Friday, July 25, 2008


Ann Coulter:
Announcing the Democrats' bold new "plan" on energy last week, Pelosi said breaking into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve "is one alternative." That's not an energy plan. It's using what we already have -- much like "conservation," which is also part of the Democrats' plan.

Conservation, efficiency and using oil we hold in reserve for emergencies does not get us more energy. It's as if we were running out of food and the Democrats were telling us: "Just eat a little less every day." Great! We'll die a little more slowly. That's not what we call a "plan." We need more energy, not a plan for a slower death.

BTW, John McCain's latest ad: "Don't hope for more energy; vote for it." Compare Obama.

(via Right Wing News, Planet Gore)


bobn said...

Conservation, efficiency and using oil we hold in reserve for emergencies does not get us more energy.

I agree that using the SPR is stupid, as is calling it a "plan".

But conservation and efficiency (not sure what the difference is) must be part of a long term solution. Every permanent conservation measure put in place saves many barrels of oil over time, whereas each barrel of oil drilled only "saves" on barrel of oil. Because no matter how much oil you think there is, it is still a finite resource. An exponential growth of usage will use up any finite resource sooner rather than later.

So, yes, drill here and now, but consider that additional energy a bonus to help our transition to something else (nuclear seems inevitable), not as any kind of long term solution.

Carl said...


We don't need a conservation plan; the price mechanism already--automatically, and without distorting subsidies--reduces demand for energy.

bobn said...


That free market thing may have some quirks that need to be worked out of it - see http://*housing*.com for more details. (Yes I know part of this was Fed induced, but much of it was just lots of money chasing higher returns with little or no regulation.)

In any event, would it not be nice to have a way to have people conserve before they no longer can afford to get to work or heat their homes? In fact would it not be nice to have a policy in place for the future when oil will decreasing in availability - which it must, given that it is finite, while demand from "Chindia" is growing massively?

I agree that the corn Ethanol subsidies are an abomination - especially while we maintain a $0.54/gallon tariff on sugar cane ethanol that would otherwise be imported from Brazil. But the fact that one government idea was totally stupid, if not corrupt, does not rule out all government action, IMO.

Oh and MccCain's ad is stupid, as it actually implies that drilling here and now will bring down gasoline prices now. I happen to think that although some wild speculation may get shook out of the market, we have a situation where supply and demand are balanced so finely that prices will not be dropping substantially - I'd be surprised to see $3/gallon gas again.

Another of McCain's wonderful ads is a litany of problems he'll solve, including this exact phrase "mortgage debt: restructured". Wow, that sure was easy! Silly me, I thought there was a real problem here! We just "restructure it" and it goes away! WE ARE SAVED! Talk about clouds opening up and angels singing..... the ultimate deus ex machina.

bobn said...

Oh, all the preceding is not in any way an endorsement of Obama - I'm real skeptical of him too, and NOT drilling here and now is really dumb. But I don't think we can be drilling ourselves out of this, long-term.

Anonymous said...

Who cares what Ann Coulter says?!

Anonymous said...

Paris Hilton has the best energy plan and you know it. PARIS HILTON FOR PRESIDENT!