Today, at gas stations across the nation, the American people are paying the price for a failed energy policy.
But faced this week with the opportunity to actually do something to address high gas prices, invest in alternatives and move toward energy independence, Republicans in the Senate once again chose the path of obstruction, just as they did with historic global warming legislation last week.
Over the last eight years, President Bush, Vice President Cheney and their Republican allies in Congress have fallen over themselves to give oil companies huge tax breaks. They have repeatedly blocked meaningful progress toward energy independence and they have shown no interest in taking on the unchecked speculation that has created extreme volatility in energy markets and pushed oil and gas prices upward.
Yesterday, addressing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Vice President Cheney said, "We have to recognize that there isn't anything out there that is going to get us away from a hydrocarbon economy anytime in the near future. There really isn't anything on the horizon that today is economic, relative, for example, to basic, good old oil and gas."
Not surprising coming from an oil man, and the man who sat down with oil company lobbyists behind closed doors to write the current failed policy. But those remarks show the bankruptcy of the Republican vision on energy. It's a vision of the status quo, invested in the problem, not in finding a solution. And it just doesn't cut it.
We need a new long-term strategy, one that fights global warming, one that ends this dependence on foreign oil. It's a strategy that will make us a leader in the world, that will create green jobs and technologies we can export, and will spur an economic renaissance in the nation.
I believe that that it's time for lawmakers to decide whose side they are on. Are they on the side of big special interests, or do they stand with the American people and an energy policy that we -- and the world -- can live with?
Tuesday I spoke about these issues on the Senate floor, and I wanted to take the opportunity to share the video with you. You can view the remarks here, and I would love to hear your feedback.
Follow Sen. Barbara Boxer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Barbara_Boxer
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/will-high-gas-prices-be-a_b_107060.html
Senator Boxer, if you think making the price of gas go UP is the way the American people want you to "address high gas prices", you're completely out of touch.
The thought process that is being used in the Lieberman-Warner bill, is that our energy costs can be reduced by using more energy efficient systems. Even though fossil fuels will cost more in the future we can use substantially less. An additional pluses of higher efficiency is that it reduces demand for fossil fuels and generates high quality green jobs.
Quoting RJ:
"The Lieberman-Warner bill specifically avoids taxing polluters directly. It used a "cap-and-trade" approach that applies market principles to reducing pollution. (The Union of Concerned Scientists provides a good summary of cap-and-trade.) Could "cap and trade" increase costs at the gas pump? Yes, potentially, with a slow rise of pennies per year that is offset by clean energy and reduced consumption."
The Lieberman-Warner bill is all about reducing energy costs by encouraging increased efficiency.
Not being sexist, just input from an ol' vet
Bring it up...alot and often
NOPE, Nope, nope, and NOPE.
Build a new refinery or two, and then we can explore 'solutions' like this.
Semi-nationalize the US Oil. It works like this:
(Numbers are just an example...your mileage may vary.)
The oil is a national resource that can be sold to the oil companies. If the oil costs $5/barrel to extract (All that oil is gone...peak oil is a myth?), the government sells that oil to the oil companies for $45/barrel. New extraction cost = $50/barrel. The oil that costs $20/barrel to extract is sold to the oil companies for $35/barrel. New extraction cost = $55/barrel. $50/barrel oil now costs $60 to extract, and so on. (They'll still extract oil at $60 to sell at $130)
(Now it's not a tax...it's a fee.)
The money is given to the taxpayers. (It's currently being done in Alaska)
Also, if an oil lease is not developed within 5 years of acquisition, it reverts to the National Oil Board, who then re-bids it out. That should take care of the idle oil leases....
please, do us a favor. stop supporting Big Energy, whether it's your old boss (Big Oil, Big Coal) or your new boss (Big - ahem - "renewables"), ans start supporting clean, harmless, affordable and reliable power on our homes and businesses. no more killing wilderness, no more hijacking ratepayers, no more blights on our views, no more wasted water. just a small chance for people who want to do the right thing to get rewarded.
can you do that for us? please?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/12/AR2008061204282.html?hpid=topnews
The legislation supported by the Democrats won't do anything to stop gas prices from rising. If you do stop gas prices from rising, it will be replaced with no gasoline to buy, and people waiting in lines for the gas transport to come.
What needs to occur is a combination of allowing oil companies to drill in ANWR, off the coasts of the U.S., and most importantly get new refineries built. While there needs to me new sources of energy, it will take a combination of Nuclear, Wind, Solar, and Hydrogen to work. Many of these sources are blocked by environmental extremists that have a problem with all forms of energy.
Currently the Democrats proposed legislation won't solve the problem, and neither the GOP or Democrats will compromise to get a solution.
"Big Oil" has NO incentive to make use of many of the present leases they have - after all it would cost to get those areas up and running (millions .. billions?) AND it would lower prices. Not good for the bottom line.
One more time:
"what needs to happen is for the oil companies to use the leases that they already have, plus paying their taxes, and some real transparency in the commodities markets. These things together will show that currently the oilcos are trading oil with each other to raise the prices, AND cause there to be more oil on the market. "
That paragraph is the answer -- why we allow the "obstructionists" to muddy the waters with their propaganda when the answer is so clear is beyond me.
If true, how much is being sold and by not selling, what are the ramifications?
How many refineries have been built or even requested to be built? (various sources site different answers, so I don't know.)
The GOP donor base does not care if America suffers since it profits from that suffering. Those donors who they bribed and how little it cost. A small investment of a few milions will return billions in profits so they will continue to back the GOP's obstructionism and stand by while the GOP accuses any progressives of being unamerican in their efforts to ease the lot of the common man.
I don't see how a windfall tax is going to alleviate pump prices, encourage exploration & development, dismantle the concentration of market share, or prevent collusion.
On the technology front, Auto is already breaking ranks with gas guzzling and moving towards rationalization of its product line. GM is closing its Silverado assembly plant in Oshawa (rated by JD Powers as North America's most efficient plant).
Soon you'll be able to pimp your Pinto/Gremlin.
That is why I am invested in Small Oil like Tunisian producer Candax (CAX.to) and its $10/barrel producing fields.
If you really care about high prices I would suggest you do something to increase domestic supply and decrease domestic demand. On the supply side, allow for drilling in Alaska and the Coasts and cut red tape to let new refineries be built. On the demand side, high prices will cut back on use, but you can also encourage the building of nuclear reactors (CO2 and air pollution free) to increase electrical production which could then support a mandate in favor of electric cars.
(CO2 and air pollution free) Well you are partially right on that point but I think you forgot about the radioactive waste that comes from Nuclear energy! Ok so where do you dispose of the Nuclear waste. Have you fallen into that same trap as many others and actually believe nuclear energy is clean. Ask the folks around Yucca Mountain how they feel about clean nuclear energy and radioactive waste. And what about the fallout in the air(air pollution of the most henious kind) from places like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl? Ask the folks who lived there what they think of your great clean nuclear plan.
It also appears clear that you are one of the people who follow the flawed belief that after we wipe out all animals and natural resources we will all be fine. Well maybe someone will come up with that amazing fix for all our ills at the last second and save the world like the ending to most fictional movies! But I seriously doubt it. That's why it only happens in movies.
See my profile for detailed calculation and links.
Cheaper then war crimes. sustainable forever.