New York Times Editorial - Delusional thinking on oil
New York Times Editorial - Delusional thinking on oil
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: August 2, 2006
Almost six months to the day after President George W. Bush urged Congress in his State of the Union address to help break America's addiction to imported oil, the Senate approved a bill on Tuesday that would do nothing to cure that addiction and could actually make it worse.
The bill, which would open up 8.3 million acres, or 3.3 million hectares, in the Gulf of Mexico for new energy development, is bad fiscal policy, since one-third of the royalties that would normally accrue to all Americans from drilling in federal waters would flow to just four gulf states. Even as a drilling bill it makes little sense: To placate Florida's senators, it prohibits drilling in offshore areas that are richer in resources than the areas it opens up. And as energy policy it's hopelessly one-sided, encouraging production while ignoring consumption.
After Bush's address in January, the Senate legislative machinery went into overdrive and produced scores of energy-related bills, at least two of which were comprehensive, bipartisan measures aimed at reducing oil consumption by half over the next quarter-century by encouraging energy efficiency and alternative fuels. But Bill Frist, the Senate majority leader, prohibited any changes to this bill, pretty much shutting the door on any grown-up discussion of America's energy future.
Mary Landrieu, a Democrat whose home state of Louisiana would benefit handsomely, conceded that by ignoring demand the bill represented only "half the solution" to America's energy problems. Even that is a big exaggeration. The gulf might well yield enough natural gas to make a difference in price. But there is not enough oil there or anywhere else in the United States to make a difference in the price of a barrel of oil or a gallon of gasoline at the pump. Why the Senate persists in deluding itself on this remains a mystery of our age.
Copyright by The New York Times
Published: August 2, 2006
Almost six months to the day after President George W. Bush urged Congress in his State of the Union address to help break America's addiction to imported oil, the Senate approved a bill on Tuesday that would do nothing to cure that addiction and could actually make it worse.
The bill, which would open up 8.3 million acres, or 3.3 million hectares, in the Gulf of Mexico for new energy development, is bad fiscal policy, since one-third of the royalties that would normally accrue to all Americans from drilling in federal waters would flow to just four gulf states. Even as a drilling bill it makes little sense: To placate Florida's senators, it prohibits drilling in offshore areas that are richer in resources than the areas it opens up. And as energy policy it's hopelessly one-sided, encouraging production while ignoring consumption.
After Bush's address in January, the Senate legislative machinery went into overdrive and produced scores of energy-related bills, at least two of which were comprehensive, bipartisan measures aimed at reducing oil consumption by half over the next quarter-century by encouraging energy efficiency and alternative fuels. But Bill Frist, the Senate majority leader, prohibited any changes to this bill, pretty much shutting the door on any grown-up discussion of America's energy future.
Mary Landrieu, a Democrat whose home state of Louisiana would benefit handsomely, conceded that by ignoring demand the bill represented only "half the solution" to America's energy problems. Even that is a big exaggeration. The gulf might well yield enough natural gas to make a difference in price. But there is not enough oil there or anywhere else in the United States to make a difference in the price of a barrel of oil or a gallon of gasoline at the pump. Why the Senate persists in deluding itself on this remains a mystery of our age.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 5:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home