Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
07.24.2008 2:19 pm

Energy issue could decide election

St. Louis Post-Dispatch
  • Email this
  • Print this

energyIf the economy is widely known to be the “#1 issue” in this election cycle, then the #2 issue could be energy. $4-a-gallon gasoline is routinely listed by voters as one of their top concerns. Recent polls have “energy” tied with “Iraq” as the second-most important issue, and 22 percent of voters now believe that energy is the nation’s “top concern” — up from just 4 percent who felt that way in 2007.

Most analysts are calling 2008 “a very bad year for Republicans,” and a June poll showed that voters trusted Democrats over Republicans on all top ten campaign issues. A more recent poll showed voters still trust Democrats over Republicans on seven of the top ten issues.

But the GOP believes it has found a winning issue for November — and they are honing in on energy, attempting to portray themselves as the party that will reduce energy costs by expanding energy production, while attacking the Democrats for keeping prices high and opposing increases in domestic production.

Yesterday, minority leader Sen. Mitch McConnell gave an ultimatum to Senate Democrats — either allow a vote on offshore oil drilling or face a filibuster by Republicans on other proposed bills before the August recess.

Senate Republicans have threatened to block nearly all other bills pending before the August recess if Democrats refuse to vote with them on expanding offshore drilling.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said bills that do not pertain to energy can wait until after the August recess, with gas prices now surpassing $4 per gallon. McConnell and top Republicans indicated Wednesday they would oppose any procedural votes to take up other legislation, which require 60 votes to succeed.

“We think there is nothing more important that we can do right now than to deal with the Number One issue of the country,” McConnell said. “This is the biggest issue since terrorism right after 9/11. People are pounding on their desks, saying, Why don’t these people get together and do something about this problem?”

The hardball tactics reflect Republican confidence that they can pull off a major election-year victory with gas prices at record highs, after they have been battered at the polls and have lost on several recent high-profile legislative battles.

[...]Democrats say the GOP is intentionally prolonging the debate in order to score political points by insisting on more than two dozen amendments to the oil-speculation bill. Democrats, who say opening up new lands won’t affect prices for a decade and are concerned about its environmental impacts, have offered the GOP one amendment to the oil-speculation bill.

But the GOP is positioning itself as the party willing to do whatever it takes to lower gas prices. The Republicans say Democrats are scared to cast votes on new drilling in the face of voter anger over high gasoline prices, and they point to the majority’s decision to scrap appropriations bills to avoid a debate over lifting the congressional ban on drilling along the Outer Continental Shelf.

Whether or not Republicans can successfully use this issue to their advantage is open to debate — but all indications are that the Democrats are certainly concerned about that possibility. Which is why, the Wall Street Journal argues, Democrats would rather prevent a vote on offshore drilling than risk appearing responsible for preventing expanded energy production via drilling — (which is a position now favored by 67 percent of Americans. 64 percent of those believe drilling will lower gas prices.)

Majority Leader Reid has decided that deliberation is too taxing for “the world’s greatest deliberative body.” This week he cut off serious energy amendments to his antispeculation bill. Then Senate Appropriations baron Robert Byrd abruptly canceled a bill markup planned for today where Republicans intended to press the issue. Mr. Byrd’s counterpart in the House, David Obey, is enforcing a similar lockdown. Speaker Pelosi says she won’t allow even a debate before Congress’s August recess begins in eight days.

Today, the BBC reported that a new U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) survey estimated that there were 90 billion barrels of recoverable oil in the Arctic — and that, ironically, shrinking polar ice could make that oil easier to extract.

John McCain has also been hitting the pro-drilling theme, criticizing Barack Obama for his opposition to expanded domestic drilling and oil production.

Recent surveys of key battleground states showed that:

Battleground state voters’ views on energy

…energy could be the pivotal issue in the race for these hotly contested states. Voters in each state consistently ranked gas prices as their number one financial concern. When asked which was more important, a candidate’s position on the war in Iraq or his position on energy policy, voters in each state chose energy.

Gas prices, though, are not the only energy-related issue Republicans are hoping to capitalize on — a crisis in electricity production is also looming in the U.S.:

America uses just 15% more of it today than when the first modern energy crisis hit in October 1973. But electricity use is up 115% since then, thanks to all those plasma screens, iPhones, computers and data centers. And all economic forecasts see substantial growth in demand for electricity–think just of the coming electric cars–yet lots of problems in meeting it.

Right now the nation has 760 gigawatts of power plants to meet current consumption, with another 154 in reserve capacity to maintain grid reliability. But in fact only 10 gigs is truly excess capacity. The other 144 is utterly essential to keep lights on when unexpected demand arises from heat waves, outages or maintenance downtime. That reserve will begin to shrink quickly. NERC estimates that over the next decade 135 gigawatts of new capacity will be needed to meet the growth in consumption. But right now plants producing a total of 57 gigawatts are planned.

Ninety percent of electric power is fueled by nonrenewable coal, natural gas or nuclear power. Renewable sources will not cover the growth in demand. While wind is gaining ground (and now supplies 1% of power), hydro’s share (7%) is shrinking as dams are dismantled. Solar, at 0.01%, is an inconsequential contributor.

Hence the Republican strategy of contrasting what they call their “pro-domestic production” (including coal, natural gas, and nuclear) stance with the Democrats’ anti-nuclear, anti-fossil fuel position. In addition, conservative pundits — and even some anti-carbon environmentalist types — are arguing that only an expanded reliance on nuclear power can truly produce Al Gore’s vision of a carbon-emissions-free energy future.

By generating electricity whose production otherwise would have required the use of fossil fuels, the 104 nuclear plants now operating in the U.S. prevent the release of approximately 700 million additional tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year; that is the equivalent of removing 96 percent of all passenger cars from U.S. roads.

Most Democrats and environmentalists have been resolutely against nuclear energy due to environmental concerns from disposing of the spent fuel these plants produce — but lifting a Carter-era ban on reprocessing nuclear waste could greatly minimize this problem.

Meanwhile, the rest of the world is quickly expanding its electricity production capacity. Germany is planning 27 new coal-fired plants by 2030. Italy will increase its reliance on coal from 14 to 33 percent by 2013. 40 new coal plants will be built in Europe by 2013.

As for China and India, the two fastest-growing energy-consuming nations in the world, in 2006 alone China built enough coal plants to equal the entire electricity production of Great Britain. India is planning to quadruple its coal production by 2030.

In the U.S., a network of environmental groups including the Environmental Defense Fund and the Sierra Club have organized campaigns to block the construction of new coal-fired plants in every state. They claim to have blocked 65 new coal plants that have been proposed since 2005.

As for nuclear power, the rest of the world is surging ahead with construction of new plants — France already gets 80 percent of its electricity from nuclear plants, and is also planning to supply neighboring countries. Japan has six new plants under construction and another six planned. India has six under construction and 19 more planned. China has fully committed itself to a nuclear future — it has seven under construction and is planning up to 85 more within the next few decades to meet an explosion of demand.

The U.S. has not built a new nuclear plant in 30 years.

The bottom line: the U.S. is going to need 135 gigagwatts of additional electricity by 2018. That electricity has to come from somewhere. Wind and solar should play a part, yes, but such sources can only account for a fraction of what will be required — even the strongest proponents admit that wind could account for, at most, 20 percent of electricity production. The remaining 80 percent has to come from either a) oil, b) natural gas, c) coal, or d) nuclear power.

Only one of those is a zero-carbon emissions source.

31 comments

Comments are closed.

Democrats should not allow Republicans to bully them into nothing. The people meed to take away more Republican seats to stop these filibusters and until then Democrat hands are tied. THEY CAN’T ACT AND ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING BECAUSE OF THESE REPUBLICAN DISTORTERS!

Roy Blunt states:

Sky-high gas prices, Blunt said, are sparking a turnaround in the GOP’s fortunes. “It’s the first time in two years that anyone’s listened to us,” he said in arguing that Republican efforts to promote offshore domestic drilling is striking a chord with the electorate. “We’re about to break through.”

What a distortion! This has got to be the most distorted thing that I have ever heard. Using a crisis which they, (the Republicans) allowed the Bush/Cheney oil businessmen to create and have the audacity to attempt to use it as a political bonus for themselves?

Offshore drilling is nothing more than just a political ploy that the Republicans are using much like the abortion issue during the 2000 election.

Oil companies do not want to drill they love these profits. They have been given government grants in the tune of ungodly amounts for the purpose of exploring and have done nothing but added all this government money to their bottom lines for their shareholders.

Oil companies, oil businessmen, Bush/Cheney included, have many thousands of acres of federal land that they have the rights to and they are just allowing to sit (68,000+ acres). They have not even reinvested their profits for exploring or building new refineries, what business do not reinvest profits big time back into their business?

What this off-shore business is really all about are these greedy monsters (oil businessmen) getting their hands on the rights of even more thousands of acres of good land to possess before Bush leaves office and Democrats take real control.

I think the GOP is an insane bunch thinking people will be so STUPID. This is really an insult to ALL people.

I wish people would vote out all these old corrupt minded politicians. Why do rural Missourians love these ones so much? Are rural Americans still so blind to this bunch? Greed and the love of money do bring about insane behavior and we are witnessing it.

RE: TAXES AND OBAMA

I see that Republicans have stopped with their attempts at distorting to people that Democrats will raise their taxes. That claim was a LIE!

Social Security Income. Under Obama it will go back to TAX-FREE INCOME!So everyone who receives social security income will no longer have to pay taxes on that income.

What would that extra deposable income do for people and this economy? Ceratinly would amount to way more than those average stimulus checks from Bush, that band-aid facade.

Citizens who earn less than $250K will pay LESS-TAXES!

The only group who will see themselves being taxed more are those who earn $250K or more per/yr.

There are a lot more of us than them. So why are so many a-few-paychecks-away-from-the-poor-house Republicans supporting Republicans in this world we live in today?

They have totally made a mess of things and no one with any good sense should want to hear their solutions concerning anything, get them out of office!

There is no greater evil than distorters because they have taken on the character of the “Master of Distortions”.

— D. Walker
4:38 pm July 24th, 2008

November can’t come soon enought. All should just bare until then. Everyone who makes less than $250K per year and every other person who hate greed and lies should replace all the Republican seats and show these people that you are fed up.

Can you believe after the 2004 elections after losing so many seats, that they(Republican lawmakers) still don’t get it and talk citizens for granted? Their minds are darkened, they just can’t help themselves.

— D. Walker
4:44 pm July 24th, 2008

Nancy Pelosi’s big oil solution - open up the Strategic Oil Reserves which is illegal to do except in a crisis - this is not a crisis - just high gas prices which are finally catching up with Europe.

I am thrilled to see the Republicans getting their act together finally. If they don’t vote on this legislation, than the citizens should withhold their paychecks until they do. I am tired of hearing the Democrats say everything is political with the GOP when it is they who are political.
I blogged weeks ago to McCain - “It’s the gas prices, stupid!” Maybe they are finally listening.

It won’t be reported in the PD, but McCain’s numbers have closed in on Obama since he has been campaigning in Europe and the Middle East to be their next president.

Alex, maybe you could get a job in the DC Bureau - you just reported more than they ever have from DC in a lifetime.

— A CENTRIST
9:14 pm July 24th, 2008

You know Walker, I don’t understand how you can only people who make more than $250,000 a year are the only ones who will pay more taxes and that is ok. You are coveting their property and you are asking others to covet their property.I don’t care if someone makes $1 or a $1,000,000,000. Their money isn’t mine to take and it isn’t yours either.

In your whole rant you gave no reason for not drilling. You said only that some people would make a lot of money off the deal. So what?

— John Deal
9:16 pm July 24th, 2008

John Deal,

Re-read what I wrote concerning drilling. I never said that the OIL COMPANIES should not drill. I said they they do not want to drill.
Please re-read what I wrote. You did not comprehend it correctly.

Taxing those more whose income is over $250K is not going to make them or break them were as the taxing at the present rate for low and middle class, it truly does break them. Your mind is truly darked with greed if you can consciencously truly state that such would amount to coveting their property.

If what you say were true, that would mean that being required to pay taxes amounts to coveting another’s property.

My suggestion to you John is to pray for a change in heart before God allows everything to be taken away from you and you won’t have to worry about paying higher taxes, if you are one who earns above $250K.

— D. Walker
10:06 pm July 24th, 2008

A CENTRISTS,

The Republicans created this mess with what is called the Enron loop-hole. This loop-hole is what is causing this speculation mess that has driven up the price of oil.

Now go do some real research, research the Enron loop-hole.

That is what the Republicans should be attempting to fix. It is utterly sad that some are so willing to put aside the truth because of their bias and darkened souls. You so easily turn your head to REAL EVIL.

— D. Walker
10:15 pm July 24th, 2008

Our friend from Planet Crackpot should know that Bill Clinton signed into law the act that became know as “Enron Loop-hole”

What a twist … the Left electorate has always wanted higher gas taxes — so we could be more like those Progressive Socialists sophisticates in Europe — and now that our prices are high they don’t want to cheer out loud.

The Democratic party owns the high-gas prices issue with everyday they obstruct new drilling.

===

— BobZ.
11:18 pm July 24th, 2008

Fine Walker. If they don’t want to drill you have nothing to worry about, they won’t drill. I am sure even you can see error in your logic there.

— John Deal
11:56 pm July 24th, 2008

According to Mr. Webster:
Covet — to feel inordinate desire for what belongs to another.

I do not desire the property you have. You and your socialist buddies desire what others in our country have so much they take it by force (I consider this an inordinate desire). Taxation in order to take from one person and give to another (other than defense) is theft, the desire to tax for wealth redistribution is covetousness.

I don’t make 250K+ but someday I might. When I do, if you desire it enough to take it from me (by force) at that time I can think of no better descriptions for your action and motivation than the 8th and 10th commandments.

— John Deal
12:09 am July 25th, 2008

Sounds like this is one of those issues that we will not come to an agreement on, does it? So let’s just agree to disagree because I do not feel that our taxes going to help the poor or being used to in the best interest of society is covetousness because just as every citizen benefiting from highway upkeep, public school education, even though you may not have children that benefit personally and a whole host of things that we use tax dollars for, helping our poor and needy is just as a benefit to society.

With all the other economic issues going on in America, and with you not even earning $250K yr.ly, what is your problem? If you did make at least that amount, you should have the good sense instead of comolaining about paying more taxes, recognize that you are a very blessed man in this present economy.

— D. Walker
1:20 am July 25th, 2008

John,

Re: Drilling

Did you not understand what I wrote about these Cheney/Bush oil businessmen just wanting to get their hands on all that off-shore land and tie it up before Cheney/Bush leave office.

The worry to these ones and the rest of the Republicans who follow along like sheep is that Bush/Cheney oil businessmen will not be the ones who get the rights to that off-shore land after Bush and the Republicans are out of office. You know, like HALLIBURTON’S sweet deals?

It’s a real fear because they won’t after a Democratic administration.

— D. Walker
4:11 am July 25th, 2008

I think the dems are really on good footing here. They should get out more and announce their energy plan; higher taxes on those that produce. They should hold news conferences with the enviroweenies on how they are against nuclear power, drilling anywhere there is oil and windfarms in view of the Kennedy compound. Sing it loud and proud, higher taxes and magic will solve our energy situation.

— Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
8:44 am July 25th, 2008

Government worship demonstrates at best, confusion; at worst, dementia. In absence of facts, other religions rely on faith. Socialism, however, has a proven record of failure and corruption that makes the social evangelicals even more rediculous than the TV preachers.

— A#
9:24 am July 25th, 2008

Centrist- The Strategic Oil Reserves is controlled by Dept.of Energy and the Secretary has the authority for “test sales”, exchanges, and drawdowns not to exceed 5,000,000 barrels at his/her discretion. In the past, and I believe the agreement still exists, that we will transfer oil from those reserves to Israel,if needed,as we did during the Yom Kippur War.

— slamfist
9:26 am July 25th, 2008

BobZ,

The Enron loop-hole was signed into law the very day Bill Clinton took office. What does that tell one with a brain? Who was President before that? It was Pres. George H.W. Bush.

Furthermore, I feel that Pres. Bill Clinton has also been a traitor to this country, BILL CLINTON IS NO FAN OF MINE! He is one of them. That element same as the Bushes. I have very little respect for what Clinton did to this country while doing something so impressive on the otherhand, the surplus, getting rid of our deficit. It was a facade to turn heads away from the real damage he was doing to this country and ALL its citizens.

It is exactley the same situation concerning NAFTA. It was also Pres. George H.W. Bush’s baby where, Pres.Bill Clinton finished off the deal for this element of power heads.

America have better see their blessing in Hillary Clinton losing the Democratic nomination. The Clinton’s are wolves in sheep clothing for so many who refuse to see what and who these people are.

— D. Walker
10:16 am July 25th, 2008

A#,

Isn’t it just maybe possible to take the good from all these failed things pefect them change them in ways so they will all work in good harmony for most of our citizens, these things we have labeled, capitalism, socialism etc., from our society and other failed societies and attempt to come up with something that works or is at least better.

People must begin all things with the right heart for anything to work.
Capitalism as this country is practicing has now shown its ugly face, what is it with your mental state that your are blind to this?

WHAT WE HAVE IS NOT WORKING! Ever heard the sign of insanity is to continue to do things the same way and expect a different result. I tell you that fact was a very difficult lesson for me to learn as it appears to be for this country and many of its citizens.

— D. Walker
10:41 am July 25th, 2008

BobZ,

One has NO WISDOM if he/she is incapable of looking beyond what he/she sees on the surface.

— D. Walker
10:43 am July 25th, 2008

BobZ,

Here are some facts for you concerning this entire Enron, Cheney, Bush and Clinton situation.

http://www.john-loftus.com/enron3.asp

— D. Walker
10:59 am July 25th, 2008

Correction regarding the TAX-FREE social security income under Obama:

It will be for those seniors whose total income is 50K or less.

— D. Walker
11:26 am July 25th, 2008

Walker;
Re: Drilling. That is an easy problem to fix. Just make it a use it or lose it lease. This is often how water rights are dealt with in the southwest.

I also find it interesting that all of your beliefs are in line with an outline of the Democratic Platform. Please tell me how it just so happens that everything you believe and all your deliberation and prayer brings you to Obama. You cannot serve two masters. From abortion, to socialism, you try to find justification for things that are clearly wrong and then say we will have to agree to disagree without any true justification of your position.

— John Deal
11:34 am July 25th, 2008

In 1972, we were facing our first “oil crisis”. At that time the movement for cleaner burning automobiles with better mileage was getting off the ground. In addition to this, there were also calls for the development of solar power, wind power, etc.

After the “Reagan Revolution”, the majority of this drive was scrapped in favor of a more “business friendly” set of standards. This continued in one form or another throughout the 1980’s and 1990’s. So instead of the “private sector” following up with more fuel efficient cars and trucks, we had the development of vehicles which could be classified as trucks, hence not subject to the same CAFE standards as “passenger cars”. Then with the growth of the SUV market, most attempts at better mileage went out the window.

However, while there was some development of wind and solar power during this period, the main focus remained on petroleum and coal based power.

Had we focused on refining solar power and made it more useable for the private citizen, perhaps by now we would have had the development of more affordable solar technology. However, we have just begun development in the past five years things that needed doing 30 years ago.

Both political parties share in this burden, as does the private sector and the energy sector. Greed and laziness (the willingness to let things “ride” until they get really bad) have determined our energy policy too long.

We cannot “drill” our way out of this mess. We need a more coherent and consumer friendly approach to our energy policy. We certainly are not going to get it from the current administration, and perhaps not from any administration. But, unless we as citizens start demanding better from the “private sector” and our politicians, we will most likely be stuck with “more of the same”.

— RHarnack
11:55 am July 25th, 2008

RHarnack:

I don’t think you get it, if we drill now we could have oil in like 10-15 years. Once we have all that oil Mr. Harnack we can use it! Some estimate that there is up to 400 Billion barrels in ANWAR! I can’t quite comprehend that, but they estimate that to be about 3 years worth of oil. 3 years! Can you imagine how much driving I could do in 3 years? So please- you keep standing in the way of waiting for 15 years for 3 years worth of crude, see how much good that does my pocketbook.

Oh and what does myopic mean? My dictionary is out of gas.

Good day sir! Good day.

— Andrew
1:28 pm July 25th, 2008

Andrew, “myopic” and “myopia” refer to “near-sightedness”, however, in regard to attempting to rely solely on “drilling”, it means “short-sighted” which is exactly what the so-called “energy policy” has been since 1972.

Developing a coherent energy policy involves all aspects of energy research and development in conjunction with more effective means of conservation, and is a difficult process at best. Thus, chanting “drill in ANWR” is not a policy, but a cry of lust from the very sector that has stymied and stiffled energy policy.

Yep, I can see where someone who needs immediate gratification might confuse “myopia” with short-sighted and self-serving. Buy a beeter dictionary, they can be found in the best bookstores.

— RHarnack
1:48 pm July 25th, 2008

Oops, “beeter dictionary” should have read “better dictionary”. I hate “beets”.

— RHarnack
1:52 pm July 25th, 2008

It’s just that my gasoline powered dictionary isn’t very efficient. I’ve been entertaining a hybrid model.

— Andrew
2:44 pm July 25th, 2008

John Deal,

Because I know from experience and God’s word that when one accepts Christ into his heart, truly desiring to follow Christ, it is a process that takes place over a life-time, the Holy Spirit crucifying the flesh into perfection. God can mole and work with a heart that is plyable and use that person as a vehicle to do righteous and good things, but when a person’s heart is hard, God is unable to work with such a person.

When I first came to Christ my thoughts still possessed much of the thoughts of things that were not in line with how God desires, but God works with the willing heart that is not hardened, but is clean (desiring to do right self-less things).

This is why I choose Obama because my spirit kicks in and tells me that Obama has a willing heart, a heart that God is able to work with.

Obama’s hearts reflects that of Christ than any man I have seen personally run fo reflects more than how I image

Does this now answer your question John Deal, why I am voting for Obama?

— D. Walker
3:30 pm July 25th, 2008

Fact: signed by President Bill Clinton in December 2000

That would be in his the 8th year of office when the impeached President Clinton signed into law the so-called “Enron Loophole” law.

===

— BobZ.
3:36 pm July 25th, 2008

That stinks that Clinton signed that. Not that we haven’t had many years since to repeal. But soon! As on June 22, 2008, U.S. Senator Barack Obama proposed the repeal of the ”Enron loophole” as a means to curb speculation on skyrocketing oil prices. Sounds good to me!

— Andrew
3:55 pm July 25th, 2008

BobZ.

You’re correct I am incorrect, it was not signed right after Clinton took office but right before he left office.

The fact still, is that it was a Cheney/Bush deal and the Clinton’s are no diferent from this bunch of greedy self-serving monsters.

I hope everyone see clearly now that the Clintons need to be ran out of Washington along with this present administration.

In fact, McCain’s top aid created this “Enron Loop-Hole”.

http://www.pubrecord.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=147&Itemid=16

I just wish that ALL would open their eyes up.

— D. Walker
4:16 pm July 25th, 2008

Walker,

You misunderstood my question. Everyone on the site thinks you are a hypocrite because you spout all your scriptures and yet support murder (abortion), theft and slavery (taxation for the redistribution of wealth). I personally believe you only use religion as a shield for your deeper socialist beliefs in the same way you believe President Bush uses it for a shield for his deeper belief (whatever you think that is).

Any comments.

— John Deal
7:24 pm July 25th, 2008

If you would read what I have stated, I don’t support abortion. I don’t think that abortions should have ever been legalized, because I believe that it only caused more irresponsible behavior and immoral actions of taking sex as a non-serious issue morally, emotionally, health, and other harm that sex and sexual relations causes a teenager, young woman or full adult woman.

I do not see it as you and many pro-lifers look at it, through black and white lens. This is one of those issues that I see much gray in because when I look at it from a Kingdom stand-view. I know that a baby who has not ever committed an act of sin, even though all are born with sin within our genes will go to heaven. But, where one should be more concerned about the moral state of a woman who finds herself in such a position.

You discount how God shows so much grace and is so merciful. Much more so than you people appear to display. But, you guys support the death penalty, murdering full-grown men and woman while knowing the grace God have shown you by sacrificing His only Son for all our sins. You also discount the fact that if you are a child of God that one would not find them self in the position of having an abortion, nor would a child of God condemn a man or woman to death under law.

If you are anyone label me a hypocrite because of my stand on this issue, then I say, Let God be the judge of my viewpoint and I pray that He will correct my stand if I am wrong and have misunderstood His guidance of me in this area.

— D. Walker
1:33 pm July 28th, 2008