The Great Energy Confusion

As usual Samuelson does not think beyond the box.

Obama is right. Off-shore drilling will not solve our problem. According to Newsweek???s own fact checkers it will take about 22 years for any one obtained from off-shore drilling to reach the market.

In addition, off-shore drilling contains risks that no one, especially Samuelson has ever imagined. First, it will pollute the ocean. The ocean is a source of food for millions of people. We may need to turn to the ocean at last as a source for ???gray??? water. If permit we turn the ocean into a toilet bowl of toxic wastes, we are, in effect, poisoning our own children???s futures.

Furthermore, drilling platforms, especially int in the Gulf of Mexico, are subject to hurricane damage. As the globe warms, the number of hurricanes and their severity is increasing. The oil industry still hasn???t fully recovered from the damage of Hurricane Katrina. Furthermore off-shore drilling rigs are inviting targets for pirates and terrorists. And piracy is already alive and well. Because oil companies love to recruit cheap off-shore labor from contracting companies in Asia, the chance of pirates and terrorists infiltrating our oil platfomrs ie excellent

Finally, as Air America talk show host Rachel Maddow observed, the oil from off-shore drilling does not belong to the U.S. It belongs to the oil companies that own the rigs. They may decide to pocket the generous subsidies that John McCain is proposing to give them, but sell the oil somewhere else. Also, there is no guarantee that American oil companies will remain American. They may follow the lead of that All-American Halliburton, once chaired by that all- American hero Dick Cheney, and re-locate to Dubai. They may even go to Moscow, the new mecca for multi-billionaires, provided the Russian government, also dominated by multi-billionaries provided them a ???deal??? they can???t refuse.

The rich do not owe any allegiance to America. They only thing they owe allegiance to is their own money.

Although Obama has moved towards ???limited??? off-shore drilling, he???s more than right when he points out the short-comings of off-shore drilling than either McCain or Samuelson

These are only some of the facts that Samuelson ignores. He ought to read his own magazine Newsweek, more carefully. About two months ago, Fahreed Zakaria interviewed genome pineer Craig Venter, who asserts that we can produce a fuel from bacteria. Samuelson ought to read the October 2007 issue of National Geographic which examines all the possible biofuels. Algae, produced from the exhausts of coal-burning power plants offers a lot of possibilities. There???s also a massive field of algae off the coast of Oregon, created by global warming, which is destroying Oregon???s fishing industry. That field could be our Saudi Arabia and Iraq if we had the right ledership.

According to Samuelson???s statisics there is no way we can free ourselves from fossil fuel. Of course, I can remember back in 2003 that Samuelson and his statistics proved that we could easily afford the war in Iraq. Now, thanks to Samuelson???s mis-information we???re $ 9 trillion dollars in debt. I also noticed that in that article there was no mention of the loss of human life, either American or Iraqi, an omission which causes me to wonder whether Samuelson walks with two feet or four, as Paul D would say.

I suppose that Samuelson believes that solar water heaters are fool???s pipe dream. However if you go to Greece, you???ll solar energy water heaters almost everywhere. If you flew into LAX, you can???t help notice the sea of roofs. What would happen if we covered those roofs with solar energy collectors. Samuelson needs to read the article in his own magazine. One features T Boone . Nevertheless, Pickens, motivated by sheer greed is able to see the Midwest as a Saudi Arabia for wind energy. He also could read some of the solar energy proposals of William McDonough. And incidentally, many European railways are greening their own rail networks.

Samuels should also read ???Runagate??? by Robert Hayden, in which runaway slaves ???went on a journey from can???t to can.??? That???s what we need to do. And, to repeat Obama???s famous words, Yes, we can.???

Of course with an "Eeyore" like Samuelson there's nothing we could NOT accomplish. We could never build a transcontinental railroad, never land on the moon, never win WWII, and never tie our shoes! "It's so far to reach! Oh my! Present estimates prove we can never reach those toesies!"

Well, don't listen to Eeyore. We CAN drill our way out. Real geologists and engineers know that - the ones out in the actual field- not some spin doctor warming a chair. There are HUGE reserves. Absolutely humongous. Much MORE than we need. All it requires is men and machinery--and of course moving the Eeyores off to the sidelines so they have plenty of room to cry themselves to sleep while the work gets done.

To put it another way: If all the countries in the world fell into a black hole we could and would extract all the oil we need and all by ourselves. Or, if we had a war like WWII to win, we would gear up but pronto and get 100% of the oil we need to run our economy and preserve the nation - and ahead of schedule. I would get done. Count on it. So let the Eeyores stand on the sidelines sadly braying "nooooo...". It's what they do. It's all they do.

Bush???s own Energy Information Agency report says that it will take at least 10 years to bring any offshore oil online and 20 years to reach peak production of 200,000 barrels per day. That is 0.2 percent of current world production. A drop in the bucket that will have no effect on the price of gas then or now.

Improving fuel efficiency to 37 MPG would save 3.3 million barrels per day which could have a gas price impact, but it will probably be overwhelmed by world demand. Energy prices are going up no matter who is elected.

Well, I suppose we could discuss the candor of any politician in the 21st Century at great length and come out wanting. As far as simplicity goes, I'm no simpleton. I have a clear view of my son's future.

I live in Denver, Colorado. We are suffering through a very severe drought this summer - the worst in 30 years. Because we had an abundance of water supply from heavy 2007 snows, our water restrictions are unenforced. We had our first significant rainfall last Friday evening. An entire summer's worth in one night. And yet, there are lovely green yards all over Denver, where the owners are watering enough to fill the gutters, which runs straight down the sewer drains. Many of these yards boast Denver Water Department signs beseeching "Only Use What You Need." Won???t our signs, green lawns, newly paved streets, and wonderful convention facilities impress the world for the DNC? Too bad we provide our students with the lowest funding for public education in the country.

We live in a country where people want what they want. And they will keep using until the ability to use is taken from them. Even those with a clear understanding of the serious energy (et al) crises we will certainly be experiencing fully in the very near future. It's the chaos theory at it's grandest. American gluttons consuming everything in sight with profits that soar beyond our wildest dreams. Profit margins have become the "God" of capitalism and the customer is never right, in fact consumers are of little or no concern. We need what "they" have and since we continue to pay no matter what "they" charge, we can only blame ourselves.

Our children, our children's children, and our grandchildren's children, will be left with a world that needs to be reinvented. This reinventing will occur only if we survive without killing each other when the resources we depend on are no longer available and no one has taken serious steps to develop alternatives. Why we don't collectively place solar panels on every single structure RIGHT NOW is just beyond my comprehension. Such an easy and inexpensive fix for more than half of our energy consumption... And yet, as with all chaos induced changes... things are not yet "bad enough." And for the oil companies, there are still huge profits to be had.

The worst part is that this has now become a partisan issue. Bikini clad Paris Hilton described the process we could employ precisely and with intelligence. It really is that simple. But articles like this, or for that matter, the spoken and written word being disseminated to all through print and other media do little to encourage cooperation or to educate our society on the seriousness of our current dilemma. Profit will be the main objective for those who have, and survival will be the main objective for those who have not. God Bless US and God Bless America!!!!

Well, I suppose we could discuss the candor of any politician in the 21st Century at great length and come out wanting. As far as simplicity goes, I'm no simpleton. I have a clear view of my son's future.

I live in Denver, Colorado. We are suffering through a very severe drought this summer - the worst in 30 years. Because we had an abundance of water supply from heavy 2007 snows, our water restrictions are unenforced. We had our first significant rainfall last Friday evening. An entire summer's worth in one night. And yet, there are lovely green yards all over Denver, where the owners are watering enough to fill the gutters, which runs straight down the sewer drains. Many of these yards boast Denver Water Department signs beseeching "Only Use What You Need." Won???t our signs, green lawns, newly paved streets, and wonderful convention facilities impress the world for the DNC? Too bad we provide our students with the lowest funding for public education in the country.

We live in a country where people want what they want. And they will keep using until the ability to use is taken from them. Even those with a clear understanding of the serious energy (et al) crises we will certainly be experiencing fully in the very near future. It's the chaos theory at it's grandest. American gluttons consuming everything in sight with profits that soar beyond our wildest dreams. Profit margins have become the "God" of capitalism and the customer is never right, in fact consumers are of little or no concern. We need what "they" have and since we continue to pay no matter what "they" charge, we can only blame ourselves.

Our children, our children's children, and our grandchildren's children, will be left with a world that needs to be reinvented. This reinventing will occur only if we survive without killing each other when the resources we depend on are no longer available and no one has taken serious steps to develop alternatives. Why we don't collectively place solar panels on every single structure RIGHT NOW is just beyond my comprehension. Such an easy and inexpensive fix for more than half of our energy consumption... And yet, as with all chaos induced changes... things are not yet "bad enough." And for the oil companies, there are still huge profits to be had.

The worst part is that this has now become a partisan issue. Bikini clad Paris Hilton described the process we could employ precisely and with intelligence. It really is that simple. But articles like this, or for that matter, the spoken and written word being disseminated to all through print and other media do little to encourage cooperation or to educate our society on the seriousness of our current dilemma. Profit will be the main objective for those who have, and survival will be the main objective for those who have not. God Bless US and God Bless America!!!!

The reason they overlap substantially is because O stole it, just like he did Hillary's, he tweaks it here and there but overall same thing ... the man doesn't have one original thought in his head. Sorry you lose on this one, McCain had his plan out months ago, and it's a good plan. O can't piggy back on this one.

when it comes to Energy, McCain is crawling on E.

when it omes to energy McCain is running on E.

I wonder how many Americans realize that Samuelson is the best columnist in the nation.

your article was interesting but you did not address the contention of the Democrats that the oil companies are not drilling on public land where they already have been granted access. Also, how about
the Bakken oil field in North Dakota where drilling is now underway, and it contains more oil than remains in Texas.
bpm

Count the number of cars with one person and you will get a hint of why the country needs to change the way it thinks about transportation. Why trucks and not more use of trains to move cargo? The waste of energy in this country is beyond measure.

The McCain drilling strategy is a win for the Republicans, maybe just in time for the November elections.

More drilling will the lower the rate at which the U.S. is increasingly dependent on imported oil in the future.

Drilling for oil in ecologically sensitive areas is a partisan political issue.

The impacts of Peak Oil, however, will soon shift the focus of debate toward how to survive high oil prices, maybe as soon as an attack on Iran.

Increasingly, average Americans will not be able to afford both fuel oil for heating and gasoline for commuting to work (starting in to be felt more in November). When unemployment increases in the ever worsening global recession, a larger and larger percentage of people will not be able to pay for fuel oil to heat their homes. These realities will shock the nation with big increases in home heating bills this winter (starting in November). Oil prices will be higher for the winter of 2009.

In such an environment, the Democrats are making a mistake with their ???no drilling??? position on this issue. As Peak Oil becomes more widely known as the cause of economic malaise, public attitudes will shift away from environmental concerns and toward more drilling.

According to energy investment banker Matthew Simmons and other independent forecasters, global crude oil production is now declining, from 74 million barrels per day to 60 million barrels per day by 2015. During the same time demand will increase 14%.

This is equivalent to a 33% drop in 7 years. No one can reverse this trend, nor can we conserve our way out of this catastrophe. Because the demand for oil is so high, it will always be higher than production; thus the depletion rate will continue until all recoverable oil is extracted.

Alternatives will not even begin to fill the gap. And most alternatives yield electric power, but we need liquid fuels for tractors/combines, 18 wheel trucks, trains, ships, and mining equipment.

We are facing the collapse of the highways that depend on diesel trucks for maintenance of bridges, cleaning culverts to avoid road washouts, snow plowing, roadbed and surface repair. When the highways fail, so will the power grid, as highways carry the parts, transformers, steel for pylons, and high tension cables, all from far away. With the highways out, there will be no food coming in from ???outside,??? and without the power grid virtually nothing works, including home heating, pumping of gasoline and diesel, airports, communications, and automated systems.

This is documented in a free 48 page report that can be downloaded, website posted, distributed, and emailed: http://www.peakoilassociates.com/POAnalysis.html

I used to live in NH, but moved to a sustainable place. Anyone interested in relocating to a nice, pretty, sustainable area with a good climate and good soil?
clifford dot wirth at yahoo dot com or give me a phone call which operates here as my old USA-NH number 603-668-4207

It is not an "energy" issue. It is a transportation issue: Moving people and goods from one place to another.

Imported oil is used as fuel for the internal combustion engine.

Brazil took the hint from the Jimmy Carter speech of July 15, 1979 (google it) and is today totally independent of imported oil--using many flex fuel vehicles manufactured by Ford!

Alternative renewable fuel sources can be developed in many countries besides Brazil--if major commitments by the governments are made and persisted in as prices fluctuate and technologies are developed.

Persistance is the key word. Cheap imported oil got us hooked before. Cheap imported ethanol or hydrogen or whatever could get us hooked on imported fuels again.

The alternative renewable fuels must be developed and maintained at home to be successful in making us independent of TRANSPORTATION fuels.

We have adequate "energy". It is self sufficient fuels for the internal combusion engine that we need.

"Americans should feel discomforted..." Well, only to the extent of the mistakes they made electing our congressional representatives for the past 30 years. The handwriting has been on the wall that long and our legislators have only dealt with the issue to the extent they could use it to issue sound bite answers that would help them get re-elected instead of making any realistic, long-term strategic plans for preventing the US from sliding into this situation. There should have been (and now must be) a drastic bipartisan plan to supply this country with most of its own energy sources, and bipartisan means using all sensible means--expanded drilling, refineries, nuclear, alternative energy R&D, and effiency improvements, not the Democrat or Republican plan. Are they worried we'll have too much energy if we entered a crash program on all fronts? No, they're quibbling politicians who obviously put the welfare of our country after their own welfare. A huge investment across the board (along with removing obstacles to drilling and nuclear plants) will pay huge dividends in the short run in hundreds of thousands of jobs, less greenhouse gas (nuclear, alternative energy replacing some of the fossil sources), and a probable immediate drop in oil prices as speculators realize the US is going to vastly increase its energy production. In the medium and long term, we will spend more of our dollars in the US instead of sending them to other countries. Even if Mexico and Canada are a large portion of our purchased oil, those purchases still come from the world pool of oil, and indirectly pour more money into Iran, Venezuela, and other governments which would be impotent without that excess cash. Long term, our economy will flourish as we stop the drain on our dollars, and strategically, we'll be free of future energy (thus, economic) blackmail from the Middle East or Russia. Any middle school child could understand this obvious situation--our government has buried its head in the sand, pretending that shoveling billions of dollars into other countries to buy what we don't want to make the effort or "dirty our hands" to do ourselves. That's why we're "discomforted." Congress is a disgrace, and can only redeem itself by doing what is completely obviously necessary, decades late. Get off your rear ends and start a vigorous process of making this country energy independent, using all means available, and give it the funding it requires. In the 60's the US had the vision to fund a massive space program, and that wasn't even something that (at the time) was accepted as strategically critical (though it became so), nor was it economically necessary. The energy situation is both and these morons still can't get off the dim.