Drilling the Bills

Representative Tim Walberg (R-MI) posted this handy chart comparing the Democrat and Republican energy bills:




source: Tim's Blog


According to the Institute for Energy Research, the Democrats propose to:

• Institute a permanent ban out of 50 miles.



• Permit leasing between 50 and 100 miles offshore if a State ‘opts-in’ to allow leasing off its coastline by enacting state law.



• Continue the ban on energy production in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico.



• Lift the ban on energy production beyond 100 miles.

The problem: "A permanent ban out to 50 miles locks-up the largest known offshore energy reserves, including those off the coast of California, that are close to existing infrastructure and be produced the fastest."



source: IER


And Pelosi's plan also would block coastal states from sharing oil revenues, undermining incentives to lease offshore rights.

Why are Democrats still stalling? As AEI’s Robert Hahn and the Milken Institute’s Peter Passell said in Monday's New York Times:

Assuming that crude will still be selling for $100 a barrel down the road, we estimate that the oil from two new sources would be worth close to $1.85 trillion. Add to that the extra benefit to consumers of paying slightly less for imported oil and economic gains from being less vulnerable to supply disruptions, and the total benefit exceeds $2.1 trillion.

On the other side of the ledger, the expected costs of developing all that oil, including cleaning up environmental damage, would amount to a bit less than $400 billion. So, at a first cut, the decision to drill seems an economic no-brainer.

Which is why Iain Murray concludes the Dem bill "is not a compromise. It is a sell-out to the anti-energy gangsters."

(via Conservative Grapevine, Planet Gore, Wolf Howling)