Pajamas Media

112 Comments

1. DougS:

Exactly so! I am astounded that this aspect of what Palin brings to the ticket has received so little attention so far. Energy policy is definitely a winning issue for the Republicans because Obama can’t embrace drill, drill, drill without turning on his core constituency. IIRC, one of Palin’s earliest truly national media appearances was on Larry Kudlow’s show early in the summer, in which she spoke out firmly in favor of drilling in ANWR and offered to show McCain around so he could see that opposition to drilling was much ado about very little.

Credit McCain’s people for spotting what ought to be their big wedge issue and finding someone who can speak to it forcefully and effectively.

Sep 7, 2008 - 12:56 am 2. chicago:

one of the many differences between Pelosi and Palin is that Palin knows that Natural Gas is a fossil fuel. in order to get Natural Gas, you’d have to drill for it.

I’m stating this becuase if Nancy Pelosi had any brains, she’d allow a vote for more drilling if she believes that Natural Gas is good for the environment….but not so long ago, she showed how clueles she is about Energy on Meet the Press:

http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/08/pelosi_natural_gas_and_drillin.php

“I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels,” she said at one point. Natural gas “is cheap, abundant and clean compared to fossil fuels,” she said at another.

not many know that Pelosi is invested in CLNE (along with Pickens) that would benefit in the increase in usage of Natural Gas which is the many factors why Pelosi is so intent in blocking a vote for drilling.

Pelosi’s “duh” moment is just one of many proofs that these liberal political hacks know nothing about the Energy crisis and how to solve it. Pelosi would spew praises of Natural Gas yet fail to have a clue that drilling, which she and democrats doesn’t want to allow, is the only way to have more if it.

Enter Palin. Palin knows that Natural gas is a fossil fuel that comes from wells that are drilled. Palin knows how to deliver the energy that Pope Nancy herself has lauded. Palin cancells out the democrat’s argument against drilling since Pope Nancy herself has stated on record that the country NEEDS Natural Gas.

Thank you Nancy (never thought I’d do that in my lifetime)for making the case for more drilling!

Sep 7, 2008 - 1:35 am 3. rightwingprof:

That may be one reason he chose her, but it’s naive at best to say it was the only or primary one. Actually, naive is a euphemism.

Sep 7, 2008 - 1:40 am 4. Tom W.:

No, no, no.

According Charles Krauthammer and one or two of the old dudes at Powerline, Palin has absolutely no qualifications, and even if McCain wins, he took such an unnecessary chance with this awful, unqualified, joke of a governor (who has just about the same executive experience as Woodrow Wilson had when he became PRESIDENT) that the whole thing is a disaster.

Even if it works.

I used to wonder what it was about Bush that drove people to paroxysms of rage. Looks like Palin is another one whose mere existence makes people crazy.

Whatever. Some people just lack the combat-aviator’s courage and ability to remain youthfully forward-thinking.

I just found out Palin’s a pilot, too.

She’s going to be a great veep and a great prez.

Sep 7, 2008 - 2:52 am 5. John Dubya:

I can’t say for sure why McCain picked Sarah Palin as his Veep running mate, but I’m sure happy he did. Palin’s husband works in the “business” and I’m sure she has a better than casual understanding of what it takes to get energy out of the ground.

I’ve commented before about the Dem’s mantra: “We can’t drill our way out of this mess!”,,, whoever came up with that slogan certainly wasn’t an oil man. These political hacks simply don’t know their butt from a hole in the ground. You’d think they would seek advice from the industry before running their mouth.

I think it’s time for the American consumer to get over the idea that they will ever see $10.00 per bbl oil again, but with a comprehensive energy plan using CNG, nuclear, wind, and solar, and a lot more drilling, it’s very possible we can drill our way to $50-60 per bbl oil. Since most of the high price of oil is driven by market speculation anyway, and not tied to actual production costs, I see no reason we can’t drive prices downward in the near term, not in the 10 years touted by the left wing loonies. We are already seeing oil futures dropping, which will be price evident at the pumps in a matter of a few days. Any relief is welcome.

Thanks to the threat of lifting the off-shore drilling ban, the pressure on the market will lessen as middle-east oil producers perceive less demand for their oil. India and China will still need Arab oil, so we don’t have to worry about the sheiks having to drive a two year old Mercedes for a while yet, but at least Americans will be paying for a smaller part of it than before.

A small prediction; once the Arabs see America making a concentrated effort to wean ourselves off foreign oil we will see a repeat of the mid-1980’s flood of cheap oil. They know that low prices will make American oil companies less competitive and that we cannot continue to produce domestic oil if we can’t sell it at a profit. All they have to do is open the flood gates and get oil to under $25.00 per bbl and they will effectively shut down American domestic production. They did this in the early ’80s and by 1985 every domestic oil producer went broke.

We simply cannot explore, drill, produce, and transport oil to market for less than the Arab when it is costing them less than $5.00 to ship a bbl of oil.

Thanks for the opportunity to rant.

Sep 7, 2008 - 2:57 am 6. Believer:

I’m awfully glad someone is finally discussing this. Palin plays a huge role in this winning issue for Republicans.

It affects both our economy and national security; and is wildly popular with the voter.

But don’t expect the MSM – or any Debate Moderator – to point this out between now and November 4. Instead, they’re all working overtime right now to divert our attention to – at best – things far less important. At worst: distortions of truth, or, if they can get away with it, pure fabrication.

Sep 7, 2008 - 2:58 am 7. TomJW:

Energy, yes. Don’t forget her crusading credentials too. McCain knew the filth that is the MSM and Dems. He knew he had to get someone who is not only clean, but proven beyond reproach so that nothing sticks. He picked as close as he could get with another human being. I hope with the attacks we see on Palin we see the death of the MSM.

Sep 7, 2008 - 3:59 am 8. gldnldy:

TomJW, not only the end of the MSM, but also of Queen Pelosi, His Highness Reid and The One. The electorate will have an epiphany and then a field day.

Sep 7, 2008 - 5:08 am 9. Freedom's just another word..:

I heard that the Virgin Airlines stint at a clean fuel plane failed because it took over 100,000 coconuts. Imagine the gas and fuel that it took to power the tractors that helped the trees grow and the trucks needed to pick those coconuts. Virgin is now looking at doing the sea algea gas.

We need green fuels. Solar, wind, ocean current turbines, and natural gas. The best way to get these is to mandate them, not mess with the tax code in the “hopes” that people use a tax incentive. The tax credits, if any, should be given to gas station owners to put in natural gas pumps.

Most of all, we need to stop giving the terrorists and dictators our money. Until greener fuels are better and widely available, we need to drill.

Sep 7, 2008 - 5:55 am 10. Big Al:

It’s like the guy behind you drafting favre, and you just waking up to what happened.
I’ll believe it’s a bad pick when i get my paper(not the n y times) the first wed in nov.
I wasn’t going to vote and now i am.

Sep 7, 2008 - 6:41 am 11. RE:

I’m not sure I agree that ‘It’s all about the drilling’. I beleive it was more about Palin’s reformer streak, willingness to challenge her own party, and outsider status that carried the most weight in the Palin pick. I also suspect that cynical identity group politics played a greater role than oil – but I’m OK with it as long as the pick is qualified and I believe Sarah Palin is qualified and not a myopic crusader. It’s been a delight to watch the Democrats being torn apart by the monster of their own making – identity group politics.

McCain has always had an environmentalist streak. That in combination with a lack of private sector business experience has made him a bit less than practical in these matters and a bit more sympathetic to the greens. Energy development – specifically ANWR – represents a point of contention between McCain and Palin.

I don’t think it was the primary factor, but rather just a big plus.

Sep 7, 2008 - 6:54 am 12. Marina:

Just wait a couple of weeks and we’ll see Obama supporting drilling. He’ll tell us whatever we want to hear in order to be elected. Hopefully this won’t work. Sarah is destroying his campaing, definitely. His first and long-time slogan was “Change we can believe in”. After Sarah’s coming they’ve changed it into “PLEASE, believe me!” Seriously! But they probably have understood how pathetic it sounds and changed it again: “I’M ASKING YOU to believe”. What a wuss! Sarah is more a man than he is.

Sep 7, 2008 - 7:03 am 13. Rignerd:

Palin is a triple whammy.

1. She knows energy and is on the side that makes he most sense.
2. She is a hard charging reformer who can take the political punches with out messing up her lipstick.
3. She is a solid evangelical conservative who reassures the conservative base that John McCain isn’t as much of a maverick as they fear.

Who ever said we can’t produce our way out of a shortage of any thing is a complete moron and needs to get out of the political theory of Marx and into the real world. The government didn’t create the oil industry and it won’t create the replaement. It might kill the replacement in the womb, but it never creates anything that is truly competitive and profitable.

Sep 7, 2008 - 7:09 am 14. SAF:

Solving our energy problems requires a multi-pronged solution. And those prongs include more exploration for what we know works (oil and gas), conservation, nuclear, wind, solar, tide etc. It is naive to think our oil based economy will go away next Tuesday. The nation would be better off if the democrats would get off the oil is evil kick and work to fix our problems.

One poster stated that Pelosi is an idiot. This can’t be true since she has managed to get elected many times to her seat. what she does do is put party before country. She won’t risk re-election by going against her oil is bad consistency.

Unfortunately if Obama looses the democrats will blame racism not the real reasons and thus not learn.

Palin showed how it is done in Alaska. I’m not sure she would have gotten the nod if she wasn’t a she. Those who attack her lack of experience need just look at Obama’s and Biden’s (and for that matter McCain’s) list of executive experience. She has some success and they have no experience at all.

As I’ve said in past posts if you think Obama and the democrats are better for the country then vote for them. But spare us the “new idea” and “experience” message, it just isn’t so.

Sep 7, 2008 - 7:18 am 15. Mike:

Freedom’s just another word wrote:
“Most of all, we need to stop giving the terrorists and dictators our money. Until greener fuels are better and widely available, we need to drill.”

Green fuel is available and a technologically mature alternative. It’s called nuclear power. Zero Co2, zero noxious emissions. Imagine an economy with electric plug-in-and-recharge transportation powered by zero emission electric power plants.

The radical environmentalists (and I was an environmentalist before most of them were born) have blocked this amazing energy source for thirty years and have kept us dependent on foreign energy. It’s time to unlock that precious power source and start this country moving forward toward a truly energy independent future.

Sep 7, 2008 - 7:24 am 16. gldnldy:

RE, it’s all of the above. She is a good strategic move all around.

Mike, you’re absolutely right. Nuclear power is the way to go, no matter what the doomsayers say. France wouldn’t have so many nuclear plants if it wasn’t safe, reliable, environmentally-friendly and less costly than existing energy sources.

Sep 7, 2008 - 7:38 am 17. Freedom's just another word..:

Mike,

Yes, nuclear can be clean, if it is run the right way. A nuclear power plant operating the way it was intended gives off no more radiation than the sun that reaches our Earth.

The problem that most people have with Nuclear is that they remember 3 mile island and Chernobyl. Plus, there is the stigma of what to do with the used rods.

Few people want a nuclear plant in their back yard.

Yet, a gas station with leaky gas tanks can & does more harm than a nuclear power plant….yet, no one complains if there is a gas station within a few miles.

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:07 am 18. Rotwang:

McCain picked Palin because Ted Nugent and Gary Coleman turned him down. Palin was his last chance to secure the irrational-novelty voting bloc.

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:12 am 19. Roschelle:

This whole thing is so bizarre to me. It’s like being in a bad dream and not being able to wake up. Palin was virtually unknown outside of Alaska just ONE week ago. A woman, who in her own words “wondered what it is a Vice President does all day”. A woman who wants to deny women the right to terminate a pregnancy even if conception occurs as a result of rape or incest.

Now, she’s more popular than Obama or McCain. What does that say about the mindset of voters in this country. I’ve heard people express how much they love her, her kids, even her parents…who’ve only been shown on TV once at the RNC and have never uttered a word (as far as an interview goes) So what is it about her that has endeared her to so many people.

The scandalous baggage that accompanies her nomination is as lengthy as the Bering Strait…yet she’s almost revered by many woman and some men that have been interviewed since the announcement by McCain that she would be his running mate.

The “maverick” is looking more and more like a sidekick…merely going along with the powers that be…he says and does whatever he thinks his champions want to hear. Just like calling lobbyists ‘birds of prey’ which is a total contradiction to what his true ties with these unnecessary evils in Washington are.

Come on America…are we so shallow that a pretty face is all it takes to win us over? Gov. Palin hasn’t given not ONE interview outlining her plans for this country as VP since McCain picked her….only pre-written rhetoric aimed at tearing down the Democratic nominee and his party.

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:20 am 20. Sandra M:

John Dubya:
“They know that low prices will make American oil companies less competitive and that we cannot continue to produce domestic oil if we can’t sell it at a profit. All they have to do is open the flood gates and get oil to under $25.00 per bbl and they will effectively shut down American domestic production. They did this in the early ’80s and by 1985 every domestic oil producer went broke.”

If the Saudis flood the market with cheap oil, the Russians, Iranians and Venezuelans will suffer financially. A win-win for us until we get our oil to market in a few years. I think we’ll take their cheap oil but it won’t deter us from drilling for oil this time. Will it help if we build more refineries? We haven’t built one in 30 years I’ve read.

It stunned me that after Hurricane Katrina we didn’t offer solar tax credits for the rebuilding necessary. If solar gets inexpensive enough we could solarize the entire south east and south west.

Newt is coming out with a film WE HAVE THE POWER and a book later this month DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW where he also makes the argument for nuclear. Jane Fonda’s film THE CHINA SYNDROME came out about the same time as the 3 mile island problem and is primarily responsible for our henceforth avoiding nuclear power, although one of the reactors at 3 mile island has been functioning for 22 years without a problem.

Sarah Palin’s interviews with Larry Kudlow (one in June) are on Youtube. They were what persuaded me she would be a great VP.

Sarah’s ability to get things done is demonstrated by her getting the natural gas pipeline project going, a project that had languished for 30 years. THAT’S proof positive that she can get things done.

And, at last, a Republican politician who is articulate, witty and persuasive, the first since Ronald Reagan. McGenius indeed for this brilliant choice.

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:40 am 21. John the Libertarian:

Thank you for writing this and pointing out what SHOULD BE obvious. Why is it I find so much less sexism and racism on the right? And yet the right is so accused of it? It’s like witnessing this bizarre mental illness on the left that has at its core clinical narcissism with extreme bouts of projection.

Palin is a moose-huntin’ U.S. version of a young Maggie Thatcher.

Git yer Baraccuda stuff here: http://cafepress.com/barracudashirt

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:47 am 22. Self-hating boomer:

The problem that most people have with Nuclear is that they remember 3 mile island and Chernobyl.

What’s unfortunate is that these two events are conflated. They’re as different as night and day. In one case, there was no fission runaway, no significant radioactive release, and no casualties. In the other case, there was a core runaway, massive radioactive fallout spreading radioactivity as far as Sweden, dozens dead, and thousands injured, and a contaminated zone covering hundreds of square miles to this day.

As primitive as the equipment at TMI was compared to modern equipment, it basically failed safe as designed. The moral to the story is that if you want clean, safe, nuclear power, limit the government’s role in producing it. The Chernobyl reactor was basically unsafe, BY DESIGN, because they wanted to save money by running a light-water reactor on unenriched fuel.

This gives lie to the left-wing talking point that the private sector endangers public safety by trying to save money. The empirical evidence supports the exact opposite conclusion.

Which, btw, makes me wonder what exactly McCain means when he said that he would build nuclear reactors. Doesn’t he mean he’d get out of the way and let private investors build them?

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:51 am 23. David Thomson:

“Just wait a couple of weeks and we’ll see Obama supporting drilling.”

Barack Obama and Joe Biden can only mealy mouth about drilling for more oil. May God help them—if their base believes they are serious! Radical environmentalism is the modern day secular religion of the elites. To allow more oil drilling would be similar to a Catholic spitting on the Host. It would be considered to be a violation of all that is sacred.

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:54 am 24. cedarford:

kyle-anne shriver – McCain chose her not because she’s a woman, but because she’s a woman who knows about energy.

Lets not confuse a politician who deals with an industry in their state as someone who “knows” that industry. Palin has an undergraduate degree in journalism and has never worked in the energy field.
Yes, her husband works part-time in the field, but we generally don’t credit kitchen table conversation for some magic osmosis of all spousal job knowledge and skills with the other spouse. Hillary claimed differently, but her campaign meltdown and her role in it suggests she did not learn executive leadership in 20 years of feeding Bubba greasy sausages and chatting about Arkansas rice farm subsidies or how to get a Kosovo coalition established.

I’m an engineer and my wife is a nurse. We both have rudimentary ideas of each others job and an above average layman’s knowledge – but we don’t “know” the others field, what challenges are there, what problems the other solves..She doesn’t know eddy current losses or the calculus. I don’t have any idea of the 14 different things a patient with bulging eyes and ragged breathing might have, or the urgency or non-urgency of getting a resident to attend.

The pipeline proposal was all design engineered, surveyed, formally submitted to both national governments back when Palin was yet to become a teenage beauty queen. It was held up by disparate parties, and she did a credible job as an executive to break a logjam caused by corrupt lawyers, environmental activists at a time when people finally realized we had rapidly rising oil and gas prices.

I doubt Palins knowledge of energy extends much past a limited, peripheral knowledge of certain aspects of the oil and gas sector, mainly in areas of transport of produced volumes of both.
Nothing on coal, nukes, the economics of renewables. The construction costs, the international finance structue and politics of energy.
That is not a detriment to her. Mitt Romney likely knows little about tunnel engineering and traffic flow computer simulations from being Governor for Teddy Kennedy’s “Big Dig”. Neither does Teddy. That is not their role. Gov Granholm has worked extensively with the auto industry, but she is a lawyer. Who “knows” the industry about as well as the average J-school grad at the Detroit Free Press.
It works in other executive positions – Gov Bill Richardson has degrees in French Lit and a masters in diplomacy. But he served as Secretary of Energy. That stint did not give any appearance that Richardson knew a thing about energy, or about the energy crisis gathering on both the Clinton and Dubya Administrations.

Sep 7, 2008 - 9:05 am 25. tanstaafl:

McCain chose her not because she’s a woman, but because she’s a woman who knows about energy.

One of her strongest points.

Palin has noted that one of the main reasons Alaska joined the union some 50 years ago was to be a “resource rich” source for the lower 48.

She has also noted her frustration at Alaskans being obstructed by federal red tape from developing their own resources.

Sep 7, 2008 - 9:18 am 26. idov:

They smeared Sarah with every calumny they could think of, but they backed off the big one, that she was seen flying through the air on a broom during a full moon. The reason, that’s clean energy, and think how much fuel we could save if everyone could do that.

It is estimated that 6 million women were burned at the stake on the basis of trumped-up charges of the type that Daily Kos manufactures every other day. Too bad for them, they were born too late, witch-hunts are out of season, and a simple bearing of false witness repeatedly is not going to influence anyone except those who are going to vote Obama in any event.

Sep 7, 2008 - 9:46 am 27. Mike:

Roschelle wrote:
“Come on America…are we so shallow that a pretty face is all it takes to win us over?”

No! Which is why Obama won’t get elected. He may be a pretty face, but McCain & Palin know that Hope is not a plan.

We need people who can face reality, have AN ACTUAL RECORD of achievement and reform (both of them) and have an actual plan of attack for tackling our problems head on. They are ‘Change I Can Believe In’.

Sep 7, 2008 - 9:52 am 28. Lisa:

My ONLY opposition to more drilling is that it may reduce funding of research for green solutions. It is a good short term solution but we need to look ahead too.

Sep 7, 2008 - 9:59 am 29. Greg:

Marina – “Just wait a couple of weeks and we’ll see Obama supporting drilling. He’ll tell us whatever we want to hear in order to be elected.

Marina, you’re so right. Obama’s double-speak is why I bought my first political bumper sticker ever. It says “BarryBarryQuiteContrary” and I get a lot of smiles from people when they see it.

I can hear Obama now: Yes, we will drill, responsibly! Which means whatever he, Pelosi and Reed want it to mean.

Yes, you can own guns, responsibly! Which means, when he thinks guns are irresponsible they will go away. Or when he believes it is the lead in bullets that is irresponsible he’ll support sweeping legislation making kryptonite the only approved bullet material.

Yes, we will cut taxes, responsibly! Which means, 38% of Americans don’t pay taxes now and Obama will increase that to 50%+ of Americans that don’t pay taxes by implementing a series of “responsible” tax credits.

Obama constantly talks in lawyer-eze and political mumbo-jumbo. In my opinion, this is why middle aged and older female voters think Obama is just a little too slick for their liking and won’t voter for him. I have to admit, my wife has a sixth sense that I don’t always have. Her bullshite meter is always turned on and this is why the messiah can’t and won’t close the deal with women.

So back to the point of this article, Sarah Palin is about as plain spoken as you can get. Gov. Palin’s plain talk is not just a single issue advantage. She will speak clearly and intelligently about energy, reform, families, America, economics, national security and on and on.

At her introduction in Ohio as VP, she clearly stated her understanding of energy independance as both the answer for improved economics for American families and as a powerful tool in national security and she called Russia on the carpet for plotting against the Caucuses like the Coyote plots against the Roadrunner. She’s got IT and she gets IT!

Sep 7, 2008 - 10:17 am 30. tanstaafl:

I doubt Palins knowledge of energy extends much past a limited, peripheral knowledge of certain aspects of the oil and gas sector…

And you know this…how ?

Maybe Sarah’s a very quick study

In the case of Granholm (MI and Detroit auto industry woes) or Richardson, I would observe that degrees and formal credentials are not, necessarily, indicators of a capacity for intelligent governance. Of anything.

Sep 7, 2008 - 10:21 am 31. Mike:

Freedom’s just another word wrote:
“Plus, there is the stigma of what to do with the used rods….Few people want a nuclear plant in their back yard.”

Yucca Mountain in Nevada is the most environmentally researched and thoroughly vetted safe depository for nuclear waste in the history of the world. Ever been there? I have. You cannot imagine a more remote or barren location, even by the standards of Nevada in general. It is geologically stable. There is no rain. There is no nearby water table. The tunnels are built and ready. That site alone could store all the spent rods generated in the USA for decades. Everything is ready. Let’s move ahead.

As far as nearby nuclear power plants, I once lived not far from Peach Bottom. It was just a small, local, unobtrusive power plant like the local hydroelectric plant. As someone noted, no one was killed at Three Mile Island. No one was even seriously injured. It’s got a better safety record than any major highway you can name. We know how to do this. We’ve been doing this safely since the 60’s, when most of these plants were built. We can do even better now. How can we NOT pursue this? We’re destroying ourselves by pandering to the radicals among us.

Sep 7, 2008 - 10:23 am 32. Rotwang:

Self-hating boomer — I’ve been in the nuclear business since 1978, and without the NRC and the outside regulatory pressures imposed on the nuclear majors like Westinghouse, GE, B&W and Combustion Engineering, “private industry’ would have taken whatever shortcuts they could get away with to cut costs and reduce lead-times.

“Safety” only really became an issue when people like Westinghouse figured out there was profit to be made by developing NSSS designs with enhanced monitoring and controls, multiple backups and passive failover deigns, and lobbying the NRC to make those improvements a part of the mandatory regs.

Which was a damn good thing, since the lion’s share of nuclear engineering was devoted to overcoming the unforeseen material, design and control failures that plagued plant owners throughout the operating life of the early-generation plants. People were improvising left and right to cope with perpetual corrosion issues, and the degrading effects of vibration and irradiation of metal parts. The plants literally ate themselves. Steam generators were breaking down left and right, and leakage and cooling problems were legion. Service and repair became the single biggest costs of ownership, and it was obvious that the original design models had been based on hopelessly imperfect data and assumptions, coupled with ad hoc operating protocols that had to be continuously revised in the face of actual oeprating experience.

Designs are vastly better now, for sure. But I wouldn’t let unregulated “private industry” run with nuclear power any more than I would care to see Enron managing the T&D grid again.

Plus, after billions and billions in research, we still don’t know what to do with the spent reactor fuel…although we’ve learned a hell of a lot about how to make glass.

Sep 7, 2008 - 10:34 am 33. Self-hating boomer:

Cedarford,I do think that Sarah Palin understands enough about energy to know that inflating tires won’t save the equivalent of all of the oil in the OCS. In fact, I think most Americans with any common horse sense understand that. Whether she brings any technical expertise to the table isn’t the point, the point is that Obama has less understanding of energy than the average ditch digger.

All he can do is recite talking points furnished to him by big environmental groups. The fact that the talking points are ludicrous and wrong doesn’t seem to bother him.

Sep 7, 2008 - 10:38 am 34. Self-hating boomer:

Lisa, that’s a non-sequitur. Since funding for drilling will come from the private sector, how will that impact funding for alternatives?

Zero-sum thinking strikes again.

Sep 7, 2008 - 10:40 am 35. tanstaafl:

Yes, we will cut taxes, responsibly! Which means, 38% of Americans don’t pay taxes now and Obama will increase that to 50%+ of Americans that don’t pay taxes by implementing a series of “responsible” tax credits.

The bottom 50% of earners pays 3.1% of total federal taxes.

In light of that fact, I wish somebody would explain to me the notion of relieving the federal tax burden on those individuals who either have a negligible tax burden or no tax burden at all.

Sep 7, 2008 - 10:41 am 36. Gail P:

Soaring rhetoric vs. true grit!
By gailtalk.blogspot.com
The left wing bloggers are going crazy. I have never seen or heard such vile, hateful, ignorant comments in my life. The mainstream media is stunned, shown to all but those who choose not to see, for the bias most of us have long recognized. The media has had over a year to vet Barack Obama. They chose to ignore his long-time “friendships” with Reverend Wright, Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, and his total lack of experience. The minute John McCain announced Sarah Palin as his running mate, the press was all over her with disgusting displays that go well beyond liberal bias. What they did not foresee was how their lies and contempt backfired, big time! I give them much credit for the huge audience she had for her spectacular acceptance speech Wednesday night! With off-the-chart ratings I might add! It could not be missed that her substantive executive experience, laughed at by the mainstream media, blew away the non-experience of Obama. Governor of a huge state! Commander of the Alaska National Guard! Chair of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission! Mayor of a small town! Community Organizer! Senator for one year before embarking on his presidential campaign! Shall I go on .. ?
Wouldn’t you love to see an Obama/Palin debate? A real debate, not pre-written scripts with amazing oratory. Especially one covering decision-making! Can’t you see Obama hemming and hawing, thinking, pondering, wavering, dodging and weaving to every question requiring a decision, while Palin is decisive and ready for action!
Obama on O’Reilly still can’t admit he was wrong about the surge. He finally said “the surge has succeeded in ways nobody anticipated ..” Well that’s not totally true. McCAIN DID ANTICIPATE IT!
Republicans and many Independents understand we are fighting a war against people who hate us, who have been planning, and are planning today, the terrible things they will do to us. Are Democrats planning to fight the people who hate us? Have they supported the Patriot Act, which has been instrumental in protecting us from unspeakable harm? No.
Are Democrats intent on causing further division in our country? I think these comments from Biden speak for themselves. “If there has b een a basis upon which you can pursue someone for a criminal violation, they will be pursued,” Biden said during a campaign stop in Florida on Monday, ABC News reported. “Not out of vengeance, not out of retribution. Out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no attorney general, no president — no one is above the law.” This is how they plan to spend their time.
Many are complaining about McCain’s speech, but I liked it. It reminded me of the difference between flash and substance McCain will never have the soaring rhetoric of Obama, but Obama will never have the “true grit” of McCain.
gailtalk.blogspot.com

Sep 7, 2008 - 11:03 am 37. ProgMeister:

here we go again …

Talk to real energy experts and there isn’t a single one of them that thinks “drill here, drill now” or “drill, drill, drill” will do a damn thing to lower prices at the pump anytime soon. (other factors will, like curbing speculation and a stronger dollar … and we’re already seeing that)

You can open up ANWR and the OCS tomorrow, full bore no restrictions on anything, and it wouldn’t make a damn bit of difference for YEARS; E&P takes time, and beyond that, we don’t even have the available equipment to drill in the first place. The largest drilling company in the world, Transocean, has nine deepwater rigs coming online in the next year and every one of them is already on long-term contract.

Far as I can tell, what Palin knows about energy is about what she knows about everything else: very little. As for this BS sexism argument, her mother-in-law had it right: she was chosen for VP because she’s a woman and because she’s a social conservative. For Chrissake, Kyle, you’ve been blathering on and on about her damned pencil skirts, earrings and lipstick … is this the new feminism or something?

Palin is Little Miss Drillhead because it benefits her state. DUH. You wanna start talking about the price at the pump, we’re ready to have a go at Phil Gramm and his self-serving role in increasing speculation in the futures markets. And dumbass McCain still hasn’t jettisoned his butt out of the inner circle. Amazing.

Write about something you know about, if anything … pencil skirts maybe

Sep 7, 2008 - 11:23 am 38. Freedom's just another word..:

Solar energy would be great, but we would “see” it and, to some, it would be visually displeasing.

The ocean currents, Gulf Stream, could provide a HELL of ALOT of power. Drop turbines in the Gulf, underwater, and transfer the energy back to the US. It would be out of sight, and constant source.

Bush’s Secretary of the Interior IS WORKING on this idea. See http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16713781

What do you think of Gulf Stream power? Could power the whole Eastern US.

Sep 7, 2008 - 11:29 am 39. Zan:

Drill Baby Drill
Sarah Palin has shown us it is ok to vote John McCain.

Sep 7, 2008 - 11:42 am 40. tanstaafl:

Opening up ANWR isn’t supposed to solve America’s energy crisis. (proposed drilling area is less than the acreage of LAX)

It’s supposed to increase our supply (of oil and natural gas) and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

It’s supposed to reduce the opportunities for the Ahmadinejhads and Chavezs of the world to hold America hostage.

It beats the hell out of what I’ve deduced from the Democrats so far, rhetoric and obstructionism on the subject of energy.

Sep 7, 2008 - 11:45 am 41. AdrianS:

Ever win a jackpot? You put in a coin and you get coins, more coins, lots of coins.

The selection of Sarah Palin brings McCain many, many political benefits. But more than that, it brings a invigoration and energizing of the Republican Party that has brought over conservatives, on-the-fence Republicans, Independents, and caring Democrats.

Sep 7, 2008 - 11:46 am 42. Deborah:

Oh come now. The attempt to nab Hillary voters was deduced from their praising Hillary (and Ferraro!) in each speech until a) those were booed; b) polling made it clear she was a home run with the base and a strikeout with independents and moderates.

As for energy, when she took on Big Oil in Alaska it was to get them to write even larger checks to the residents of Alaska each year. If I were an Alaskan I’d appreciate that; as a non-Alaskan American I don’t see how it translates to larger issues. She’ll get BP to write a $3000 check for me, too? Really? And all 280 million of my fellow Americans?

I can see why she’s popular in Alaska, but not how any of that experience is supposed to translate on national issues. One would expect her to be out there explaining that, but instead we have surrogates trying the “Alaska is near Russia; also, she commands the National Guard.” If they picked her for oil bonafides, they sure as hell are doing a good job of hiding that behind less impressive talking points.

Sep 7, 2008 - 11:54 am 43. Greg:

tanstaafl – “In light of that fact, I wish somebody would explain to me the notion of relieving the federal tax burden on those individuals who either have a negligible tax burden or no tax burden at all.”

I’m not a tax expert my friend, but what I have observed, regarding relieving the tax burden on people who don’t pay taxes in the first place is, that if you take money out of my check and hand it out like a Chicago community organizer to those that need it more than I do, you make a lot of friends and buy a lot of votes for real change.

Now, if the rest of America would just quiet down and go along with this plan for real hope and real change, Barack could get busy creating ten’s of thousands of posses ‘er I mean, community organizers to bring real change to Americans hurting from the last 8 years of George Bush and the evil Republicans like Sarah Palin.

You think I’m getting this tanstaafl? I’m all freaking over it. Hear that? Off in the distance… I believe it is angels singing, yes, I’m sure it is… angels!!! Hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah!

P.S. If you won’t go along peacefully, it don’t make no never mind, ’cause Barack is going to make you change and get you some hope whether you know what’s good for you or not, which I’m sure you do not! Paraphrasing – Michelle “my bell” Obama.

Sep 7, 2008 - 12:03 pm 44. SCOOTER:

Good work ProgMeister. You attempted to slam KA in this article about Gov.Palin and her knowledge about O&G drilling, sexism and economics. However, you didn’t contribute anything to enlighten the rest of the readers; in fact, you sounded like a malcontent, an angry adolescent crying “it’s not fair”. What you, obviously neglected to mention, is that Gov. Palin knows more about the subject of drilling for oil and gas than beloved Pelosi, Reid and Obama TOGETHER….. THAT’S THE POINT. Attend the next API convention and spew your theories to them.

Sep 7, 2008 - 12:03 pm 45. tanstaafl:

As for energy, when she took on Big Oil in Alaska it was to get them to write even larger checks to the residents of Alaska each year.

It was the government of Alaska, under Sarah Palin, that redistributed revenues from oil company profits to Alaska’s citizens.

Sep 7, 2008 - 12:06 pm 46. tanstaafl:

Greg, my friend, thank you so much

It seems that Barack Obama plans to use the machinery of the federal government to effect the “change” he was unable to bring about as a community organizer in Chicago in the 1980’s.

He’d better not squeeze too hard on the top 10% of taxpayers who currently

Pay over 70% of total taxes !

Sep 7, 2008 - 12:15 pm 47. ProgMeister:

Good work ProgMeister. You attempted to slam KA in this article about Gov.Palin and her knowledge about O&G drilling, sexism and economics. However, you didn’t contribute anything to enlighten the rest of the readers; in fact, you sounded like a malcontent, an angry adolescent crying “it’s not fair”. What you, obviously neglected to mention, is that Gov. Palin knows more about the subject of drilling for oil and gas than beloved Pelosi, Reid and Obama TOGETHER….. THAT’S THE POINT. Attend the next API convention and spew your theories to them.

malcontent? because I know we can’t drill our way to short-term cheaper gasoline? you know how to read? if readers didn’t know that, then I enlightened them … if they did, then I didn’t … simple stuff, no?

It ain’t gonna happen but Barack could turn Palin into a bowl of Jello in about five minutes on ANY topic of interest to voters in this election; it didn’t take him five or six colleges to get a bachelor’s degree; you folks think that because you say something enough times the whole world will accept it as true … doesn’t work that way and if you wanna trot out Sarah as an energy expert, she’s gonna have to prove it …. not sure why it matters since McCain’s Steve Schit and his crew have already announced that the American people don’t care what Palin thinks about the issues

Reid and Pelosi aren’t running for VP … if you happen to be in Pelosi’s district, vote for the other candidate; Harry’s not up this year … either way, each will be back as leader of a Dem majority … which you know … try impeachment or something; or maybe you can just scream at the television set with C-SPAN on; knock yourself out

Sep 7, 2008 - 12:31 pm 48. John O'Brien:

Long with Nancy Pelosi is Andrea Mitchell (Mrs. Alan Greenspan,) who said that only uneducated Clinton supporters would vote for McCain because of Sarah Palin. The larger issue of oil supplies in the USA is that we the people own the oil and gas under public lands and we should be using those resources not only for domestic consumption but also to their fullest extent by selling them abroad as Russia and the OPEC nations already do. And we should retain ownership of that oil rather than continuing the current Federal giveaway program oil companies who simply stockpile oil bearing properties in order to artificially inflate oil prices.
Industrial socialism, as in continually bailing out the private sector and printing billions of dollars to enable Wall Street racketeering enterprises, has become the hallmark of American government and can no longer be viewed as capitalism or free enterprise. Further, with the destruction of the dollar, the last asset we have to put into play to gain some semblance of solvency is our oil. Not the oil industry’s oil, our oil.

Sep 7, 2008 - 12:31 pm 49. Greg:

Deborah – “Oh come now. The attempt to nab Hillary voters was deduced from their praising Hillary (and Ferraro!) in each speech until a) those were booed; b) polling made it clear she was a home run with the base and a strikeout with independents and moderates.”

Politics has nothing to do with substance. If it did, John McCain would have poll numbers in the high 90% based on the 40 million that watched both conventions. Politics is a slick, marketing package designed to play the numbers, more today than ever before. Think… huge stadium, huge Greek columns, a huge stage shaped like an “O” and throw in fireworks to puncuate the soaring oratory and BOOM!, you’ve got instant Presidential candidate in a box, just add water, only 48 monthly payments of $1995!

Therefore, Republicans don’t want Hillary voters! Republicans want a subset of Hillary voters. I’ll prove my point: Barack Obama is going to get 90% or more of the black vote. If John McCain picked Colin Powel as his running mate it would have siphoned off a subset of black voters who are voting on race and race alone.

That is exactly what you’re seeing with Sarah Palin and the women’s vote. Additionally, if McCain would have picked Colin Powel, some black voters would have liked the experience that he would bring to the ticket, just like some women like the experience Sarah Palin has as Governor of Alaska.

Many blacks would certainly not like Colin Powel’s experience especially with the lead up to the war, likewise, many radical feminists Hillary supports (read one issue voters, abortion) do not like Gov. Palin.

But it’s still a numbers game plain and simple. Right now, the numbers are moving away from Obama/Biden and moving in favor of McCain/Palin. We have 60 days or so left before the election and the numbers game will be driven by the most vicious, ugly, smear campaign (read Democrats, because past behavior predicts future behavior, always) we have ever seen in our lifetime. The smears don’t have to be true, because in marketing the first step to gaining marketshare is gaining mindshare.

How many people really believe those “Ancient Chinese” pads you stick on the bottom of your feet will suck the toxins out and cure you of sickness and disease? It is a proven scam, but mindshare leads to marketshare. The Democrats will sell Obama as the “Hope & Change Pads” that American’s can stick on their forehead to rid the world of the evil George Bush! Many will fork over their hard earned money only to find out the only thing they were relieved of was their wallet. Hope this helps.

Sep 7, 2008 - 12:46 pm 50. heather:

so drilling for north american oil and gas won’t solve our energy problems ‘immediately’. It’s ’stupid’ to drill any more because if we do that, energy problems will not disappear ‘next week.’

So we do nothing? Nada?

And tell me, what immediate solution does Earth Saviour Pelosi and Agent of Hope Obama have?? Aside from “clean energy” (whatever that is.)

Sep 7, 2008 - 12:48 pm 51. Pat:

“Few people want a nuclear plant in their back yard.”

Given the choice between a coal-fired power plant and a nuclear reactor in their back yard, I’ll bet a lot of people would opt for the nuclear plant.

Of course, there will always be those who oppose the construction of ANY power plant in their neighborhood. Those people deserve to freeze in the dark.

I live about six miles from a nuclear plant (the Shearon Harris facility in North Carolina), and I’m happy to have it. I wish Progress Energy would build more nuclear plants. We’ll need them if we’re going to be switching to electric cars over the next couple of decades.

Sep 7, 2008 - 12:50 pm 52. ProgMeister:

John Dubya:

First you said:

I’ve commented before about the Dem’s mantra: “We can’t drill our way out of this mess!”,,, whoever came up with that slogan certainly wasn’t an oil man.

And then you said:

We simply cannot explore, drill, produce, and transport oil to market for less than the Arab when it is costing them less than $5.00 to ship a bbl of oil.

how about making up your mind, pal? Are you one of SP’s energy experts?

Sep 7, 2008 - 1:04 pm 53. Greg:

tanstaafl – “He’d better not squeeze too hard on the top 10% of taxpayers who currently Pay over 70% of total taxes !”

It seems to me, I’d like to know your thoughts, that the American people are some of the most, if not the most, industrious, innovative, hard working people on the planet. The liberal socialists know that Americans, especially the most industrious, the top 80% of taxpayers across all sectors of industry, will not stop being who they are, industrious, innovative world builders. As a result, the top taxpayers are ripe for the picking. In reality, a sustained harvest of industry, innovation and business.

Therefore, when you try to explain to a liberal socialist that soicalism, communism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism has never worked to the benefit of “…life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, they say… that’s because “WE” haven’t managed it yet and when WE do it will work in America, once we get the U.S. Constitution out of the way!

In my humble opinion, Barack Obama (the consitutional scholar) is the ultimate apologist for this belief system.

Sep 7, 2008 - 1:15 pm 54. ProgMeister:

Therefore, when you try to explain to a liberal socialist that soicalism, communism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism has never worked to the benefit of “…life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, they say… that’s because “WE” haven’t managed it yet and when WE do it will work in America, once we get the U.S. Constitution out of the way!

leaving aside the idiotic proposition that liberals are interested in any of the “isms” you posit here, what in the text of the US constitution gets in the way of anything you allege liberals propose or promote? please try to be reasonably specific ….

and just so we have some idea of what a “liberal socialist” is, would one qualify as such for, let’s say, being in favor of building the interstate highway system? for building a sports arena financed with municipal bonds? how about for funding biomedical research and then licensing the work product to pharmaceutical companies?

Sep 7, 2008 - 1:45 pm 55. Terry Gain:

The correct answer as to why McCain chose Sarah is:

All of the above.

Sep 7, 2008 - 1:48 pm 56. Michelle:

I’ve never seen leftists screeching and running around like decapitated barnyard fowl so much as when it began to dawn on them that Sarah Palin was not just going to go away because Andy Sullivan and idiot Kosists tried to smear her.

Forget that tactic, dumkopfs. Time for you to do something you’ve probably never done in your entire lives: think, reason, investigate, and re-consider most of the things you thought were true. Because that foundation you thought you were standing on is just quicksand. And right now you seem to be going nowhere but down.

Sep 7, 2008 - 2:14 pm 57. HRPKathy:

Maybe you legal eagles can help me, but isn’t Con Law where those who lack the intellectual heft to argue a case go? Isn’t it where the analysts, not the ‘persuaders’ who pursue that course? Just askin’.

As to whether Governor Sarah Palin knows anything about energy, it’s laughable to read cedarford and progmeister’s analysis. Really. They should come with a snort alert.

Several of Governor Palin’s predecessors attempted a natural gas line project. Several. But because the industry was in bed with the politicians, they couldn’t get a fair bid process. Gov. Palin negotiated this deal – it’s all on her. But I suppose according to you, that ole ‘ignert’ gal felt her way along in the dark. You make me want to puke with your condescension.

And no she didn’t get her knowledge from being married to a BP foreman and union member, but she did hear about production issues from both sides – blue and white collar. I’m sure according to you guys, that just made her dumber…

The single greatest wedge issue is energy. Americans stand with republicans two to one on this issue. And most Americans link energy issues with the economy, the most prominent issue in voters minds. While the 9% approval of Congress seems not to phase them, imagine what it does to people who pay $4.50 for gas to see Pelosi out hawking her book and vacationing democrats when most Americans cancelled their vacations this year.

It’s a no brainer. Governor Palin chaired the Oil and Gas Energy Commission, and received an insider’s view of corruption. Her subsequent actions resulted in the resignation of those she identified – including the Attorney General of Alaska. But while she was on the O&G Commission I’m sure she didn’t learn anything cedarford. She’s not an engineer, and she’s a woman. No way with those two strikes against her. (OMG!)

People who say “Read my lipstick” are missing the real slogan this year. It should be “It’s the energy policy, Stupid.”

Of course she was chosen for that, and more, her REFORM of the energy issues and the way they were being addressed in Alaska, as well as her ability to get things done.

For a description of Gov. Palin’s performance in energy and as commander of the national guard of her state go here.

Sep 7, 2008 - 2:16 pm 58. tanstaafl:

My thoughts, greg, are that the liberal socialists would and do place too much emphasis on “taxing the rich” in order to effect something they view (giving it the benefit of the doubt) as a Robin Hood agenda.

And that the increased levels of taxation on America’s highest earners that Obama espouses (the top 1% of taxpayers already pay 40% of total federal taxes) will stifle and smother industry and growth.

Not to mention human incentive (see Europe)

My further, darker thought is that this isn’t a Robin Hood agenda at all, but an agenda to seize power and infuse federal government more and more deeply into the lives of all of us.

“He who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.”

Since the topic here is “energy” we’ve seen how the federal bureaucracy has increasingly acted in a manner as to inhibit we the people from intelligently managing our own resources.

Russia and China have no such reservations or ponderous restrictions when it comes to their own energy needs. Given technology, American exploration and development of oil is done a lot more “environmentally” than what the Russians will be doing as they lay greater and greater claim to the Arctic Circle and any former “Soviet” regions with oil and pipelines.

Therefore, when you try to explain to a liberal socialist that soicalism, communism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism has never worked to the benefit of “…life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, they say… that’s because “WE” haven’t managed it yet and when WE do it will work in America, once we get the U.S. Constitution out of the way!

Pretty much nails it.

“The definition of insanity is repeating the same old behaviors and expecting a different result.”

Sep 7, 2008 - 2:35 pm 59. John Galt:

I’m so depressed.

Is anyone else feeling like it’s OVER? Palin is is the party’s way of saying, we’re not winning in 08, so let’s put a dynamic woman on stage with McCain to give the party some life that will carry us into 2012. I’m sure that’s how it’s going to be. Palin is going to give us the momentium to rebuild this party over the next 4 years into something that can defeat the Obama machine.

Why won’t anyone else come out and say it? I know the “message” is “win win win” but really, the blogosphere is not the convention, it’s not the mainstream media, we should say it how we see it, and doesn’t anyone else see it like the beginning of the end?

Sep 7, 2008 - 2:40 pm 60. Frieda:

He picked her because of

ENERGY CRISIS WE FACE NOW AND WE NEED SOMEONE ON THE TICKET WHO KNOWS WHAT IT MEANS

REFORM REFORM REFORM, we need some who had some results in reforming not just talking about it

Independence. Palin has show she is not afraid of going after her own party. Has Obama done anything close?

WE NEED SOME FROM REAL MIDDLE CLASS SO SHE CAN REPRESENTS US

BECAUSE SHE IS a WOMAN…and 50% of American want representation

Sep 7, 2008 - 2:53 pm 61. tanstaafl:

You do sound depressed, John.

Something like the depressed computer Deep Thought in Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

I’m grateful that an individual like Sarah Palin has been willing to throw her lot into national politics.

I myself might have stayed in beautiful Alaska rather than expose myself and my family to the cesspool we’ve witnessed over the past week and all the jollies we can expect in “the media” over the next 2 months.

(adios for the nonce)

Sep 7, 2008 - 2:57 pm 62. Charlie:

Its rather amazing to me ,to see the press trying their level best to find someone in Alaska,who does not like Palin.She is the most approved of gov. in the entire country..80percent plus approval,and thats some of her lowest ratings.We are then to beleive the 9 percent congress is who we should listen to..I am definetly missing something here.I supported Hillary,I am not a single issue voter,and I prefer to vote for someone who will do what is best and right for the country,not their political party.That choice has become increasingly obvious the last few days.Regardless of whatever it is Hillary will be saying in the coming 2 months..McCain-Palin has my vote locked up,and if the leadership of my party doesn’t turn their attitude around about America and what we need to get going,they might be missing my vote for a long time to come.

Sep 7, 2008 - 3:18 pm 63. Lisa:

Self-hating Boomer,

You misunderstand me. My fear is that if we drill for more oil and gas becomes cheap enough, the need to develop sustainable alternatives will be less obvious and we simply won’t do it… eventually we will end up back where we are today. Soaring energy prices and no viable alternative.

Oil is NOT a long term solution. There is only a finite amount. Eventually, it will run out and we really aren’t sure when.

As long as we continue to fund research into sustainable fuels/energy as an eventual replacement to oil, I have no objection to drilling. BUT we must continue to work hard on finding viable alternatives that will leave us independent of foreign energy.

Sep 7, 2008 - 3:18 pm 64. HRPKathy:

Well Lisa, when you eliminate oil, where are you going to get plastic?

How do you feel about typing on a wooden keyboard?

BTW, oil is not finite. It continues to be formed by heat and pressure imposed on organic matter in geological strata in the earth’s crust.

Sep 7, 2008 - 3:53 pm 65. D Lund:

>Oil is NOT a long term solution. There is only a finite >amount.

Lisa, You have been told this, but it is not true, at least not as I think you understand it.

Indeed, the space the earth occupies is finite, and therefore, in an ultimate sense, oil contained within it is finite.

But in terms of usable oil, oil available to us to extract, this is entirely a function of market price. The higher the price goes, the more oil reserves come “on-line” that were not feasible to develop before. This is why the “global oil supply” has constantly gone up, not down, for about 14 years as technology has advanced and the price has gone up.

There is no end point here– just a dance between price and supply. Price goes up, more difficult extraction becomes feasible, “world reserve” goes up, more oil is extracted and produced, surpluses grow, price falls, difficult extraction is no longer possible, “reserve” goes down, etc…

I wish everyone would take the time to understand this! We wouldn’t say and do such foolish things.

Sep 7, 2008 - 4:04 pm 66. D Lund:

>Eventually, it will run out and we really aren’t sure when.

P.S. the reason we don’t know is that it is unknowable. Since the rate we extract and refine oil is entirely a function of price, and we can’t predict prices even in the short term, it is impossible to know where an end point might be.

>BUT we must continue to work hard on finding viable alternatives that will leave us independent of foreign energy.

P.P.S. Independence is crucial. You are right on here. Only, don’t worry about working so hard! If energy prices stay high enough long enough, alternatives will become feasible and clever people everywhere will invest in them and develop them. Then someday the oil reserve will become eternal, because we’ll stop extracting any! This is the beauty of prices, you don’t have to stress or lose sleep, it’ll just happen, even if you’re not paying attention and doing something else worthwhile.

Sep 7, 2008 - 4:17 pm 67. Ed Wallis:

Lisa 3:18,

NO WORRY on that one. This is no longer 1973, and I am of the opinion that more and more people are realistic to recognize that oil is now – for lack of better terms, use what you will – a “bridge” energy vehicle.

I am also confident that “the market’s invisible hand” has a pretty good feel for things. I say this thinking of something NOBODY needed (ha!) back in 1973: personal computers. Moral of the story: Let enough folks free up their creative juices (to…ahem!…make some money) and America will shine every time.

Sep 7, 2008 - 4:38 pm 68. Self-hating boomer:

Lisa, that doesn’t make any sense. If we’re going to run out, it’s not going to get cheap again. If it gets cheap again, barring a major worldwide depression, that means we’re not going to run out in the foreseeable future. When it becomes evident to the people in the energy business that the worldwide demand can’t be satisfied by oil alone, they’ll start to phase in alternatives.

It’s already happening. Alberta is producing a lot of oil from tar sands. Shale is being tapped in a pilot program in Jordan. And the plug-in hybrids are going to be available in 2010.

Have faith. The market knows what it’s doing, even if the politicians don’t.

Sep 7, 2008 - 4:51 pm 69. cedarford:

tanstaafl:
It was the government of Alaska, under Sarah Palin, that redistributed revenues from oil company profits to Alaska’s citizens.

NO, it was the government of Alaska, in negotiations with Big Oil and the Feds 30 years ago, that set up a direct distribution of royalties to Alaskan citizens rather than a Democrat “general government fund” to be divvied out to cronies.

Sarah Palin’s role was a corporate shakedown -extorting higher royalty payments into the Fund – after the system has been chugging along for decades.

======================
ProMeister – You can open up ANWR and the OCS tomorrow, full bore no restrictions on anything, and it wouldn’t make a damn bit of difference for YEARS; E&P takes time, and beyond that, we don’t even have the available equipment to drill in the first place. The largest drilling company in the world, Transocean, has nine deepwater rigs coming online in the next year and every one of them is already on long-term contract.

The commentor doesn’t realize that once you create a good investment climate and rein in the lawyers for the good of the country – you can move fast. Very fast.
E&P delays can be cut 70%. Steel for all the new rigs we want and drilling tools from Schlumberger & Hughes can be cranked up. We know this because we ramped up during other booms and for other projects like WWII material production and quadrupling our concrete and steel output for new concrete-rebar construction of the Interstates and the modern city.

As was, barred by lawyers and special interests from offshore drilling, we don’t build new oil rigs. Or set up financing and regulatory confidence needed to create new McDermott, Transglobal capacity or new firms. Instead, we sent our scrap steel to India to make cheap rebar to build Shanghai or new high tech factories in Guangdzhou (including all the steel of the WTC save a few chunks of rusty crap set aside for “Heroes” monuments and growingly disinterested museums).

=========================
Rotwang – an otherwise well-informed discussion of nuclear power and Gen I nuke plant problems undermined in the end by this statement:

Plus, after billions and billions in research, we still don’t know what to do with the spent reactor fuel…although we’ve learned a hell of a lot about how to make glass.

We do, recycling and reprocessing as the French, Russians, and Asians do. A closed loop system killed where it was invented, in America, by the Idiot. Namely Jimmy Carter. Unfissioned uranium (98%) of original mass that goes into a reactor is recycled into new fuel. Almost all the long-lived activity comes from transuranics like plutonium and americium – and that is separated out from the intensely radioactive but shorter-lived fission product mass (150 pounds or so from a 3,0000 MW thermal reactor fuel cycle). Then the longer lived transuranics are not long-lived waste but added to new fuel for extra energy and burnup.

The other reason we haven’t pushed the issue is that for decades it was cheaper to go with open cycle fuel made with cheap uranium and surplus military stores of weapons grade plutonium & HEU reblended into fuel and burned to keep it safe from diversion and proliferation.

Overruling The Idiot’s folly is critical if nuke power is to make a sustained comeback as a clean, CO2-free fuel and as a critical adjunct fuel that can make fusion plants more likely (fusion neutrons can not only make heat, but breed new fissile fuel).

Without recycling&reprocessing, we have uranium sources adequate for 50-100 years. With it, over 10,000 years of supply from not treating such a scarce valuable metal as 98% waste and opening up newly economical additional uranium deposits.

Sep 7, 2008 - 5:04 pm 70. John Dubya:

ProgMeister:

Can you not read?

I could hold school on the topic of energy exploration and production,,, but I doubt you’d pass.

Sep 7, 2008 - 5:09 pm 71. Teresa:

Lisa:

You do not seem to have much of an idea how much oil there truly is. It is not helpful to say “there is only a finite amount”. Of course there is only a finite amount, sweets. Of course it will run out eventually. That tells us absolutely nothing.

As for “sustainable fuels/energy” do you have any idea how long it will take to substitute those for oil and nuclear? Over the past 20 years, sustainables have gone from half a percent to a full percent of energy! Try 50 years for the takeover, dear, optimistically. What do you propose to do in that time.

This is the problem with people opining and voting without any knowledge of the real world. Jeesh!

Sep 7, 2008 - 5:36 pm 72. chicago:

cedarford said that Palin doesn’t know about energy. I believe that Palin knows more about energy than Pelosi (Natural gas is not a fossil fuel to her), Reid (coal makes us sick so we shouldn’t use it, even though coal delivers 50% of our electricity already), and Obama who stated that we shouldn’t drill in ANWR since “we have some nice real estate up there” during the interview with O’Reilly.

yup, sure does look like the democrats know more about energy alright! LOL!

some of the liberal trolls here try to present a good argument but when you DRILL into those arguments, it always come out as a dry WELL!

Sep 7, 2008 - 5:58 pm 73. Tcobb:

We could have been energy-independent some years ago–but no–we can’t have any offshore drilling, we can’t have any more nuclear power plants built, and we can’t have any coal to gasoline plants built either like Exxon wanted to do back in the freaking 1980’s. And the same people who made and enforced these policies are the ones saying they have the answer—just give them more and more power of micro-managing our lives.

It reminds me of some years ago when there was a street person who lurked in the vicinity of the small office building I worked in. He approached the landlord one day and told him that the parking lot was a mess–it was littered with trash and beer bottles, but he would be willing to pick it up for $10.00. But of course, as the landlord knew, the man who was talking was the source of the mess to begin with. Instead of paying the wino $10 he summoned the cops to give him a criminal trespass warning.

I wish we could do that to the politicians.

Sep 7, 2008 - 6:06 pm 74. Bill:

Lisa,

It’s not possible to drill our way to $25 oil no matter what anyone says. We can drill our way to $50-70 oil which is more then it costs for most alternatives to be profitable and yet cheap enough that we have the time to design and rebuild our entire national energy and highway systems to support electric cars.

As it is right now there is no way to deploy the millions of electric vehicles we will need to replace oil based fuel the transportation system the nation relies on. We have enough trouble getting power to run the AC with out brown outs but what will happen when you plug in all those cars?

Even moving to hydrogen instead of all elective will require massive new build up of nuclear power plants to break down water into hydrogen as it is very energy intensive which leads me to Bio-Fuels.

The very concept of bio-fuels like e85 is a bad joke propagated by the corn lobby as shown by the hike in food costs farms make more to plant e85 corn then they ever will planting the corn we eat. If we really wanted bio fuels we would move to massive algae or sugar beats farms or other non-food based plants. Corn is a major food source using it to power our cars is a stupid idea and should of never gotten off the ground floor.

Right now we have the time and ability to act to break out independence on oil for our transportation needs. It’s unrealistic to assume we will have no need for oil in the future since it’s used in plastics and other related products.

Sep 7, 2008 - 6:20 pm 75. Everett:

Roschelle,

Thanks for the description you just gave us of Obama and his media enhanced campaign. Never have we seen a bigger empty suit than your chosen one.

Sep 7, 2008 - 6:23 pm 76. ProgMeister:

You misunderstand me. My fear is that if we drill for more oil and gas becomes cheap enough, the need to develop sustainable alternatives will be less obvious and we simply won’t do it… eventually we will end up back where we are today. Soaring energy prices and no viable alternative.

Oil is NOT a long term solution. There is only a finite amount. Eventually, it will run out and we really aren’t sure when.

As long as we continue to fund research into sustainable fuels/energy as an eventual replacement to oil, I have no objection to drilling. BUT we must continue to work hard on finding viable alternatives that will leave us independent of foreign energy.

I think you’re right on all counts, Lisa … I wouldn’t be overly concerned with backsliding on alternatives; we’ve hit a tipping point on energy and alternatives will go forward. That said, giving XOM more tax breaks isn’t the way to make progress, unless of course they’re willing to become an energy company rather and not just an oil company.

Sep 7, 2008 - 6:34 pm 77. Bagua:

“Deborah:
As for energy, when she took on Big Oil in Alaska it was to get them to write even larger checks to the residents of Alaska each year. If I were an Alaskan I’d appreciate that; as a non-Alaskan American I don’t see how it translates to larger issues. She’ll get BP to write a $3000 check for me, too? Really? And all 280 million of my fellow Americans?”
Actually Deborah…

you would get at minimum the same as that check. The reduction in costs at the pump for each driving American could easily exceed $1,000, and that’s not a one time check, that is each and every year. Over the Mcain/Palin 8 years that would be a minimum of $8,000.

Of course this is only a very minimal estimate, the savings could be far higher, add to this a knockon effect of savings in food, electricity, heating and cooling, everything manufactured, hundreds of billions of dollars formally going to OPEC now remaining in the US economy, the list goes on and on.

The actual effect would be a new era of prosperity, something like what the Kuwaiti’s enjoy.

Sep 7, 2008 - 6:38 pm 78. ProgMeister:

HRPKathy:

Maybe you legal eagles can help me, but isn’t Con Law where those who lack the intellectual heft to argue a case go? Isn’t it where the analysts, not the ‘persuaders’ who pursue that course? Just askin’.

In a word, no.

As to whether Governor Sarah Palin knows anything about energy, it’s laughable to read cedarford and progmeister’s analysis. Really. They should come with a snort alert.

ok … ha ha, snort snort … now, what qualifies Palin as an energy expert?

Several of Governor Palin’s predecessors attempted a natural gas line project. Several. But because the industry was in bed with the politicians, they couldn’t get a fair bid process. Gov. Palin negotiated this deal – it’s all on her. But I suppose according to you, that ole ‘ignert’ gal felt her way along in the dark. You make me want to puke with your condescension.

that’s pretty short on detail but basically suggests two things: (a) Palin’s predecessors were corrupt and she’s not; very nice but honesty in one’s dealings is supposed to be a baseline assumption, not a bragging point … maybe not for Alaskans? (b) could it be that market conditions were considerably more favorable for the deal by the time Palin got to the table? as you say, just askin btw, feel free to puke but please use the ladies room

And no she didn’t get her knowledge from being married to a BP foreman and union member, but she did hear about production issues from both sides – blue and white collar. I’m sure according to you guys, that just made her dumber

still no indications of what this knowledge is; the claim on the table is that Palin is an “energy expert” … what you’ve described, if true, is some measure of skill in political/business negotiation; lawyers do this all the time without expertise in the subject matter of the negotiation

The single greatest wedge issue is energy. Americans stand with republicans two to one on this issue. And most Americans link energy issues with the economy, the most prominent issue in voters minds. While the 9% approval of Congress seems not to phase them, imagine what it does to people who pay $4.50 for gas to see Pelosi out hawking her book and vacationing democrats when most Americans cancelled their vacations this year.

Obama has tracked WELL ahead of McCain on ability to handle energy and gas prices all along.

It’s a no brainer. Governor Palin chaired the Oil and Gas Energy Commission, and received an insider’s view of corruption. Her subsequent actions resulted in the resignation of those she identified – including the Attorney General of Alaska. But while she was on the O&G Commission I’m sure she didn’t learn anything cedarford. She’s not an engineer, and she’s a woman. No way with those two strikes against her. (OMG!)

finding corruption in Alaska is easy

For a description of Gov. Palin’s performance in energy and as commander of the national guard of her state go here.

complete fluff piece … Palin commands 4000 or so Guardsmen and ONLY when they are deployed in local missions; the campaign has tried to make it sound like she’s commander-in-chief of military operations, which is simply not true

Sep 7, 2008 - 7:17 pm 79. stam:

So picking Palin did achieve two things – energized the base and created momentum.

But…. What exactly makes her an expert on energy?

I don’t recall anything in her CV about managing
energy issues or studiying about them.
If being a governor for 18 months in an oil
rich state makes her an expert by osmosis?

Sep 7, 2008 - 7:34 pm 80. Ex-fetus:

The drilling is part of it. Like any strategic movement of genius, the Palin pick attacks on many fronts and defends at the same time.
Anybody remember the Dean Scream? It cost him the nomination ( he was the ‘chosen one’ of that election cycle) because Americans don’t trust people who show themselves to be mad as a hatter. Screwball, nutbags, what ever you call them.
By picking Saracuda McCain has caused the Entire liberal media to do a collective ‘Dean Scream”, with what I expect to be similar results. Now he is driving home the point by dissin’ the MSM.
I saw some nit-wit from the MSM on a Sunday show today claiming it was a fight he couldn’t win. As soon as I heard that I hit the power button on my remote and McCain won. That woman had an IQ equal to the total average rainfall in the Gobi desert. Talk about the arrogance of ignorance. Does she think the money for her way to high salary comes from trees in Central Park?
Besides, all the Republicans need to do is say that Sara will do intervies AFTER Ohhh…BAAMA releases his Birth certificate to the public and surrenders the documents from his days as a community organizer. That will mean her first interview will be as VP, since Ohhh….BAAM knows there is something in those documents that will prevent his election. That is the ONLY possible reason they haven’t been made available to the public. So he is doing a Kerry and trying to stonewall the issue. Good luck with that. It’s not like I’m the only voter who can figure out that you stonewall because you have something to hide.

“No one gossips about other people’s secret virtues.”
Bertrand Russell
British author, mathematician, & philosopher (1872 – 1970)

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:15 pm 81. Gringo:

Lisa: recall that in her speech, Governor Palin pointed out that 1) increased drilling would NOT of itself solve our energy issues and 2) we needed to also increase our exploitation of other sources, such as nuclear,wind, solar etc. Very realistic.

Nobody, including oil and gas professionals, believes that conventional oil resources in the US are of sufficient quantity to substitute for the oil we currently import, not in five years, not in twenty years, not in fifty years.

Do you realize that oil-rich Texas is the country’s leading producer of wind energy?

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:51 pm 82. Greg:

tanstaafl – Well said!

Regarding your comments to John Galt, let’s try good cop, bad cop. Your comments were good cop, let me give bad cop a try.

John Galt – You’re depressed? Why don’t you shut your freaking pie hole you miserable piece of human flesh. You’re not fooling anyone with your liberal,troll post. I hope you run out of anti-depressants on a long holiday weekend and chew the ends of your fingers off. Depressed huh? Good, I hope it gets worse right up to the election and the McCain/Palin presidency drives you right over the edge.

Wow, I’m pretty good at this bad cop thing. Just giving you a hard time John. Don’t do anything rash.

Sep 7, 2008 - 9:15 pm 83. Gregory:

Dear Lisa;

What makes you think that the major oil companies are not aware of this problem? Let me put it to you in free market terms;

1. Companies exist to do one thing – make profit for the management and the shareholders.

2. The way companies (and other private enterprises) usually do this is by selling product(s). Either goods or services, or both. There is obviously a need to ensure that total cost of production (including overheads, taxes, payroll etc) is LOWER than revenues, in order to make money.

3. The corrolary is that no product, no profit.

4. Therefore, ALL companies (but especially large, successful ones with brand reputations to protect) are very mindful of the availability/inventory of their products, and take very great care to ensure a continuing flow of products to their markets.

5. Bear in mind that this is not happening in a vacuum. Oil companies compete with each other, and with alternative fuel/energy suppliers.

I won’t worry too much about alternative energy sources. The moment the big oil players (both state-run and private) know for a fact that there is no more undiscovered oil (i.e. everything they have in current production and in reserve is it), you will see HUGE amounts of money being pumped into R&D, if not already. Because businesses on that scale cannot succeed with the short-term mentality you describe fearing. The market will correct for such, and new companies with fresh ideas will supplant them, if they do not watch out themselves.

And, you know, what everyone else has been saying.

Sep 7, 2008 - 10:04 pm 84. William of Orange:

Ex-fetus writes:

saw some nit-wit from the MSM on a Sunday show today claiming it was a fight he could not win. As soon as I heard that I hit the power button on my remote and McCain won.

Isn’t amazing how these MSM folks behave like someone gave them a thong wedgie? They really hold on to that pathetic mantra about their being the gatekeepers for we, the proletariat. It is the acme of condescension.

Chris Matthews went medieval on Rick Davis (McCain’s campaign manager) because Davis refused to give him a time and date for Rarah Palin to get cozy with the press. Inferences were dropped all over the place that this could be her undoing, she’d descend into political oblivion, never to be seen again in this mellenia, etc. to which Davis dispassionately replied that he was not going to drop her into a lake of piranha (..just yet.)

Ordinarily, I like Chris Matthews, but I am sorry he is not impervious to the Orange Sunshine or Purple Haze that is circulating around the press circles.

I mean, fercrissake, Obama holds out from talking to serious interviewers for 18 months until the blowtorch of reality is shined on his behind and then goes on Bill O’Reilly for that paddy cake session of dueling egos.

Sep 7, 2008 - 10:08 pm 85. DavidN:

I have been enjoying this whole discussion for the week or so that Palin has been the Republican nominee. The whole discussion has been very strange, and no one (in the MSM anyway) points out the contradictions of both candidacies. Barack Obama tries to contrast himself with John McCain by saying that he’s not a Washington outsider…and he’s running with Joe Biden, who of course is a long-term senator who by most measures is part of the problem. McCain campaigns against Obama by saying he’s inexperienced, and then picks a Governor who hasn’t been in office for two whole years, and before that was the mayor of a town of less than 9,000.

Actually, this last point becomes the main one, if you think about it for a minute. If the Democrats continue their attacks on her experience, deriding her mayoral duties in Wasilla, they’re going to merely reinforce Obama’s “clinging to their guns and bibles” condescension, which of course has already created a backlash for him. I’ve never lived in a small town, really (though my suburb sometimes feels like one), but I don’t think being the mayor of one is an easy or undemanding job, as the Obama campaign seems to be hinting. Further, for a 20-month governor, she’s gotten a lot done, some of it things her predecessors were unable to accomplish. You can belittle that, but really it sort of stands on its own, doesn’t it? Biden, meanwhile, merely looks a bit old and tired, having had hairplugs (it’s widely reported). He’s also got a poor record when it comes to speaking, having done everything from lying about his own academic record to plagiarizing someone else’s speech when it suited him. the latest poll has the McCain/Palin ticket up by 10 points over Obama/Biden. I have to say that this surprises me. We had been told that Obama’s magical internet cash machine was going to generate $500 million by election day, and that he was going to be unstoppable. Now, it appears that his money is slowing, and the Republicans are surging on the strength of Palin’s speech and Obama’s perceived weakening. Polls always skew in favor of the Democrats by at least a percentage point or two, which means that if the election were held today it would be a landslide for McCain. Frankly, I expected them to be considerably weaker than they are, at this point, and I feel that they’ve got a much better chance of getting elected than I did a few weeks ago. We’ll see, though.

Sep 7, 2008 - 11:17 pm 86. John Dubya:

It’s so obvious that people have short memories. Let’s look at the energy situation and it’s history a little more closely.

It’s only been a bit over 6 moths ago when oil futures went, and stayed, above $100 per bbl. A year ago oil was priced at $75.00 per bbl. Not good, but still reasonably affordable. The year before that, oil was less than $50.00. So,,, this oil crisis is a relatively short term thing, not a long term issue we’ve struggled with for the 8 year Bush Administration.

What non-oil business folks don’t know about the domestic production landscape is that for 30+ years it cost more to explore for and produce American oil than it was worth on the market. Labor, associated acquisition, permit fees, and material costs here far exceed that paid out in any of the OPEC countries. All of which BTW, explains why we can’t compete when oil prices fall much below $25.00 per bbl.

However, in those aforementioned 30+ years, there has been a steady demand for domestic natural gas, we could make a living exploring for, and producing gas. Virtually every American independent “oil” company found itself caught flatfooted and short on oil properties when oil prices suddenly went skyward. Every one I know in the business had so concentrated on the gas side of production for so long we are almost universally 85% gas, and 15% oil. And the 15% oil was by accident. In other words, the industry looked up one day and found itself upside down in the market place. The scramble is now on to reverse those numbers, but it won’t happen overnight.

Another problem faced by the domestic energy companies right now is the absence of trained people. For over 30+ years domestic drilling has been curtailed, exploration for new fields has been put on the back burner for most of the CONUS and all the near off-shore regions, no new refining capacity has been built, etc. That job market just dried up. People in the business 30 years ago were forced to go find something else to do. Where are we going to grow a new crop of geophysical experts to get back up to speed? There are darned few recent graduates with earth science degrees out there. Almost every man I know in the business right now who knows his butt from 3rd base is between the ages of 50 and 68, the competent oil and gas men of the 1970s and 80’s are a dying breed. Start up costs for seismic operations are outrageous, land owners are demanding higher leasing fees, environmental restrictions are,,, well, restrictive, and so on… There is a whole litany of issues the public isn’t aware of that must be resolved before a gallon of domestic gas gets pumped into your car’s tank.

There isn’t a handful of Washington politicians who have any idea of what they are talking about regards domestic energy. Yet, this election cycle the voting public wants the candidates to “come up with a plan”, like magic, to solve their problems. This is why the Democrats should have a clean sweep at the polls in November. They are the ones who promise pie-in-the-sky, with no substance to their statements. I watched Obama speak on the subject in PA (on TV), and I’ve never seen more ignorant words coming out of one mans mouth in my life, he was so obviously over his head, yet the audience was eating it up like candy. He’s got them fooled… Big time.

If you like what has happened to the U.S.Postal Service, you are gonna love a government controlled oil company.

Just some food for thought.

Sep 8, 2008 - 2:21 am 87. John Dubya:

realitycheq:

All of those energy saving tips you give are great for reducing your electric bill, however they won’t reduce consumption of oil significantly. The US electric power comes from sources other than oil, (except 2%).

49% Coal
20% Natural gas
2% oil
the rest is hydro, wind, solar, and nuclear.

One of the largest consumer of refined oil products is the air travel sector. Getting rid of the private jets used by Congress would save far more than me buying a smaller car. I’m not saying we should get rid of Air Force One, but Nancy Pelosi, Al Gore, and Harry Reid, et al, ain’t that important.

There are many ways we could trim our appetite for oil, I say the best place to start is at the top. Starving our farmers of diesel to run the tractors that grow our food is probably not the best way to go. Depriving the nations OTR truckers of fuel would bring the country’s economy to a standstill.

Percentage-wise, getting an extra 5 MPG from personal vehicles would help, but not that much. A really big savings could be had, very quickly, if the vast oil consuming northeast could be converted to natural gas for home heating instead of oil. About 40% of Massachusetts homes use oil heat. More than 963,000 households in the state use home heating oil. In Maine, one of the nation’s coldest states, four out of five households heat with oil.

Home heating oil is basically #1 diesel fuel, just imagine converting all those tons of oil back into our transportation industry. What a savings that would be.

Sep 8, 2008 - 3:31 am 88. Johnny J.:

Kyle-Anne has done it again. Not only are her thoughts well expressed but she’s generated myiad lively comments. I found I couldn’t stop reading ‘em. I particularly liked Gail P’s at 11:03 am plus many others. The knowledgeable engineers are right that she may not “know” about energy but she has enough knowledge to realize actions must be taken, so she resolved some longstanding impasses. Kyle-Anne’s comparison of Pelosi’s stalling techniques and Palin’s actions durng the same time frame both were in power is most revealing.

Sep 8, 2008 - 4:57 am 89. John Dubya:

“Set your thermostats lower in the winter and wear a sweater even when indoors – it will help you lose weight.”

Easy for you to say.

“Get rid of your gas-guzzling SUVs. Drive more fuel-efficient vehicles. Drive less. Use public transportation. WALK!”

WALK~? It’s 26 miles from my motel room to the oil/gas field staging area where I work. I’m 67 yrs old. Are you trying to kill me?

Hurricane Gustav just dumped 12+ inches of rain on my project, I NEED my 4WD gas guzzler just to get around in the muddy fields.

You advise is more applicable to the city dweller who commutes to an office job, they could probably make better use of mass transit, and I agree with you, those folks should take the bus to work.

I was trying to give you a view from the inside of the oil/gas business. We see 1st hand the difficulties of developing additional domestic production, these are things Obama will never understand. However, I think Sarah Palin probably does. This business is even tougher in Alaska.

Sep 8, 2008 - 6:07 am 90. Vivienne Avare:

The Obamacans, liberal media, anchors and pundits got away with their Sexist, anti-Hillary bias spin and thought they could ride on that wave against the Lady Sara! Finally, the bitter truth came out when they overplayed their stacked deck in order to win; saying anything they could get away with, true ot not! Obama won the Primaries by default! The flawed Dem.,system and rules favored the teflon Rookie! Sad but true, ‘Hills., popular’ vote took a backseat to the unrealistic Caucas and unrealiable Delegate process. The Dem., Presi- dential election policy is UNdemocratic and needs reform. Ex Democrat Go Lady Sara!

Sep 8, 2008 - 8:05 am 91. Scout:

John Dubya is absolutely correct! Reading what he has written will not make you an expert, but it sure as hell will enlighten you as the the complexities and realities of the oil industry. I am an RN, who is married to an accountant that works for an independent Oil and Gas drilling company. Repeatedly, my husband has talked about the cost of drilling. Companies lose money if oil is below $25.00 a barrel, as John Dubya has said. Drilling in ANWR has been a viable alternative for many years. With the new technology available, especially with ‘directional drilling’ the environmental impact would be negligible. Do not discount
Governor Palin’s knowledge,…all one
needs to do is watch her on Youtube, talking about this very issue. The lady definitely ‘gets it’. Enough said.

Sep 8, 2008 - 8:12 am 92. CallMeIshmael:

I used to enjoy reading Peggy Noonan’s on-mike anti-Palin, anti-conservatives comment. My God! She sounds just like Obama saying nice things about us when she knows we are listening and outright nasty things when she thinks we’re not. I’ve heard enough from Ms. Noonan.

Sep 8, 2008 - 9:15 am 93. Deborah:

Greg said “Therefore, Republicans don’t want Hillary voters! Republicans want a subset of Hillary voters.”

I’ll grant this. (The OP says they aren’t going for them, though, which was my point.) But they argued for those Hillary voters on a very explicit “if you want to vote for a woman, like Hillary, here’s one” front. I have yet to see a poll or focus group that suggests Palin’s much-touted pull on independents, moderates, and women (and I’m all 3) has any foundation in reality.

@Bagua’s numbers: Let’s see, I’m a driving American, I buy about 16 gallons every 2 weeks at $4/gallon for a year that’s about $1600. To save $1000 gas would have to fall to 38% of that price, or $1.50/gallon. Yeeeeeaaaah. While demand in China and India and the rest of Asia continues to ramp up. We have 4% of the world’s oil reserves, to Russia’s 12% and Canada’s 30% or so. Anyone who thinks all the oil we drill would stay right here should go look for that 10 cents/gallon gas they must have in Alaska and Texas, then get back to me on markets. (I’m not opposed to drilling, in fact, but I’m opposed to magic math and economics-doesn’t-really-happen arguments. And no one’s explained why the oil companies can’t try their existing undrilled leases first.)

Looking through the thread, I observe that Governor Palin’s energy expertise consists of appearing on YouTube. Gosh I hope she feels sufficiently deferred to to come out and fill in a few details someday. Just as a citizen, I’d argue that before the election would be nice.

And as a woman and independent voter, I’ll note that if Sebelius were tagged as Obama’s veep and then had to hide away with no questions about her policies until the media had developed sufficient deferrence, the media and right would be convulsed in hysterical laughter.

Sep 8, 2008 - 9:32 am 94. Zbigniew Mazurak:

This is a good article, but some issues remain to be resolved by KA. For example, she omitted to mention that McCain is against drilling in the ANWR. BTW, why are almost all beautiful American women (like KA Shiver, Sharon Soon, Melanie Morgan, Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter) conservatives?

Sep 8, 2008 - 9:34 am 95. ProgMeister:

BTW, why are almost all beautiful American women (like KA Shiver, Sharon Soon, Melanie Morgan, Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter) conservatives?

you need to get out a bit more, Z …

Sep 8, 2008 - 10:24 am 96. ProgMeister:

I was trying to give you a view from the inside of the oil/gas business. We see 1st hand the difficulties of developing additional domestic production, these are things Obama will never understand. However, I think Sarah Palin probably does. This business is even tougher in Alaska.

gimme a break, eh? we’re electing a president, not a roustabout

Sep 8, 2008 - 10:54 am 97. tanstaafl:

NO, it was the government of Alaska, in negotiations with Big Oil and the Feds 30 years ago, that set up a direct distribution of royalties to Alaskan citizens rather than a Democrat “general government fund” to be divvied out to cronies.

Sarah Palin’s role was a corporate shakedown -extorting higher royalty payments into the Fund – after the system has been chugging along for decades.

Under Governor Sara Palin, a $1200 check was sent to each Alaskan…taxpayer ? voter ? and this was related to her government’s receipt of increased revenues from oil companies.

The price of gasoline in Alaska averages higher than in the Lower 48, $4.76/gallon was recently quoted.

I don’t pretend to be an ex-spurt in how all this stuff works.

Not all that long ago, Barack Obama proposed a $1000 rebate to each of us, money to come from grabbing a greater share of oil companies “windfall profits”.

Me, myself and I find these kinds of drop in the bucket exercises by the federal gov’t to be rather iffy and shallow endeavors, including the ‘07 tax rebate offered up by this administration.

($600, Michelle Obama rather mockingly said she’d buy a pair of earrings…)

Sep 8, 2008 - 11:20 am 98. tanstaafl:

Greg, my dear friend…

It did occur to me that JG might be trolling, but I attempt to give benefit of the doubt.

John Dubya

Appreciate the actual information. Am often put off by Democrats who scream “the Rocky mtn shales !” or Pelosi going on about “millions of acres already available”, knowing on the one hand, the prohibitive cost and, on the other hand, that many of the milions of acres in available leases might not even have any oil underneath.

It’s such a complicated picture and the Democrats, as far as I can tell, are offering little more than rhetorical “solutions”.

Sep 8, 2008 - 12:10 pm 99. ProgMeister:

cedarford:

The commentor doesn’t realize that once you create a good investment climate and rein in the lawyers for the good of the country – you can move fast

just how much better do you want the investment climate? RIG’s new units coming online are pre-booked at $600,000 per day; they can finance this stuff with giddy bankers all day long …. BUT:

As was, barred by lawyers and special interests from offshore drilling, we don’t build new oil rigs

dude, there’s no more building capacity … we decimated our own capacity years ago and the Asian shipyards are booked solid

Sarah Palin’s role was a corporate shakedown -extorting higher royalty payments into the Fund – after the system has been chugging along for decades.

so Palin took money from the oil companies and gave it to “the people” … why does that sound suspiciously like the “wealth redistribution” attributed to “leftist liberals” all the time? But it’s ok when little Queenie does it? I gotta admit, it’s a great way to run up those approval ratings

did anyone around these parts happen to read the paper this morning? seems to me that a Republican administration just nationalized two very large public corporations … and did it with the blessing of conservative financial commentators because Fannie and Freddie are “too big to fail” …. now, for 10 points and a chance to win the all expense paid trip to Wasilla, who can tell me how and why these companies got too big to fail in the first place?

for the slower readers out here, of which there are many, THAT is the “socialism” and “wealth redistribution” you jerks keep trying to pin on liberals … but it’s not liberals, it’s your REPUBLICAN and allegedly CONSERVATIVE administration taking money directly out of your pocket and putting it in the hands of Asian investors who were too damned stupid to read a market and a balance sheet

and now you want four more years to screw the pooch completely dead? NO WAY.

oh … did I mention that Condi Rice (she works for Bush) has been negotiating (begging) Qaddafi in Libya for some of his light sweet crude recently; Muammar wouldn’t even shake hands with our SOS … think about THAT, “my friends”

four more years my ass

Sep 8, 2008 - 12:41 pm 100. ProgMeister:

John The Libertarian:

Palin is a moose-huntin’ U.S. version of a young Maggie Thatcher.

Would this, per chance, be the very same (conservative) Maggie Thatcher who increased the UK’s GDP per capita 24.66% during her 11 years as PM, as compared to (labour party’s) Tony Blair, who increased the UK’s GDP per capita 71.64% during his 10 years as PM?

The trick is good policy, not conservatism or “huntin’”

Tony Blair characterizes himself as a left-of-centre social democrat.

Sep 8, 2008 - 1:52 pm 101. Lisa:

Gregory,

Why don’t I trust the free market? The Big Three auto makers had record profits in the 90’s. We all knew that cheap oil wasn’t going to last long but rather than invest in future technologies, they kept building big honking SUVs and now are struggling to catch up to Toyota in fuel efficiency all because they wanted to put their profits in their pockets and not in the company’s future.

I do not expect big oil to be any wiser.

Sep 9, 2008 - 3:58 am 102. Bagua:

Deborah,

Thank you for replying.

Obviously the individual savings per person would vary greatly depending on how much they drive, the actual price change and the MPG of their vehicle, your numbers may apply to someone who drives only 21 miles a day with average fuel efficiency. Others will drive much more, or much less. And even if you don’t drive much, most everything you buy takes fuel to manufacture and deliver. Cheaper oil means cheaper most things. Considering that in 2001the price of a barrel of crude was in the $20 range, and today it is over $100 the likely reduction in price is easily 80%. You are also missing the overall effect, the cumulative savings would effect most everything you spend on.

As far as China, India and the whole demand fallacy, do a bit of research, you will find that while demand has increased, supply has increased as well, more than the demand, thus supply and demand does not explain the high prices. Bringing Americas vast reserves online would continue to increase the supply far beyond any projected increase in demand.

Also, saying “We have 4% of the world’s oil reserves,” is incorrect. The current, proven reserves are closer to 16%, however, we have not even explored vast regions and there are likely huge amounts of oil left to be discovered. And you’re forgetting about shale, estimates of 1 trillion barrels of recoverable oil are likely very low. Known reserves in Saudi Arabia are in the 260 Billion barrel region. If fact, the US oil shale alone is approximately equal to all the known crude oil reserves world wide!

Finally, the oil companies want to explore and drill for oil that is economical to produce. It does them no good to drill a bunch of dry wells. Forcing them to use the limited drilling resources to drill in areas that show no signs of oil is not a productive argument.

Also:

realitycheq:

Your numbers cover only proven reserves (90% accuracy). There is an unknown amount of oil in unexplored areas. Furthermore, you are only listing ANWR, if we were free to explore and drill freely nationwide the discoveries could be immense.

Sep 9, 2008 - 8:01 am 103. ProgMeister:

Also, saying “We have 4% of the world’s oil reserves,” is incorrect. The current, proven reserves are closer to 16%

you need to move the decimal point; we have about 1.6% of proven reserves by conventional measurements (CIA)

As far as China, India and the whole demand fallacy, do a bit of research, you will find that while demand has increased, supply has increased as well, more than the demand, thus supply and demand does not explain the high prices.

correct .. but China and India are growing; the future is not about oil

Sep 9, 2008 - 10:08 am 104. ProgMeister:

Now here’s something for you Republicons to chew on … pretty juicy stuff … keep squarely in mind that these are the actions of a Republican administration, actions which John McCain has endorsed … enjoy:

Sept. 9 (Bloomberg) — Senator Jim Bunning said Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, by rescuing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is acting like China’s finance minister and both Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke should step down.

“I sincerely believe that Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke should resign,” said Bunning, a Republican from Kentucky on the Senate Banking Committee. “They have taken the free market out of the free market.”

Paulson and the federal regulator for Fannie and Freddie placed the two largest U.S. mortgage-finance companies in a government-operated conservatorship on Sept. 7, ousting their chief executives and eliminating their dividends. Treasury also may purchase up to $200 billion of stock in the firms to keep them solvent.

“We no longer have a free market in the United States, we have a government controlled free market,” Bunning said in an interview. Paulson, a former chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs Group Inc., “is acting like the minister of finance in China.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=alpUsTv3.upI&refer=home

Senator Bunning is right about government-controlled but he’s wrong about free …

Sep 9, 2008 - 1:19 pm 105. Bagua:

Correct, I left out the decimal point, and to be fair this is the low side of the estimates, with the higher side being closer to Deborah’s number (around 2.37%)

Regardless, these estimates have questionable significance as there is a vast amount of unexplored territory. With a lifting of the bans we could see our proven reserves increase dramatically, as many in the industry believe. The other factor that renders these estimates nearly meaningless is the suspicion that OPEC states are over-reporting their reserves as this allows them to pump more under their own guidelines.

ProgM said: “correct .. but China and India are growing; the future is not about oil.”

Yes they are growing, though it is doubtful they can continue to grow at the current rate. Regardless, it is irrelevant as oil production has increased at an even higher rate, and this is with US production all but shut down. Open the taps by drilling and the supply will easily outstrip the most bullish estimates on growth.

And you say the “future is not about oil.” What future, 10 years? 30 years? 100 years? With the extent of unknown reserves a wild card no-one can accurately predict this. Add in the full use of Oil Sands and Shale and the “future” is certain to involve oil for the next 100 to 200 years, based upon known reserves alone. Also one must factor in the unknown future development of realistic “alternatives” such as nuclear, solar, wind, tidal, hydrogen and lets not forget our abundant coal. As these develop and come on line, the proven reserves are could last 1,000 years or more. With a sensible energy policy we will have an oil glut for at least the next couple of centuries.

Sep 9, 2008 - 4:18 pm 106. The Potency of Palin « Republican Party of Jefferson County, TN:

[...] Kyle-Ann Shiver over at Pajamas Media seems to agree with the energy issue being a key factor.  [...]

Sep 9, 2008 - 7:46 pm 107. ProgMeister:

With a sensible energy policy we will have an oil glut for at least the next couple of centuries.

that’s right; with sensible energy policies there is no energy problem at all; with sensible policies, we can get rid of all sorts of resource scarcity problems unrelated to energy … but none of it will happen if we don’t get smart about markets, and we haven’t been smart for quite some time now

Sep 9, 2008 - 9:11 pm 108. Zbigniew Mazurak:

ProgMeister – I do go out of my home often enough. But most conservative women ARE beautiful. E.g. Sharon Soon, KA Shiver, Melanie Morgan, Debbie Schussel, Michelle Malkin and Laura Ingraham.

Sep 10, 2008 - 10:59 am 109. Bagua:

Progmeister: that’s right; with sensible energy policies there is no energy problem at all; with sensible policies, we can get rid of all sorts of resource scarcity problems unrelated to energy … but none of it will happen if we don’t get smart about markets, and we haven’t been smart for quite some time now

Agreed.

And at a fundamental level both sides agree on this point, the eventual evolution of our energy base.

The key difference being, one side want to force the issue by shutting off our existing supply, forcing us to innovate in a climate of desperation,economic collapse and government control and subsidy.

The other side want to drill our way to a few decades of an oil glut, (or possibly a century) and at the same time develop new energy sources in a climate of prosperity and free-market based innovation.

Sep 11, 2008 - 1:33 pm 110. Tina Lawson:

Sarah Palin is a repetitive idiot. She is not experienced enough in the least. Before she was chosen Mcains camp was all about experience. Their main statement was Obama had noexperience. She was only chosen to capitalize on the hilary clinton supporters who felt she shouldhae been Baracks vp pick. I was a hilary supporter, but Obama is also a great choice. McCain and Palin are not a good choiceat all. LikeMatt Damon said in a recent interview, can you really see Palin as president? If mcCain is elected there is a good chance he will not make it through his complete term due to the fact of his age and health issues. Do you realized a woman who puts her religion before anything and of very little experience running a country of people who are of many different religions and cultures? Also, can you see this woman of very little experience in forum with experienced world leaders? When asked about foreign policies she says we have to watch russia. She says this as though since Alaskas relation to Russia she has behind the scenes knowledge of its government. Just because you can see some of Russi from Alaska does not mean anything. If she saw something that was of concern to the U.S to really keep an eye on Russia for why does our government not know about it. We need Sarah Palin to inform us of what goes on in Russia because they are in her “backyard”? This woman is not comparable to Hilary Clinton. Women voters please do not look at Sarah Palin as the womans voice in government. There are already many intelligent experienced women i our government already.

Sep 12, 2008 - 4:32 pm 111. hg:

Stop writing. Sarah Palin is an insult to the American people. She has been exposed as a liar and openly dishonest person. She has lied about her record. She has proven that she is no more qualified for VP than any Wendys night manager. She is a figurehead for how completely distorted our country has become. She is by no means proper to run this country. You are a loose witted individual and would do better to not poison the world with your foolish blog.

Sep 29, 2008 - 2:40 pm 112. Conservative Reform Network » Blog Archive » Governor Sarah Palin May be the First Woman in the White House:

[...] Why Did He Pick Sarah Palin? It’s the Drilling, Stupid  [...]

Oct 10, 2008 - 5:56 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: