THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VIII, Issue # 10, January 11, 2006
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
A BIG DOSE OF ENERGY REALITY
By Alan Caruba
POLITICAL ENVIRONMENTALISM, CONGRESSIONAL POLITICS, & AMERICA'S ENERGY NEEDS -- THE FACTS: AMERICA
HAS NO SHORTAGE OF TRADITIONAL ENERGY SOURCES, SUCH AS OIL, NATURAL GAS, & COAL -- WASHINGTON, D.C., HAS A
SHORTAGE OF THE POLITICAL WILL REQUIRED TO ALLOW ENERGY PRODUCERS TO TAP THESE ENERGY SOURCES -- ONE OF
THE MAIN DRAGS ON THE SEARCH FOR, EXTRACTION, & TRANSPORTATION OF ENERGY SOURCES IS THE WORLDWIDE
ENVIRONMENTALIST MOVEMENT
FULL STORY:
Americans get interested in energy when either gasoline or heating prices rise. The rest of the time, we assume that, either
there are sufficient energy resources, i.e., coal, natural gas and oil, or, if we buy into the doom and gloom “experts,” that we
are running out of everything.
Accustomed to affordable energy, Americans, when they do pay any attention to energy issues, look for someone to blame
when prices spike. They rarely look at Congress, assuming it is in the pocket of Big Oil. There’s something to be said for this,
given the fact that the oil industry pumped $25.5 million into the campaigns of federal candidates during the last election cycle,
80% of which went to Republicans.
Surely, then, Congress is catering to Big Oil and doing what it can to insure ample energy for the nation. No. In fact, according
to Ed Feulner, the President of The Heritage Foundation, “before the House of Representatives passed the federal budget,
lawmakers stripped out a provision that would have allowed companies to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.”
The oil from a tiny portion of ANWR “could generate as many as 16 billion barrels of oil, enough to replace about 30 years
worth of oil imports from Saudi Arabia.” A more recent effort to authorize the extraction of ANWR reserves also failed.
Feulner also noted that, “partly because of opposition by lawmakers from Florida and California, Congress bans oil and natural
gas exploration in the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the outer continental shelf.” These days, too, “federal law restricts access to
resources in the Rocky Mountains and elsewhere.” Does any of this make any sense to you? If Congress is in the grip of the
giant energy companies, why has it consistently created obstacles to the extraction of our own resources of energy?
Representative Richard Pombo, Chairman of the House Committee on Resources, will tell anyone who will listen that, “for the
foreseeable future, America has no shortage of oil or other traditional energy resources. Washington, D.C., has a shortage of
the political will required to let American workers go get it.”
For example, “The United States has enough non-park federal resources to supply natural gas to 100 million homes for 157
years. But, despite that massive supply, we cannot deliver even one year of affordable natural gas to Americans right now.”
The result is that the wholesale price of natural gas is twenty-four percent higher than it was last April, as most non-park
resources are off-limits, and locked up with more than thirty regulations.”
Representative Pombo notes that ANWR contains “a mean estimate of 10.4 billion barrels of oil, according to the most recent
United States Geographical Survey report. This represents a forty-five percent increase in total U.S. proven reserves, and could
create more than 735,000 U.S. jobs.” The oil trapped in shale rock in the U.S.A. could produce two trillion barrels of oil; four
times Saudi Arabia’s resources. For various reasons, while it is far from providing oil independence, America’s energy security
would surely benefit from developing this source.
The United States of America is literally funding both sides of the war against the Islamofascists, buying oil from the Middle
Eastern nations that support them and funding our military to destroy them.
At this point, I will be told that I am very naïve about our current energy problems. After all, the President comes from an “oil
family.” True. And equally true is the fact that he has been trying to free up the ANWR oil reserves without any success to date.
It would appear that any energy executives who got together with Vice President Cheney to advise on national policy haven’t
had much luck either, except for some tax breaks.
Granted, Big Oil took in some significant profits recently, but, without them, they cannot invest the billions it costs to search for
and develop new reserves worldwide, nor can they expand their refinery capacity without profits. Exxon Mobil, however, has
spent $3.3 billion in the past five years expanding and improving its existing U.S. refineries, adding the equivalent capacity of
three new facilities. To suggest oil companies are not looking for new sources is nonsense, though industry insiders debate
issues about where they’re looking.
Daniel Yergin, Chairman of Cambridge Energy Research Associates, went on record earlier this year in the Washington
Post to report that his company’s field-by-field analysis of worldwide oil production capacity suggests:
“From 2004 to 2010, capacity to produce oil (not actual production)
could grow by 16 million barrels a day — from 85 million barrels a
day to 101 million barrels — a twenty percent increase. Such growth
over the next few years would relieve the pressure on supply and
demand.”
As Yergin noted:
“This is not the first time that the world has ‘run out of oil.’ It’s more
like the fifth. Cycles of shortage and surplus characterize the history
of the oil industry.”
The World Energy Outlook 2005, published by the International Energy Agency, “expects global energy markets to
remain robust through 2030." This publication states:
"If policies remain unchanged, world energy demand is projected to
increase by over 50% between now and 2030. World energy resources
are adequate to meet this demand, but investment of $17 trillion will be
needed to bring these resources to consumers.”
One of the main drags on the search for, extraction, and transportation of energy resources has been the worldwide
environmentalist movement. In the U.S.A., the restrictions imposed on energy companies are largely the work of legislators in
league with various Green organizations opposed to any use of “fossil fuel” energy on the grounds that it produces
“greenhouse gases” and thus will lead to a massive, highly theoretical “global warming.” Since there is very little, if any, proof
that anthropological (human) induced warming exists, it would be a good idea if we could get on with the business of
producing the energy supplies the U.S.A. and the world need.
The world is not running out of oil, natural gas, or coal. The U.S.A. has so much coal we export it. If the environmentalists would
just get out of the way, there would be no energy problem at all. Ironically, nuclear energy, the least polluting of all, has long
been opposed by the Greens. At a recent UN Kyoto Protocol conference, Patrick Moore, the former founding member of
Greenpeace, long since a critic, said, “It is the environmental movement itself that is the primary impediment to the reduction of
CO2 emission and fossil fuel consumption because they refuse to support the obvious alternatives” of nuclear power and hydro
power.
Energy costs are affected, of course, by unpredictable factors, such as Hurricane Katrina, which briefly disrupted oil extraction
and refining in the Gulf States area. While gasoline prices did rise after the hurricane, they fell just as rapidly within weeks. Other
factors involve the political and other objectives of Middle Eastern oil-producing nations and other oil-producing nations such
as Venezuela.
That’s why Saddam Hussein had to be removed. He was a major threat to the nations of the Middle East. Responsible for an
eight-year war with Iran and an invasion of Kuwait, he also posed a threat to Saudi Arabia. A stable constitutional democratic
Iraq with a reliable justice system would prove to be a glaring example of what every other Middle Eastern nation, with the
exception of Israel, lacks. It would also insure that Iraq’s huge oil reserves would flow again, minus the obscenities of Hussein’s
vile regime. Iraq’s oil facilities and pipelines are under constant attack for this reason.
Meanwhile, in Iran, the extremist Shiite Islamic Revolution is discovering that Western direct investment in Iran has zeroed-out,
thanks to the Iranian regime's highly dubious pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability and its open threat to destroy Israel.
China’s and India’s growing need for oil, however, has gained Iran some powerful new friends.
Iran sits atop the third largest oil reserves. The more belligerent its leadership, the more Iran invites a “solution” comparable to
Iraq’s.
Finally, back home in America, the U.S. national government is spending billions to research the possibility of hydrogen as a
new “alternative” energy source. At some point, the government will have to tell the public that hydrogen as an energy source
is impractical and inefficient and that, regrettably, researching the possibility has wasted a huge amount of money. This is called
a learning curve and, until the money is down the old research chute, various environmentalist organizations and university
research centers will continue to insist hydrogen is the wave of the future; along with solar energy and wind power.
You want low prices at the gas pump? You want to heat your home without having to give up one meal a day? You want
electricity? Learn to love Big Oil, Big Gas, and Big Coal.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Policy Issues Relating to Energy, Environment,
& Natural Resources
Alan Caruba is a veteran business and science writer, a Public Relations Counselor, and Founder of the National Anxiety Center, a
clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns. Caruba writes a weekly commentary, "Warning Signs," posted
on the Internet website of the National Anxiety Center, which is located at
www.anxietycenter.com.
© Alan Caruba 2005
Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VIII, 2006
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues