A Gusher of Hypocrisy

Posted August 21st, 2008 at 11.41am in Energy and Environment.

George Skelton makes the case that Californians should “let go of the past and allow offshore oil drilling” in the Los Angeles Times:

California is the nation’s biggest consumer of gasoline — 45 million gallons a day, plus 10 million gallons of diesel. That makes us the third-biggest petroleum-consuming entity in the world, behind only the United States and China. We are the nation’s No. 3 oil-producing state, behind Texas and Alaska.

But California produces only 39% of the crude oil it uses. An additional 16% comes from Alaska and the remaining 45% is bought from foreign sources, according to the California Energy Commission.

So there’s a gusher of hypocrisy here: The state that is the biggest consumer of gasoline in the nation — but produces less than 40% of what it uses — is opposed to drilling for more oil off its shores. We’re slackers not pulling our weight. The continental shelf off California contains an estimated 10 billion barrels of crude oil, according to the U.S. Minerals Management Service.

Offshore exploration opponents point out that if the federal drilling ban were lifted today, there’d be no immediate effect on gasoline prices. It could take 10 years to get any crude to the gas pump. Fine. Most people driving today still will be 10 years from now.
…
Environmentally, drilling is much safer than in 1969. There are new technologies. The rigs are ugly? They mar the sunset? That’s an elitist attitude we no longer can afford.

Author: Conn Carroll
Interact: Sphere
Share This

Tagged with california
offshore drilling

6 Comments

August 21, 2008 A Gusher of Hypocrisy writes:

[...] Original post by Conn Carroll [...]

August 21, 2008 Thomas Gray, South, Carolina writes:

elitist,, The best definition that I have heard yet for the,, anti energy environmental activist.

tom.

August 22, 2008 Kevin, Denver writes:

While I recognize that hypocrisy permeates politics and politicians in general like stink sticks to a skunk, in typical fashion, though the liberals/Democrats win the prize for knowing no limits to their own hypocrisy! Many of my liberal/Democrat friends and acquaintances [it was “most” prior to $4.00/gallon gas] recoil at the idea of drilling in ANWR, the Rocky Mountain area, and the outercontinental shelf. Typically the reason for not drilling is something like “When I’m in the mountains, I don’t want to see a drilling rig in the middle of nowhere…” or “I don’t want this country’s resources scarred or damaged by drilling activities…”

These shallow, ill-conceived, “bumper sticker slogans” strike me as naïve, arrogant and hypocritical.

Technology has improved such that the impact to the environment is nearly a moot point. Further, stringent regulations are in place to ensure a proper response in the event of an accident or other incident requiring a response. (But wait, liberals/Democrats will argue that “Big Oil” always skirts these regulations. While it’s easy to vigorously contest that argument, if the liberals/Democrats really believe this charge then why don’t they amend the laws so they can’t be easily skirted? Regulating things is what they live for, anyway!)

Liberals/Democrats insist on importing more and more oil from other counties to feed THIS country’s demand. To them, it’s ok if we exploit another country’s resources; it’s ok if [accepting for a moment the liberal’s/Democrat’s argument that oil/gas production damages the environment] we destroy the pristine state of another country’s land; it’s ok if we, by importing oil, cause the citizens in other countries to become sick due to environmental contamination.

BUT DAMNED IF WE’RE GOING TO DO THAT HERE! WE’RE TOO GOOD FOR THAT SORT OF THING. OIL/GAS PRODUCTION IS FOR THE POOR COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD Isn’t the liberal/Democrat the one who purportedly cares about all the peoples of the world?

The hypocrisy of the liberals’/Democrats’ position is stunning!

Worse still is that many of these same liberals/Democrats who drive trucks and SUVs themselves will never see a dirt road let alone any “real” backcountry. What do they care if there’s an oil rig somewhere “out there”? The reality is, very few “visit” ANWR. The reality is the Alaskan pipeline place has caused little to any adverse environmental impact. The reality is the pipeline and the oil/gas industry in Alaska has resulted in myriad high-paying jobs. The reality is most Alaskans are in favor of drilling in ANWR. The reality is most Americans will never see anything beyond the trees that line the side of this country’s roads. As for me, I’m perfectly willing to run the risk of an encounter with an…um…odd looking oil rig when climbing or hiking or hunting or fishing.

What baffles me, though, is the near idolatry by liberals/Democrats of wind power. You talk about “scarring the land,” one is hard pressed to find a bigger eyesore that’s necessarily in plain sight for all to see. Never mind the fact that any intellectually honest observer must concede that wind power will never be a significant source of energy – in the near or distant future.

August 23, 2008 Bob, Wisconsin writes:

Elitist attitude, because you don’t want an eyesore? I am sure there is a better way to make an argument. So, for example, if I don’t want a housing project in my backyard, I am being and elitist? Then, I guess everybody is an elitist. It is the old saying, “Not I My Backyard”. It is as simple as that. I am sure you would object to a windfarm or solarfarm in your backyard like most people. Especially, if it could cause and has caused damage to your property.

I don’t think knee-jerk reactions to the price of oil is going to solve anything. Oil will run out at some time. Alternatives need to be developed. The price of oil is causing alternatives to be developed quicker due to the great capitalistic system going into action. Energy innovation will be the next great boost to the economy. And hey, if somebody wants to drive an SUV with $4 gas, who cares? He is paying the price. Oil consumption has decreased and will decrease with the price of oil. The market has finally figured that out. That will reduce gas prices as well. Let the market work it out. Off-shore drilling isn’t going to change much for the consumer. Speculators aren’t going to stop buying oil futures, because we are drilling a little more. The oil companies may make more money and they like to push this issue, but in the end, other issues are much more pressing, like stopping the $100 billion entitlement program called Iraq. I know that will affect my tax bill in the end.

August 24, 2008 Thomas Gray, South, Carolina writes:

To Kevin, Denver,, Yea

To Bob, Wisconsin,, Nay

August 25, 2008 Kevin, Denver writes:

Quick responses to Bob in Wisconsin, then I’m moving on:

1) I have a solar guy coming out THIS WEEK to advise about adding panels to my home. This is despite the fact that the toxic waste stream from solar panel development makes one eyes spin - those with eyes that recognize this unfortunate side effect of panel production. Most whose idea of “alternative energies” stop right there. A convenient bumper sticker slogan with no basis in details!

2) In fact, oil will NEVER run out. Again, the realities of the energy struggle are more challenging than the bumper sticker slogans liberals/Democrats prefer to tout. Nope, the reality is that there will come a day when the further extraction of crude will be too expensive and the crude in the ground will simply be left there - with no value to anyone. Physics dictates this.

3) Did you really mean to say “The price of oil is causing alternatives to be developed quicker…” or did you mean to say something to the effect of “The price of oil WILL CAUSE alternatives to be developed quicker…”? You’re plain wrong on the former. The latter statement, which I’ll give you, is correct, and one with which I couldn’t agree more. Unlike the liberals/Democrats with who allow emotions and personal idiosyncrasies dictate your political agenda, I prefer a much broader, thoughtful approach to an issue. My energy plan would be the following 9 words: “All of the above, with the exception of conservation.” Ah, now you protest…”No conservation???” Well, why are you griping about this when you’ve put all your eggs into the “renewables basket” that you argue is available to this country now, if we all could just get out of “Big Oil’s” pocket. Can’t have your cake and eat it, too. John McCain may let you, but I won’t!

4) If there’s oil in the green belt adjacent to my house, “Drill There, Drill Now!”

5) “Speculators.” Nothing but a red herring being pushed by Pelosi and Reid! Speculators have been around for decades. Multiple investigations have uncovered no instances where speculators have manipulated the price of oil. Further, speculation (commodities trading) have been around for so long because it is an effective tool that companies use to smooth the price over the long term of commodities that must be purchased, be it oil or corn or whatever else. The fact that companies and purchase call/put contracts is a positive to you and me and everyone else. I shudder to think of the impact on some of my clients if, in an environment of increasing commodities prices, they were not allowed to purchase futures contracts for oil! By the way, the cost of steel and copper and concrete are ALSO going way up and have been for many years causing havoc in the construction industry and for many who rely on services provided out of those structures that are built - hospitals, roads, bridges, etc. Are you in favor of doing away with these commodities speculators, too, or are you just being selfish and limiting your griping to the oil issue because that’s all that directly impacts you?

The Heritage Foundation - Leadership for America

The Foundry