Congress Weans Us Off the Teat of Foreign Oil with Concessions to Offshore Drilling

The Republican mandate to "drill, baby, drill" is shortsighted and unsustainable, yet even the most rational of Dems is now kowtowing to this call. On September 16, the House of Representatives debated a bill House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) unveiled last week. In addition to conservation measures and the higher fuel efficiency standards addressed in my last post, the bill permits oil drilling 100 miles off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts and empowers coastal states to decide whether to allow drilling as close as 50 miles off their shores. A variation of this bill developed in the Senate plays with the boundaries of who can drill where, in a water-logged version of NIMBY.

Weaning America off the teat of foreign oil is something that every citizen can agree is a good thing. But most of that foreign oil comes from just north and south of us in Canada and Mexico, presumably not countries that John McCain says "don't like us very much." Suck on that, Senator.

Let's be clear, this legislation will not take away your hurt at the pump, regardless of your political affiliation. What it will do is finally start to put some funding into the renewable energy infrastructure that we so desperately need. Royalties from the minuscule amounts of oil that we extract offshore will be pooled with increased tax revenue from big oil to fund domestic renewable energy resources: the sources that keep on giving. I'll explore more of these over the next few weeks. Let's start with the energy source that is getting the most attention at the moment: wind.

Oil tycoon and Swiftboat funder T. Boone Pickens has sunk billions into what he hopes will be the largest wind farm in the world, bolstered by U.S. Department of Energy research indicating wind could generate 20% of our energy by 2030. Pickens is not an altruist. He's a shrewd businessman who looks after his own interests and wants to continue to grow his wealth. Right now wind is just 1% of our total domestic energy mix. The huge growth potential of wind coupled with dwindling fossil fuels makes the energy source a darling of environmentalists and Wall Street. Last year, nearly half of the $54.5 billion spent on clean energy generation went to wind. And for the last three years, the U.S. has been the largest market in the world for new wind turbine sales, reflecting the growth in wind farms across the country.

But with all the fanfare, we still have a long way to go. The windiest spots tend to be situated in the middle of nowhere, making heavy-wind areas inaccessible to consumers and transmission lines that could move the electricity to where it's needed. Some locations closer to civilization are suffering a logjam of entrenched political interests, like the scenario playing out in full color in Kansas, a state with the 3rd largest wind capacity in the country that currently gets only 1% of its energy from wind and almost 90% from coal. Other locales are reluctant to get windy for cosmetic reasons (yes, even Democrats are vain).

If we want to harness our earthly elements for power and energy, it's time to re-define beauty and reinvigorate our economy. Turbines eliminate the invisible, ugly impacts of coal like mercury contamination and air pollution, and the market volatility of dwindling resources such as coal and petroleum.

Don't get me wrong. We still have major primping to do in the form of improved tax credits and rapid investment in infrastructure. Maintenance costs are low, but wind is more expensive to build. The Pelosi bill is a significant step in recognizing the long-term benefits of clean, abundant, homegrown energy and reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

This post was written by Simran Sethi. Thanks to Heather Mueller for research assistance, the University of Kansas School of Journalism, and Kris Kros for the image. For more information on energy challenges and opportunities, subscribe to Simran's "Powering the Planet" podcasts.

Comments

[Aramingo]

I would take issue with part of the statement "Weaning America off the teat of foreign oil ". I believe that we must wean ourselves from oil, period. We will run out soon enough. No matter how much we find or drill, there is no way a sphere 8000 miles in diameter can hold an infinite amount of anything. The sooner we start preparing for the day when the wells run dry, the easier the transition.

[Simran Sethi - Huffpost Blogger]

I'm saying the same thing, I think the notion that this legislation is doing to do it is short-sighted, but it's a start.

[Aramingo]

A journey of a thousand miles...

[tomking]

The emperors of fossil fuels aren't going to give up their interests without a fight. At this stage of the game, any progress towards renewables is worth advancing--even by baby steps (the Pelosi bill). But there's still the nagging question that we may be shutting the barn door after the horse has gone.

[NL207]

Renewables are not cost competitive with fossil fuels. If they were, people would buy them willingly. If they were cheaper than fossil fuel energy, people would buy them in preference to fossil fuel energy. Since nobody buys this stuff without the applicatoni of either government subsidies or compulsion, we are left to conclude that renewable energy is more expensive than fossil fuel energy, even at current oil prices.

[Simran Sethi - Huffpost Blogger]

Indeed, but I am going to think positive thoughts. The fact that big oil would have to offer up tax revenue, states would have to surrender their offshore royalties and we'd start to put real money into renewable R & D is laudable. Let's see if this makes it through Congress. I doubt anything will happen until we have a new President.

[Sarah Smarsh - Huffpost Blogger]

A reminder that, for all our important efforts in our own homes and lives, the necessary level of change requires legislation.

[NL207]

"the necessary level of change requires legislation"

translation for the ignorant: requires compulsory government force because no right thinking people would so disadvantage themselves with such silly choices.

[Simran Sethi - Huffpost Blogger]

I completely disagree. No one likes to legislate behavior but in this case it's necessary. Not for citizens, but corporate citizens. How much more destruction will we wreak upon the planet in the name of oil? For .25%? For 3%? We're even pulling oil out of rocks and sand! This madness has to stop. And the only way to do that is to force a change.

[realpolitic]

NL, spoken like a true reactionary, as usual! What right thinking person is going to go drill for oil, anyway. Democracy is compromise. I am sure NL is quite comfortable with legislation that says drill here and drill now.

[alicel]

As usual, Simran is right. This bill that Pelosi is putting forward isn't perfect, but Democrats have to stop sacrificing good (enough) in pursuit of the perfect. T Boone Pickens is a slimy eel, but he IS all about the wind power. If this bill gets us closer to that, I hope we can go for this, and hit the Pepto Bismol later.

[Simran Sethi - Huffpost Blogger]

I wish I had something better to say than "pass the pink stuff." Thanks, Alicel!

[FearlessFreep]

For Democrats, appeasement of conservatives on the important issues isn't the best option. It's the ONLY option!

[Simran Sethi - Huffpost Blogger]

We have to pick our battles.