter and ain can't beat him. You think the economy is bad now, Give Obama a few years and he could really outdo Carter on everything taxes to a war.
This war is Carters fault because he let the islamic inquasition get control of a very rich state. Bush had to be the bad guy and stop the radicals from overtaking another rich country which is exactly what was about to happen.
Stephen, I'm in Texas and there wasn't any oil men there. Most of the independence oil producers are scraping by with a 6% profit margin. Martha, nationalizing any product invites failure and corruption. Just ask any Mexicans about pemex. Thats actually what Chavez did in Venezuala.
This oil problem stems from the speculators on the futures market which is global. It also doesn't help that the dollar is week.
Blaming this on almighty bush is just showing stupidity. So please keep that to yourselve.
Bill has come back to do more of his trolling, but of course he give a rather foolish excuse for why why he thinks he is right. Did he not read the article at all or can he just not do math? Three percent of the worlds oil supply can in no way shape or form provide a quarter of the worlds use age for any period of time that would be useful. Of course its easy to ignore facts when your a right wing nut bag, or a troll, or both. Bill even points to articles on MoJo that reaffirm global warming with all their 'facts' and 'evidence' to try and prove what a giant sham it all is. You just can't fight the ignorance and the audacity of troll.
Never fear; Obama, or as he will soon be known, Emperor Taxenus Maximus, will soon ride to the rescue, and with a wave of his executive wand will command his legislative lackeys to nationalize the oil companies! And a roar of approval will arise from the McGovern Left who has waited lo these many years for a savior who will put all those evil corporations in their place. Of course, what's missed is that those evil corporations and those equally evil rich business owners provide all the jobs in this country. What's also missed is that there is no alternative to fossil fuels on the horizon workable on the scale we use petroleum products. So if all of us wish to start taking Amish 101, fine, but there appears to be little appetite for that option. My bet is the parking lot at Mother Jones is as full as the one at the Heritage Foundation with fossil fuel vehicles ready to take its owners the 30 to 50 miles home to the burbs.
When oil hits $200 a barrel next year and gas, assuming you can get it, hit $6 to $8 a gallon objections to drilling on US holdings will evaporate.
How about an actuality check reality check? Why just today MoJo revealed that the ships required for off shore drilling are in short supply. What you are talking about, more drilling, will take as long to do any good as finding alternatives will and won't solve any actual problems in the long run. There is no way to get at oil any faster than it would take to work out ways around oil. There is no point to going after more oil and you bring no evidence to prove that it will do anything, although it can be an excellent pander and a foolish excuse for an actual solution. I will certainly admit that people are foolish enough to buy the cheap line that drilling will solve everything, but the actual facts and evidence prove that to be false. Oh and by the way Obama wants to give middle class Americans a tax cut that is triple what Bush gave them in addition to eliminating tax breaks for the wealthy. Additionally BHO is from the Democratic party not the Socialist party smart guy, and Democrats regulate as necessary and rarely if ever nationalize. Perhaps you've been listening to too much right wing rhetoric to realize this but its Bear Sterns and the wall street crowed who are the true welfare queens in America, always looking for a bail out or some other kind of corporate welfare hand out.
KillThePlanet suggests:
{"Hey, let's drill EVERYWHERE. Let's get rid of ALL our environmental protections. Let's compete with China on who can do the most damange to the planet the quickest. They've taken the lead, but I'm sure we could catch up quickly. Voting in McBush would be a good first step. Let's be #1 once again."}
We could do that.
Or we could try to SAVE the planet by turning to biofuels made from food crops.
We'd starve the PEOPLE off of the planet, but hey, that'd be GOOD for the planet, wouldn't it?
I am a liberal and an environmentalist - but I kind of believe we ought to be drilling off the coasts (or maybe I am just playing devil's advocate). My reasoning is: we have basically outsourced our pollution by having others live with the mess from oil drilling. Maybe if we drilled here, and had some accidents, we would DO something about alternative energy sources.
I think it was an article about pollution in Africa that made me consider this. Do we have any reason to think other countries are being as careful as we would be? The Saudis may care about oil spills because it is inefficient - but they probably use foreign workers, so they certainly don't care about them!
Dan
When will people get it that oil is finite? We need invention, innovation, and risk taking to develop, implement and change the energy system we have today. In the meantime, gimmicks and quick fixes will be unveiled and praised by corporate america and its puppets like McSlime and McBush to get rich and move to hide in South America like the Nazis
We need to do more drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf. This is one thing that will help bring down the cost of fuel. Show your support for a new five-year plan for the years 2010-2015 that includes access to all offshore oil and gas supplies by visiting http://cea2.advocacyinteractive.com/?cea=blg and signing the letter for lower gas prices.
The seventy percent solution.
Americans are in love with the quick fix. If it sounds good and requires a minimum amount of effort on our part it's fine by us, and so we have a significant number of citizens supporting the idea of expanding domestic oil production.
Seventy percent, if the polls are correct. I find that interesting, since it's also been pointed out recently that two thirds of us are overweight. Is it a coincidence that virtually the same number of Americans lacking the character and self discipline to pursue a healthy lifestyle are also unwilling to make the effort and sacrifices necessary to solve our current energy crisis? I'm sure those of you who drive SUV's because they're safer, meaning safer for you and more dangerous to the rest of us, fit into at least one of those groups.
And while we're at it, isn't this about more than our failed energy policies? Hasn't it been demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that global warming is real? Its' effects are being felt even now, to say nothing about how much worse things will get in the future. But let's not kid ourselves. This isn't about solving anything other than $4/gallon gas prices. It wasn't in the hope of saving the planet that we started trading in our gas guzzling SUV's, it was when gas hit $3.50/gallon that this phenomenon occurred, just as the same scenario played out back in the 70's. Not surprising, considering most SUV drivers would be better served with more efficient and intelligently designed vehicles in the first place.
So why do we find ourselves with the problem today? Weren't the oil shortage and the subsequent crippling of out economy enough of a wakeup call back then? Certainly there was a failure of our political leaders to heed that warning, but ask yourselves this. Would those same seventy percenters' have elected anyone campaigning on a platform based on increased gas taxes to invest in alternative energy sources, let alone even remotely hinting at bigger sacrifices in order to secure energy independence and a cleaner environment for our future?
When discussing politics with people from other countries, the phrase "Americans deserve the people they elect" often comes up. To paraphrase a famous quote, "no one ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people." That quote applies to votes as well, as exemplified by the fact our very own president said recently that increased drilling will have no effect on gas prices in the immediate future and only minimal effect in the long run. He couldn't help pointing this out just as he was lifting the ban on offshore drilling!
Shouldn't the absurdity of basing so much of our economic livelihood on a finite source of energy also be mentioned in this discussion, as well as the fact that increased drilling will only increase the chances of adding yet another environmental disaster to the one we're trying to solve? Maybe we should look on the bright side. The more we drill the quicker we'll run out. The world's such a wonderful place now, just think how much better it'll be when we're all fighting over that last drop of oil!
But hey, arguing about drilling these days is like discussing religion. At some point a person just believes what they want to, and nothing anyone says is going to change that. Too bad believing something doesn't necessarily make it true. Too bad you can't teach common sense. The bottom line is, our politicians will continue to insult the intelligence of the rest of us while the seventy percenters' worry about their petty self interests, and while that's happening the situation will just keep getting worse.
Here's one thing I know to be true, America. There is no quick fix, and when it comes to saving our environment and securing a future for later generations, you're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem. Maybe it's time we stop listening to "the great masses of the plain people" and start making decisions that make sense, regardless of the personal sacrifices involved.
Mike M.
Submitted by Christopher McManus (not verified) on Fri Sep. 12, 2008 11:06 PM PDT.
Want to see a really amazing plan to launch the US into the future? Imagine an energy plan that would provide a fixed cost to gasoline at about $3 gallon, stop the dependence on foreign oil, give the US control over its own destiny and at the same time raise hundreds of billions of dollars annually to accelerate the development of alternate/sustainable energy, pay down the national debt and shore up the SS system. You have to see details at www.openmatrix.com/energy
