Posts with the tag offshore drilling

McCain's lies about offshore drilling in the US

Dan Lovingood — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:56:39 EDT

I am trying to help correct the lies about "drilling offshore". I am sick and tired of McCain and Palin telling massive lies to the people that we have no offshore drilling and falsely claiming that a moratorium exists for all offshore drilling. He fails to recognize the vigorous exploration in the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico (as well as North Slope of Alaska and offshore, and production drilling in California). I see on the MMS' website that one of my prospects I promoted when I worked for Texaco is a major 280 million barrel discovery in ultra-deep water (Atwater Valley Block 65)... and more is on the way in those regions. Please try to correct McCain's and Palin's lies. They have taken hold to the extent that even highly educated engineers with whom I work believe that we have no offshore drilling in the US. But continuing our reliance on oil reserves to feed our continued deadly addiction to oil will bring about our certain collapse. That collapse will bring the rest of the world down with us.On this day (10/225/2008) we are on the verge of a deep global economic recession. We can drill safely offshore, but this will not save us from our energy problem. The USGS says it, the non-governmental scientists say it and the oil industry even says it. We MUST transition to a new energy economy.

Dan Lovingood

Drill Baby Drill? A chant for the uninformed...

Mon, 06 Oct 2008 00:08:08 EDT

Dear Friends,

I'm writing this for those who believe that more drilling, specifically in ANWR and off of our coast is a terrible idea, but more so for those who think it's a powerful and quick move towards solving our energy crisis. Let me take a second and clear some of disillusionment regarding drilling. It's a bad idea, it's not environmentally sound, do not believe the hype, "Drill Baby Drill" is a chant for the uninformed and....drum roll please...IT'S NOT A TIME SAVING MEASURE, NOR WILL IT SAVE US MONEY AT THE GAS PUMP ANYTIME SOON!!!

I keep hearing people pushing for drilling. During the RNC they loudly and aggressively chanted "Drill Baby Drill". On the other side of the spectrum I hear people speaking of drilling as an ineffective answer to our energy crisis specifically when it comes to places such as ANWR and the like. So who's right? I did some research on my own to answer this and here it is:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/anwr/introduction.html

This article is straight from the "Energy Information Administration" (EIA) which provides "Official Energy Statistics From The US government".

Opening up ANWR "is projected to increase domestic crude oil production starting in 2018". 2018!!! This is not a quick solution.

The other part of this to take note of is: The opening of ANWR is projected to have its largest oil price reduction impacts as follows (relating to three different cases presented in the report):

"A reduction in low-sulfur, light crude oil prices of $0.41 per barrel (2006 dollars) in 2026 for the low oil resource case, $0.75 per barrel in 2025 for the mean oil resource case, and $1.44 per barrel in 2027 for the high oil resource case, relative to the reference case."

This is in no way the large scale savings avid drilling supporters are touting. With a cost of crude oil presently above $90.00 a barrel, a savings totaling $1.44 per barrel is in no way effective enough. This is not the savings we've been told about. Even if you were so inclined to be satisfied by these tragically minimal saving, take into account that these savings are only projected to take place in 2027!!!

This is not energy efficient. This is not a quick and easy plan to save us from high gas pump prices.

It is prudent to also look at the long lasting effects oil has in the event of it reaching our shores. According (again to one of our own government agencies) to the NOAA who released this report in 2001:

http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/Quarterly/jas2001/feature_jas01.htm

Regarding the shoreline that the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill effected, in 2001 "Oil was found at 58 percent of the 91 sites assessed. "We should keep in mind that the Exxon spill was way back 1989...in 2001, oil is still present.

So, in closing, if the "Drill Baby Drill" sound waves rock Washington in favor of those who are pro drilling we can expect to not see that new oil for 10 YEARS! And minimal savings like (at the highest prediction) $1.44 on the barrel in 2027!!! This is laughable, absolutely laughable.

Alternative energy is available. If we as a country - government and citizens combined - want energy independence, we can have it. With the correct information, a high amount of drive, and the right people in office, WE can do this. We have the ingenuity, we have the technology, and we have the NEED. If we could set a 10 year time frame to put a man on the moon with 1960's technology and, mind you, achieve that, we can move out of the firm grasp oil has on us and our economy (while the oil companies post record profits at our expense). If we can drop $10,000,000,000 a month on war, we can certainly put money back into our country, our people to bolster the move towards energy independence. WE can do this.

That is all.

-R
P.S. - I challenge you to confirm this information. I encourage you to forward this. Get the real facts out there. People need to be able to cut through the hype and take hold of the truth. We have the will.
"Will Baby Will"

Democratic Party Dares Off Shore Drilling

Food Fascist — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:53:37 EDT

Inspired by Randi Rhodes interview of Wednesday, September 17, 2008 podcast available at http:www.green960 or novamradio.com

So what does it mean that the Democrats passed a bill on offshore drilling.

If you are one of those 'drill baby drill' Republicans shouting 'USA USA' whenever a protester snuck inside the convention hall to wreak havoc, you should be happy today knowing the Federal Government has given the States their rights back to decide whether they will or will not drill for oil offshore.

And so it goes, in addition to the 66 million acres for which leases have already been issued to the oil companies that they are already NOT drilling, they now have another estimated 44 million acres...that they....will drill.........? hmmm?

Given already as reasons why the oil companies for not drilling are: 'We don't have the refining capacity' 'We don't have the land we want to drill' 'We don't have the equipment to drill', ' It will take 10-12 years to recover those wells.'

Well...word has it, the Republican President will veto this bill...why?

First of all, the bill takes away tax breaks the oil companies have enjoyed for years and re-reroute that money to renewable fuels as well as royalties that the Department of Interior, for which a report just came out charging employees of being literally in bed and exchanging drugs at wild parties with the oil company staff they were to regulate and collect royalties from.....

What will it mean in an election year to have the Republican base believe that drilling now will relieve gas prices now, while the President vetoes off shore drilling?

Do you really think the Democratic Party wants off shore drilling?

If you said 'no'- then you are onboard with the idea that the Democrats have dared the Republicans to veto off shore drilling because they know the oil companies do not want to drill as it would drop their profits on every gallon as they now can justify the profits with a straw man argument, which is that the Democrats won't allow them to drill, when really....

It is the Oil companies that don't want to drill.

DRILLING...OIL GOING TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER!

Mike Ciriello — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 21:57:00 EDT

All oil drilled goes on the WORLD market.

The highest bidder gets the oil.

Increased drilling off the coasts of America will guarantee two things. Oil companies will make more money and oil and gas extracted will be sold to the highest bidder and the highest bidder could the US, or, it could be China or Japan or India or France. If you think more drilling is going to save you money, or make America "free from foreign oil", think again.

Can oil be drilled off our shores without a major environmental disaster destroying your favorite beach? Probably. But that's not really the question we should be asking...the question should be who does off shore drilling really help?

The average American consumer, giant multinational corporations or anyone really? In this political season when the facts get lost and are replaced by lies that appeal to the emotional instincts in all of us, it's good to have information from non-partisan, unaffiliated, sources to understand that not all problems have easy answers. This is one of them...to drill or not drill is not as simple as some would have us believe.

(MORE...)

IMPORTANT CAMPAIGN ISSUE RECOMMENDATION

Tony — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:49:47 EDT

Sen. Obama I was gonna write this sunday but my internet was down and thanks that I waited to help the democrats fight the so called offshore dfrilling flip flop which is not. This is the issue I was holding and I know this for many years but thought it was best to bring it in the final strecht of the campaign. I just saw the Mr. Independent Lou Dobbs lambasting the democrats for now agreeing to offshore drilling. and it looks like there are no experts in the oil industry, even Mr. Pickesn doesn't sounds like one and now I think he is a geologist as he mentioned something about giving credit to engineers, well, Mr. Pickens I am a petroelum enginneer with a Texas Professional License (very few with this) and I graduated in the top 10 of the best petroleum engineering school in the world, the University of Texas at Austin you can call then and they will see who I am. I know I know more than you and all experts about this energy crisis and no expert has come forward, not even a CEO who get a 15$ million bonus from exxon-mobil, ladies and gentleman the real solution is a diversified energy policy, someone who tells you offshore drilling is the solution is ignorant and it aint nothing but a hoax. As an expert from the bottom up, as i was in the oil fields day and nite while you were in the corporate offices I am knowledegable of the oil industry and all american I have seen LOVE drilling which I call RUKU RUKU for the boring sounding noise when drilling was less than 5 feet per hour, I used to go to the nearest town in western venezuela for a beer and come back and RUKU RUKU was still there. I liked the action, the casing runs, the cementing, the perforation and completion of wells, yes, US driling engineers never complete wells, the leats test it with a drilling rigs something never done by an american company, but venezuela did it cause of lack of deep workover/completion rigs so that is why my ample knowledge. Mr. Pickens knows and a production engineering authority from the UT-Texas that out of 100 engineers they hire ony 1 or 2 productions engineers, also and I was in charge of 7000 beam pumped wells when Venezuela had 300000+ wells and saudi arabia had only 2000 and you know they dont use production string and they produce from the casing and most wells are shallows. my wells were from 9000-15000 feet., so YES it's not just DRILL DRILL BABY DRILL OR RUKU RUKU productions is not assigned the same resources as drilling and Dr. Augusto Podio can tell you, so the solution is not just drilling, but production and reservoir engineering. There are secondary recovery, tertiary recovery and my own invented QUATERNARY RECOVERY, where you can get 15-20% of what is left, and many other things like coal bed methane exploitation, so Sen Obama and Sen Biden my recommendation is recommend that an American Oil Company be formed, never in history has this been applied because Mr. Pickens knows they never let washington do it, Big Oil never will like this by you can form a American or washington energy company to tackle of phases of oil industry not just drilling and you will see the results sooner that later, why cant a domestic oil company can be formed when the US used to be a major producer of oil and this can be done with the windfall profits tax and the oil will be sold of put on strategic reserve and this company will compete with big oil with no problem and they will hire the best people not the friends of oil men and bypass people with great minds and ideas.

McCain-Palin Same Ole Same Ole Speech

Tony — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:14:39 EDT

Jesus, have you seen what they talk?, well I thought I was seeing a rerun speech from the republican convention but I saw now different cities and they say the same BS looking like parrots who memorized a speech. I can't believe it and the mediatic media doesnt get it OR they favor them. Sarah Barracuda, has yet after 10 days to mention a word about the economy or foreign policy and all she does is talk about McCain like he is a superman at 72!!...people go look and i am predicting they will get burned repeating same thing day after day in each city, Are american people dumb?? I am beggining to say YES and those people are republicans hearing same old BS day after day...well imagine if Palin were to meet the tiger PUTIN who is trained as all KGB agents to outsmart their opponents, woww. PUTIN would make Palin a ridicule in front of him if she were to someday be the president. Ladies and gentleman this ticket is smelling like a worst foreign policy that the one of Bush administration, I hope Americans wake up and see these parrot -like speeches, I am just waiting for the big debate to see her nervous and people will see her inexperience, so far it looks like she is carrying the pants instead of McCain..Hillarious what we see and Democrats dont pay attention to the manipulated polls, many people will wake up to this mediocrity soon and she hasnt even faced the media, look at that..all we see is scary cats, ladies and gentleman.

Oil is our Heroin

Michele — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 11:29:04 EDT

We are addicted to oil. Nobody is arguing against that the United States has an unhealthy dependency on oil.

If you think of oil for a momment, as a narcotic drug - like heroin - if addiction visited your home - if not a family member - your car, your home - what would you recommend? How should the problem be handled?

Get more drugs? Find a new dealer? Another back alley find a new flow of addictive substance?

The Republican Convention was dotted with signs that say DRILL, DRILL, DRILL. We need more of this addictive substance - so lets go get it. That is called ENABLING. They are the oil DEALERS' best friend.

Obama's plan is much stronger towards developing materials to get us off this addiction. How can the Republican's ridicule this as a pipe dream? If someone you loved was addicted to something - wouldnt you do everything in your power to get them off the dependence? Sure you would, because you love them. Republicans want to find America another poppy field to harvest.Get another fix - delay the solution - (and dirty the climate while doing it).

Anyone who loves their country would do anyting to get them off of oil addiction. Ridicule won't stop them.If you had a family member or best friend with a drug problem, if you were a good friend, a responsible relative, you would make a stand and tell that person something they need to hear, whether they like it or not.

Sen. OBama has the courage and integrity to intervene. It may not be what the Republicans want to hear - but it's the straightest talk and most honest leadership that has surfaced during this election.

We're all one American family. We need to step up and do what it takes to help each other off the oil drug.

Gulliani: "Let's Drill Offshore". If that's how he feels, how about drilling in NYC Harbour first?

Jason — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:43:38 EDT

Rudy Guillani is speaking at the RNC right now amoungs a diverse group (of mostly white rich people).

Guillani just stated that he supports offshore drilling.

ORLY?

Well...since Rudy seems so gung ho about the idea of offshore drilling, perhaps we should start drilling in New York Harbour first. That spot where the World Trade Center used to be seems like a good place to start. Smack dab in lower Manhattan.

Oh, wait that's right. "Not in my back yard."

We need to remember that just because we don't live on the coast, or if we do live on the coast and assume that the small little hamlet down the shore is going to be drilled, that if your elected official is so eager to support offshore drilling, then their property, not public property, should be drilled first.

Gustav would like to remind you why we shouldn't do offshore drilling.

Jason — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:35:24 EDT

Meet Gustav, 24 hours old.

In three days he will damage several offshore drilling platforms off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico.

The logic behind building more offshore drilling platforms is senseless.

As global warming continues, so will the potential for more violent and destructive hurricanes in the Gulf Coast and the Atlantic. But this isn't a problem people in the South and East coast face. California has the potential to be hit by hurricanes too, though most of the time it is the remenance of an East Pacific hurricane. (As if the earthquakes and the fires are not bad enough!)

So continuing our dependence on oil, foreign or domestic will continue to increase greenhouse gasses. And the continued dependence on oil will cause economic strain as the oil industry will collect millions on insurance (something that people on dry land can't get because the insurance industry serves those with the most income in the first place) for repairs and drive the price of oil up every time a Gustav or a Katrina, Rita, Hugo, or Andrew like storm occurs.

The price of food will not decrease until farmers recieve alternative energy support first.

Some farmers do not like the idea of wind energy although the amout of space a single wind turbine occupies is very minimal. If they chose, they could use biomass as a source of energy. The oil, gas, and nuclear energy industry continues to push old number showing the flaws of wind, solar, and biomass and spreading lies about alternative energy and recalling the old problems earlier forms of alternative energy had but are now reduced or solved due to newer alternative energy technolgy.

Farmers need alternative energy support first as they produce the food that America and the world needs. We learned this summer that biodesil and ethanol are not the best choices for alternative energy, in fact they still rely on the use of crude oil and waste pleanty of resources (i.e. corn or sunflower stalks that can also be processed). Then there is the fact that ethanol is poisonous to bees that need to polinate food crops. It is more than likely that excessive ethanol usage may be a factor in Coloney Collapse Disorder (CCD) which threatens to decimate the bee population and in turn cause poor crop yeilds.

Worse yet, continued usage of ethanol drives up food prices as our energy demands are gluttonous. The more we spend on energy, the more we buy foods that are not as healthy as the foods that are healthy become more expensive. Why should America continue to suffer an obesity epidemic if healthy food is not as affordable as junk food?

The price of oil has been down the past couple of weeks, but DO NOT BE DECIEVED! Everytime we have a hurricane in the gulf, oil prices will spike, and with more offshore platforms being damaged the more likely we will pay at the pump and at the diner table.

Decrease energy demand

JTSommers — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 10:27:24 EDT

It is time to put the offshore drilling debate to an end. This is a bad idea on so many fronts;
it is difficult to know where to begin. First, it will solve nothing. It will not reduce gas prices
in the near term due to supply or by reducing speculation. It might reduce price by a few cents ten
years from now but by then, it could be several dollars higher than it is now anyway.

Second, with Exxon reporting yet another record quarterly profit, adding supply to oil reserves will
only give them increased inventories to make money on. If you think big oil will give you and I a
break just because they own more land, think again. The only winners from offshore drilling are oil companies and the Republicans that invest in them.

Kolbert nails McCain on Offshore Drilling!

Eric — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 01:35:41 EDT

This is an excerpt from Elizabether Kolbert's New Yorker article:

The Department of Energy estimates that there are eighteen billion barrels of technically recoverable oil in offshore areas of the continental United States that are now closed to drilling. This sounds like a lot, until you consider that oil is a globally traded commodity and that, at current rates of consumption, eighteen billion barrels would satisfy less than seven months of global demand. A D.O.E. report issued last year predicted that it would take two decades for drilling in restricted areas to have a noticeable effect on domestic production, and that, even then, “because oil prices are determined on the international market,” the impact on fuel costs would be “insignificant.”

So in other words..

Dear John,

Where are you getting your information? You are running a platform that is at odds with fact. Either you have haphazardly chosen an energy platform without thinking about what you're saying, you're lying to the American public, or you're lying to yourself to appease Republicans. Whether it's one, two or all three, all I know is I don't want a president who does any of these things! I want someone intelligent (not even amazingly so, I'm OK with mediocrity), honest and who can speak their mind. I want Barack Obama.

Florida for grab - Tropical Storm Fay - Offshore Drilling

Obamanizer — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:02:50 EDT

Once Fay is gone, just wait for the McCain campaign to flood into Florida while the Democrats will be bound to their convention.

Instead this would be a great chance to point out the failings of this administration again. The dangers of global warming in connection with the dangers of offshore drilling.

Florida, Florida, Florida

Ethan — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:52:47 EDT

FL may be the key to all this. I have a theory. The Southern Strategy.

Attack McCain hard in FL and it will have an effect on the rest of the swing states. Why? B/c FL is the biggest swing state. One with a mix of the perfect McCain voter, the southern cultural conservative and the senior voters. Rudy Giuliani turf. But they despite that, it is still a chasable huge swing state. With a LOT of young people and elderly. Start changing the race in FL and watch the effect on other swing states, esp southern ones like NC, VA, maybe even OH as they watch the battle unfold.

And, somewhat related, here's a chart of the electoral map:

That basically confirms what Chuck Todd has been saying. That the Rick Warren fiasco only helped McCain shore up with GOP base and Obama didn't lose any Dems. And in fact, he has room to go up as he consolidates the Dem base. Then the final stretch will be Indies and swing states, which, if Obama plays his cards right he is leaning on those now.

Make McCain sweat in FL -- elderly, jewish vote, latinos, offshore drilling, hell, Jeb Bush! -- and it will drive down his #s in other swing states.

UPDATE:

This just in...

FL-Pres (Aug 21 ARG)

McCain (R) 47%, Obama (D) 46%

1 point ballgame in FL.

If we seriously threaten to flip it, that is a huge huge distraction for McCain... Or an outright win for Obama in the EC.

UPDATE:

FL-Pres
Aug 27 Mason-Dixon
Obama (D) 45%, McCain (R) 44%

Fallacy of Offshore Drilling

Rodney from Waxahachie, TX — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 00:14:46 EDT

Dear Editor,

With the hubbub that seems to be brewing about the perceived inaction of the Democrats to further offshore drilling, I think it's time to bring to light many of the points that seem to be overlooked by the media in this debate.

Let's begin with the fact that offshore drilling won't bring the price of gas down one penny. Even George Bush and John McCain have conceded that the effect will largely be 'psychological'. It will take approximately ten years to extract oil from these new rigs. Even then, the impact will be tertiary at best. Quite possibly, the greatest con this administration has perpetrated was not its theatrics leading to the Iraq War, but rather getting the public to buy 'supply and demand' as the lead contributor to high gas prices.

So why isn't supply the reason? That can be answered in two words: oil refineries. America's oil refineries are already operating at capacity and have been for quite some time. There hasn't been a new refinery built in over 30 years and the oil companies have given no priority to building new ones. Why would they? They're already making record profits while simultaneously enjoying tax subsidies provided by you and me while not investing a single dime in refinery and production expansion.

This being the case, even so, why not open up the outer coastal shelf and ANWR for expanded drilling? Won't we need that oil when we run out of the rigs we have now? There are currently over 68 million acres of untapped land, half of it offshore, already leased to oil companies. The Congressional Democrats have already proposed a plan, blocked by House Republicans, that allowed increased offshore drilling so long as the oil companies exhaust their existing leases first (Drill Act, HR 6515). Why wouldn’t we want the oil companies to bring the oil to which they have access before handing them another billion dollar giveaway? I think it’s pretty clear that the House Republicans favor the interests of the oil companies over those of the American people.

But, shouldn't Americans be allowed access to their own oil? Another fact that many offshore drilling proponents, including John McCain, tend to shade is that all oil, foreign and domestic, is traded on the world market. This means that in ten years when we do get oil from these rigs, this new domestic oil is more likely to go to China, Russia, and India than to Texas, California, and Mississippi. Simply put, increased domestic production does not generate directly to increased supply.

But, even so, when Bush lifted the executive ban on offshore drilling, hasn't that led to the recent drop in oil prices? Though his timing was impeccable, the answer is no, it didn't. Overlooked is the fact that during the week Bush ended the executive ban, the abysmal economic data for the second quarter, including the highest jobless rates in five years, was released. This troubling economic data led oil speculators to drop their oil futures at an unbelievable rate. As they unloaded these futures in bulk, the price dropped continuously with each sell. This is a pure demonstration of the almost unwieldy power of oil speculation on the price of oil.

Given this evidence, it is easy to draw the conclusion that America's problems are largely on the demand side, not the supply side. Nobody is debating that America has an oil addiction; it is in how to combat this addiction that there seems to be some dissidence. I liken John McCain's plan for increased offshore drilling to supplying methadone to a heroine addict. Sure it makes the addict feel good, but it doesn't eliminate the problem. Barack Obama's plan, on the other hand, reads like a comprehensive rehab program that not only provides short term relief for families, but a long term plan for eliminating oil dependency altogether. Not just foreign oil, but oil. Period.

Obama's energy plan begins with selling 70 million barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, a move that has historically dropped prices within 2 weeks. Obama's plan also gives families a much needed $1,000 energy rebate, paid for by taxing the oil companies' record profits. Obama's plan will put 1 million American-made plug-in hybrid cars (over 150 mpg) on the road. Obama has also proposed a $7,000 tax credit for the purchase of these hybrid and electric vehicles. The Obama energy plan also invests over $150 Billion in renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, further reducing our dependency on oil to heat our homes. This investment is projected to lead to over 5 million new jobs. The Obama energy plan will also curb these speculators that have wreaked havoc on the price of oil over the past few years.

Let's be frank. 'Drill Here, Drill Now' is a buzzword, not a plan. The only future secured by John McCain's increased offshore drilling is that of the oil companies.

Rodney A Hopper II
rodney@rodneyhopper.com

http://www.rodneyhopper.com

Offshore Drilling

Realist Unknown — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 19:44:38 EDT

Can You Afford $15 Gas

Imagine a time in the United States when the price of regular gas barely reached over the $1 mark. That era was in the early 1980’s when the Federal government placed restrictions on the areas where oil could be drilled for off our nation's coast. Now we fast-forward to the present and reality hits us in the face like a concrete brick. Gas is now at a relatively high price and unfortunately, those restrictions on the outer continental shelf drilling still stand.

After much thought and research of the causes. I have come to the same conclusion as many experts that we must “DRILL HERE and DRILL NOW”. I acknowledge this is not a fix-all solution to our energy woes but merely a Band-Aid until alternative energy sources can be brought up to par with oil. However, oil is presently the life-blood of our nation and the price of gas is on the majority of American’s minds. This is accentuated by reading the following excerpt that appeared August 7, 2008 on US News and World Report’s internet site in regards to the Presidential Race.

More than half of those in a USA Today/Gallup Poll in late July said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who favored easing restrictions on offshore drilling, while one third said they'd be likelier to oppose that candidate.Moreover, the subsequent quote from an article posted August 1, 2008 on Newsweek’s website again exposes the significance of the issue at hand.

Until recently, coastal states had taken a "not in my backyard" approach to offshore drilling. But that's beginning to change, now that gas prices are hovering at or above $4 per gallon. In Florida, 60 percent of voters now support drilling off their coasts. Perhaps more surprising, a majority in eco-conscious California is also willing to tap waters off the state's shorelines.

No matter how one looks at the evidence, it all leads to one fact: The price of gasoline will continue to be unstable. According to the statistical agency of the Department of Energy, gas prices have increased as follows.

May 1993 to May 2003 by only $.40

May 2003 to May 2008 by $2.57

May 2007 to May 2008 by a whopping $1.07

Therefore, if the trend of gas prices continues at the conservative estimate of $1.07 per year, then the price for a gallon of regular gas will be as follows.

May 2009 $5.15

May 2013 $9.42

May 2018 almost $$15 dollars

Then the sudden plummet in price recently illustrates the instability of gas. It went from record high of $4.06 per gallon to an average of $3.88 nationally in just two weeks as stated on the Department of Energy’s website. This is detrimental to our country because it gives Americans the false impression that price of gas has reached its peak and thus only drop. However, this is more than likely false when considering the many factors that affect the price of gas such as the increase in world demand, the decrease in national oil production, natural disasters, and geopolitics. Geopolitics is one area that as a Nation can be removed from the equation.

Geopolitics is an issue because of the reality that most of our oil is imported although we are the third largest oil producer. In fact, 60 percent of our oil is imported as stated by the Energy Information Administration. Of that amount, 20% comes from Africa and 16% from the Persian Gulf. This is significant because any fighting in Africa or talk of war with Iran can instantly skyrocket the price of gas.

Therefore, you ask what you can do about it. Well, we must urge our Nation’s leaders to “DRILL HERE and DRILL NOW”. The Washington Post reports that 75 billion barrels of oil have been declared off limits in our own country of which would be enough oil to replace every non-North American import for 22 years. Of that 75 billion, 18 billion barrels lie in the restricted areas of the outer continental shelf as reported by the E.I.A.

Much has changed since the Federal bans on offshore drilling were enacted to include tremendous advances in technology that allows oil to be drilled with far more precision and environmental care. Not even powerful hurricanes such as Katrina and Rita caused any significant oil spills from the thousands of allowed oil well rigs in the Gulf of Mexico. Additionally, the Mineral Management Service states, “over the past 20 years, less than .001 percent of the oil produced in U.S. state and federal waters have been spilled.” Furthermore, almost 60% of the oil that enters North American waters comes from natural seepage.

Like many of you, I love the beach and would be completely against offshore drilling if the slightest chance of an oil spill existed. Nevertheless, the revelation of $15 gas in just 10 years is enough for me to DEMAND CHANGE AND DEMAND IT NOW. So, sign the American Solutions petition at http://www.americansolutions.com/ to implore our Nation’s leaders to “DRILL HERE AND DRILL NOW”. In doing so, you will be heard amidst the masses of millions that feel the same pain as you instead of the government drowning out your single and silent voice.

Sen Obama Appears To Be Dormant

Tony — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 01:18:26 EDT

Well, even though I think these 1000-people polls are manipulated to reflect a tight race when the country has been brought ruin by the republicans and these facts alone are enough to cause a landslide democratic victory as McCain is no Reagan who won in the past plus the country is in the worst shape in modern history with millions losing homes and jobs and benefits and now having a low quality life thanks to the Republicans and this election is a referendum on the Republicans and they might be in jeopardy on losing many elections in a row in the future due to the precarious situation of this country at this level and McCain doesnt represent NO NEW thing and NO NEW REPUBLICAN, so he will be the same thing and even worst as if you analyze history republican administrations all had wars recently so Sen Mccain will have one and this will be WWIII when he attacks Iran or tell Israel to attack it which is the same BS., and this WWII will be the total ruin of america, so Sen obama why are you dormant? why don't you choose Hillary as VP and you will see the polls getting wide open when this is announced, Can't you see that you will have 18 miilion strong supporters who are now debating if giving you their vote,? instead act properly and show you want all their support by honoring their wishes and lider as I beleive that the toughest battle you won was that against Hillary and I know there are many good candidates outhere for VP, but analyze what Hillary will bring without mentioning Bill another strong assett, you appear to be infiltrated with nasty republican spies as they know that ticket combination they will fear it, Hillary acted better than many republican candidates and even McCain, so do not feel too confident, ...and start acting on behalf of the democratic party that is to make sure to recover the white house for the well being of america because I am sure McCain will be worst than Bush as he is a military man and look at history and name me a good military man who has been a good leader and you will find NONE as they do not know the economy and all they know is wage wars like McCain says it in his political ads that he knows how to win wars..I would like to ask Sen McCain if he won the Vietnam War...enough said...

Don't fear the "Flip-Flop"

Daniel A Dorn — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 20:22:43 EDT

I have already heard accusations of "Flip-Flopping" regarding Sen. Obama's tentative support of the compromise proposal for the Energy Reform Act of 2008. I hope that the Obama campaign does not shy away from discussing the compromise, and that Sen. Obama comes out strongly in favor of it. Let the McCain campaign and the talk show hosts make their accusations (which are pretty weak, considering Sen. McCain's reversal on the issue). Then Sen. Obama can simply point out that he is still against offshore drilling, but it is a reasonable price to pay for all of the good that the act would accomplish. Remind the voters that the ridiculous no-compromise politics of President Bush have put us in out current situation in the first place. There is tremendous upside to this bill, both politically and in terms of what it can accomplish. The more Sen. McCain talks about Flip-Flopping, the more he shows the electorate just how much he wants to emulate Pres. Bush.

How Obama Can Own the Energy Issue!

Mister Anderson — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 08:34:39 EDT

If you have never heard of FiveThirtyEight.com, I think you should bookmark this website throughout this entire election. It is probably two steps ahead of the great Chuck Todd when it comes to "scientifically" staying on top of this polling non-sense and which candidate is truly ahead, by how much, and where!

This morning, they posted a great message about how Senator Obama can own the energy issue just like he currently owns the Iraq War, Afghanistan, and Pakistan issues. Basically, the post says he should join the bipartisan Gang of 10 and make it 11. He is currently leaning towards their position but hasn't fully embraced it as he's trying to walk the tightrope on the drilling issue. At the same time, John McCain is leaning against it because it doesn't offer any financial benefits to the oil companies.

If Senator Obama joins the Gang of 10 by signing on to this legislation, then he would team up with the likes of Senator Lindsay Graham (McCain's best friend and chief surrogate) in pushing bi-partisan legislation to really tackle the issue. Yes, it does involve offshore drilling in states that welcome it (like Florida), but continue to ban it in states that oppose it (like California). The biggest benefit is that it represents his themes of change, working across the aisle, and it forces McCain to either join his position or defend his opposition which is nothing more than protecting the oil companies.

Senator Obama has to take this position before Senator McCain smartens up and flip flops towards it.

Here is the link to the article: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/gang-of-10-obamas-checkmate.html

The full article is posted in my extended text.

Bi Parttisan Gang of Ten 's September Compronise on Offshore

Tom Pearce Palm Beach Community Organizer — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:26:37 EDT

I am posting this article on the compromise as it is shaping up that will if paseed devestate our beaches. Note that the compromise would force Florida and only Florida to frill against it's will with no vote. IT exmepts everyone North of VA and on the West Coast. A very elitist approach.

Barack Needs to Do Some More Explaining on His Energy Policy Changes

marguerite manteau-rao — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 15:23:10 EDT

Loved Barack's speech on Energy Policy. You may be interested to some of my readers' reactions to post I wrote on La Marguerite green blog:

http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/obama-shows-flexibility-and-strength-in-energy-policy-speech/

Especially worth noting is comment from reader Meryn, on Obama's need to do a better job of including his supporters in his decision changes, particularly regarding offshore drilling.

Smear which Boils My Blood

Chris — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 20:44:03 EDT

The GOP smear campaign that Barack Obama is shallow wrt his energy plan is outright false! He has outlined in detail his long term and short term plans. He has also joined forces with an independent group of politicians who have pulled together their energy plan (with some off shore drilling as a potential short term element). McCain is playing games with his offshore drilling tirade and working up citizens who are tired of high gas prices. Only problem is that Offshore drilling is a short term finger in the dyke and seems to be the anchor of McCain's entire approach. How can we put a stop to this lie?

Barack On Compromises

Al Pao in San Francisco — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 02:49:06 EDT

From KNX 1070 News, http://www.knx1070.com/Obama-s-Ok-With-Offshore-Drilling---If/2712301:

"Like all compromises, it also includes steps that I haven't always supported," Obama conceded. "I remain skeptical that new offshore drilling will bring down gas prices in the short-term or significantly reduce our oil dependence in the long-term, though I do welcome the establishment of a process that will allow us to make future drilling decisions based on science and fact."

McCain Surrogate Refers to Ireland as a Competitor Nation

Cindy in Salt Lake — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 21:21:51 EDT

Today on the NewsHour, McCain surrogate, Nancy Pfotenhauer, said:

NANCY PFOTENHAUER: Senator McCain has proposed lowering the corporate tax rate across all industries, because we have a rate of 35 percent, which is significantly above our competitor nations. We're competing with countries like Ireland that have a rate that's less than half our corporate tax rate.

Hmmm. Ireland’s population of 4.1 million is competing with a U.S. population of close to 305 million? I thought our major competitors were China and the European Union! According to World Bank rankings, the top five in GDP are the U.S., Japan, Germany, China and the U.K., in that order. And Ireland? They place 31st.

It also was fun to watch her try to explain why the oil companies deserve a tax break while Americans are suffering at the pump. That, in addition to the normal rolling of the eyes, use of air quotes, and laughing at and interrupting former U.S. Energy Secretary Federico Pena, Obama's national campaign co-chair.

By the way, Mrs. Pfotenhauer was a lobbyist until 2001 for Koch Industries, an oil, chemical and mining mega-corporation which is the largest privately-held company in the U.S.

(Read or listen here)

Ten senior Hess Corporation executives and/or members of the Hess family each gave $28,500 to the joint RNC-McCain fundraising committee.

John Lewis-Dickerson, Atlanta — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 20:44:47 EDT

Multiple Oil Company Executives Gave Huge Contributions To Electing McCain Just Days After Offshore Drilling Reversal

By Greg Sargent and Eric Kleefeld - August 4, 2008, 12:47PM

Ten senior Hess Corporation executives and/or members of the Hess family each gave $28,500 to the joint RNC-McCain fundraising committee, just days after McCain reversed himself to favor offshore drilling, according to Federal Election Commission reports.

Nine of these contributions, seven from Hess executives and two from members of the Hess family, came on the same day, June 24th, the records show. The total collected in the wake of McCain's reversal for the fund, called McCain Victory 2008, from Hess execs and family is $285,000.......

ARTICLE- http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/oil_company_executives.php

Energy Policy - Offshore Drilling

Miguel Maseda — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 22:08:51 EDT

Offshore drilling will not solve the enormous energy problems this country faces. It will become a distraction, even when I firmly believe it will not bring the price of oil down. It can only help the oil companies, allowing them to drill in areas closer to the coast and cheaper for the oil companies. The fact that they can drill cheaper will not result in a lower price, but in a bigger profit for the big boys.

Senator Obama - please remain firm in your opposition to oil drilling close to our coasts and beaches. It does not look good to be changing your position based on baiting from Senator McCain, or from polls indicating the majority of the American public supports overturning the drilling ban close to our coasts. They are reacting to the very high gas prices without completely thinking about the outcomes of such a policy.

America needs a strong leader with a clear and unwavering belief in alternative/renewable energy solutions that will cut our dependency on oil (foreign and domestic) within a few years.

to drill or not to drill

rgs — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 02:56:18 EDT

Offshore drilling SHOULD be encouraged. Future oil reserves will take years to develop and will be needed. But there is no need to open up more drilling areas, either offshore or in the Alaska wilderness. Granting moer oil leases just stockpiles future profits for the oil companies. Oil companies are only exploring 19% of the leases that they already own. They should be encouraged to start utilizing the oil reserves that they already have.

They also need to build more refineries while they are at it. Oil refineries in the US are already operating at capacity, with no applications to build new ones, in spite of the government's offer to allow the oil ompanies to build them on federal land. This lack of refining capacity situation guarantees limited supplies at the gas pumps for years to come regardless of the amount of crude oil sucked from the ground or leases that are given to reward the poor struggling oil companies.

Warning Senator Obama: I'm NOT a Sheep!

Mister Anderson — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 12:30:44 EDT

I'm very bothered by the idea that Senator Obama is considering a compromise on his stance of offshore drilling. His position at least through yesterday was that it was a gimmick and all of our time, energy, and effort should be in the investment and development of long-term alternative energy solutions that doesn't include oil. Now he has shifted his position as of yesterday to say that he would consider limited offshore drilling if the compromise was necessary to pass a full comprehensive plan.

Sorry Senator Obama, you're about to walk down a path that I refuse to follow!

Barack's shift on Offshore drilling - how he can still seize this issue

John from Hawthorne, CA — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 05:28:24 EDT

Now that Barack Obama position on offshore drilling is more flexible there are many that disagree with this shift. Rachael Maddow an MSNBC political analyst and a strong defender of Barack Obama against conservative analyst on a daily basis called this shift idiotic. I think she is wrong and I think in the immediate short term it was wise to do considering the majority of the american public is in agreement with the idea of offshore drilling. Although the majority of the american public are not fully aware (in my opinion) that offshore drilling is environmentally unsafe and will take years before anything positive happen at the gas pump, their desperation for relief has led the majority to believe that this is the solution.

After the shift by Barack Obama what next? I believe it is now time for Barack Obama to seize this issue with a new approach and a new plan in addition to what he has already proposed. A plan that is simple and easy, and offers immediate and realistic relief at the gas pump right away. It is also a plan that will put the Mccain camp on the defensive and force them to respond to an issue that Obama has put forward. If Obama fails to do this then Mccain will have won on this issue of who best can lower prices at the gas pump.

So what is this plan? Barack Obama need to speak daily this week proposing and pushing the need to release millions of barrels of oil from the strategic petroleum reserve. This is the plan and a new approach to solving the problems that ordinary americans are faced with because of the high price of oil. This needs to become Barack's issue! An issue that will immediately help families and an issue Mccain, the republicans, the oil industry, and the white house will certainly disagree with. This will put them all on the defensive and change the discussion from offshore drilling which is a risky long term approach, to releasing oil right away which provides practical short term relief.

If George Bush could deplete the budget surplus he received from the Bill Clinton Presidency to finance an illegal and unjust war why can't we use some of the oil in the strategic petroleum reserve to help bring relief to american families and citizens? I have posted below a well thought out position on the need to release oil.

By Daniel J. Weiss | July 14, 2008

President George W. Bush plans to announce today that he will lift the executive moratorium on oil drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf, which was first established by his father, President George H.W. Bush, in 1990. The current president has argued that the United States should be “drilling for more oil here in America to take the pressure off of gasoline prices.” The congressional moratorium on OCS drilling—first signed into law by President Ronald Reagan—remains in effect, but must be renewed annually.

A Department of Energy analysis determined that opening the OCS to offshore drilling “would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.”

A much faster, more effective action to reduce oil prices would to sell a half million barrels of oil per day from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to increase supply, reduce prices, and burst the “speculative bubble” that leads speculators to buy oil futures based on the assumption that supply will remain fixed and prices will escalate.

On July 8, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi wrote President George Bush to urge him to “draw down a small portion of the oil held in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in order to expand available supplies and help reduce the record prices.”

The White House predictably rejected this common sense suggestion that would lower oil prices—and oil industry profits. White House spokesperson Tony Fratto said that the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, “is not there to try to market-time and to try to manipulate prices in the market.” Yet he did confusingly acknowledge that, “as long as we keep the sources of oil off the market, we’re not going to see increases in supply…if you don’t increase supply and you only increase demand, prices are going to rise.”

There are many reasons that selling a small amount of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is our best short-term option for lowering oil prices. Here are eight.

1. Record oil prices have hurt American families Ordinary families are struggling with record high energy prices. Many families’ gas costs have increased by hundreds or even thousands of dollars a year. The price of home heating oil has doubled in the past year. And the Department of Energy predicts that average electricity prices will increase by 5 percent this year, and go up 9 percent in 2009.

A recent Center for American Progress analysis found that families are spending an average of 4 percent of their after-tax income on gasoline—the highest proportion in 25 years. Rural and low-income households are hurt even more because they spend an even greater proportion of their post-tax income on gasoline.

2. There is a lot of oil in the reserve The United States sits on 706 million barrels of oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which is 98 percent full. It is “the largest stockpile of government-owned emergency crude oil in the world.” It was created in the wake of the 1973-74 oil embargo to prevent future supply disruptions from wrecking our economy. Although there is not currently a supply disruption, the record oil prices are nonetheless wreaking havoc on our economy and families. This situation warrants using reserve oil to help alleviate the pain of record prices.

3. Reserve oil can get to the market fast Under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, “decisions to withdraw crude oil from the SPR are made by the President…SPR oil would be distributed by competitive sale.” President Bush agreed to sell up to 30 million barrels after Hurricane Katrina. The on-line sale of this oil ended September 9, 2005, and the first oil was delivered to oil companies for refining on September 26. More significantly, it reduced oil prices in a day (see #4).

President Bush and many conservative congressional leaders want to drill for oil in the protected Outer Continental Shelf to address price and supply problems. Yet this “solution” would take over a decade to produce any results. As noted above, the Department of Energy says that drilling in the OCS will have no impact until 2030—a generation from now.”

4. Reserve oil would significantly increase worldwide supplies The International Energy Agency believes that “these abnormally high prices are largely explained by fundamentals. Supply growth so far this year has been poor and higher prices are needed to choke off demand to balance the market.” The IEA predicts that worldwide oil demand will average 86.8 million barrels per day in 2008, while oil supply was 86.6 million barrels per day in May 2008. “OPEC countries are running close to flat out” to keep up with demand. Adding a half million barrels to the daily market would be a significant addition to the worldwide supply of 86.6 million barrels.

To put this increase in perspective, compare it to President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney’s efforts to beg Saudi Arabia to increase production. Eventually, the Saudis agreed to increase production to 9.7 million barrels per day, a total increase of 600,000 barrels per day since March 2008. Selling a half million barrels per day from the SPR would nearly double this production increase, and this additional SPR oil would only be sold in the United States. This will ease competition for the world oil supply, which should reduce prices.

5. Past reserve releases lowered oil prices In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, oil markets were roiled due to some damage to oil rigs and infrastructure. On September 1, 2005, the spot price for oil was $69 per barrel—up 10 percent from two weeks before. President Bush announced the impending release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve the next day. Oil closed at $66.91—a 3 percent decrease. On October 10, a month after the oil sales closed, the spot price was $60.74, a 12 percent drop from September 1. Oil averaged $62 in October, $58 in November, and $59 in December.

On January 16, 1991, on the eve of the first Gulf War, President George H.W. Bush announced that he would sell 34 million barrels from the Reserve to “minimize world oil market disruptions.” That day oil sold for $32 per barrel. The day after the announcement, the price dropped to $21 per barrel. Oil remained in the $20 per barrel range during and after the war. The Department of Energy concluded that the “partial drawdown…help[ed] restore stability to world oil markets during the Persian Gulf War.”

6. There is plenty of oil in the reserve to withstand a supply disruption The SPR has more oil than ever before—706 million barrels, which is 98 percent capacity. Selling 50 million barrels over 100 days would still leave it filled to over 90 percent capacity. This is enough oil to cope with a complete foreign supply disruption for nearly two months, assuming zero reduction in demand in the wake of such a catastrophe.

Is such a supply disruption likely? No. There has never been a complete supply disruption. The last major disruption occurred nearly 30 years ago during the Iranian revolution. What’s more, the United States gets its 13.4 million barrels of oil imported daily from a diverse array of producers, including Canada (18 percent of imports), Mexico (11 percent), Saudi Arabia (11 percent), Venezuela (10 percent), and Nigeria (8 percent). This means that even if we are suddenly unable to import oil from one country, it will not affect the availability of imports from other nations, thought it could affect price.

7. Selling SPR oil would yield significant funds to help families cope with high energy prices Selling 50 million barrels of oil at today’s prices would produce over $7 billion. Even if the oil price was cut by 40 percent to $100 per barrel, selling this amount of SPR oil would still raise $5 billion. These funds could help families cope with high energy prices via the home weatherization program, the Low Income Heating and Electricity Payment program, or via direct rebates. Or these funds could promote research, development, and deployment of energy-efficiency technologies that would reduce consumption, energy bills, and global warming pollution.

8. Putting SPR oil on the market could help burst the speculative bubble Various government and private energy experts believe that speculators account for one-third or more of all oil trades, and have increased the price of oil by anywhere from $10 to $30 per barrel. Since January 2, oil prices increased from $100 to $145 per barrel. This steady ascent in price makes it tempting for speculators to buy oil futures as a safe bet, particularly given that record prices have not led to more supply. Putting some SPR oil on the market in one sudden spurt could burst the speculative bubble. Investors and speculators in oil contracts could no longer assume that oil supplies will remain stagnant even as prices rise. When institutional investors and oil traders sense that the supply and price of oil might go in different directions, all bets are off. http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/07/eight_reasons_spr.html

Thanks for reading my blog

JohnR

Not Smart

Lee — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 23:55:17 EDT

Obama slipped up with the oil issue. He should have explained how foolish this entire exercise is, rather than giving McCain the leeway to continue to lie to the American people.

Obama is wrong!

Curt — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:29:09 EDT

Obama is wrong to compromise his opposition to offshore drilling. He needs to stick to the message he delivered the other day. We can save more oil by checking the air in our tires than we can produce by drilling offshore. This will provide benefits now, rather than ten years from now.

Barack needs to stick to the message and repeat it every chance he gets. Repetition is a method that has produced results for the conservatives in the past. Opinions are starting to change about offshore drilling and repeating the truth that it won't help the economy will only speed that up.

The reason for changing this position also is wrong. We need to attack the conservatives where they're weak, not compromise with them. To them, compromise is a display of weakness, and Barack is in a strong position. He needs to take advantage of that and go on the attack. Emphasize your strengths by repeating the truth. Exploit McCain's weaknesses by exposing his lies. Don't compromise your principles. Don't give an inch.

Offshore oil drilling

operdoc — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 21:40:17 EDT

I don't vote for flip floppers who support offshore oil drilling. I gave a couple hundred dollars to this campaign. What a waste.

Campaign feedback

Bruce from Vero Beach, FL — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 21:36:47 EDT

First, I've noticed that people sitting directly behind Barak in his speeches that are shown later on the news DON'T respond in any way to what Barak is saying..sort of sit there like dunces. I think they're Republicans who have been recruited to act as bored as possible, thereby giving that impression to the public when they view the speeches on the news. Diabolical, but wre're running against Rebublicans.

Second, Barak has to start taking a stronger stand against McCain's ads. Hillary was nice compared with McCain & the Rove boys. Suggestions..use the McCain/anthrax clip from Letterman to show how little he knows about what's really going on. Then show the negative ads Bush ran against Gore & Kerry, which we are now seeing against Barak. This proves McCain is indeed McBush. And we know what those negative ads has done ... allowing Bush to ruin the country for the past 8 years.

Finally, STOP THIS BIT WITH OFFSHORE DRILLING. In the context you present it, it may be somewhat acceptable as a very small portion of future energy policies based on renewable , non polluting resources, but McCain will use it as a further example of you flip flopping. The negatives from his ads will far outweigh any positives that could come from it. Half the people in a recent poll think new offshore drilling will get more oil to us in two years!!!! Tell them the facts, don't flip flop.

You have great ideas and offer hope, but you won't be doing that if you change your position on everything. GET TOUGH WITH MCCAIN OR WE'LL LOSE THE ELECTION.

Why Offshore Drilling Is the Wrong Solution

David from Rancho Cordova, CA — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 02:29:15 EDT

Al Gore stated recently in a speech on July 17th, 2008 in D.C. that most of the critical problems we face today such as high gas prices, our faltering economy, the war in Iraq and global warming can be traced back to our addiction to fossil fuels. Our addiction is so old and entrenched that the latest trend in poll numbers in the presidential race confirms my suspicion that the American people are simply not ready for the radical solutions required to break ourselves of this self-destructive vice.

As I see it, many Americans have become complacent after 8 years of being told not to worry, that all we have to do is go shopping and everything will be just fine, even after the worst attack on our country since Pearl Harbor. We are so used to letting other people do the sacrificing for us, that shared sacrifice might as well be a foreign phrase belonging to an ancient culture. And despite the vision of change articulated so eloquently by Barack Obama, Americans stand frozen at this critical juncture, unable to stomach the sacrifice required of us, a sacrifice that has been hinted at, yet not fully explained by the Senator.

Here is the problem we face: many scientists are now in agreement that the pace of global warming is accelerating faster than they had originally predicted. Perhaps this is due to rising car and industrial emissions in India and China. Perhaps this is due to more methane being released into the atmosphere from the melting tundra of Siberia and Alaska. Perhaps this is due to the effect of melting ice sheets - as ice melts, more ocean water covers the surface of the earth, absorbing the sun's rays instead of reflecting them back into space. Maybe it is a combination of all of the above. Whatever the case may be, global warming's effect on the planet will be nothing short of catastrophic if nothing is done to reverse this trend. Like a freight train gathering speed on a downhill slope, the sacrifices required to bring the train to a halt and then make a u-turn become increasingly urgent and simlutaneously more difficult to make.

Many Americans, used to a material lifestyle that is the envy of the rest of the world, see high gas prices as the problem. After all, high gas prices have contributed to the rising cost of food and cut into discretionary income. Now we are angry - angry at having to pay over $4/gallon for a gallon of gas, angry at the oil companies for the obscene profits they make at our expense and angry at our leaders for not doing something quickly about it.

Bush and McCain have successfully tapped into this anger and now a major shift in public opinion is taking place that threaten to derail Obama's chances of winning this November. Offshore drilling used to be the option that only conservatives antagonistic towards anything that remotely hints of environmental protection would support. However, since Bush signed the largely symbolic act of lifting the moratorium on offshore drilling, the drumbeat heard around the country to open up our coastal waters to oil drilling grows louder each day. Somehow, through a deductive logic that I have yet to grasp, increased drilling will help bring down the prices at the pump.

First, oil companies must do extensive geological studies and before one drop of oil is pulled out of the ground, billions of dollars are spent building the costly equipment needed to extract the oil and transport it safely to a refinery. The process is long and success is not a certainty. From what I have read it takes at least 5 years to build all the infrastructure needed. In the meantime, the demand for oil from China and India is expected to increase dramatically as millions of newly middle class and affluent people in Asia buy more cars, washers and other goods that Americans have taken for granted for most of the last 50 years.

A key economic concept that Americans seem to be unable to grasp is that oil is not a commodity that fluctuates based on domestic supply and demand. Oil is a global resource that responds to global supply and demand. All oil produced is added to the global pool of oil. The arctic circle was recently estimated to have reserves approaching 85-90 billion barrels of oil . If all that oil was extracted and refined, it would satisfy global demand for 3 years. What does this mean for us? It means that our contribution to the pool is small and not significant enough to make a noticeable difference. As the offshore wells kick into high gear years from now, people will be scratching their heads and wondering what the hell happened. How come the price, rather than decrease as promised by the oil industry, continues to increase? The answer was predicted very accurately by a geoscientist working for a Shell Oil lab in Texas. M. King Hubbert developed the theory that the "aggregate production rate from an oil field over time appears to grow exponentially until the rate peaks and then declines, sometimes rapidly, until the field is depleted."(1) As the inventory dips below 50% of the total estimated reserves, each additional barrel of oil extracted becomes more expensive until finally it becomes economically prohibitive to continue drilling the remaining oil locked up in the ground. Oil companies would like us to believe that technology can keep pace with dwindling supplies but the Hubbert curve has been used to accurately predict peak oil for a number of countries over the years. Applying the same theory to world production of oil, scientists predict that global oil production is somewhere near that tipping point. If that turns out to be true, the economic fallout from an exponential rise in oil prices has the potential to cripple the world economy and even cause a complete collapse. Can we afford to take that risk?

Going down the road of increased drilling will provide almost no benefit to consumers over the next decade. So what should we do instead? First we must make the switch now to renewable energy such as solar, wind and geothermal. Only renewable energy is reliable enough and widely available to protect us from any price increase due to depletion. After all, the energy we receive from the sun is free. Unlike finite resources such as coal, oil and gas, only the initial investment is needed. Imagine blanketing the Mojave Desert in California with huge arrays of solar panels or building thousands of windmills to tap into windy areas of the midwest. Next we need to add a $1 tax on gasoline to fund the research into efficient production of hydrogen from water and further spur the auto industry into producing zero emission vehicles on a mass scale.

These changes require political will and leadership. I am encouraged by Nancy Pelosi's refusal to allow a vote on lifting the moratorium. Now we need Barack Obama to step up to the plate and speak in plain language why we will never be able to drill our way out of this mess. The Senator must make energy the core focus of his campaign because there are so many issues related to energy that will never get solved until a comprehensive energy policy is enacted.

(1) Wikipedia Peak Oil

Will More Drilling Mean Cheaper Oil?

jgabriel — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:29:04 EDT

This article is about a month or so old, but it's still very relevant, as the debate over offshore drilling rages on.

"...even if tomorrow we opened up every square mile of the outer continental shelf to offshore rigs, even if we drilled the entire state of Alaska and pulled new refineries out of thin air, the impact on gas prices would be minimal and delayed at best. A 2004 study by the government's Energy Information Administration (EIA) found that drilling in ANWR would trim the price of gas by 3.5 cents a gallon by 2027."

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1815884,00.html

And now, Deep Thoughts...

Beth from ColoradObama — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:48:19 EDT

Just some random musings at the end of my day...

Offshore Drilling

Dennis — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:24:32 EDT

I was disappointed today to read an article saying that Senator Obama still will not support offshore drilling under any circumstances. While the Democrats have good intentions on preventing environmental degradation and continuing dependence on oil, I simply cannot support their position. First is the argument that the environment will be put at unnecessary risk. This simply is not true. The greater threat is shipping vast amounts of oil thousands of miles instead of through pipelines or domestic ships which can be closely monitored, maintained, and regulated. Technology for drilling has progressed to the point where the environmental impact is much less than it once was.

The second common argument is that it continues our dependence on oil into the future by not forcing us to move to alternatives. This may be true to some extent, but as we have seen from various reports, the price of oil will not be significantly affected, so demand should not change appreciably from the new oil. With gas at 4 dollars per gallon, you can bet that automakers and industry will be looking to provide more fuel efficiency and use more conservation in order to better align themselves with market realities.

Now, with those arguments addressed, I'd like to propose what I, an American citizen, think should be done to address energy policy.

1. Massively increase funding for alternative energy research, development, and implementation. By doing this, we can increase the efficiency and viability of wind, solar, geothermal, and hydrogen technologies. Senator Obama supports these measures from everything I've read and heard him say. This, however, is only one piece of the puzzle.

2. Incentives to conserve energy must be implemented to complement efforts at producing more energy. This means everything from encouraging recycling and reduced water and electricity use to improved building code requirements for energy efficiency (though mainly local in nature) and mandates for improved vehicle fuel efficiency. The US is the largest consumer of energy in the world and by reducing our usage, even slightly, we can make a dent in the rising cost of energy and be environmentally friendly at the same time.

3. Increase domestic production of oil and natural gas. There are resources here in our own country not being utilized. It just makes no sense. I understand the argument about companies not using the leases they have already, but does anyone actually think they would hold back development if there was oil they could sell for 130 dollars per barrel? Lets get real. Let them find whatever they can and let them develop any resources that can safely be accessed. Even if prices don't decrease, we can have economic benefits. More Americans working the fields, more tax revenue for our governments, less money sent to foreign nations. This is in addition to the obvious national security interest we have in producing as much oil domestically as we can to protect against foreign disruptions and wars etc.

4. Nuclear power. We know how to do it, its safe, we have uranium, and we have a safe place to put the waste. This should have been done 30 years ago like the rest of our nonexistent energy policy, but there is still a chance to utilize nuclear power to help relieve some of the stress on providing electricity.

5. Clean coal. We have mountains of coal and we've started to develop cleaner ways to use it. simply a no brainer.

So this is the bulk of what a 'Dennis Butcher Energy Plan' would look like. I would encourage Senator Obama to consider offshore drilling as part of a plan that includes conservation, alternative energy, improved fuel efficiency, nuclear, and clean coal. We can't accomplish our goals on this issue without a comprehensive solution, any and all measures must be considered. I invite anyone to comment.

The Real True Sen McCain

Tony — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 03:00:56 EDT

I was planning a post on the issue raised today by the News Media, not to forget the hillarious show by Sen. McCain as Obama was in Europe. Well, Sen "Flip Flop" you are doing BERRY Good, you showed your real short-temper and keep doing it that you will lose by a landslide, I know Sen Obama should continue to laugh at the manipulated 1000 people poll, wait for the Nov. one, on another note I had discussed with friends the real threat that McCain represent for working families, definitely the McCain household bringing $100s of millions per month shows he doesn't represent the working people who are hurting today, he has never mentioned the word Poverty as he only says low income americans, he is like Bush who says this word weak and you can also see and let the minority population know that in Bush 2nd term Never had been mentioned the word of Affirmative action or the ackward republican law called americans with disabilities act. and rampant racism and discrimination is happening even more today in america as CNN reports that blacks find twice as hard to find jobs as whites do, imagine latinos who according to this unfair society are at the bottom after whites, blacks, asians and others, they probably be 4 or 5 times as hard for us to find exploitation jobs, and I am gonna spew the secret that this election will be decided by the latino vote after the recent steady attack of Mccain that increased the support of blacks for obama from 89% to 98% and Mccain if he gets 1% of the black vote it will be too much, so you all latino OJO PELAO this time, McCain mentioned today that he doesn't supports the quotas and I know what that is, put them as quota but never promote them leaving whites as the majority of managers selected only for the color of the skin and not intelligence or ability, then you ask yourself why is this country is in such a shape as CNN reported that most Bush appointees were just selected due to friendship rather than intelligence and ability, you can see why no wonder the credibility of this country keeps sinking like the Titanic and nobody can find oil in the mainland as CNN says that corporate america is almost all WASP People, and take a test online and visit a few oil companies and see the directorship whiter than white paint, then you ask yourself no wonder they can't find oil in mainland america as they are a bunch of worthless CEOs and I am not gonna say where there is oil these days, ask them who make millions and get $15 million bonuses, they should at least demonstrate if they deserve these outrageous high salaries and compare to productivity, I say this because I am a petroleum enginnering expert from the bottom up as I once was in charge of 7000 wells in western Venezuela when Saudi Arabia had 2000 wells and I kept seeing the so called wasp experts learning along side me as there were more problems and complexities than in the middle east, they could not understand why the geology used to change on an hours drive and yes they used to make 15 times what I used to make in salary, but nobody knows this but when you apply they throw your resume on the trash can when your name is latino or black by the so called racist minority of this country as a white woman said in another blog, if it's a minority it is real a huge one, and then you can see why nobody can find oil in this country in the mainland that is easier than offshore, although as a former Petroleum Engineer graduated from the TOP Petroleum Eng School (UT-Austin) in the world, I do beleive offshore drilling should be a part of the new energy strategy but applying Environmental Technology where the US is a leader but with a limited drilling plan like you recommend, but offshore drilling alone will not solve this problem in the short term while the economy keeps deteriorating due to high oil prices, there are for example Oil techniques underdeveloped in this country and without receiving any millionaire bonus I am gonna give a hint about one, that is Coal Bed Methane that wells are so easy and fast to drill and here Gas production increases with time contrary to standard gas wells, the areas now exploited are underdeveloped and new areas have never been tried to find as I believe there are more to be found even worldwide, developing a whole coal bed methane gas field is the equivalent to drilling just one offshore O&G well in costs and you get a clean energy source faster than offshore drilling and in ample supply fast to tackle the country's energy consumption, so hope the highly paid energy experts give a reading to this post and speak better, I am very surprised no experts and think tank has never analyzed this alternative, and I have for you Sen Obama a plan/strategy that I will recommend that makes sense and I know nobody has thought about that, and you can do it easily by taxing big oil and oil will be produced without waiting for scared investors and w/o telling big oil to drill more as it's true easy oil is depleting, what is left is hard oil which has more risks so that is the reluctance to start new drilling projects, I have meant to post it even before the lift to offshore drilling, however it's better to give you this alternative close to election day or before convention so you see if it sounds good to you, you announce it there, so be on the lookout...

New Orleans oil spill causes McCain to cancel event highlighting how safe drilling is

Mikeystyle — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:43:46 EDT

From JedReport:

Wed Jul 23

You can't make this stuff up

Update: He's not going, blaming the weather. Yeah, right. Smells like an oil spill to me.

So McCain is going to NOLA tomorrow to do an event to tout off-shore oil drilling, flying out to a rig on a helicopter, trying to be all Jack Bauer the oil man. His agenda: demonstrate how easy, safe, and important more offshore drilling is.

But there's a problem: today, on the eve of this stunt, there was a huge oil spill in NOLA:

The Coast Guard closed 29 miles of the Mississippi River at New Orleans after a 600-foot tanker and a barge loaded with fuel oil collided Wednesday, breaking the barge in half.

Nobody was injured, but more than 419,000 gallons of heavy, almost tar-like fuel oil spilled from the barge, forming a slick 12 miles long, said Lt. Cdr. Cheri Ben-Iesau, a Coast Guard spokeswoman.

I mean seriously -- could things possibly be going more wrong for this guy? I'd say he was the unluckiest guy in the world, but the truth of the matter is that you make your own luck.

http://www.jedreport.com/2008/07/you-cant-make-t.html

Why the Congressional Ban on Off Shore Drilling will be lifted.

Rick D. — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:08:01 EDT

The Congressional Ban on offshore drilling will be lifted simply because the Democrats in congress are a bunch of pussies. Plain and simple. The Republcans do this everytime. They put forth a proposal for something so asinine, like offshore drilling to releave the current gas prices, and the democrats oppose it. Do the Democrats propose anything to counter said proposal? No, then before you know it. It's become the Repblican cause celebre and they've spinned it as the reason everything is so terrible and it's the Democrats fault. Do the democrats counter no. My question is why? Why do the Congressional Democrats always back down or compromise? I know they're looking to save their political seats and all but come on. One of the main reasons why the Repubs win is they make the Dems look like idiodic pussies. All complaints no solutions. The people know that off shore drilling won't give them oil for years but that's the only solution they're being given. Also bear in mind the fact that most Americans are too lazy to find the facts out for themselves so they're left with the Republican spin and that the Democrats are opposed to it. Hell I can't really blame them. The average American is being lead to believe that removing the ban will lower their gas prices today. Why? Because that's what the Republicans are getting them to believe. The Democrats are, sad to say, just going to give in. Like pussies.

BUT I SAY NO! DON'T GIVE IN. GIVE A NEW SOLUTION TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. Let the people know that our Democratic leaders have ideas and solutions. Explain to the public that not only will new drilling and exploration not deliver oil for years to come, but that it will have no effect on prices. Think about it. demand for oil is only going up and up. what could the price of oil be by the time the first barrel of oil comes from new sources. $250 a barrel? Maybe less maybe more? what will these "new" sources do to the price of gas? there's no way we're getting below $4 dollars a gallon anymore. The people should also know any oil that comes out of those lands will not be soley for domestic use. That oil will be sold on the world market. That will not benefit the American people. The oil companies are not going to "reserve" that oil for America. That would lower the profits that oil would bring them. People need to know this. People need to know all the facts from all perspectives.

They need to know the truth. They need to know the Democrats have a plan. A better plan. Tell the people what they're going to get if they open up the restricted lands. They'll have a shitty environment on top of inflated energy prices, food prices, and other commedities without more oil for America.

The Offshore Oil Charade

Bob from Richardson, TX — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:58:43 EDT

Republicans have long pushed for opening environmentally sensitive areas offshore to oil exploration and drilling. Now with the price of gas at about $4.00 per gallon at the pump, George bush has called on Congress to end the offshore drilling ban and so has John McCain.

They say that it will increase supply and reduce the price of gas at the pump. But this action would not likely reduce the price of gas for many years to come, if ever. Instead it is a disingenuous attempt to shift the blame for high prices on environmentalists and their Democratic supporters in Congress, divert attention from Republican failures, and avoid real but difficult solutions.

(consume) Less We Can

citisven — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 17:55:19 EDT

Well here it is. The oil barons have turned the volume on their "drill hard, fast, deep, often, everywhere and NOW" propaganda to ear-shattering levels, just in time for election season. Never mind global warming...who has time for that when the poor American consumer is hurting at the pump! Never mind peak oil, let's drill, squeeze and milk that peak so hard, we'll shoot that little pimple of a problem all the way to the year 2015 where it'll erupt all over our children. Oh, wait, 2015 is not even a generation away - never mind, just fill up my hummer.

Offshore with John and Charlie

♫Parodee♫ — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 12:46:43 EDT

Surf's Up - Offshore Drilling

♫Parodee♫ — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 07:28:24 EDT

No More Gasoline

J. KRAKKER — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 18:14:14 EDT

I have worked on this project for 5 years. Having been offered a buy out to not build my automobile power plant. Investors from as far away as Japan have read my proposal and want it for themselves. I have refused to surrender the American Dream.

So I put this out to you Senator Obama, I believe in the direction you are going and so I put this in your very hands, and that of your supporters. I have created what I call a Transduced Engine. Originally I designed it to be in a motorcycle but the system is more suited for the auto industry.

The Transduced Engine uses no fossil fuels meaning NO GASOLINE, and has no emmisions. It is a sealed fluid dynamic worm drive system with compressed air charged system. I can state this, it changes the very direction of an electric Hybrid. The Transduced Engine uses a rail of compressed fluid drivers, and magna chargers that recharge the cars lightweight battery as it drives. Unlike hybrids my powerplant charges itself.

Why havent others invented it. Because people forget that small inventors are what MADE AMERICA, but if your not some Big 3 or famous scientist you could not possibly have an idea worth helping the world.

Reality is this Sir. My invention is the real deal it has no fuel injection, no spark plugs, no spark plug wires, no radiator fluid, no brake fluid, no exhaust pipes, cadilatic convertors, in short it looses the entire tradition of the gasoline and desiel engine.

It puts the Big 3 and the Oil Companies on the chopping block. I want to give my invention to our people, our America to show we are strong. My engine can be adapted to fit in any car, truck, bus or semi. My Transduced Engine would change the entire outlook on fossil fuels usage.

All it takes are those willing to accept change and make a differnce to grow with the times. The Transduced Engine would eliminate the need to drill for oil off our shores, and Alaska's wilderness.

It would though cripple the oil companies, and the Arabian Kings because we would not need them. My power plant could be ready for full production in a year. At 1/3 the cost that the Big 3 spend on fossil fuel or Hybrid engines alone. Being that my designs looses 1/2 of what they put into vehicles today.

Best Wishes Senator Obama on becoming our next President.

Offshore oil drilling is another step backwards

Michael Laval — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:22:53 EDT

In yet another act of defiance against the realities of climate change and America’s energy crisis, President George W. Bush planted his head further into the sand yesterday by demanding that oil drilling be allowed off our coasts. Not surprisingly, Sen. John McCain and Florida Gov. Charlie Crist flip-flopped on their previous positions to march in lock-step with W.
Republicans once again are willing to sacrifice the overall good of ordinary Americans and the entire human race in favor of stuffing billions of dollars into the pockets of the corporate entities they serve. We don’t merely need to “end our dependence on foreign oil,” we must end our dependence on oil, period!
Even if enormous oil reservoirs were discovered off our coasts, while it hypothetically might end dependence on foreign oil, it would only serve to prolong America’s dependence on an antiquated fuel and further delay the necessary change to alternative energy sources. If offshore drilling were given the green light today, it would still take years before one drop of oil makes it from the ocean floor to an American’s gas tank. The time, money and resources wasted on this futile endeavor could and should be spent on transforming our country’s energy infrastructure.
We must break free from the 19th century corporations that keep us shackled to their fossil fuels. McCain’s new stance on offshore drilling illustrates his obedience to George W. Bush and a willingness to shift positions at the whim of those same entities to which Bush is beholden. We must reverse our current course and step forward into the 21st century — an era in which ending carbon dioxide emissions and utilizing clean, renewable energy sources will be necessary to counter changes in the Earth’s climate that will redraw the world’s shorelines, as well as result in many other devastating consequences for human life.
We cannot wait any longer for the 21st century to begin. We’ve already lost eight years.

More Proof Offshore Drilling is Simply Pandering

Fred - Team Liaison - Smyrna-Vinings — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:28:21 EDT

As if we needed more proof that the suggestion to open more offshore drilling areas (let's not forget there are plenty of offshore drilling areas not being used by oil companies because they're "too expensive" to work...poor oil companies wouldn't make quite the same profits on those areas) is simply pandering to both the oil companies and right-wingers who don't know anything other than to clap when they hear we're going to go after more oil, we got more proof anyway.

In California, even Governor Schwarzenegger couldn't be swayed to come along for the ride. In Florida, where Governor Crist is nothing more than a Bush/McCain puppet, he not-at-all-surprisingly jumped right on board. But, guess who didn't? The state's CFO, Alex Cink -- you know, the woman most directly responsible for the state's FINANCIAL well-being, and the person arguably most informed of the impacts of all this.

In this article at Forbes.com, Cink and others point out that Crist has repeatedly -- and as recently as a couple weeks ago -- adamantly opposed offshore drilling. But, lo and behold, when the puppetmasters say, "Time to pander, Charlie," he hops to it.

So, as McCain and Bush and the Republican "strategists" out there push this oh-so-novel idea, be glad that there are some people refusing to go along with it.

It's the Economy, stupid!!!

Michael — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:05:21 EDT

Simply stated - the United States economy is in trouble. Prices at the pump are soaring. Unemployment rates are steadily increasing. Homes are in foreclosure. The national debt is in excess of $9 trillion. Considering these circumstances, it is easy to see why 79% of Americans hold unfavorable views about the economy, according to a recent Gallup Poll.

I think the message is clear. Americans are fearful of continuing the economic policies of the current administration. Sporting a voting record with George W. Bush 98% of the time over the past two years, many feel that Senator John McCain does not represent anything resembling change from the status quo.

As Barack Obama continues on his “Change Works for You” economic tour, he continues to lay out the substantive differences between himself and John McCain with regard to the economy. Senator McCain continually attacks Senator Obama’s economic plan. “Under Sen. Obama's tax plan, Americans of every background would see their taxes rise … seniors, parents, small business owners, and just about everyone who has even a modest investment in the market,” asserts McCain.

Clearly, this is a distortion of the facts. Senator Obama’s plan would repeal measures of the Bush Tax Cuts, lowering taxes for lower and middle income taxpayers while simultaneously offering relief to our seniors in trouble. Under Senator McCain’s plan, tax breaks would be extended to those with very high incomes, and on average, raise wealthy Americans’ after tax income to twice that of middle-class Americans. According to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center, over the next ten years Senator Obama’s economic plan would raise $700 billion in revenue while Senator McCain’s plan would lose approximately $600 billion.

Senator Obama is also at the forefront of tackling rising gas prices. As opposed to Senator McCain, Barack has proposed an aggressive and environmentally responsible plan aimed at ending our dependence on foreign oil. Recently, Senator McCain has proposed repealing the federal ban on offshore drilling - reversing his previous position in support of the ban. According to experts, drilling offshore would not begin to have an impact on the price of oil and natural gas for at least another five years - and that impact would be negligible at best.

In stark contrast to Senator McCain, Senator Obama seeks to institute an effective, multi-faceted solution to our oil problem. One of the key proposals would be to impose “Windfall Profits” tax on oil companies. This proposal would make the big oil companies bear their share of the burden of rising gas prices with the American people. In addition, Obama would invest significantly more in clean and renewable technologies. An investment would spur innovation, reduce our dependence on oil, and create a new workforce of “Green-Collar” professionals. Senator Obama understands that the problem is our dependence on oil and speculation about oil and natural gas futures. Even when we have seen oil demand decrease, we see the average price per gallon increase. Placing ExxonMobil rigs in the middle of the Everglades will do nothing to curb our addiction to oil or curb the demand of other industrial nations.

From tax policy to oil prices - the choice couldn’t be clearer. Senator Obama’s overall approach is both fair and fiscally responsible. Senator McCain’s plan continues the Bush economic hallmarks of income inequality and increased revenue deficit. The last seven plus years of Bush’s economic principles of tax breaks and favorable treatment for wealthy individuals and corporations does nothing to improve the nation’s economic conditions.

We simply cannot afford John McCain's Bush-like policies.