Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (60208)	6/21/2007 8:05:57 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

[I]f America wants more fuel-efficient cars, George W. Bush isn't standing in the way. The GOP is not preventing anyone from ditching their Ford Expedition for a Prius. Democrats And Pipe Dreams By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Tuesday, June 19, 2007 4:20 PM PT Energy Policy: On the 30th anniversary of the Alaskan pipeline, the Democrats tout a plan that would have blocked its construction. One way to reduce our dependence on energy from abroad is to produce more here. On June 20, 1977, the first of more than 15 billion barrels of domestically produced crude began its journey from Pump Station 1 on Alaska's North Slope through an 800-mile-long pipeline to the south central Alaska port of Valdez. It was a technological feat that took 70,000 men and women to construct. But it never would have happened under this Democratic Congress. Last Saturday, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., used the Democrats' weekly radio address to support an energy bill that would produce not a single drop of new domestic oil or natural gas. Instead, it would increase fuel economy standards and punish companies like those who made the Alaskan pipeline possible. The trans-Alaska oil pipeline, on remote wind-swept flatlands along Alaska's north coast near the Beaufort Sea, is shown in this March 2006 photo. Most of the 15 billion barrels delivered over the last three decades came from Prudhoe Bay, some 60 miles to the west of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Prudhoe was supposed to yield just a "six months' supply" of oil while ravaging the environment. The same arguments, in other words, that are used against oil development in ANWR. Yet caribou herds and other wildlife thrived. So what do Cantwell and the Democrats propose? Well, in her address Cantwell said that "America deserves more fuel-efficient cars" and that "the only way consumers are going to get more out of a tank of gas is if the president and his party help deliver votes in a narrowly divided Congress." Positively visionary. The Senate bill would require automakers to increase the fuel economy of new cars, SUVs and pickups beginning in 2020 to a fleet average of 35 miles per gallon. It's now 27.5 mpg for cars and 22.2 mpg for SUVs and small trucks. But if America wants more fuel-efficient cars, George W. Bush isn't standing in the way. The GOP is not preventing anyone from ditching their Ford Expedition for a Prius. The fact is, Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards, or CAFE, have failed to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. In 1975, we imported about 75% of our oil. After three decades of living under CAFE, more than 70% of our oil still comes from foreign sources. John Felmy, chief economist at the American Petroleum Institute, reminds us that there are more than 131 billion barrels of oil and more than 1,000 trillion cubic feet of natural gas ready to be exploited in and around the U.S. Perhaps Democrats can explain why we must import 4.2 trillion cubic feet of natural gas each year. Much of these resources — 78% of the oil and 62% of the gas — are locked up beneath federal lands and coastal waters, under places like the frozen tundra of ANWR and the Outer Continental Shelf. Even if the Democrats let us produce more oil domestically, it would still have to be refined. We haven't built a new refinery since 1976, partly because of cost and environmental restrictions. The U.S. has an oil refining capacity of about 17.5 million barrels a day, far short of the 21 million consumed daily in the domestic market. To help remedy that situation, Republican Sen. James Inhofe offered an amendment to provide financial incentives for the construction of refineries on surplus federal lands, such as abandoned military bases. Democrats defeated it 43 to 52. Instead of building new refineries or drilling for more oil and gas, the Democrats would strip away $15 billion in tax breaks from large companies and put the money towards making energy from renewable sources like wind, solar and soybeans. Yet the Democrats reject increased use of nuclear power, which, with reprocessing of spent fuel, becomes the ultimate renewable resource, one that reduces greenhouse gas emissions. Nuclear is so green that Kyoto signatories like France use it to generate three-fourths of their electricity. The Democrats' motto seems to be that when you're in an energy hole, stop drilling. ibdeditorials.com ibdeditorials.com