In 2008: A Few Questions on Energy For The Candidate

In the last seven years this administration has done little to confront the looming danger that our consumption of fossil fuels presents to the nation's environment, economy and national security. Perhaps their singular contribution has been to idly sit by and watch the price of oil escalate by over 400% since the administration's outset, overseeing a transfer, or better said a "tax," on American consumers paying an additional $500 billion plus a year to oil interests both domestic and foreign. Seven years have passed without any significant progress in the abatement of our fossil fuel consumption, nor our dependence on foreign suppliers, nor in the transfer of the nation's wealth to regimes who support directly or indirectly the dissemination of radicalized religious teachings inflaming jihadists who would willfully destroy our way of life and our liberties.

We are at war with oil interests both here and abroad, whether it is the rapacious demands they are making on our economy and the world's economy, or using this tidal wave of money to fund movements and philosophies with the potential for destabilizing the world and our national security. And we are at war with our own personal demons, unable, unwilling to see the danger to ourselves, to our progeny, and to act in a manner that would forgo comforts and short-term advantage in order to secure our nations future, our planet's livability, our economic independence, and our self-respect.

This being said, perhaps no greater challenge will befall the next administration. Truly hard decisions will have to be made not only to catch up with the time lost, but to effectively deal with the issues at hand. Our nation, our future, must confront this existential challenge. Presidential leadership will be of primordial importance to make us understand the dangers and to make us willing to bear the burdens that need be imposed. Therefore Mr. and Mrs. Candidate, a few questions:

- Given the comments above, would you agree, and could you give us your perception of how important this issue is to the nation?

- In order to reduce consumption of petroleum based gasoline the new energy bill calls for the enhanced production and use of corn ethanol. Yet it is silent on the current 54 cent/gallon import duty on sugar based ethanol from Brazil. Brazilian ethanol yields more than eight times the energy it uses, surpassing corn ethanol's yield by a factor of almost seven. What steps would you take to remove this tariff, and do you believe it should be removed?

- The production of ethanol and bio based fuels will be increasing significantly in the years ahead. All this new supply will require distribution, that is retail selling points. Given the general reluctance of the oil industry to open their gas stations as well as those of their contracted distributors, how will you work to help the driving public overcome this major roadblock to accessing non petroleum based alternative energy sources?

- The oil and gas industry through lineage and moneyed lobbying has enormous influence on our government. The Department of the Interior and the Department of Energy have become virtual fiefdom's of the oil industry peopled in large measure by ex oil patch hires who have steered incredibly generous royalty, depletion allowances and tax incentives to the industry. At the Interior Department, Earl Deveney, the Interior Department's Inspector General would be quoted, "short of crime anything goes at the Department of the Interior" causing Rep. George Miller (D.California) to comment "if things keep going like this we're going to need two sets of handcuffs; one for the oil companies and one for the bureaucrats." How will you work to return government's oil, gas and energy policies to the needs of the nation as whole, rather than the narrow interests of the industry?

- Given the need to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels, given our lack of self discipline, would you be prepared to use the bully pulpit of the presidency to pass a national cap on fossil fuel based gasoline so that in five years say, the consumption of petroleum based gasoline will have been reduced by 50% from todays levels. It would be clearly understood that this limitation would apply to fossil based fuels exclusively, the consumption of alternative energy sources such as ethanol, biomass, biodiesel, electric plug-ins, hydrogen and other non petroleum based fuels being open ended and priced to market?

- At the beginning of World War II the American automobile industry, at the government's behest, stopped production of virtually all personal automobiles, retooled, and became the core of the "Arsenal of Democracy" during the Second World War. Could you work with them in the same manner, providing government help with loan guarantees to assist retooling together with tax incentives, so that within a short but specified period of time all production of fossil fuel powered automobiles would be halted and only alternative fuel powered cars ranging from highly efficient hybrids to electric plug-ins would be produced?

- The United States has not opened a nuclear power plant since the 1970's. China, which is increasingly our world economic competitor, is heightening its energy efficiency by scheduling some 30 new nuclear power plants by the year 2025. France already generates more than 80% of its power needs from nuclear power. Nuclear energy is clean energy especially when compared to coal and oil, sparing the atmosphere of harmful pollutants as sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides. Clearly other countries have found solutions to the waste disposal problems, safety concerns and the licensing process. We need to rethink nuclear energy, and if you agree how do we go about doing so?

- In July of this year the House overwhelmingly passed what was called the NOPEC bill which would have lifted the sovereign exemption making it impossible to sue OPEC's state owned oil companies in U.S. Courts for collusion and restraint of trade. The president threatened to veto the measure, and so the bill died. Would you have acted likewise. If so, why, and if not, why not?

- Commodity trading markets have become suspect. There are many in Congress seeking stricter oversight. This after the Amaranth collapse while trying to manipulate the price of natural gas, BP's $300 million payment to settle accusations of trying to manipulate the propane market, the ongoing investigation of BP's activities impacting the crude oil market, are cases in point. There has been a call for greater investigative powers for the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (USCFTC) to determine the interrelationship of commodity trading and the movement of energy prices. If this is an issue of concern how would you act to allay or deal with these concerns?

- Much like a secluded monastery of old, in the mountains of Colorado lies a modern offshoot of beatific acolytes committed to finding the Rosetta stone that will lead us toward our nirvana of becoming a fossil fuel free nation. This temple is called the Rocky Mountain Institute and its mission is to free us from enslavement to petroleum/fossil fuel based energy. Here work is done with deep intelligence and profound commitment. Words like hybrid willow, poplar and native switchgrass are bandied about. A magical broth is brewing which may well give us the strength, and impart the needed vision to help us achieve energy independence. Here men of great achievement, including ex-presidents, come to partake knowledge and drink in inspiration, leaving with pride that our culture, our nation can at its most difficult times enlist the entrepreneurial energy of its citizens to begin leading us out of the wilderness. Are you familiar with the RMI and given that it has been largely ignored by this administration's Department of Energy, how would you engage it to help formulate your administration's energy policy?

Thank You.

Read more New Year's posts from HuffPost bloggers

Raymond J. Learsy is the author of the updated version "Over a Barrel: Breaking Oil's Grip on Our Future"

Comments

[WilliePilgrim]

I suppose asking the candidates about their views on fusion would be like asking George W. Bush about...well, about anything that isn't in VBS comic book form.
Important research is, never the less, being conducted thanks in part to the US's decision to toss some money its way, however it does come from the budget for the ITER project. As expensive as fusion research is, it's peanuts compared to the amount we spend on buyinig uniforms for the Air Force band. The result is that high energy fusion research, once nearly the sole domaine of our US research effort is slipping away as kids go to college to learn the intricacies of hedge fund management...while repeating catch phrases like "peak oil" and "carbon foot-print" while not really understanding the origins and implications of those concepts. Oh well, global primacy is over-rated and it'll feel nice when we're not doing any heavy lifting anymore, like carrying gold bars to the bank like we used to...unless it's to an offshore tax dodge.

[teeb27]

we as a country got our first glimpse of rising gasoline prices in 1972. i thought then that we would diligently strive for an alternative fuel source and be free of the middle east stranglehold on rising oil prices and our slumping economy. where are the ben franklin's of the world today? we the people have always had the power, as a whole, to make changes for the better. but greed, comfort and just plain laziness have divided us and turned us into a country of whiners who think god is the way the truth and the light, when god only helps those who help themselves.

[skewerstupidity]

China and India are developing rapacious appetites for natural resources. It is difficult to see how conservation and the like by us does anything but make more resources available to them. Soon these nations will need to employ military power to arrogate these resources to themselves. The first step was our diaster in Iraq. There will be inevitably others.

[BenjaminTheDonkey]

Google "Peak Oil."

[ErnestineBass]

Mr. Learsy
Thank you!
Yours is by far the best blog I've read on HuffPo yet. How I wish members of our "fourth estate" would ask such germaine questions of our presidential candidates.

[cylindar]

You are right about RMI. They are important. In regard to your mention of biofuels. They will not answer to our energy needs as hydrogen would. Biofuels because of the very nature of the tremendous water resources needed to process them, and the cost of the land lost to agriculture for food purposes would be catastrophic to our economy. Basically I think that biofuels will not be able to supply more than 6% of our fuel needs. Hydrogen needs to be implemented quickly as the fuel designate for our country. I would not want to vote for anybody who promoted biofuels.

[GetAbike]

Bravo, Mr Learsy!
It was a refreshing blog you wrote. Hopefully someone who can ask the questions (MSM) will.ask.the.questions.
I appreciate that you are addressing the real issues and how to proceed rather than trying to foist some kind of conspiracy on us- it is sooo much more useful. You have a certain background and skill in conveying these important issues that give you a unique opportunity to communicate with all people concerned with our resource and lifestyle problems.
Thanks.

[mamacat]

Thank you for the blog!
It is not entirely correct to say that Republicans, while in power, did nothing to solve our energy problems. If words count as well as deeds, then when Bush announced to the country that we are addicted to oil, was he makinga call for action, or announcing victory for his friends in big oil?
When the democrats attempted to use a revenue neutral tactic by shifting the $13 billion annual giveaways to big oil over to developing alternative energy sources, the Republicans in the Senate successfully blocked the legislation, ensuring at least one more year of our unreasonable reliance of big oil.
Sometimes it seems, not that the federal government as run by Republicans favors the interests of oil over those of the republic, but that big oil controls the government through their puppets in the Republican party.

[ErnestineBass]

One comment here, and forty-one over on the "Who's Wearing The Speedo?" piece in the Entertainment Section.

America is doomed.

[maddogbitesback]

Energy is the single most important issue the United States must deal with. It has the know how and great savings can be achieved by each citizen. Some are easy. Stop buying ridiculous waste. Stop buying what you don't want or need. Turn off lights. Insulate. LEGISLATE the production of energy efficient appliances. LEGISLATE free public transportation that is efficient.

All of that sounds easy and it is hugely profitable for the individual and government. An email to a legislator at each level of government can do a lot. Rathr than build a new coal fired generator give away energy efficient LED light bulbs. They cost a lot but nothing like the cost of the coal fired generator.

Each and every citizen has to realize that each and every action of his is extremely important. I personally multiply by six billion to get an idea of the importance of recycling a price tag and a checkout list. I know that trillions of plastic bags are used once and thrown away. I avoid them like the plague. Recycling is second on my todo list. Reusing is first. I know that shirt or dishcloth is made from a region which has been destroyed by the chemicals used to grow cotton and the water it needs. I never ever think of American slave labor without thinking of the slave like labor used to produce cotton for a pair of jeans or the destruction of the environment when the dye is poured into a river to save a cent of the finished product.

America could lead but right now it is an anchor hooked on the rock of oil.

[martinchill]

Oil is also an immense sustainability issue. With the peak of U.S. oil production some decades in the past and the world facing inevitable shortages in the near future, a continuation of our present energy policies is a prescription for unending conflicts. No candidate understands the precarious environmental perch man sits on more than Dennis Kucinich who has promised:

As President, I will lead the way in protecting our oceans, rivers and rural environments. I will also lead in fighting for clean, affordable and accessible drinking water. I have worked hand-in-hand with the environmental movement on many battles, from thwarting a nuclear waste dump to boosting organics to demanding labels on genetically-engineered products. A clean environment, a sustainable economy, and an intact ozone layer are not luxuries, but necessities for our planet's future.

sustainable.jpgFighting corporate powers that do not operate in the public interest has been a focus of his public life from the beginning. Nearly 40-years ago he helped draft the first air pollution law as a member of Cleveland City Council.

More recently, Dennis attended the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, advocating a plan with Mikhail Gorbachev for a Global Green Deal that would enable the introduction of $50 billion of new solar projects around the world. It will be a major initiative to use our country's leadership in sustainable energy production to provide jobs to Americans, to reduce energy use here at home, and to partner with developing nations to provide their people with inexpensive, local renewable-energy technologies.

http://www.dennis4president.com/go/issues/a-sustainable-future/