NTKG, Reporting

muppetpants:

ubercalifragilisticxpialidocious:

notthatkindagay:

Global problems obviously require a global response. As the world’s most profligate user of energy, and as one of its most technologically gifted nations, the United States can and should lead the way by developing more efficient vehicles and by expanding carbon-free energy sources like wind and solar power.

The John McCain of a few years ago understood this. He sponsored a bill with John Kerry that would have aggressively raised fuel economy standards, and another that would have put a stiff price on carbon emissions to encourage investment in cleaner technologies.

Unfortunately, that John McCain has receded from view just in time for the presidential campaign. He has dropped his opposition to offshore drilling, pandered shamelessly by urging a gas tax holiday, and missed several crucial votes on bills extending credits for wind and solar power.

And while his acceptance speech promised “the most ambitious national project in decades,” including efforts to improve energy efficiency, increasing oil production remains the centerpiece of his strategy.

Wondering if Mr. Pants saw this and had any opinion?

Yeah Pants—-what do you have to say??

Drilling is an extremely important part of any balanced energy strategy in my personal opinion.  Domestic drilling has nothing to do with renewable energy.  Nothing.  This has to do with preventing economic collapse.  We simply cannot create the energy and infrastructure needed today, tomorrow, or anytime soon.  This is a given—and hell, in my line of work, the best thing that could happen would be if I woke up tomorrow morning and rather than being in charge of 1% of our energy portfolio I was in charge of, say, 50%.

Alternative energy is not just about global warming.  We don’t know much about global warming.  I don’t know what to think about it—I’m not a denier or anything, I just don’t have the scientific background to really make a judgement myself, so I’m withholding my judgement.  I understand a lot of people here this and go “OMFG WTF RETARDID!” but I don’t really give a shit—I don’t really understand the science behind it.  That being said, it’s best to err on the side of caution.  Getting rid of oil won’t get rid of global warming—it will lead to a transfer of reliance from fuels to electricity—which would lead to more coal plants.  Global warming remains a constant in this model.

I care about renewable energy because I see it as an economic and national security issue.  We’re not in control of our energy destiny.  Our well being is completely reliant on foreign powers.  That is a really scary prospect.  I want to get rid of that.  I want to exploit American energy resources.  This includes oil.

In reality, the areas that we’re talking about drilling won’t even come into the equation for years.  It’s not even that much oil  But these years will be the crucial—when we’re bridging the gap from conventional fossil fuel sources to renewables.  When these sources of oil hit the market, they’ll be much more valuable than they are now—we’ll, due to economic necessity, be driving cars of ridiculous efficiency.  One gallon of that oil may be worth five gallons of today’s oil in value.

This limited amount of oil is not going to lower the prices of oil.  By this point, I’m hoping demand will be static as more and more of the economy is transferring over to renewables and supply drops.  As a matter of fact, if this oil was going to come on to the marketplace and drop the price of oil significantly, that would lower investment in renewables and put my job at risk.

Also, they discuss investment in efficiency of vehicles.  Fuel economy standards aren’t the best way to raise efficiency of vehicles.  We’re seeing this now.  What’s causing cars like the Chevy Volt to come on to the market?  It’s not the increasing standards, it’s the increasing economic benefits of producing such vehicles—when gas prices rise, everyone wants a more efficient car.  Hummers are cheap and unwanted while Geo Metros are all of a sudden a hot commodity?

There really isn’t much to say about this article.  There are no figures.  There aren’t really many facts.  This article insinuates a correlation between domestic drilling policies and renewable energy policies which is in no way realistic.

Not to beat a dead horse, but what’s worse for the planet and the economy: Obama’s ethanol or McCain’s drilling?  Nobody’s energy plan is perfect.

EDIT: If I’m called “Pants” now, can I refer to NotThatKindaGay as “Gay” now?  If so, I’m sorry I missed your original post Gay.  Thanks for bumping it Uber.

Hey, I called you Mr. Pants, since we’re not on a first name basis, and because I have manners! Feel free to call me gay, I’ll respond to it. In fact, in college many people (like peterwknox.com) called me Gay Mike. Doesn’t offend me. I’ll just pretend you shortend that.

I don’t think this editorial was supposed to include figures and numbers, etc. I think it was more about comparing John McCain circa a year or two ago to John Sidney McCain III today and his pivoting on a really comprehensive energy strategy to just election year political rhetoric.

The reason I thought of you and wondered your opinion had more to do with knowing that you were a fan of Governor Richardson due to your line of work, and seeing how McCain and Richardson, IMHO, are now more fundamentally mirrors of one another rather than sharing any of the same energy policy.

I do agree with your allusion to the fact that we do need a comprehensive energy policy, and if that includes offshore drilling, then it should be part of the package. If nothing, than for a bridge to the future, to create Amurrican jobs, and to ween us off of foriegn oil. But also, I only support it if it is economically feasable, viable, and with assurances that it will be done right. And right now, Barack is the only candidate that, again IMHO, has floated the idea of a comprehensive energy strategy including everything you’ve mentioned.

Good talk, Pants.