<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for An effective political response to the Republican push for drilling]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Jon Rynn http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/ Mon, 28 Jul 2008 06:22:57 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/1 Electrify now, electrify here, pay less

We need something very clear and focused, and twisting around the drilling mantra to an electrify mantra might be one way to do it.

Drilling is, at best, a medium-term solution -- electrifying would take time, but not necessarily that much time.  By electrifying I mean electric and plug-in cars, electric trains and high-speed trains, and transit.  The government could pay for lots of plug-in/electric car development, if that's what it will take, which it might, could promise to buy fleets of electrics, etc., give tax breaks on buying electrics, and could certainly help out all the transit agencies that might have to cut service in the face of greater ridership.  

I'm not sure how much all of the short-term ideas Dave mentions are going to do enough.  They're sort of wonky, and they're scattered, allowing the "drill" perspective to dominate.  

]]> Electrify now, electrify here, pay less

We need something very clear and focused, and twisting around the drilling mantra to an electrify mantra might be one way to do it.

Drilling is, at best, a medium-term solution -- electrifying would take time, but not necessarily that much time.  By electrifying I mean electric and plug-in cars, electric trains and high-speed trains, and transit.  The government could pay for lots of plug-in/electric car development, if that's what it will take, which it might, could promise to buy fleets of electrics, etc., give tax breaks on buying electrics, and could certainly help out all the transit agencies that might have to cut service in the face of greater ridership.  

I'm not sure how much all of the short-term ideas Dave mentions are going to do enough.  They're sort of wonky, and they're scattered, allowing the "drill" perspective to dominate.  

]]> Comment #2 by setb http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/ Mon, 28 Jul 2008 07:52:33 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/2 Oil is like an anchor

This is close David- but I think it needs to be evn more simple-- Oil is bad.  

Oil is like an anchor On our economy and foriegn policy-- we need to break the chain and find real solutions.

It's time for enviro groups (and Presidential candidates) to repeat this over and over.  There is a side benefit that this will force McCain to appear as the "Oil Man" connecting him even more closely to Bush.  

 

]]> Oil is like an anchor

This is close David- but I think it needs to be evn more simple-- Oil is bad.  

Oil is like an anchor On our economy and foriegn policy-- we need to break the chain and find real solutions.

It's time for enviro groups (and Presidential candidates) to repeat this over and over.  There is a side benefit that this will force McCain to appear as the "Oil Man" connecting him even more closely to Bush.  

 

]]> Comment #3 by Jon Rynn http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/ Mon, 28 Jul 2008 08:07:34 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/3 But people think oil is good, setb...

...which is why I think they need to see some kind of alternative, even if it's a bit medium or long-term.  I mean, they don't like oil, per se, but they link oil to cars and suburbs, which they do like, so if someone seems to be threatening cars or suburbs -- then threatening is bad.

]]> But people think oil is good, setb...

...which is why I think they need to see some kind of alternative, even if it's a bit medium or long-term.  I mean, they don't like oil, per se, but they link oil to cars and suburbs, which they do like, so if someone seems to be threatening cars or suburbs -- then threatening is bad.

]]> Comment #4 by JMG http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/ Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:24:39 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/4 Cash for Clunkers

Outstanding op-ed in NYT today recommending a big cash-for-clunkers program --- figure out which old cars are the worst mileage and most polluting (normally one and the same) and figure out the income limits and then give people a big bonus for turning those vehicles in to be destroyed (since clunkers are the cars overwhelmingly in the hands of the poor).

A laundry list of benefits ---
 * overall US fleet mileage goes up
 * number of cars goes down
 * worst polluting cars go away
 * a boost in scrap steel supply, lowering price
 * Some of those people will probably adopt transit or use the money to buy bikes
 * even if they buy cars, they are replacing a polluting low-mpg junker with a much cleaner, higher-mileage car
 * it puts the cash in the hands of people who are likely to spend it all, fast.

If the Dems want to stop looking like palookas in lead boots, this is a great way to go.

The 5% Project








]]> Cash for Clunkers

Outstanding op-ed in NYT today recommending a big cash-for-clunkers program --- figure out which old cars are the worst mileage and most polluting (normally one and the same) and figure out the income limits and then give people a big bonus for turning those vehicles in to be destroyed (since clunkers are the cars overwhelmingly in the hands of the poor).

A laundry list of benefits ---
 * overall US fleet mileage goes up
 * number of cars goes down
 * worst polluting cars go away
 * a boost in scrap steel supply, lowering price
 * Some of those people will probably adopt transit or use the money to buy bikes
 * even if they buy cars, they are replacing a polluting low-mpg junker with a much cleaner, higher-mileage car
 * it puts the cash in the hands of people who are likely to spend it all, fast.

If the Dems want to stop looking like palookas in lead boots, this is a great way to go.

The 5% Project








]]> Comment #5 by Gar Lipow http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/ Mon, 28 Jul 2008 09:51:27 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/5 Hi JMG

Yeah, I noticed this among other things. While there is not A LOT we can do the reduce oil use immediately, there are some thing that can reduce some oil use immediately, and that is not even the cheapest.

]]> Hi JMG

Yeah, I noticed this among other things. While there is not A LOT we can do the reduce oil use immediately, there are some thing that can reduce some oil use immediately, and that is not even the cheapest.

]]> Comment #6 by Colin Wright http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/ Tue, 29 Jul 2008 05:55:52 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/6 Can the peak oil dragon be slayed?

DR wrote: The way to reduce the cost of gas to American families is to help them use less gas. This must be pitched not as something politicians do to voters, but something we, as a country, do together. The American people are already cutting back on gas consumption; let's put our heads together and figure out ways public policy can help make it easier.

I thought this was excellent framing! The latest stats show demand in May down almost a million bpd. This is huge, and likely why crude is plunging. So we can keep the Oil Dragon from breathing down our necks if we can continue to reduce demand for gasoline (faster than it is rising elsewhere). And this is where good gov't policy can come in -- innovative ways to reduce oil consumption. We just need to keep excess oil on the markets!

Targets could help here, eg. supporting a 3-4% annual decline. Cities and public planners can promotr densification and build more transit. (Portland OR already has ambitous targets.) And if prices start rising again, a new federal policy could be unveiled (speed limits, etc.).

Not only that. If the dems can figure out how to do this, and keep oil prices manageable, they can make the reps "drill now" strategy impotent.

Here's the latest oil reporting from MSNBC.
More concerns that crude's run-up over the past year has pushed prices to unsustainable levels fed Monday's decline. The U.S. Transportation Department said Monday that U.S. drivers logged 9.6 billion fewer vehicle miles in May -- or 3.7 percent -- compared to the same period last year, the biggest drop ever for the historically busy summer driving month.

And demand for oil in the U.S. -- the world's thirstiest consumer -- continues to fall, dropping by 891,000 barrels per day in May compared the same month a year ago, the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration said Monday.

"We're seeing both statistical and anecdotal evidence of very rapidly weakening demand picture," said Jim Ritterbusch, president of energy consultancy Ritterbusch and Associates in Galena, Ill.

The declines accelerated after oil briefly dipped below $122, a key resistance level that triggered technical selling by computers programed to dump oil contracts once prices fall below a certain threshold. The next technical level traders are watching is $117.

"I think we could see $117 a barrel in a one-week time frame, and this market could eventually get to $100," Ritterbusch said.


]]> Can the peak oil dragon be slayed?

DR wrote: The way to reduce the cost of gas to American families is to help them use less gas. This must be pitched not as something politicians do to voters, but something we, as a country, do together. The American people are already cutting back on gas consumption; let's put our heads together and figure out ways public policy can help make it easier.

I thought this was excellent framing! The latest stats show demand in May down almost a million bpd. This is huge, and likely why crude is plunging. So we can keep the Oil Dragon from breathing down our necks if we can continue to reduce demand for gasoline (faster than it is rising elsewhere). And this is where good gov't policy can come in -- innovative ways to reduce oil consumption. We just need to keep excess oil on the markets!

Targets could help here, eg. supporting a 3-4% annual decline. Cities and public planners can promotr densification and build more transit. (Portland OR already has ambitous targets.) And if prices start rising again, a new federal policy could be unveiled (speed limits, etc.).

Not only that. If the dems can figure out how to do this, and keep oil prices manageable, they can make the reps "drill now" strategy impotent.

Here's the latest oil reporting from MSNBC.
More concerns that crude's run-up over the past year has pushed prices to unsustainable levels fed Monday's decline. The U.S. Transportation Department said Monday that U.S. drivers logged 9.6 billion fewer vehicle miles in May -- or 3.7 percent -- compared to the same period last year, the biggest drop ever for the historically busy summer driving month.

And demand for oil in the U.S. -- the world's thirstiest consumer -- continues to fall, dropping by 891,000 barrels per day in May compared the same month a year ago, the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration said Monday.

"We're seeing both statistical and anecdotal evidence of very rapidly weakening demand picture," said Jim Ritterbusch, president of energy consultancy Ritterbusch and Associates in Galena, Ill.

The declines accelerated after oil briefly dipped below $122, a key resistance level that triggered technical selling by computers programed to dump oil contracts once prices fall below a certain threshold. The next technical level traders are watching is $117.

"I think we could see $117 a barrel in a one-week time frame, and this market could eventually get to $100," Ritterbusch said.


]]> Comment #7 by Colin Wright http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/ Tue, 29 Jul 2008 07:31:32 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/more-choices-for-a-healthy-economy/7 Staying one step ahead of the markets...

Permit me some more speculation here...

Perhaps now that the Saudi's (the old swing producer) are essentially maxed out on oil production, the U.S. has become the swing conserver? The ball is now in our court to determine the world price of oil. (So long as we can conserve and stay ahead of world oil depletion!)

I wonder if the same reasoning could apply to the energy markets in general (given we are the world's energy hog!). If, say, the next President appointed an energy czar to direct a federal policy of the "Great Renewable Energy Transition", could we not only keep oil prices manageable, but those of natural gas and electricity. So, for example, the gov't could "direct" more conservation/efficiency/wind/solar/geothermal to come online in such a manner to keep all energy prices manageable. (They would of course want to keep the prices high enough to encourage conservation but not high enough to bankrupt ordinary people.)

I wonder if a new TVA/BPA type project (wind, solar, geothermal) would serve to moderate electricity prices as the private markets switch to renewables. Sort of as a parallel to an expanded Strategic Petroleum Reserves, though of course electricity cannot be stored for a rainy day. (You could also make a case for a Strategic Natural Gas Reserve -- I don't think we have one, or do we?)

I guess what I'm getting at is using gov't policy to act as a price buffer, as well as a market regulator/innovator.

]]> Staying one step ahead of the markets...

Permit me some more speculation here...

Perhaps now that the Saudi's (the old swing producer) are essentially maxed out on oil production, the U.S. has become the swing conserver? The ball is now in our court to determine the world price of oil. (So long as we can conserve and stay ahead of world oil depletion!)

I wonder if the same reasoning could apply to the energy markets in general (given we are the world's energy hog!). If, say, the next President appointed an energy czar to direct a federal policy of the "Great Renewable Energy Transition", could we not only keep oil prices manageable, but those of natural gas and electricity. So, for example, the gov't could "direct" more conservation/efficiency/wind/solar/geothermal to come online in such a manner to keep all energy prices manageable. (They would of course want to keep the prices high enough to encourage conservation but not high enough to bankrupt ordinary people.)

I wonder if a new TVA/BPA type project (wind, solar, geothermal) would serve to moderate electricity prices as the private markets switch to renewables. Sort of as a parallel to an expanded Strategic Petroleum Reserves, though of course electricity cannot be stored for a rainy day. (You could also make a case for a Strategic Natural Gas Reserve -- I don't think we have one, or do we?)

I guess what I'm getting at is using gov't policy to act as a price buffer, as well as a market regulator/innovator.

]]>