T. Boone Pickens, tells the Chicago Tribune about his new plan to help wean America from oil dependence -- and about bipartisan political indifference to America's energy problems.
The country has been in denial for a long time. I'm doing what I'm doing for the country. It's that simple. I think I know more about the oil industry than anybody else around. These [presidential] candidates do not understand. They don't understand how critical this all is.I've talked to presidents before about energy. I was going to be the key energy adviser for Bob Dole in 1996. He said he wanted me to be chairman of Texas when he ran against Bill Clinton. I said, "OK, if I get to be the energy guy in the deal."
So maybe a month or two later, I said, "Do you think it's time to talk about energy?" He said, sure, go ahead and talk about it. He listened and said, "OK, now I'm gonna teach you something about politics. Right there, on the floor, that's a sleeping dog. Politicians don't kick sleeping dogs. Bill Clinton doesn't give a damn about energy and I don't either. Neither one of us is gonna kick a sleeping dog and so energy will not be an issue in this campaign. But in case one of us stumbles over the dog," he said, "you will be the guy that advises me on the issue." Neither one of them had a problem with energy, just like he said. They didn't want anything to do with it.
Pretty damn telling, don't you think?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
The most optimistic estimate I have seen for ANWR and offshore drilling combined is 2 million barrels a day, with most estimates claiming one to one and a half million (if anyone knows better numbers speak up). Given that we currently use 21 million a day and that we are talking many years before said oil would actually arrive, I do not see those sources affecting our oil prices.
1. Energy prices are being driven up in part because of market expectations of future scarcity rather than just current supply and demand. Drilling in ANWR and elsewhere reduces that scarcity and thus mitigates the price problem.
2. ANWR production obviously wouldn't solve the entire energy price problem -- but how is that an argument against it? Hybrid vehicles have far less positive impact on our environment than ANWR would on energy prices; should hybrid production cease? It is one piece of a large puzzle.
3. ANWR is a political football only because the environmental movement has made a fetish out of it, as if limited drilling there would turn some pristine arctic treasure into a vast toxic wasteland.
Assuming a steady market, absolutely. We are looking at an accelerating market. Also, you assume in this that the other oil producers will help us out by continuing to produce at max production rates. Why would they do that? You think OPEC likes us? I find it much more probable that the other oil producers will cut back on their production to maintain prices.
I specifically said that we should eventually drill in those currently restricted areas as it will mean we send less money overseas. The problem I see with drilling is that Republicans offer it as the only solution. Democrats fail to acknowledge that ti will help us send less money overseas.
Steve
I specifically said that we should eventually drill in those currently restricted areas as it will mean we send less money overseas. The problem I see with drilling is that Republicans offer it as the only solution. Democrats fail to acknowledge that ti will help us send less money overseas.
I apologize for misreading you, Steve, and I completely agree with this. ANWR drilling is like a lot of political hot potatoes -- interest groups on both sides have made it a much bigger deal than it ought to be.
We need more petroleum production, including ANWR. No environmental catastrophe will result, despite the talking points from urban, northeastern Democrats. That said, more domestic drilling is only a small part of the solution to the overall energy problem. It isn't the silver bullet that Sean Hannity-ite Republicans pretend it is.
Lessee, our consumption will not likely go much lower than it is, suppliers are running past peak and are either keeping more for their own development [cf, Saudi Arabia, our #1 import source] or they're moving away from being net exporters [cf, Mexico, our #3 import source]. That last scares the bejeebers out of me because the oil fields down there are a key source of government revenue. Once that goes, as it will rather sooner than we'd like to think, the scatology hits the rotational cooling deviced in both a gap in oil supplies here and a wave of illegal immigration as people try to come to a better [?] economic situation.
Keep it in the ground for now. The longer it stays there, the more valuable it becomes.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.