Eco-Gingrich and "Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less."

Now it is quite clear why the We campaign so enthusiastically embraced Newt Gingrich for an advertisement sitting next to Nancy Pelosi. Yes, Newt Gingrich is working for "American Solutions for Winning the Future." We would think that might actually include thinking seriously about moving forward on Global Warming legislation. Yet, Newt's deceptive calls on people to support efforts to "Drill Here" and "Drill Now" also include a broadside against the Lieberman-Warner Climate (in)Security Act that could have come straight out of the mouth of a polluting industry spokesman. (On reflection, perhaps it did). Gingrich's truthfulness about solutions to gas prices is potentially enticing but (at best) misleading.

Advertised as "tri-partisan," Gingrich is seeking to wrap himself in some form of post-partisan sainthood, a repackaging enabled by the We Campaign's embrace.

Gingrich's DRILL! DRILL! DRILL! mantra argues that by blocking action on Global Warming and opening up all of America for drilling, gasoline prices would be magically reduced. Hmmm ... let's consider some facts, Newt:

It would take roughly 10 years for any opened areas to contribute to US production in a serious way.. Gasoline prices in the United States have quadrupled in the past decade. How much might they increase in the intervening time period between decisions to open up reserves and pumped oil? DRILL! DRILL! DRILL! has nothing to do with today's gasoline prices.

Newt is asserting false information about the state of international oil supplies. Ignore Peak Oil, according to Newt, supply is where we should focus. If we believe George W Bush's statement that the United States is addicted to oil, Newt's approach to dealing with addiction is to feed that addiction, not solve it.

In this discussion, of course, is nothing about real solutions, about things that might actually have an impact in the near terms. These include efficiency measures (properly inflated tires, more efficient driving style, to buying more efficient tires to a more efficient car) to changed behavior (such as riding public transport, driving less aggressively) to policy programs (such as supporting plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, increased/improved rail, electrification of rail). These forms of measures would have a far greater impact on the suppply of liquid fuel over the coming decade than Gringrich's siren's call of DRILL! DRILL! DRILL!

Joe Romm has a few choice points about eco-Gingrich's new energy strategy for America:

The administration's own Energy Information Administration explained in 2004 how ineffectual this strategy is. In a 2004 Congressional-requested "Analysis of Oil and Gas Production in ANWR":

It is expected that the price impact of ANWR coastal plain production might reduce world oilprices by as much as 30 to 50 cents per barrel [in 2025].

As Joe reminded Gingrich: "There are 42 gallons in a barrel." Yup. Newt's strategy might (MIGHT) lead to up to a 1.2 cent per gallon reduction in the price of gasoline. McSUV drivers: don't spend your savings all at once.

Of course, Newt doesn't get into a discussion of the catastrophic climate change implications of a path that focuses on feeding the addication rather than curing it.

As per David Roberts, Grist,

the We campaign people and all the other earnest politicians and enviros out there trying to convince us that climate and energy are bipartisan issues should wait until they are actually bipartisan before celebrating. Gingrich is using a green fig leaf to push the same corporate-friendly policies the GOP has been pushing for decades, and rather than getting smacked down, he's being helped by greens. It's stupid.

It is not enough for someone to mouth words admitting to reality. Wow, Newt Gingrich acknowledges that there is such a thing as Global Warming and human action is contributing to it. Time for a standing ovation? Absolutely not. Unless he is willing to come to the table with serious paths for solving the problem, Gingrich remains part of the problem.

Comments

[noneIn2008]

Our largest waste of energy in the US is the power plants. They run at only about 27% efficiency, throwing away 73% of the energy to warm the environment. Congress should demand increased efficiency in power plants starting today.

[freshnotbitter]

Newt claims to be a free marketeer and as such he knows that any oil we produce should be sold to the highest bidder and the highest bidder would be the world market price for oil.

In other words, prices would not go down. At best we would import less oil and reduce our trade deficit which would have some beneficiary effect in theory.

However, it is also true that oil may very well increase in value and we should just sit on it til it really gets valuable. After all, the oil off the continental shelf and on federal lands belongs to the people of the United States, right?

I hope Obama takes the approach of increasing production on all fronts, including geo thermal, nuke, off shore, solar, hydro-electric, wind. I've never understood why we here in Florida do not have a thriving solar industry. The sun shines 360 days a year here. In my town they just approved a new utility plant using bio mass because the present one will not be able to keep up with growth. If they had begun installing solar cells in houses a decade ago they would not need the additional plant.

[dadw5boys]

Rupert Murdoch is NEWT GETRICH'S main supporter.

Watch out Newt comes with a full barrel of snakes!!!!!!!

[UsofA]

Newt "Contract With America" Gingrich is the fellow partly responsible for America's current 'circling of the drain.' Only now, he wants to re-package himself and blend in, hoping people will forget the damage he's done, and continues to do, to our country. Be smarter than he thinks you are, don't buy into it.

[UnbiasView]

"Gasoline prices in the United States have quadrupled since the Clinton administration"

How can you call yourself a legit poster with a lie like that? In 2000, gas was averaging $1.74, unless I a missing something quadrupling would be about $7 per gallon.

[KillTheMessenger]

Only if you adjust for today's dollars. The current value adjusted for inflation is higher than in 1918 and 1973. In 1998, unadjusted, prices were below a dollar a gallon.

Try again?

[UnbiasView]

Try again?

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/images/charts/Oil/Gasoline_inflation_chart.htm

or

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/Gasoline_Inflation.asp

[UnbiasView]

"It would take roughly 10 years for any opened areas to contribute to US production in a serious way"

Well Clinton used that same philosophy in 1995 when he vetoed drilling, 13 years later we could be using that oil now.

[KillTheMessenger]

And you really "think" 4% more oil supply for the US and about 1% more for the world would make any difference? That's what I call a "think again". But then, if you are payed 10 cents/post by Exxon to post drivel... it has to be right.

[UnbiasView]

Guess what, there isn't going to be a magic bullet. We will need to tap multiple resources not just ANWR.

Either that or watch the prices of everything triple and sit back and wait, like it or not, we will need large quantities of oil for a long time still.

[A. Siegel - Huffpost Blogger]

Let us say that you are 100% right about this, this says nothing about the disingenuous nature of Gingrich's call to "Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less." Gingrich is quite directly implying that doing this drilling will lower gasoline prices in the near term. You want to support him in that argument?

[UnbiasView]

I would say within 5-10 years we will really need that oil so my argument is and always will be that we need to have the ability to go after our own resources in the short & medium term with a long term goal of using alternatives which are no where near ready fand affordable or the market place.

Another piece of rising prices now are the speculators, if the USA came out and said we are going after our own resources tomorrow, they would react accordingly.

[UnbiasView]

Russia is offing about $40 BILLION in tax breaks for oil copanies to go out and find new sources.

USA is not drilling because of goverment regulations and they call the oil companies in to yell at them. Add to that, the liberals want to take the tax breaks away and install a windfall profits tax.

This is a very dark day when Russia is using a free market approach while the USA if the one being held down by government regulations.

[KillTheMessenger]

Russia is still desperate because they are about to peak and don't want to let go of the bit of good life oil buys them. The US has peaked 38 years ago and ANWR will not undo that. So we have really nothing to lose.

See how looking at the big picture changes everything?

[UnbiasView]

So sit back while the USA is passed by China, Russia & India because you don't want to possibly kill a polar bear?

[KillTheMessenger]

There is nothing wrong about Newt's logic. By the time the drilling is done, the oil company which gets the drilling rights will be able to sell oil they got at $1/barrel at $500/barrel.

It's a wonderful deal. Not for US consumers, not for polar wildlife but for sure for big oil.