4th
Sticky solution to clear problem
The Columbia Chronicle - link
Originally published: May 2, 2005
Who better to determine the solutions to our nation’s energy crisis than industry lobbyists? Well, nobody, according to the House of Representatives.
In fact, Representatives felt so confident about this answer that they were willing to attach a $12 billion price tag to H.R. 6, a bill passed on April 21. It’s all about more production of crude oil and less restrictions on how we go about it.
After the Senate stalled the first four attempts at this legislation, perhaps the fifth time will be a charm.
Ironically, on the same day, the UK’s Guardian ran an article in which Colin Campbell—a former chief geologist for Amoco, who also worked for BP, Texaco and Shell, among others—noted that, “Estimating [oil] reserves is a scientific business. … Reporting [reserves], however, is a political act.”
Politically, the White House has blessed the new energy legislation that carries more than a few suspicious items.
Aside from protecting makers of the gasoline additive, methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE), from water contamination lawsuits, the bill also allows Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to welcome another completely wild form of life: oil drilling.
Alternative sources for energy will once again have to wait for another day—or at least for another administration.
President Bush demanded that Congress get an energy bill on his desk by summer, but he has even acknowledged that should the legislation pass, gasoline prices would not be dropping anytime soon.
On April 20, Bush told the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, “I wish I could simply wave a magic wand and lower gas prices tomorrow.” A magic wand might be required for the president’s approval ratings, which have been sinking as fast as the cost of gas for consumers has been rising.
While the requests of House Democrats for improved fuel economy standards on automobiles failed to pass, there are signs that skyrocketing costs at the pump may have us taking the matter into our own hands.
As we head into the active “summer driving season” when costs will likely soar, some recent numbers are indicating that more people are growing impatient with the abysmal mileage they’ve been getting over the years.
So many, in fact, that MSNBC reported the market for hybrid automobiles has surged an astonishing 960 percent since 2000. The registration of new hybrid vehicles in 2004 increased 81 percent from 2003.
And in the first three months of 2005, Toyota has reported it is on track to double the sales of its Prius, which made up more than half of the hybrid market last year.
We’d like to think that anything reducing the number of visits a consumer has to make to the pump should likely be taken into consideration.
But according to The New York Times, when Rep. Joe L. Barton, a Texas Republican and chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, was asked about urging consumers to help lower demand by driving less, he responded, “If you want to tell them that, go ahead. I want to be re-elected.”
Such statements, which reflect elected officials’ reluctance to address our oil dependency problem, bring one word to mind: crude.
