The Politics Of Oil: The Discourse Must Change

[Strelnikov_]

Hear, Hear!!

http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/4/26/121441/891#more

We strongly feel that the leaders of both political parties are not only headed in the wrong direction with respect to gas prices, but we also worry that they fundamentally misunderstand the factors behind the current situation at gasoline stations around the US. Public statements by political figures over the past several days would seem to suggest that oil companies and their record profits are the sole factor determining the price of gasoline. Not only is this untrue, but it is dangerous to give the American people the impression that only oil companies are to blame. The American people need to understand that the phenomenon of high gas prices cannot be attributed to a single source. They also need to understand that no one political party will be able to fix our current woes.

. . .

These points demonstrate that disruptions in the supply of oil that affect the price of gasoline at the pump are not just a temporary glitch. For various reasons--decreased discoveries of new oilfields, geopolitical instability, international competition for oil supply--we can no longer assume that we will be able to consume as much oil as possible, or ever get it again for $1.50 a gallon.

Demagoguery and grandstanding are not strategies for addressing our energy problems. As an alternative, the editors of The Oil Drum put forth the following recommendations:

1. It is nonsensical for political leaders of both parties to eliminate the gas tax temporarily or permanently as this will only worsen our dependence on oil by disincentivizing the innovation of oil alternatives and oil conservation efforts.
2. Both mainstream American political parties are doing their country a disservice by accusing convenient scapegoats of price gouging or price fixing instead of educating the public about how the price of gas is actually set.
3. Right now, governments should be focused on helping us cure our "addiction to oil." The answer does not lie in lowering gas prices, which will only encourage people to drive more and further waste our valuable resources. As the Department of Energy funded Hirsch Report on Peak Oil laid out, the consequences of not taking steps to transition away from oil could be dramatic to our economic system. Appropriate solutions include large-scale research, development, and implementation programs to improve the scalability of alternative sources of energy, other projects geared towards improving mass transit and carpooling programs across the country, providing incentives to buy smaller and more fuel efficient vehicles, and promoting a campaign to increase awareness about conservation.

The political discourse on this topic is simply so devoid of fact, and constructive discourse so buried and out of the mainstream, that we felt we needed to raise a voice of reason. Public officials will continue to misinform and obfuscate if we allow it.

The only solution is to educate the public about the most important problem we face as a generation. We, the citizens of the US and the world, must move our attention to this the issue of energy more than any other. We must hold our representative governments accountable for having an open and honest debate on the subject.

. . .

[Old and In the Way]

1. It is an opportunity for the Democrats to contrast a different

energy/national security vision and use this as a way to jumpstart the domestic economy. Tie the Republicans to Big Oil and the dinosaur implications of maintaining this loser of an energy policy.

[saltpoint]

2. The rising oil and gas prices, plus the stubborn refusal of the

government to budge on renewable and alternative fuel sources seems likely to prompt renewed pressure to drill in the Arctic.

For any number of reasons, this is a terrible solution.

For anyone willing to commit a few minutes, it would help to write directly to Howard Dean to reiterate the urgency of the problem and to demonstrate that the concern is widespread.

The Republicans deserve to take a hit on this -- all the way from Ted Stevens to the lesser-known House GOP members who blindly shove negative environmental legislation through the Congress.

Jimmy Carter's energy initiatives were FAR surperior to those of the current administration, which seems to me is mostly Dick Cheney sitting around secret meeting rooms with his wealthy Big Oil buddies. That is not an energy policy at all, but it is a campaign theme waiting to happen.

Contact information:

Howard Dean, Chairman
The Democratic National Committee
4305 Capitol Street SE
Washington, DC 20003

ph. 202 - 863 - 8000

web contact email: http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contact

general website: http://www.democrats.org/

Letters matter. A large pile of letters will REALLY matter.

[BlueCaliDem]

3. Brazil. Need we say more?

If Brazil can fuel all their automobiles with 100% sugar cane ethanol, why can't Congress force funding for alternative energy resources like soya, maybe? Sugar? Corn? Not that limp 10:90 ratio crap, but like Brazil, use an alternative, renewable resource like corn, or sugar to fuel our cars?

Use clean-burning coal to fuel our electricity? The United States is literally sitting on mountains of coal, and we're not using it!

Instead of giving 2 billion tax giveaways to already excessively profitable oil companies, how about using that money to do the research into alternative fuels the oil barons are supposed to, but are refusing to?

You think Lee Raymond, ex-ceo of ExxonMobile would mind?