EIA bombshell: Offshore drilling “would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030″
McCain has flip-flopped his position on offshore drilling, pandered to the oil companies, and embraced the exact same strategy endorsed by the man McCain is trying so hard to run away from — President Bush. He must have a damn good policy reason:
Short-term? If only the facts supported that position. If only the man who wants to be the next president bothered to check the analysis by the current president’s own energy analysts.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) recently did a detailed study of the likely outcome of offshore drilling for their Annual Energy Outlook 2007, “Impacts of Increased Access to Oil and Natural Gas Resources in the Lower 48 Federal Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).” The sobering conclusion:
The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.
And the impact of the projected 7% (!) increase in lower-48 oil production that might result in 2030 thanks to opening the OCS is … wait for it …
… any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.
Yes, the man who would be president has sold out his principles to garner support from the oil industry while achieving no benefit to the American gasoline-consuming public whatsoever even a quarter century from now!
To paraphrase Sir Thomas More in A Man for All Seasons:
“It profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world … but for ExxonMobil!”
So what price is McCain getting for auctioning off his principles?
The Center for American Progress Action Fund explained yesterday:
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) is heading to Texas today for a series of fundraisers with the Texas GOP elite <http://www.johnmccain.com/ Informing/ Calendar/ Detail.aspx?guid=ea0c0b28-5a8d-4f2f-b642-d46465d2a7fd> in Dallas <http://www.johnmccain.com/ Informing/ Calendar/ Detail.aspx?guid=b795adfe-23da-467f-a59d-e31b8d384375> , San Antonio <http://www.johnmccain.com/ Informing/ Calendar/ Detail.aspx?guid=6a98219e-bbb7-4cb9-9898-f46847a3005c> , and <http://www.johnmccain.com/ Informing/ Calendar/ Detail.aspx?guid=a3377b3d-3105-4bc9-a07c-a6da69bd9c64> Houston <http://www.johnmccain.com/ Informing/ Calendar/ Detail.aspx?guid=76734400-6e7a-4795-af48-7c05710c9c27> .
Wedged between the multiple money events will be a speech in Houston, which McCain has indicated will be on energy policy. Yesterday, McCain told reporters that he will call for <http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/ post/ ?q=ZjVhZjQ1NGRjNTZjM2MzMDk4YTRmMjRmZjY3YzNiMjI=> :
– Lifting the federal moratorium on off-shore drilling <http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/ images/ stories/ Documents/ truth_about_americas_energy.pdf> established by President George H.W. Bush,
– Providing incentives <http://thinkprogress.org/ wonkroom/ 2008/ 04/ 21/ mccain-nuke-subsidies/ > to states to commence off-shore drilling, and
– Suspending the gas tax <http://thinkprogress.org/ wonkroom/ 2008/ 04/ 18/ mccain-vs-gastax/ > .
This suite of proposals adds up to a big fat kiss to Big Oil and its conservative allies — at the expense of everyone else. Unrestrained fossil fuel use <http://thinkprogress.org/ wonkroom/ 2008/ 04/ 25/ big-oil-future/ > delivers obscene profits for Big Oil but is a threat to the planet <http://thinkprogress.org/ wonkroom/ 2008/ 06/ 10/ global-boiling-signs/ > . McCain’s strong talk <http://thinkprogress.org/ wonkroom/ 2008/ 05/ 12/ mccain-warming-both-ways/ > on global warming is proving unserious — much as candidate Bush’s campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide in 2000 turned out to be false <http://thinkprogress.org/2006/07/07/co2-pledge/> . At the very same press briefing, McCain backtracked <http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/6/16/124515/466> from his vaunted mandatory system to reduce greenhouse gases.
Strapped for cash and surrounded by Big Oil lobbyists, McCain is now embracing Bush’s Exxon-Halliburton energy policy <http://action.foe.org/ t/ 4027/ pressRelease.jsp?press_release_KEY=382> . Although a “megabucks” fundraiser with Midland Texas oilmen was postponed <http://thinkprogress.org/ 2008/ 06/ 15/ mccain-event-with-fundraiser-who-joked-about-rape-has-been-postponed-not-canceled/ > , pledged donations have already raked in $1.5 million <http://www.mywesttexas.com/ articles/ 2008/ 06/ 15/ news/ top_stories/ doc4855134f3c4c5977465576.txt> . Midland County GOP Chair Sue Brannon told the Midland Reporter-Telegram what will happen at the postponed fundraiser, “When the 15 oilmen giving big time money <http://www.mywesttexas.com/ articles/ 2008/ 06/ 15/ news/ top_stories/ doc4855134f3c4c5977465576.txt> meet with McCain, all we’ll ask is that he be fair.” The millions McCain is raising in Texas will be added to his impressive haul of oil industry cash this campaign season — 65 percent <http://thinkprogress.org/ wonkroom/ 2008/ 06/ 04/ polluter-mccain-cash/ > of his lifetime receipts:
<http://thinkprogress.org/ wonkroom/ wp-content/ uploads/ 2008/ 06/ big_oil_mccain_barchart2.PNG>
1990 to 2008 cycle (April), Center for Responsive Politics, compiled by Center for American Progress Action Fund.
According to a Campaign Money Watch analysis of campaign finance data provided by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics Center, John McCain and his leadership committee have accepted at least $1,069,854 <http://mccainsource.com/corruption?id=0014> from the oil and gas industry since 1989. Despite his mediagenic opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, McCain’s voting record on energy policy has been consistently friendly to Big Oil — and since his campaign for president began last year, he’s been steadfast:
McCAIN’S RECORD OF CODDLING BIG OIL.
– McCain Voted Against Reducing Dependence on Foreign Oil. In 2005, McCain voted against legislation calling on the President to submit a plan to reduce foreign petroleum imports by 40 percent. [Senate Roll Call Vote #140, 6/16/05 <http://senate.gov/ legislative/ LIS/ roll_call_lists/ roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00140> ; DNC 6/22/07 <http://www.democrats.org/ a/ 2007/ 06/ bush_republican_1.php> ]
– Candidate McCain’s “Zero” For Energy Future, Billions For Big Oil. Since launching his campaign for president in 2007, Sen. McCain has skipped out on every key environmental vote the Senate has considered, earning him a zero on the League of Conservation Voters scorecard this session. In one such instance, his absence killed the rollback of billions of dollars in oil subsidies for renewable energy investment. [LCV 2008 <http://capwiz.com/ lcv_stage/ bio/ keyvotes/ ?id=192&congress=1102&lvl=C> ]
– McCain’s Absence Allows GOP to Filibuster Oil-For-Renewables. By a roll call vote of 59-40 on December 13, 2007, Senate Democrats failed to muster the 60 votes needed to prevent a filibuster threatened by Republicans of compromise energy legislation with an oil-for-renewable tax package. The tax package rolled back $12.7 billion in tax breaks on the oil and gas industry to invest in renewable energy tax credits. Sen. John McCain, on the campaign trail, was the one senator not voting. [CQ 12/12/07 <http://www.cqpolitics.com/ wmspage.cfm?parm1=1&docID=cqmidday-000002641110> ] [Vote #425 12/13/07 <http://senate.gov/ legislative/ LIS/ roll_call_lists/ roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00425> ]
–McCain’s Tax Policies A Boon For Big Oil. Sen. McCain’s plan to cut the corporate tax rate to 25 percent is worth $1.2 billion a year to Exxon Mobil alone. In addition, his plan includes a massive new corporate tax shelter. His call for a gas tax suspension would funnel money — about $11 billion — to oil refiners and producers. [CAPAF 3/27/08 <http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2008/pdf/oil_tax.pdf> , 4/18/08 <http://thinkprogress.org/ wonkroom/ 2008/ 04/ 18/ mccain-vs-gastax/ > ]
<http://www.americanprogressaction.org/ issues/ 2008/ img/ oil_tax_table.jpg>
BIG OIL LOBBYISTS RUN McCAIN CAMPAIGN.
At least fourteen Big Oil lobbyists <http://mccainsource.com/corruption?id=0014> hold top positions in the McCain campaign, including his top adviser, Charlie Black.
– McCain’s Senior Adviser Lobbies For Foreign Oil Interests. Charlie Black (lobbying firm: BKSH), McCain’s senior campaign adviser, is a registered lobbyist for two Russian oil companies — Yukos Oil and Occidental International Corporation — and his lobbying firm was hired in 2005 by the China National Off-Shore Oil Corporation. [Roll Call 7/18/05, Senate Lobbying Disclosure Records <http://soprweb.senate.gov/index.cfm?event=choosefields> ]
– McCain’s Campaign Liaison to Congress a Million-Dollar Big-Oil Lobbyist. John Green (Ogilvy Government Relations) — the “full-time liaison between McCain’s presidential campaign and Republicans in the House and the Senate” — has made over $7.6 million dollars since 1999 lobbying for petro-industry giants such as Amerada-Hess, Chevron Texaco, the American Petroleum Institute, Reliant Energy, PJM Interconnection and First Energy. [Politico 3/4/08 <http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/8814.html> , Senate Lobbying Disclosure Records <http://soprweb.senate.gov/> ]
– Fossil Fuel Lobbyists Everywhere in the McCain Campaign. Frank Donatelli, McCain’s RNC liaison to the Republican Party, has lobbied for ExxonMobil, Dominion, and Eastman Chemical. Jerry Kilgore, co-chairman of McCain’s Virginia campaign, has lobbied for Shell Oil and coal company Alpha Natural Resources. Nancy Pfotenhauer, a policy adviser and spokeswoman, has lobbied for Koch Industries. [Washington Post 3/12/08 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2008/ 03/ 11/ AR2008031103134.html> , O’Dwyer’s 8/9/06 <http://64.233.169.104/ search?q=cache:XBgalxiFNIIJ:www.odwyerpr.com/ members/ washington_report/ 2006/ 0809loeffler.htm> , Media Matters 2/26/08 <http://mediamatters.org/items/200802260009> , Senate Lobbying Disclosure Records <http://soprweb.senate.gov/> ]
So remind me again how exactly would McCain not be a Bush third term?
Related Posts:
- President McCain pushes offshore drilling in support of presumptive GOP nominee Bush …
- McCain energy bombshell: More oil + dirty coal. That’s Bush-lite, crude, and not sweet.
- Memo to media: McCain doubletalks to woo conservatives and independents at the same time
- On energy policy, is better than Bush enough?
- McCain, NOT the candidate of change, says no to Boxer-L-W without giga-subsidies for nukes
- Speech, Part 4: Will McCain bring conservatives with him on climate? As if!
- Climate speech, part 3: John McCain loves big government
- McCain speech, Part 2: Relying on offsets = Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic
- Speech, Part 1: Anti-wind McCain delivers climate remarks at foreign wind company
- McCain reveals cynicism, hypocrisy with call for summer gas-tax holiday, energy budget freeze
- Campaign stunner: McCain “might take [new CAFE standards] off the books”
- McCain’s non-straight talk on nuclear power
- McCain opposes ‘mandatory’ carbon limits
- No climate for old men: Why John McCain isn’t the candidate to stop global warming
- McCain’s Double-Talk Express on Global Warming
June 18th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Check out this Interactive US Energy Footprint Chart, an interactive United States Energy Consumption Footprint chart, illustrating Greenest States and more. This site has all sorts of stats on individual State energy consumptions, demographics and State energy offices - drill down to your local city.
http://www.eredux.com/states/
June 18th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Article is a bit hard to read with links scattered throughout which aren’t linked to relevant text. Otherwise, excellent.
June 18th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
It sure would be nice if the authors of these pieces would identify themselves. Joe Romm (and colleagues on this blog), I’m talking to you. Why not put your name(s) at the top, so readers like myself (strange fellows who like to know who’s talking) don’t have to spend several minutes hunting for that information? Basic, don’t you think?
June 18th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
@Bill Dunne
“don’t have to spend several minutes hunting for that information”
Several minutes?! A little slow, are we Bill?
June 18th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
The more McCain opens up his mouth about energy, the more he sounds like Bush.
June 18th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
I just saw a clip of McCain on CNN. He said, in essence, that America has 21 billion [I’m not certain that was exactly the number he used] barrels of “proven reserves,” and that we need to change the offshore drilling policy in order to get at them.
Reserves can’t be labeled “proven” until there has been considerable drilling to delineate the resource and to establish that they can be economically produced. Clearly, when the proposal is to open up offshore exploration, that can’t involve “proven reserves.” I’m certain the people who wrote this for McCain know that and that they hope to mislead as many people as possible.
June 18th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Off-topic, strictly speaking, but relevant to ClimateProgress as a whole:
“Are we all North Koreans now?”
http://www.atimes.com/ atimes/ Global_Economy/ JF19Dj03.html
Yes. Three strikes and you’re a North Korean.
Note the result.
June 18th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Bill — 95+% of the pieces are mine, so it seems kind of silly to put my name at the top when it’s almost always me and my name is at the bottom.
June 18th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
The media should be reporting more critically and Obama needs to push back with his own policies as well as pointing out McMain’s misconceptions/distortions, which will become reality to some voters, especially with Bush pushing the same misconceptions/distortions.
June 18th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
350 reasons for john mccain to change direction
June 19th, 2008 at 12:03 am
Even politically this makes no sense as it will cost Florida and several other coastal states. McCain has looked deeply into the well and seen that he is a sure loser, thus he throws bombs hoping to break something lose.
June 19th, 2008 at 12:16 am
If it is so minor, why are you against it? Florida will jump all over the lease money, @ 135$ / Barrel there is enough green to shut up all but the most foolish eco- fascists. Can you say balance of trade, let’s use native oil to power our economy. A simple switch with The SPR would pressure prices now. Even another five years will give America time to build the necessary Coal to Liquid infrastructure to fuel our engines.
June 19th, 2008 at 12:38 am
(name’s not at the bottom of single-post pages)
June 19th, 2008 at 7:23 am
thank you güzel site
June 19th, 2008 at 9:30 am
I think it’s very disappointing that the EIA analysis Joe linked to isn’t getting more press. I’ve seen/heard no one in the broadcast media refer to it; the most they do is toss a crumb in the direction of faux balance by acknowledging that it will take years for the oil to reach market.
Once again, it’s the rampant laziness in the media. They’re far too concerned with lifestyle pieces and other garbage instead of doing (gasp!) real research on hard news stories.
June 19th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Lou:
I’ve seen/heard no one in the broadcast media refer to it; the most they do is toss a crumb in the direction of faux balance by acknowledging that it will take years for the oil to reach market.
Who owns these media outlets?
Right! Giant corporations with vast investment in the status quo. Can’t have everyone gittin’ all uppity and stop spending an’ all.
Best,
D
June 19th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
NBC is owned by General Electric a company that stands to profit greatly from alternatives, especially wind. GE spends millions of dollars lobbying for subsidies. NBC recently had an entire week devoted to AGW not only on the news but also on sit-coms and dramas.
June 21st, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Ken Williamson makes so good points about this on http://www.posterspost.com.
He makes a good case for drilling.
The point is, we have no choice but to drill if we continue driving our vehicles.
June 22nd, 2008 at 2:26 am
It is either drill and CTL or CTL. I need to fuel my car to earn the money to save the world. I’d think the ZPGers would be all over defunding the the be fruitful and multiply bunch of current oil producing regions. With out a working growing economy the first to go is luxuries such as the latest green fads.
Very large corporations can use the added moronic regulations to raise barriers to new competitors–the more government, the lower the need to actually produce innovations to maintain market share. In a truly competitive market the well lead major producers would be even now migrating to the replacements for fossil oil, CTL, Shale, and tar sands.
Every barrel of oil produced in under the Aegis of the USA’s EPA will have the least amount of negative impact–only the ego-centric fools keep exporting extraction industries to nations with little or no concern for environmental damage reduction/elimination.
Again the ‘greens’ fail to see the destruction of 3 to 5 % of GDP by the completely unnecessary high prices of liquid Hydrocarbons as destructive to actually reducing civilization’s impact on the Earth.
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Peter Foley, in the time you could have significant gasoline refined from offshore drilling, you could instead be getting 80% of your miles fueled with American electrons.
June 23rd, 2008 at 9:25 pm
Earl Killian, ANWAR would be a year or two quicker then the water born drilling with the underwater pipe-lining required. Re-task the 51 cent a gallon blending credit subsidy away from ethanol to Coal to liquid infrastructure. Tax breaks and loan subsidies for CTL refineries.( A 10 cent a gallon Tax on ‘foreign’ liquid fuels?) We need a federal punishment tax to punish NIMBY states like California and Florida who selfishly lower the living standards of all Americans.
Tree huggers who fail to remember what derailed the eco-movement in the Seventies will repeat the historical pattern.
Earl, compare the energy density of diesel to the same weight of batteries, Without McCain’s super-battery, CTL is THE solution.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Peter — You are a jumble of misinformation. ANWR is 2 cents a gallon off the cost of gasoline in 20 years. Offshore oil is 0.0 cents a gallon off the cost of gasoline in 20 years.
CTL is climate death and should be banned.
The eco-movement in the Seventies gave us clean air and clean water. You’re welcome!
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Joe, Even if ANWAR or US Continental shelf fossil oil production wouldn’t ‘lower’ prices,(Is Karl Marx’s ghost suspending the laws of supply and demand?) the improvement in the balance of trade and the increased cleanliness of production under the rule of Law alone requires immediate action to start fast tracking state and federal drilling permits.
Just the elimination $100 per metric ton of shipping costs alone would save 20 cents a gallon.(Yet again the cheaper oil is also the oil with a lower ‘carbon’ footprint, what a coincidence! Shipping costs mostly spent on bunker fuel and steel hulls) Again repeating a BIG LIE- ANWAR production would only lower fuel costs 0.5 % a gallon is just excretable economic propaganda. In twenty years it be either coal to Liquid or next/third generation battery powered vehicles.
I think you’re confusing the actual effecting of the laws passed in the Seventies that occurred mostly in the Eighties,
By the way, just what did YOU do in the seventies to clean up the USA as claimed in your last sentence? Under sniper fire perhaps?
I has trying to put over the idea that the end of growth caused by the first and second oil crisis of the Seventies combined with the second poorest President of the twentieth century, Jimmy Carter, forced the the early tree-hugger to return to the world of work. This could repeat if we don’t rationally increase sources of cheap liquid fuels soon.
Every time a self-proclaimed expert posits a falsehood, they negate Ninety-nine of their honest remarks, with more rigorous honesty you’d come closer to your misguided goal faster.
June 24th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
thank you güzel site
June 25th, 2008 at 9:53 am
I just loved the latest McCain quote from today’s LA Times:
“Even though it may take some years, the fact that we are exploiting those reserves would have psychological impact that I think is beneficial,” the senator said during a town-hall meeting in Fresno.
At least he is admitting now that the only reason to do this is for the “psychological impact”, i.e., pretending to be doing something about the problem. Unbelievable!
June 26th, 2008 at 6:34 am
thank you
July 16th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
thank you very good
July 29th, 2008 at 2:41 am
thank you very
August 1st, 2008 at 7:20 am
thanks
August 7th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Thanks, it saves a lot of time
August 7th, 2008 at 10:06 am
thanks
August 7th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Increased access to offshore oil would only boost total domestic production by about 3% by 2030 (or 1% of total U.S. demand). There is a discussion of offshore oil; active platforms; and technically recoverable, undiscovered, offshore oil and natural gas; and how increased access would affect prices at http://www.energyanalysis.org.
August 11th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Thanks.
August 11th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
If it is so minor, why are you against it? Florida will jump all over the lease money, @ 135$ / Barrel there is enough green to shut up all but the most foolish eco- fascists. Can you say balance of trade, let’s use native oil to power our economy. A simple switch with The SPR would pressure prices now. Even another five years will give America time to build the necessary Coal to Liquid infrastructure to fuel our engines.
August 12th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
thank you…
August 19th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Saying that that some oil from ANWR or offshore may be exported or it wont lower gas prices is a very stupid reason for not drilling there! Take an class in economics. If we export a million barrels from ANWR and import a million barrels from somewhere else, it costs us nothing. If we import a million barrels and export none it costs us 140 million dollars! Research and development of alternative energy sources is great and we should do that, but as long as we are useing more oil than we are producing we need to drill as much as possible. If we end up with more oil than we need we can sell it to China to pay for all our imported lead painted toys!
Democrats say drilling would not help because we wont get the oil for 10 years, a great argument they have been making for a decade - jay Leno
August 21st, 2008 at 2:29 pm
thanks a lot
August 22nd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Offshore Drilling is a huge issue right now and rightly so. Between the
desire to deal with the economic mess that is being spurred by the price
of oil and the on-going longer-term concern of global warming, how do we
address all of this? Check out Obama and McCain in side-by-side videos
on PollClash http://www.pollclash.com/ comparing their recent
comments on ANWR and offshore oil drilling. It is, if nothing else,
very interesting to hear their perspective.
August 31st, 2008 at 11:43 am
ThanKs a Lot
September 4th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
ty man
September 6th, 2008 at 9:16 am
Thanks a lot
September 7th, 2008 at 8:18 am
thanks
September 7th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
thank you
September 9th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
thankss youuu goood web sites.
September 10th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
thanks fine nice .
September 11th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
thanks a lot
September 12th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
John McCain to support drilling in ANWR, biggest news from Palin/Gipson interview.
http://strategicthought-charles77.blogspot.com/ 2008/ 09/ john-mccain-to-support-drilling-in-anwr.html
September 27th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Thank you very much
September 29th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
thanks very good.
September 30th, 2008 at 8:49 am
Thank you very much for this information. I like this site
September 30th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
thanks
October 1st, 2008 at 6:18 pm
http://www.arkadasyeri.net
October 2nd, 2008 at 5:31 pm
thanks very good.
http://www.hikaye.name
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:22 am
Today, 152 members of the House of Representatives — over one-third of all members and nearly two-thirds of all Democrats — signed and submitted a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stating their guiding principles for “comprehensive global warming legislation” to “save the planet from calamitous global warming.” The letter, led by representatives Henry Waxman (D-CA), Ed Markey (D-MA), and Jay Inslee (D-WA), was delivered to Pelosi this morning.
The legislators describe four key goals:
Reduce emissions to avoid dangerous global warming;
Transition America to a clean energy economy;
Recognize and minimize any economic impacts from global warming legislation; and
Aid communities and ecosystems vulnerable to harm from global warming.
October 4th, 2008 at 11:19 am
The writings , explanations and pictures are so usuful that i will keep in my mind and they are really interesting so thank you because of your hard work of your web page.I enjoyed too much and i will wait for next new writings of you.
October 7th, 2008 at 4:02 am
Can you say balance of trade, let’s use native oil to power our economy. A simple switch with The SPR would pressure prices now. Even another five years will give America time to build the necessary Coal to Liquid infrastructure to fuel our engines.
October 7th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
good sharing, thank you.