It comes as no surprise that China is competing with us for global economic supremacy – in business and technology and, as world energy supplies become scarcer, for resources as well. While we are busy fighting two wars, the largest oil spill in history, a recession, and playing partisan politics, China has been ramping up a clean energy economy that has the potential to vault it ahead as a world leader. China has set a long-term development goal of doubling its alternative energy industry by 2020, though its private sector hardly needs incentives; the People’s Republic is already the largest manufacturer and exporter of clean energy technology, from solar panels to windmills.
Against this background, the United States Senate recently failed to pass comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation. There is plenty of blame to go around, from the partisan politics played by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) to the hundreds of millions of dollars in dishonest attack ads paid for by the oil and coal lobby. The Republicans were obstinate and obstructionist, the Democrats were weak and uninspired. In the race to create jobs, decrease our dependence on foreign oil and reduce pollution, we are not simply falling behind; we are not even playing the game.
Even an obvious lesson from the most disastrous environmental tragedy in our country’s history was lost on Washington: offshore drilling is clearly a terrible answer to meeting America’s energy needs. With two percent of world reserves and 25 percent of consumption, the United States cannot make a dent in our growing dependence on foreign oil, even if we were to drill on every available deposit. Anyone who says that increasing domestic reserves will increase our energy security is either misinformed or pandering for votes.
More importantly, if the name of the game is economic growth, how can we consider drilling offshore now that the BP oil disaster has shown the crippling impacts of a disaster on coastal economies? South Carolina in particular should not be included in the federal government’s 2012-2017 Gas Leasing Program. Independent, scientific assessments simultaneously rate the Mid- and South-Atlantic as having the least amount of oil and natural gas resources while being the most environmentally sensitive of all Outer Continental Shelf regions.
Just like in any business, cost-to-benefit analysis should guide our energy policies, not politics. To drill in South Carolina, as some state politicians propose, would be to take a huge risk for a tiny prospect of return. We elect our representatives to make discerning choices, not throw the kitchen sink at our problems. Our energy challenge requires a strategic response, not an “all-of-the-above” approach.
Furthermore, how can we consider leasing South Carolina’s coast for exploration when we have yet to fundamentally fix the root of BP oil disaster? The agency responsible for leasing federal land for resource extraction – The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (formerly the Minerals Management Service) is being investigated for drug, sex and bribery scandals. South Carolina has a long and vocal tradition of mistrusting the federal government. Where is that resistance now? Why are our state leaders showing so little concern about the federal agency that would be managing the energy resources three miles off South Carolina’s coast?
A growing spectrum of Americans on both the right and the left believe Washington is broken. At least part of the answer lies in the way special interests have bought off politicians and put corporate greed above the common good. How else do we explain the billions of dollars in tax breaks and incentives given to an oil industry that does not stand by the American consumer? Meanwhile, public officials ignore the clear advantages of creating incentives for a clean energy economy. A recent study concluded that investing $100 billion in the clean energy economy would create four times more jobs than in the oil industry. Developing a clean energy economy now means more jobs in domestic construction and manufacturing, which would jumpstart local markets across the board.
If our elected leaders want to show true vision and leadership, they will realize that developing a clean energy economy will not only jumpstart an eager labor force, but will also help create a cleaner, safer, and more secure world for our children. The federal climate bill failed in part because many politicians are unable to see this future, but those of who represent the leaders of tomorrow do. It is my sincere hope that we see a renewal of leadership, especially coming from our own Sen. Lindsey Graham, who demonstrated commitment to the issue when it was first brought to the floor.
The United States is at a crucial juncture in history, and we have important decisions to make. Will we fall behind our global competitors, like China, by continuing to invest in the technologies of the past, or will we put true American ingenuity to work, develop an economy for the future, and rise to the challenge? The choice is ours.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Taking local action against offshore oil
Many South Carolinians are finding themselves enraged by the idea that a Deepwater Horizon-type disaster may be making its way into South Carolina waters. Only seven days after the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe the Mineral Management Service and Big oil companies met in Charleston to discuss the future of offshore drilling in S.C. Many coastal residents, who do not want tar balls on their beach are wondering what they can do as individual citizens to at least slow the process. Residents of San Luis Obispo, California found themselves in a similar position in the late 1980’s, and they acted. The county was able to create and pass a measure prohibiting any onshore support facilities within their counties jurisdiction. So coastal residents, talk with your local representatives and urge them to consider similar measures so that our coastline does not end up horrifically scarred for who knows how many years, sorry to be so frank Gulf residents.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Oil: A Temporary Solution to a Permanent Problem
No matter how hard we might wish we could simply drill our way to energy independence, it is simply not possible, and the sooner we learn this, the better. Dirty fossil fuels like oil and gas are not the future. They are a temporary solution at best, one that we’ve been lucky enough to enjoy for over a century of rapid industrialization. But as countries like China, India, and Brazil enter into new stages of their industrial revolutions, resources are only going to become much more scarce, perhaps much faster than we’d originally planned.
For example, China has already begun stockpiling uranium, the compound essential for nuclear reactors. China’s own Prime Minister has personally traveled to Nigeria and made deals that are expected to drive up the price of uranium by over 30 percent next year. The same is inevitable for oil and natural gas. Unless the United States wants to deal increasingly with other nations, many of whom are hostile to our values—such as countries in the Middle East and the oil barons in Russia and China—we need to act now.
Unfortunately, unlike some proponents maintain, drilling for oil and gas domestically is not the answer either. Even if we drilled in every square inch of available water, the United States still would not have enough to support our ever-growing energy appetite. And besides, creating new rigs offshore takes years of bureaucratic blue tape, exploration, and lease bidding to become feasible solutions. By that time, we could have been well on our way to developing real energy solutions, like solar, wind, and biomass. Creating a green, independent future will take time, so why waste it by developing temporary solutions to a permanent problem?
For example, China has already begun stockpiling uranium, the compound essential for nuclear reactors. China’s own Prime Minister has personally traveled to Nigeria and made deals that are expected to drive up the price of uranium by over 30 percent next year. The same is inevitable for oil and natural gas. Unless the United States wants to deal increasingly with other nations, many of whom are hostile to our values—such as countries in the Middle East and the oil barons in Russia and China—we need to act now.
Unfortunately, unlike some proponents maintain, drilling for oil and gas domestically is not the answer either. Even if we drilled in every square inch of available water, the United States still would not have enough to support our ever-growing energy appetite. And besides, creating new rigs offshore takes years of bureaucratic blue tape, exploration, and lease bidding to become feasible solutions. By that time, we could have been well on our way to developing real energy solutions, like solar, wind, and biomass. Creating a green, independent future will take time, so why waste it by developing temporary solutions to a permanent problem?
Friday, July 23, 2010
SC Energy Forum code name for big oil
This past Tuesday, Conservation Voters was as disappointed as we always are when we see a letter written by a proponent of offshore drilling who captures his or her audience with misguided “energy independence” rhetoric. (Read the Sun News article here:) But this time we were especially outraged when we realized the source.
The South Carolina Energy Forum sounds noble enough—“a growing community of concerned citizens committed to two goals—achieving energy security for our country and holding our elected officials more accountable in shaping energy policies."
But make no mistake: the South Carolina Energy Forum is a front group for the oil companies, and the American Petroleum Institute in particular. With that in mind, it should come as no surprise that they are fighting hard to expand offshore drilling. And they are working to attack industries like wind, solar, and biomass that have real potential to replace fossil fuels.
That is why Conservation Voters wants all of its supporters to become aware of the true nature of this misleading “South Carolina Energy Forum.” After all, do we really want to find out what happens when we keep big oil in charge? They already had their chance, and unfortunately for all of us, they blew it.
More resources:
-The SC Energy Forum’s Website can be found at: . Write in to express your discontent over big oil purposefully misleading the American people and unjustly taking charge over SC politics.
-The Sun News article can be found at: . Comment to help inform the public about the true intent of this agency.
The South Carolina Energy Forum sounds noble enough—“a growing community of concerned citizens committed to two goals—achieving energy security for our country and holding our elected officials more accountable in shaping energy policies."
But make no mistake: the South Carolina Energy Forum is a front group for the oil companies, and the American Petroleum Institute in particular. With that in mind, it should come as no surprise that they are fighting hard to expand offshore drilling. And they are working to attack industries like wind, solar, and biomass that have real potential to replace fossil fuels.
That is why Conservation Voters wants all of its supporters to become aware of the true nature of this misleading “South Carolina Energy Forum.” After all, do we really want to find out what happens when we keep big oil in charge? They already had their chance, and unfortunately for all of us, they blew it.
More resources:
-The SC Energy Forum’s Website can be found at: . Write in to express your discontent over big oil purposefully misleading the American people and unjustly taking charge over SC politics.
-The Sun News article can be found at: . Comment to help inform the public about the true intent of this agency.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Building energy resources, building up the economy
With an unemployment rate of 12.5 percent and record foreclosures, South Carolina needs something to smile about. The president recently gave us that when he announced his support for offshore drilling along the Outer Continental Shelf, a position that will help ensure a brighter energy and economic future. Developing the nation’s energy resources could boost the economy and add thousands of good jobs in our state.
Today, the U.S. oil and natural gas industry supports more than 9.2 million jobs nationwide. In South Carolina, 67,000 men and women are directly or indirectly employed by the industry, according to a PricewaterhouseCoopers study. And a study by ICF International says the development of offshore oil and natural gas could provide the state with 2,247 new jobs by 2030.
Our Gulf Coast neighbors in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas receive more than a third of the revenues collected by the federal government for offshore energy production. South Carolina could reap these economic benefits, too. A September report by the Southeast Energy Alliance estimates that a similar revenue-sharing program could provide our state with up to $250 million a year from oil and natural gas exploration and production along the Outer Continental Shelf. These funds would play a vital role to help fill the budget gap, fund critical health care needs and support infrastructure and education projects.
Despite the obvious benefits, some people continue to oppose offshore drilling. But with an overwhelming majority of American’s supporting offshore drilling – 72 percent, according to a Rasmussen survey – energy development should be treated as an opportunity, not a problem.
The president’s decision is an encouraging one, but he still supports damaging cap-and-trade legislation and $80 billion in tax increases on the U.S. oil and natural gas industry. These proposals would discourage investment, further inhibit domestic energy development and destroy existing jobs – not create the new ones that more than 270,000 unemployed South Carolinians desperately need.
As the United States strives to reduce its budget deficit, it’s critical that we explore all paths that could improve the economy and create much-needed jobs. Developing America’s oil and natural gas resources is clearly one such path. We should take it.
Rep. Bruce Bannister
Read more: http://www.thestate.com/2010/04/26/1257505/building-energy-resources-building.html#ixzz0mRYaWIdY
Today, the U.S. oil and natural gas industry supports more than 9.2 million jobs nationwide. In South Carolina, 67,000 men and women are directly or indirectly employed by the industry, according to a PricewaterhouseCoopers study. And a study by ICF International says the development of offshore oil and natural gas could provide the state with 2,247 new jobs by 2030.
Our Gulf Coast neighbors in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas receive more than a third of the revenues collected by the federal government for offshore energy production. South Carolina could reap these economic benefits, too. A September report by the Southeast Energy Alliance estimates that a similar revenue-sharing program could provide our state with up to $250 million a year from oil and natural gas exploration and production along the Outer Continental Shelf. These funds would play a vital role to help fill the budget gap, fund critical health care needs and support infrastructure and education projects.
Despite the obvious benefits, some people continue to oppose offshore drilling. But with an overwhelming majority of American’s supporting offshore drilling – 72 percent, according to a Rasmussen survey – energy development should be treated as an opportunity, not a problem.
The president’s decision is an encouraging one, but he still supports damaging cap-and-trade legislation and $80 billion in tax increases on the U.S. oil and natural gas industry. These proposals would discourage investment, further inhibit domestic energy development and destroy existing jobs – not create the new ones that more than 270,000 unemployed South Carolinians desperately need.
As the United States strives to reduce its budget deficit, it’s critical that we explore all paths that could improve the economy and create much-needed jobs. Developing America’s oil and natural gas resources is clearly one such path. We should take it.
Rep. Bruce Bannister
Read more: http://www.thestate.com/2010/04/26/1257505/building-energy-resources-building.html#ixzz0mRYaWIdY
Friday, April 23, 2010
Oil companies pursue drilling along coast 7 companies apply for permits
CHARLESTON -- Seven companies have already applied for permits to explore for oil and natural gas along all or part of the Southeast coast. All of them want to look off South Carolina.
They would detonate compressed air guns dragged behind ships, creating a series of seismic blasts in order to read the "echo" beneath the sea floor.
To explore the area off South Carolina alone could cost a company some $4 million or more.
That's why two public hearings will be held in Charleston on April 27 by the federal Minerals Management Service. The idea that potential supplies off the coast aren't large enough to interest energy companies doesn't mean nobody wants to test the water. Oil companies don't usually do the early surveys, geophysical exploration companies do. Then they sell the data they find.
Whether the supplies or the onshore infrastructure is large enough to make offshore drilling profitable usually doesn't get decided until after a few test wells have been drilled.
"You wouldn't want to preclude anything until you had a better understanding" of the subsurface geology, said Walt Rosenbusch, projects and issues vice president of the International Association of Geophysical Contractors.
That's enough to alarm environmentalists. The seismic blasts would be the latest in an intensifying din along a coast inhabited by the critically endangered right whale, among other species of concern.
A series of blasts from a single compressed air gun can blank out the calls of whales and other marine mammal over an area bigger than New Mexico, said Michael Jasny, of the environmental advocate Natural Resources Defence Council.
The animals call to do everything from navigate to feed and mate.
Studies also have shown commercial fish catches drop 40-80 percent during seismic exploration, he said.
"There's an environmental impact. There's also an economic impact," Jasny said.
The federal "scoping meetings" are two of 13 being held along the Southeast coast to get public comments for an environmental impact statement, a preliminary step to deciding whether mitigation and monitoring will be ordered to take place during the surveys. Federal regulations call for companies to share their findings with Minerals Management Service, which makes no bones about its interest.
"It has been more than 25 years since geological and geophysical studies were conducted off the Atlantic coast. This data will enhance, update and supplement information to support future MMS planning decisions for both renewable and conventional energy development," the minerals service news release said.
The Obama administration in March lifted a long-standing ban on new offshore drilling. The S.C. legislature last year gave the go-ahead for drilling off the coast.
The politically charged issue has South Carolinians divided on whether the potential for new energy reserves and revenue outweighs the risks to an $18 billion tourism industry, fishing and other interests.
Derb Carter, Southern Environmental Law Center director, said the seismic blasts would disrupt marine life, and the exploration permits would open the way for drilling.
"The risk and impacts of drilling off the South Atlantic coast are too great and conflict with both the environmental conditions and the economy," he said.
S.C. Sen. Paul Campbell, R-Goose Creek, who championed the state bill, said he hasn't seen permanent environmental consequences from seismic work in the Gulf of Mexico. "If it's a temporary consequence, that's one thing we've got to live with," he said.
They would detonate compressed air guns dragged behind ships, creating a series of seismic blasts in order to read the "echo" beneath the sea floor.
To explore the area off South Carolina alone could cost a company some $4 million or more.
That's why two public hearings will be held in Charleston on April 27 by the federal Minerals Management Service. The idea that potential supplies off the coast aren't large enough to interest energy companies doesn't mean nobody wants to test the water. Oil companies don't usually do the early surveys, geophysical exploration companies do. Then they sell the data they find.
Whether the supplies or the onshore infrastructure is large enough to make offshore drilling profitable usually doesn't get decided until after a few test wells have been drilled.
"You wouldn't want to preclude anything until you had a better understanding" of the subsurface geology, said Walt Rosenbusch, projects and issues vice president of the International Association of Geophysical Contractors.
That's enough to alarm environmentalists. The seismic blasts would be the latest in an intensifying din along a coast inhabited by the critically endangered right whale, among other species of concern.
A series of blasts from a single compressed air gun can blank out the calls of whales and other marine mammal over an area bigger than New Mexico, said Michael Jasny, of the environmental advocate Natural Resources Defence Council.
The animals call to do everything from navigate to feed and mate.
Studies also have shown commercial fish catches drop 40-80 percent during seismic exploration, he said.
"There's an environmental impact. There's also an economic impact," Jasny said.
The federal "scoping meetings" are two of 13 being held along the Southeast coast to get public comments for an environmental impact statement, a preliminary step to deciding whether mitigation and monitoring will be ordered to take place during the surveys. Federal regulations call for companies to share their findings with Minerals Management Service, which makes no bones about its interest.
"It has been more than 25 years since geological and geophysical studies were conducted off the Atlantic coast. This data will enhance, update and supplement information to support future MMS planning decisions for both renewable and conventional energy development," the minerals service news release said.
The Obama administration in March lifted a long-standing ban on new offshore drilling. The S.C. legislature last year gave the go-ahead for drilling off the coast.
The politically charged issue has South Carolinians divided on whether the potential for new energy reserves and revenue outweighs the risks to an $18 billion tourism industry, fishing and other interests.
Derb Carter, Southern Environmental Law Center director, said the seismic blasts would disrupt marine life, and the exploration permits would open the way for drilling.
"The risk and impacts of drilling off the South Atlantic coast are too great and conflict with both the environmental conditions and the economy," he said.
S.C. Sen. Paul Campbell, R-Goose Creek, who championed the state bill, said he hasn't seen permanent environmental consequences from seismic work in the Gulf of Mexico. "If it's a temporary consequence, that's one thing we've got to live with," he said.
Dealing with a Drilling Debate
In March, President Barack Obama eased restrictions on off-shore drilling. If approved by congress, it could open another 167 acres of ocean to be explored and drilled.
Already seven companies have applied for permits to explore and survey the ocean floor of the South Carolina coast.
Senator Lindsey Graham is onboard; he is proposing a new energy plan, which would pump 37.5 % of any revenue derived from off shore drilling back into the state.
The Republican said that searching for new and cleaner sources of energy are at the top of his agenda.
"I don’t want the next generation of Americans to be more dependent on foreign oil than we are today." The Senator remarked.
Environmental groups like the Coastal Conservation League, however say any oil drilled from off shore platforms will not be enough to drive down cost or curb the countries dependence on foreign oil.
“When you look at the numbers and recognize that the United States has about three percent of global oil reserves yet we consume about 25 percent of what’s produced every year, it becomes obvious very quickly that we're not going to drill our way to independence," said Energy & Climate Director Hamilton Davis.
Davis is also concerned that if approved, building and reinforcing those off shore platform and pipelines could change the coastal landscape.
“"You look at places like the Gulf of Mexico and see huge impacts to their coastal communities in the form of oil refineries, pipelines storage facilities. And they continue to have trouble with spills during hurricanes,
The public will have their chance to weigh in on the issue. Two off shore drilling hearings will be held April 27th.
Already seven companies have applied for permits to explore and survey the ocean floor of the South Carolina coast.
Senator Lindsey Graham is onboard; he is proposing a new energy plan, which would pump 37.5 % of any revenue derived from off shore drilling back into the state.
The Republican said that searching for new and cleaner sources of energy are at the top of his agenda.
"I don’t want the next generation of Americans to be more dependent on foreign oil than we are today." The Senator remarked.
Environmental groups like the Coastal Conservation League, however say any oil drilled from off shore platforms will not be enough to drive down cost or curb the countries dependence on foreign oil.
“When you look at the numbers and recognize that the United States has about three percent of global oil reserves yet we consume about 25 percent of what’s produced every year, it becomes obvious very quickly that we're not going to drill our way to independence," said Energy & Climate Director Hamilton Davis.
Davis is also concerned that if approved, building and reinforcing those off shore platform and pipelines could change the coastal landscape.
“"You look at places like the Gulf of Mexico and see huge impacts to their coastal communities in the form of oil refineries, pipelines storage facilities. And they continue to have trouble with spills during hurricanes,
The public will have their chance to weigh in on the issue. Two off shore drilling hearings will be held April 27th.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)