I think that the rich get richer and for the rest of us it's "Arbeit macht frei".
Here is a link to a current article with Sarah Palin's byline in an energy publication discussing the development of Alaskan oil and gas resources. It recommends building a second trans-Alaska pipeline with a trans-Canada extension for natural gas and doubling our reliance on the existing Trans-Alaska Pipeline System by drilling for oil in the ANWR. Her Alaskakin perspective leads her to promote it as a good idea for America but her discussion is devoid of any comparison to alternatives. She seems conversant enough with the issues to refer to some of the challenges involved but makes no mention of the very real national security risk of loosing even the oil now being delivered by the existing pipeline for an extended time.
http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/energycentral/energybiz0908/
Oil needs to be heated to 120 degF to be able to make the 800 mile trip from Prudhoe Bay to the Gulf of Alaska at Valdez where it is loaded into tankers for the trip to the US. When it was approved, the pipeline was supposed to be capable of restarting after being shut down for three weeks in the middle of winter. As built, it will not meet that requirement if the temperature is lower than +40 degF. In winter, when it goes to -40 degF, it will take less than four days for the cargo to congeal into an 800 mile (dare I say) lipstick that's unpumpable until the weather warms up. As things are, the pipeline transports 20% of the total US production of oil, the loss of which would cripple the west coast for long enough to severely undermine the whole economy.
The Trans-Alaska pipeline is is commonly understood to be the single most potent terrorist target in the US. Built during less dangerous times, it was not hardened or even insulated sufficiently to recover from, much less withstand, a serious attack. Now the Governor of Alaska wants us to up the stakes by increasing the oil flow from a newly developed ANWR field and by building a 1,715 mile natural gas pipeline from the North Slope to the TransCanada hub in Alberta. And she wants to do it on the cheap like Rumsfeld:
"In order to protect the value of our resources, we must be sure that the cost of transportation is not made unnecessarily expensive."
It's nuts. Whatever you think of the T. Boone Pickens plan for converting commercial vehicles & trucks to natural gas, his map of all the natural gas fields in the continental US begs the question of why it's a good idea to invest billions to get the gas from Alaska by tripling the size of the pipeline bulls eye. Absent lower cost alternatives that abound, expensive and risky measures like these could be considered. As it is, undeveloped Alaskan resources should be considered more of a last resort than the first thing you'd turn to - the same as making war because it costs and risks too much. But sure enough, Big Oil has found another proxy and sure enough, The Washington Post reportes that 20% of white women just jumped ship and ran off to get on the Alaska bandwagon.
Deep Throat was right when he advised: "Follow the money." Even Alan Greenspan admitted that the Iraq adventure was primarily about oil. The oilers are not comfortable until they're running their agenda straight at us hard enough to generate so much cognitive dissonance that it hurts. I guess that undecided people vote for big oil supporters thinking they'll get some relief.
Apply Directly to the Wallet. Apply Directly to the Wallet. Apply ...
Sara's no different - Republican energy experts are mostly like white coated actors in drug adds telling us what's good for us. They do it because some of us are ditzy enough to believe them - like if rape is inevitable just roll over and enjoy it. I'm sorry, we're being violated. If she walks like a junky and she hawks like a junky and she's got her hand in our pocket and tells us it's OK because our gang is getting the money but we still run the risk of geting busted: she's a junky. It appears that her expertise is more in the nature of diverting our money to the Alaska drillers.
And in case you think any of it will trickle down (aside from paying for Alaska state government where citizens get a check instead of a tax bill), you've forgotten to follow the money: Exxon and BP are currently spending more of their windfall profits and government subsidies buying back common stock than they are on exploration while they leave existing offshore drilling leases untouched. When Senator McCain talks about giving oil companies even more leases to leave fallow as CHANGE, people who believe him are buying a bridge to nowhere that he doesn't own and for which they can't pay. With fingers crossed behind their backs, the Republican candidates are thinking: "Plus ca change! plus ca la meme chose".
Comments are closed for this post.
