Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Victor Davis Hanson :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Oil Hydra
by Victor Davis Hanson
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Oil is nearly $100 a barrel. Gas may soon reach $4 a gallon. And Americans are being bitten in almost every way imaginable by this insidious oil hydra.

Two billion people in China and India are now eager consumers. They want the cars, gadgets and lifestyle that Westerners have claimed as a birthright for a half-century. Their growing energy appetites mean that the international petroleum market may remain tight, even if Americans — who use almost twice as much oil per day as China and India put together — cut back on imported energy.

The Middle East is raking in billions each week. At best, our so-called friends in cash-laden Saudi Arabia subsidize fundamentalist mosques and hate-filled madrassas worldwide. At worst, our enemies in petrol-rich Iran are after the bomb, send weapons into Iraq to kill Americans and fund Hezbollah jihadists.

War in Iraq, rumors of fighting in the near-future in Iran and tension on the West Bank only panic markets, raise oil prices and further enrich our grinning enemies.

The nearly half-trillion dollars we will soon pay for imported oil does a lot more than prop up Russia's Vladimir Putin, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The petrodollar drain also contributes to our trade deficits, falling dollar and a general demoralization of the American people.

Our oil habit not only makes us dependent on some creepy suppliers, but we look like fools as we work nonstop to hand over our earnings to those who are rich by an accident of sitting atop oil someone else found and developed.

There is talk in this country of a gradual transition to alternative fuels, solar power, wind machines, plug-in electric cars and nuclear power. Supposedly Americans will soon be less dependent on imported oil — while helping to slow global warming — as we are weaned off our fossil-fuel addiction.

But let's talk about the present: If oil continues to climb, ultimately, it will change our very way of life. Hard-pressed families will shell out thousands more a year in direct transportation and heating and cooling costs, and more still as consumer prices inflate.

It may have always been unwise for commuters to buy large SUVs and V8 supercab trucks. Now, though, we may reach the point where these pricey huge vehicles will sputter to a halt. Indebted Americans will still shell out monthly payments to pay off their parked dinosaurs, only to drive them for emergency or ceremonial occasions.

Also expect rising popular anger at an asleep-at-the-wheel government that for the last 20 years should have been doing a lot more to mandate conservation, subsidize alternate fuels, encourage nuclear power and open up oil fields offshore and in Alaska.

Instead, doctrinaire free-market purists and radical environmentalists, hand in glove, for years have thwarted both conservation and exploration.

True, in a perfect world, the market would teach Detroit not to build gas-hungry big cars. Yet in the here and now, we are needlessly burning scarce fuel as too many 7,000-pound mammoths deliver single 180-pound drivers to work — while the auto industry continues on its path to irrelevance.

Meanwhile, green politicians may not want messy oilrigs off their coasts, or tankers up north among the ice and polar bears. But so far very few of them have sworn off jet travel, nice cars or ample homes.

Oil companies claim that they are only passing along escalating costs from overseas suppliers over which they have no control. But around a third of our oil is pumped here at home.

Think about it: The cost to extract oil from existing older wells is relatively fixed. For much of the 1990s and early 2000s, oil prices had been steady at between $20 and $30 a barrel (when adjusted for inflation) — and domestic oil companies did quite well. So now at near $100 a barrel, these corporations are raking additional profits of over $60 a barrel — potentially a domestic windfall of hundreds of billions of dollars each year.

Is there an easy way out of the mess we've gotten ourselves into?

Maybe a Silicon Valley genius inventor or entrepreneur will step forward with a breakthrough new energy source.

Maybe our government will start a crash project on the scale of the Manhattan Project to conserve and produce more fuels.

Maybe China and India will consider radical conservation measures.

Maybe countries like Iraq, Libya and Russia will start reinvesting in their oil infrastructures and double production.

Maybe the Middle East will finally settle down and soothe jittery oil speculators.

Those are too many maybes to wait for while our way of life hangs in the balance. It is past time to demand from our presidential candidates, as well as the current government, exactly when and how they plan to slay this many-headed oil monster.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and a recipient of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.

Be the first to read Victor Davis Hanson's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

SteveL
Although you raise a good point about the wahhabist propaganda and madrassas, etc, I can't agree that that's the only thing we need to address -- or that "Saudi propaganda" even CAN be starved away. Propaganda is also cheap, and gets more bang for its buck with every pretext people have for feeling sorry for themselves.

What it would take to actually deny oil revenues to Saudi, Iran, and Russia is a full-on "renversement" (great French word for which there's no perfect English equivalent) of the modern, convenient way of life that much of the world is only now attaining. The resentment that would be created by state-imposed suppression of the oil market would give "Saudi propaganda" a far greater boost around the world than anything we have seen yet.

The essential problem of wahhabism for the rest of us is precisely that it can't be comprehensively attacked on the traditional, historical state-to-state basis. The national boundaries and resources of its sponsors are significant to it, but not decisive in the summary, Clausewitzian sense. There's no such approach as the one that will efficiently make all the wahhabist terrorism stop -- and that includes "weaning ourselves off of oil."

2 Trillion barrels of oil in shale rocks
In Colorado shell oil has invested 1 Billion in a
shale oil recovery plant. However, when the shale rocks are cooked to get the oil, the shale
pops like popcorn. This leaves more volume of rock than they started with. When the enviro's saw the slag pile, they sued and stopped the project. So a producing plant is sitting idle until Shell can solve the slag pile problem. And this plant is in the middle of nowhere. And very few will every see the area. SMART!!! not.

SAUDIS' TEATS
I just saw another MoveOn..Org Media Matters bone head do the Bush-Cheney horses hit dance SMEARING THIS BLOG

Look dumby: Does your wind farm Work??? NOOOO !

Do Your Solar Panels provide enough power to do what you want to do ???? NOOOOOOOOOO !

Did your bucket shop college/university (PCU) prepare you to work a union job in a coal mine ??? NOOOOOOO

The immature BRAT-CRATS from MoveOn.Org MediaMatters are like Karl Marx – stunk and never worked a real labor job in their lives

Do you get radioactive with the word “Nuclear”???? YESSSSS! Love faire a visite aux Framce? Quand tout de monde est atomique’!

Have the Greeniacs made you guilty because a) own a car, b) heat a residence, c) A/C a residence, d) use a stove, e) prefer warm baths/showers, etc. ALL THE ABOVE ????? YESssssss

Hillary, O’Boyma, the crash lawyer, Seig Heil George Soros are all pigs on the Saudis’ teats.

Energy Independence
I agree with others who have said that it's not so much about conservation as it is about supply. We haven't allowed allowed drilling, we haven't built new nuclear power plants, and we haven't encouraged alternative fuels and energy sources. So now we are overly dependent on foreign oil.

It's difficult to take the right approach to win the war on terror when we're dependent on the countries that support terror. Energy Independence is not about saving the "planet" from global warming it's about our national security and our freedom to prosper, our future economy is at stake - this is why we need energy independence.

I personally think Gov Mike Huckabee has the most balanced, sane appproach towards this whole issue as well as some great ideas about taxes, the conomy and free (but fair) trade. Rassmussen polls now have Huckabee in 3rd place, ahead of Romney and McCain, and gaining on Thompson.

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Issues.Vie w&Issue_id=21

Here's a snip of what Rush Limbaugh had to say today, "Folks, I want to posit here a couple things for you. Everybody's asked me, and they continue to ask me, "How come you haven't picked anybody in the primaries? How come you haven't launched anybody?" Well, I never do, but I've always answered them saying, "It's still too early. There's so much flux out there, anything can happen right now," and I want to give you just a couple of scenarios. Huckabee is really coming on strong in Iowa. He is really coming on strong. What happens if he wins Iowa, which is a distinct possibility now? What if Mike Huckabee wins Iowa? What does that do to Mitt Romney and Thompson in New Hampshire and South Carolina, respectively?"

Dick Morris Echoes pretty much the same idea:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/11/huckabee_ can_win_in_iowa.html

Just wait until Diesel hits $5.00.
You guys really must be joking, that it was Enviromentalists who ruined alternative energy.

America, as we know it will come begging for trains.

But we can't use trains, because the oil companies pulled up all the railroad tracks.

I have heard there has been a delayed approach to diesel price hikes, because we are farmers and when diesel goes up, the proverbial waste is going to get spread far and wide.

I predict the Oil Conglomerate profits will be about equal to the nation's Iraq war spending, what maybe a $Billion per week? But that won't bother Bush. You might see some Crocodile tears. I'm sure you will all be convinced by Fox News, he really cares about the plight of Americans, who can no longer afford to have food shipped to their local WalMart from China.

What justice would you toughies propose for someone who deliberately ruined our chances of developing and using alterative energies?

You guys really must be joking, that it was Enviromentalists who ruined alternative energy.


eastlake joe
You're absolutely right. We can't depend on oil forever. We need some time to develop a better way. We need to use the resources available to us now while working on other sources of energy.

The most dangerous position this country is in right now is depending on energy sources from out side this country.

I’m not informed enough to know whether there’s anything to the US engaging in war to protect oil interest or not. It sure doesn’t look like we got much oil for our effort and dollar if we do.

If Bush took us to Iraq for oil, we sure got the loose end of that deal. As far as I know, we haven’t gotten a barrel out of there.

It doesn’t really matter now why we are there now; we have to make it work out.

We need to get off of fossil fuels as soon as possible.

There’s always going to be some risk with accessing energy sources. But, returning to the Stone Age is not an option.

I read your posts often. You do a good job getting your point across.

We! are in with the Saudi's ????
I am in awe of your idiocy. All of you. First of all, do you know that the U.S. and your president are now members of OPEC? And actually, since both Bush and Cheneny came from the oil business, they are doing quit well now with $100 crude.

The only reason there is any sense to this VDH article is that he stole all his material from "enviro-fascists" like myself, who have been saying the same thing for years: tax gasoline to force conservation and create new technologies, manhatten projects for environmentally efficient technologies, plug in cars, etc. All of these things we have been screaming for since Reagan ruined this country (by driving it into debt then claiming he wants small government.)
I drive a Prius, but because the "American market" didn't want a plug in car, I can't plug mine in now, without practically developing the technology by myself. THAT's the JOB of GOVERNMENT: to do things for the common good that no one else can afford. It makes me want to scream. I mean we have deserts that have nothing but solar energy, we have cities with thousands of square miles of rooftops, but our government wanted to make oil cheap so that all these solar technologies would be prohibitively expensive. VDH (sound like an STD) says: "There is talk in this country of a gradual transition to alternative fuels, solar power, wind machines, plug-in electric cars and nuclear power. " Environmentalists have been interested in clean fusion power for a long time, just not having to deal with radioactive waste for 100,000 years. There has been such talk for a very long time. All opposed by the lunatic fringe. When you guys look in the mirror, you might recognise it.

"ALTERNATIVE ENERGY" FAKERY
ALONE -I am fighting a no-win game! No matter how hard I yodel the Greens always out yodel me louder and louder higher up on the hill to be heard by many more people. The resources for the Green Environmentalists are inexhaustible because it is Saudi - OPEC - Big Oil that pays the rent and all their other expenses.

I scream aloud anxiously about the critical importance of domestic energy independence and the environmental obstructionist halt – in the courts with their $1,000.oo/hour attorneys – any consideration because of some restrictions on greenlands, grasslands, floodlands, mudlands, waterlands. and some bug or field mouse supposedly “endangered” that stops any further progress dead in its tracks.

Think deep for a moment! Realize the reasoning why some creep sheik like Moham bin Moola Moola would sponsor his political opposite and accept the reality that none of these “alternative” sources of energy actually work so we find ourselves investing in energy sources we think will work that in reality will not now or ever work. We are buy ing into a fake!


"ALTERNATIVE ENERGY" FAKERY
Try to see what cannot be seen and the rest of the mystery will then come into the clear.

Imagine a Sheik Moham bin Moola Moola whose primary social-financial-economic-political interest is OIL-OIL-OIL and the best thing possible for this creep-sheik is the US to remain desperately dependent on acquiring its oil needs for foreign sources.

The ever changing socio-political activity in the US makes it of priority importance to be on top, ahead of, and setting every trend relative to energy economics and public policy; ergo, public image politics devoted to “Alternative Forms of Energy” must be rightfully controlled and managed by none other than Sheik Moham bin Moola Moola – better said - the Big Boys from Saudi Arabia and OPEC.

Did I say that correctly? OPEC is the primary source selling the US public the fallacious notions of solar power, wind power, biomass, anything but - god forbid - nuclear power and forget about mining and burning coal or domestic drilling for oil anywhere that the Stars and Stripes might wave. It is the Oil Barons who are footing the bill selling the “Alternative Fuels” nonsense which the guilt tripped American public are buying hook line and sinker.

ALL LIES! Global Warming-Climate Change, Sola-Windo-Pedo Power are all masquerade masks of Saudi Arabia, OPEC and the creep sheiks like Moham bin Moola Moola. These smiling jackels will willingly drown the US in its insatiable demands for more and more oil.


Foxfire
I agree with you we could be self sufficient, but at best it's a temporary fix. World supplies are "fixed". They wont go on forever at the rate we are consuming. The long term fix is indeed renewable energy. I don't claim to know which is best- solar, bio,hydrogen or others but we do need a long term fix and we need it sooner than later. If we keep on the way we're going, I can see the world holding us hostage with oil supplies and that translates to a loss of national security. that is something we can not tolerate as it could be a prelude to fullscale war.
I'm done for the night, God bless you all.
God bless America.....AGAIN!!
SEAL THE BORDER BEFORE WE SEAL OUR FUTURE!
HUNTER/TANCREDO "08"

Well said, Foxfire
Amen.

We Could Be Self Sufficient

Everywhere you look, they are blocking efforts to our survival.
California prides itself for its environment position. So, they don’t build power plants, they buy it from someone else, then use it like a drug addict with an unlimited expense account.

When they start having black outs, they want the blame someone else.

We need leadership in Washington that will do what it takes to get off of dependency of foreign oil sources.

We keep crying about wars for oil. Why don’t the American people tell Washington to get off dependency NOW, not 5, 10 years from now?

Environmentalists need to make up there mind. Do you want wars or get off dependence on foreign sources. The need isn’t going away.

We Could Be Self Sufficient
You know what amazes me?
During WW2 the US lost nearly half of its navy. We would be speaking Japanese if they had not made the mistake of breaking off the attack.

The US recovered and went on to fight on two fronts and win.

In less than 4 years the country recovered from near destruction, and went on to become a super power.

What am I leading to?
Why is it that we can’t deal with this energy problem?

What Washington needs to do is declare a state national emergency and mobilize its resources.
The president needs to tell environmentalists to buzz off, and we need to do what ever it takes to get off our dependence on foreign oil.
If we need nuclear power, we need to start building them, if we need to drill, then lets get at it.
We got plenty of coal, natural gas, oil right here. It’s the cotton picking environmentalists that are hamstringing us.

Least someone say that I’m not environmentally conscience, let me say that we can manage the environment without destroying ourselves.

These wackos want to take us back to the dark ages.
What we need to do is get off dependence on someone else, and that’s worth taking the chance. We are the world’s greatest producer of technology and we can’t come up with enough energy to provide our needs.

Right now we are trying to build a fence that could be up in a few months, but the environmentalists are trying to block efforts. The New Orleans mess was created by environmentalists.

CONTINUED

SteveL
For your further enlightenment:

http://www.jericanonoil.com/


I quote: "The Canadian oil shale deposits are small only when we compare them to the enormous American deposits, the Green River Formation, and our Canadian tar sands. The US shale deposits rank as the world's largest with over two trillion barrels of recoverable crude."




SteveL
Read my post more carefully next time, Steve. I clearly drew the distinction between our own oil shale and the oil sands in Canada.

The eastern face of the Rockies is loaded with oil shale.


for dyerje
dyerje writes: "Terrorists could fund their very cheap war with bake sales, if they had to. We can't arrest terrorism by not buying oil."

It's not the TERRORISTS per se. It's the Saudi propaganda machine that we need to starve.

The Saudis are now spending MORE money on spreading Islamist propaganda, and paying off agents of influence operating in the West, than the USSR's KGB ever did spreading their Communist message. There are Saudi lobbyists right in Washington DC, highly paid, spreading a message of "friendship" with the fundamentalist Muslim world (you know what that means).

80% of the mosques right here in the U.S. are funded by Saudi money. And that money comes with strings attached; the literature supplied by the Saudis to those mosques is virulently anti-American and anti-Semitic, as surveys have shown.

The propaganda war being waged by the Islamists is very effective and it's the soil in which terrorism takes root and grows.

Price per barrel
If the price per barrel is the deciding factor in price per gallon, then why is gas 2.76 a gallon in Mississippi and 3.19 here in Ohio? the answer is road use taxes that vary state to state. It doesn't make it any easier to take, but it's the facts, just the facts.

Seal the border or seal our fate.

HUNTER/TANCREDO "08"

for BrianR
BrianR writes: "Our own oil shale is a vast proven reserve, again blocked by the enviro-Nazis."

It's not "our" oil shale, sir.

80% of the oil shale in North America is inside Canada, not the U.S.

Why should Canada be willing to strip-mine their western provinces for oil shale just so we Americans can continue to drive gas-guzzling cars? Unless they can sell us that product at a price high enough as to cover the huge environmental degradation from mining oil shale. That will cause the oil from oil shale to be MORE expensive than drilled oil.

Or would you prefer that we just go to war and annex Canada outright?

Eon
Check your facts a little closer. Perry nuclear was built in 1976 to about 1983 If I remember right. I know it was after I got married in 1976, because both my brothersin law worked on the building of it. Thats Perry Ohio, by the way.

close the border close the drain economy wise.

HUNTER/TANCREDO "08"

Driven By The Trade Deficit
A large chunk of the runup in the price of oil is a result of our trade deficit. The trade deficit is to a large degree the result of our energy purchases. Excess dollars in the hands of our trading partners has in the past returned to us in the form of debt purchases from the US Treasury. That wasn't going to go on forever.

When trading partners find themselves in the position of holding too many dollars you have to up the payout to get them to take more. This is the self correcting aspect of trade imbalances and it would have happened sooner had we not been borrowing so much money to finance our spendthrift ways.

To say the price of oil and of gold have gone up is incorrect. We have, through bad fiscal policy and the complete lack of a rational policy on energy, driven the dollar down. Gold and oil are the standard, the dollar is not.

We are set for a perfect storm. China and India rising, the dollar falling, entitlements preparing to suck up every dollar the government takes in and the Democrats preparing to stab the economy in the *ss by raising taxes. Ain't life interesting?

Agree -- Blame Bush
But also blame all you guys who don't understand that gasoline has not "hit" $3.00/gallon yet. It is the Federal and state taxes that account for about $.50/gallon (that is the last number I saw). So quit complaining, and understand that the Feds and states are the biggest single cost of gasoline other than crude.

Pooh, I am TheHistorian. Quit stealing my mantra about being doomed to repeat history if you don't learn it.

The idiots who don't understand history is those with the environmental agenda which drove oil to this peak (the US is importing refined products like we are Iran, we are not drilling and exploiting our own oil, and the propaganda that coal is a dirty fuel has caused NG to be burned for electricity, forcing its price up instead of building coal-fired power) which taken together have caused most of this price spike. Although I will admit that the drop in Iraq export of oil has not helped; Sadaam had so screwed up that infrastructure it was near collapse, but not going in to guard it was a big mistake.

Blame Bush and his ilk
He and his Republicans (and the Democrats too) have spent an enormous amount of money advancing war and expanding the welfare state. All of that has to be paid for. And we are paying for it all with high prices for gas and various other things, ultimately everything. It's called inflation and it's the sneaky way government is paid for by simply printing dollars. The value of our dollar is lower, because the size of government is larger. Middle Easterners, or oil itself, have nothing to do with it. Exactly what happened under Richard Nixon, for the same reasons.

Those Who Do Not Learn From History....
Those Who Do Not Learn From History are Doomed to Repeat It! You would think that the idiots in Washington would have figured out by now that every time we stickour noses in the middle of Middle East affairs,it turns around and bites us in the butt!

Does anyone remember that it was the US that armed Saddam to give him the advantage which enabled him to gain control of Iraq.

These weapons will end up being used on us, just as they have every other time we tried these stunts.

Perhaps we should make our leaders actually lead our soldiers into the battlefield and fight along side the soldiers. Then maybe the people who start wars and arm people they should not,would think twice before doing idiotic actions which causes a loss of our soldiers lives.

We could also REQUIRE that each politician read and understand every word of legislation that they sign.

carlos
Yep, I meant INelastic. Brain synapse misfiring.

The Current Spike
The current oil spike did not occur until George W. Bush launched a foolish war in the Middle East. As the bulk of his political support lives in exurbia and rural America, they are paying the price for $ 3 a gallon gasoline, over twice the price of gas in 2001. They wanted Dubya and they got him good and hard in their wallets.

Kroneborg
I don't need propaganda from some web site. I worked for a public utility for 30 years and retired about a year ago.

Carlos is correct.
Both demand and supply are inelastic in the short term, and that is what leads to extreme price spikes. Mostly this is due to the enormous scale of both sides of the market.

Prolonged high prices will lead rapidly to changes in consumer behavior, however.

Look up ''thermal depolymerization''...
--
...online.

Even with 'viro opposition and all the political barricades thrown up by the oil industry, at the current price of crude oil on the world market, the production of petrochemical feed stock equivalent to light sweet crude (at energy efficiencies half again greater than what is presently gotten out of agricultural fuel ethanol or biodiesel production processes) is economically - hell, PROFITABLY - practicable.

And cheaper than what we're getting out of Hugo Chavez, the Nigerian Oil Pirates, and the Wogs.

The raw materials?

Offal from the poultry processing industry, waste plastic, and the like.

One pilot plant operating for the past three years has demonstrated the yield from one ton of turkey waste (guano, guts, feathers, and the like) to be 600 pounds of petroleum, 100 pounds of butane/methane ("natural gas"), and 60 pounds of various minerals, which include fixed carbon solids that can be used as filter material or as activated carbon in wastewater treatment, as a fertilizer, or as a fuel similar to coal.

And the plant recycles the water employed for reuse.

Heard anything about it from the MSM?

No?

Well, that's hardly a surprise, is it?


--


I better get back to work Akagi
Money translates to power and it's flowing out of America rapidly.

I'll shut up now.

Think Bush
George W. Bush deserves much of the blame for the oil run-up due to his war of choice in Iraq and his sabre-rattling against Iran and Venezuela. Oil was relatively cheap until Bush stirred the Middle Eastern hornet's nest. He refused to consider that the Middle East is vital only for its oil and nothing else. Democratization of the Middle East is of no importance to America's interests.

Bush's blind spot regarding oil is this- when Reagan crushed OPEC in the 80s, Bush is one of the few Americans not to profit from OPEC's demise. He's resentful of what happened over two decades ago. And though Bush is no longer part of the American oil industry he is sympathetic toward the oil industry. Remember, many oilers are still his friends. They're the type of people he used to like to get drunk with in the 80s.

Carlos
Since you seem to think that "big oil and big auto..." caused the desmise of streetcar systems, you might be interested in this:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa559.pdf

It's a thorough analysis by Randal O'Toole of urban mass transit. In it, O'Toole identifies the government as the culprit.

As far as "doing business with OPEC", oil is fungible. "Energy Independence" is an illusory dream, neither desirable nor attainable.

Inelastic demand
I might have it backwards but I don't think our demand for oil is elastic dyerje.

No OPEC?
Is Nigeria such a threat these days? Only one of the top three exporters to the US is in OPEC. Most OPEC members actually export little oil to the US except for Saudi Arabia (#2); Nigeria (#4) and Venezuela (#5).


Akagi
Yes, I know where the US gets our oil from. The extended argument about American oil imports (and don't mistake this for MY argument or concern; but this is how VDH would extend it) is that our elastic demand is a key element keeping world oil prices up. Thus, because Americans buy so much oil, Iran can charge China more for it than if America didn't buy so much oil.

As far as it goes, this element of the argument is correct. Simple supply and demand. There IS a world price of oil, and it is driven by aggregate demand, regardless of who buys from whom.

The rest of VDH's concerns on this matter I don't buy into so much.

Good point re Canada and Mexico...
but spare the lame sarcasm. We shouldn't be doing business with OPEC.

Roosters
Whatever solution one proposes - it takes time. And as is generally the case in democracy's, what we need today should've been done 15 years ago - and wasn't. There was a time when the Saudi's would've turned up the spigots to help us out - but they've essentially stopped doing so - and the Saudi's and Mexico are where we get much of our import oil. It also does us no good to say that if we buy from them, but not the Irani's, that someone else is feeding that lion. After all - if you're consuming 24% of the world's consumption, you're directly or indirectly feeding all the lions. It is, after all, a manipulated and finite supply. We were warned when the price jumped from $30 to $60 - and didn't fall, and now it's jumped from $60 to $90. Indeed, they may take it from $90 to $120. After all - if it was my oil and I could get it I just might do that as well. The price, after all, as in all finite markets, is reflected by what the market will pay - and just what is it Americans and others will pay to drive those SUV's? We don't have the leverage we once had, in part because the Saudi's are furious at our actions in Iraq, which they believe have destabilized the region and strengthened their historic enemies - the Shia's. We may not believe we have limits on our power, but China's announcement that she's going to start selling the debt she has purchased to get rid of the dollars - due to weakness, the refusal of the Saudi's to purchase more debt at the interest rate recently offered by the Fed, and the decisons by the Irani's and Russians to stop selling oil in dollars is weakening our currency and threatening to drive up the cost of money needed to fund our debt. The bottom line is that when you rely on the unreliable - whether in oil or in debt - they have leverage - and they're increasingly using it.

We're the worlds largest debtor - and that rooster, as well as the continued reliance on oil, is coming home to roost.

Oil
dyerje:

But the US gets most of its oil from Canada and Mexico. Of the top 5 producers only Saudi Arabia and Venezuela are problematic. Russia sells only 10% to the US that Canada does and the US gets no oil from Iran.

I'm not too worried about Canadians or Mexicans really.

Vic
You should get your numbers straight. Wind is already around the 4-6 cents per/kilo watt hour range. http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/Cost2001.PDF
And depending on the prices for various fossil fuels is already beating them. The wind industry is growing at 20-30% a year. And it will soon be the cheapest form of energy, either renewable or fossil. Yes it does have it’s draw backs, but I would much rather live next to a wind farm, than a coal plant. Wind turbines might occasionally kill some birds, but at least my kid won’t get mercury poisoning.

Landlords
Of the top five exporters only one is a Muslim nation. of the top 15 only 6 are. Except for Saudi Arabia, the remaining 5 don't even equal Canada's imports.

One more thing
Of the top 15 countries the US imports oil from, Iran is not even on the list. Will China stop importing oil from Iran if Americans pay more for gas or stop driving SUVs?

Of the top five countries the US imports oil from only the #2 and #5 are problematic--Saudi Arabia and Venezeula. Russia, which he mentions is only 10% of what Canada provides.

Dave6on
That is a bleedover habit from my blog. Click on my name & stop by :)!

Yes Creepy
Like Canada, which the US imports the most oil from and Mexico at #3.

What are those evil Canucks planning to do with those billions they get from their oil. Make us eat our french fries with mayonnaise? Oh the humanity.






reaping what we've sown
I am all for conservation, because it echoes the values my grandmother grew up with during the Depression.

Having said that, the posts following this article should make clear the results of what happens when the Enviro-Left and their cronies get to run things:

First, proclaim that government would do everything better than the private sector, because the private sector tends toward monopolies and gouges the public.

Second, regulate the private sector damn near out of business, such that only the biggest companies (read, near-monopolies) can survive, eliminating the competition that drives prices down.

Third, legislate away the ability of even the largest companies to function effectively (no drilling, no new refineries), increasing dependence on foreign oil and driving prices higher.

Then, clamor that you were right all along - now the government has to come in and cap prices.

Now imagine what will happen if the Dems take control of the White House in addition to Congress. Good luck.

Wayne's right. $50 to ARCO today
So why again am I lining the pockets of guys like Putin, Chavez and the Saudis ?

It's not about left or right - it's about crooks screwing us over.

The Sierra Club, big oil and big auto each will put their own interests ahead of energy independence. Research how the electric street cars were replaced in New York with a bus system. Just follow the money and it will lead to the truth.






Windfarms will never
be anything other than special case small project sources in out of the way places that are too expensive to bring in power lines and don't have suitable sun for solar.

They are expensive and all the scale you can get is already here. They are noisy if you use a blade of size sufficient to give you any power, and they will kill birds if you put them in an area with birds.

It is also very difficult to regulate the power from a windmill because it constantly chages speed. This is why in the past they were used primarily for wells fill a tank.

As I said in an earlier post, when the rpice of electricity reaches 15 cents/kw-hr, with penalties for use and subsidies for solar, it can become cost effective.

And this is ultimatley the aim of the eco-idiots. They are doing everything possible to drive up the cost of energy so that their "preferred source" become economical. What they don't tell you is that as the price goes up those on the margins are driven in the dirt.

Georgetwin
I agree with what you wrote. I was just clarifying that one point. I do think you could use fewer caps ;-)

Kroneborge
Theory vs fact. And apples vs. oranges.

It's a persistent Western error to posit that economic downturns will prompt POSITIVE reforms in command societies/economies (and Russia still has a largely command economy, and is increasingly reverting to oligarchic control of the political apparatus). There are no instances of lower revenues from a key product forcing Russia, Iran, or any other centralized, authoritarian state to institute liberal reforms. "Reforms" under those conditions tend much more to tightening state control on speech, travel, and individual options; and dividing the citizenry against itself.

State belligerence vis-a-vis other nations is also not the same thing as suppressing internal reforms, nor is the converse true. Russia and Iran have maintained a fairly uniform level of "belligerence" since the collapse of the Soviet Union, regardless of oil prices. Both have pursued weapons program improvements and procurement, which is an effort made more effective by higher oil revenues. That may be what you mean.

But belligerent intentions find oil revenues convenient; they don't wax or wane with oil revenues. The causes of belligerent intentions lie elsewhere, and can't be addressed through the oil market. It's far, far more likely that actually trying to starve Russia or Iran of oil revenues would cause them to attack their neighbors, than that it would cause them to abandon their belligerent intentions and their weapons programs.

Dave6on
I realize that, but my other points are still valid.

Kroneborge
It's fine for you to argue why what I wrote about commodity prices shouldn't be true, but that does not make it untrue.

Malthusian predictions have always proven to be false. The Club of Rome, Malthus, and Ehrlich have all been discredited, to cite three examples.

A large part of the recent rise in "food" prices, meaning corn in particular, is the result of misguided, politically motivated, government mandates that divert food crops into fuel production. It won't last long. Already, there's a glut of ethanol production, with scheduled plant investments being abandoned daily. An additional problem with ethanol is that the railcars required to ship the ethanol scheduled to be produced by those plants cannot be built for about ten years.

It's another case of government distortion of a functioning market, resulting in shortages and high prices.

I don't know how many of you proponents of windmill farms have noticed, but the wind doesn't blow at night. As a result, windpower will never occupy more than a tiny fraction of the market, and it will not result in any reduction in conventional power plants, because of the need for utilities to provide peak power from reliable, large-scale generating facilities.


Kroneborge
It's fine for you to argue why what I wrote about commodity prices shouldn't be true, but that does not make it untrue.

Malthusian predictions have always proven to be false. The Club of Rome, Malthus, and Ehrlich have all been discredited, to cite three examples.

A large part of the recent rise in "food" prices, meaning corn in particular, is the result of misguided, politically motivated, government mandates that divert food crops into fuel production. It won't last long. Already, there's a glut of ethanol production, with scheduled plant investments being abandoned daily.

It's another case of government distortion of a functioning market, resulting in shortages and high prices.

I don't know how many of you proponents of windmill farms have noticed, but the wind doesn't blow at night. As a result, windpower will never occupy more than a tiny fraction of the market, and it will not result in any reduction in conventional power plants, because of the need for utilities to provide peak power from reliable, large-scale generating facilities.


Dyerje
Actually that's not true. There is a direct relationship between how beligerent countries like Iran and Russia are, and the price of oil. High oil allows them to suppress reforms. Low prices require it.

If oil goes to $100 a barrel
... and the price at the American pump doesn't increase... did a tree make a noise falling in the forest?

VDH's long-term concern has really been that buying oil puts money in the hands of the questionable and downright execrable on this earth, from Putin's Russia to Saudi Arabia to Hugo Chavez and the Venezuelan Bolsheviks.

In the single case of Iran, we may correctly associate oil revenues with an imminently threatening, state-wielded WMD arsenal. The US doesn't buy any oil from Iran, so it's Iran's non-American customers who are feeding that lion.

But when it comes to the funding of terrorism, oil money is a proximate convenience, not a life's blood. Terrorists could fund their very cheap war with bake sales, if they had to. We can't arrest terrorism by not buying oil.

VDH avoids prescribing anything particular here, and that's wise. We can't "preserve our way of life" by arranging for the state to force us to REJECT our way of life, in order to send the economies of oil producers into tailspins for decades. If you think Russia with oil revenues is bad, try Russia WITHOUT oil revenues. None of the threats to us can be either placated or starved -- they can only be defeated.

Patriots?
How sad when someone from the right or left offers up the truth and a bipartisan call to action and he is met with distain and name-calling, especially by his own. I heard from the Bush administration that oil supply would increase and the cost would go down if we invaded Iraq. What happened? All the while the “patriotic” American continues to fund terrorism at the pump. And the best part: President Bush holding hands with Saudi King Abdullah at his Texas ranch as they walk off into the sunset. Pathetic.

Part 2
Environmentalists who preached the idea of clean power generation 10 to 20 years ago now claim wind mills can hurt the birds that fly near them. And some even complain about the swooshing sound they make as the blades spin. Mind you they are not loud like prop driven planes or helicopters, the loudest noise they make is comparable to trees rustling in a strong wind.

One thing holding back hydrogen as a fuel for our vehicles (either for combustion engines or better yet fuel cell systems which drive electric motors) is the power required to convert water into hydrogen and oxygen. If our national power supply was not produced in part by the burning of fossil fuels, and we had more power producing sources on-line feeding the grid we could make hydrogen from desalinated sea water, which according to Al Gore we will have plenty of as the ice caps melt.

Once a steady and affordable supply of hydrogen is in place then fuel stations will be more inclined to adapt and sell it. As more fuel stations offer it then car manufactures will be inclined to provide the buying public vehicles which run on it rather than traditional gasoline.

Part 1
Increasing drilling for oil domestically is a short term solution to the problem of funding those which want to convert us to Islam, enslave us, or kill us. I'm all for the short term solution of drilling as long as we also take the actions at the same time to ensure fossil fuels are not needed in the long term.

We have technology that can solve the reliance on fossil fuels, and that technology improves dramatically every year as we experiment and develop it further, but every time we act to build something cleaner which will reduce our demand for fossil fuels either the environmentalists, the left leaning court system, or the government bureaucrats step in and hold us back.

I live in Kansas. One of the most often used words by our local weather men and women is "windy". The terrain is so flat the wind blowing is a regular thing for us. Windmills are a win/win for farmers because they can either pay to have a large windmill built and sell the excess power they do not use themselves back to the local power company, or lease small portions of their land to a company that will build and maintain the windmills. Either way it gives farmers a second source of income and could prove to be a more profitable resource to farm than food crops. One day our food could be cheap because it is subsidized by the profits of power production.

Bring up the idea of windmill farms and many support the idea, until the prospect of them being in their back yard is brought up. The communities start having more problems with windmills than they do smelly cattle or hogs.

Dave6on
Actually, the technology for the extraction really doesn’t matter long term. In the short term, better technology and higher prices will make things like oil shale profitable to extract, BUT, that won’t make any new oil, it will just mean we can get to more of our current supplies. And it still won’t make it as cheap to extract as our other supplies that are currently being extracted.

Something to remember, is that oil is really not a regular commodity in the long term sense. Instead it should be thought of a stash of non replenishable stock of capital that we are burning through at an every increasing rate. A true commodity like wheat, can be grown year after year, but I’ve yet to see anyone grow any oil (although they are working on growing substitutes of course). Also, we should remember that even with regular commodities, they are subject to the forces of supply and demand. As we add 70 million people to the planet each year, farmers will struggle to meet their food demands. Because one, we are not adding any more land, two, many places have been pumping their aquifers in an unsustainable manner, and three we have been seeing diminishing returns lately on the returns to technology in farming. IE, technology will probably continue to increase the amount of food that can be produced on a given acre, but I seriously doubt that it will be able to keep up with the increasing demand. Especially, if food has to compete with fuel. Note the recent surge in food prices. Also, if you are really interested I recommend Lester Brown’s book “Plan B”. It goes quite in depth into the current problems in regards to food production, in particular for China.

Georgetwin
The reason racing cars run on alcohol is so that fires resulting from crashes can be doused with water.

Kroneborge
The long-term price trend, in real terms, for all commodities, including oil, is down, not up. You forget the role of technological innovation in the extraction and refining of oil.

You should read some Julian Simon, the economist who made the bet with Paul Ehrlich about this very subject. Simon's wager was that each of ten commodities, chosen by Ehrlich (author of "The Population Bomb") would be cheaper ten years hence. Simon won, and Ehrlich, I understand welshed.

Where you're right is about the fact that we are in a world economy, and we can no more become energy independent than could we become independent in the production and consumption of any other commodity. Oil is oil, and exercises in attempting to become energy independent are futile.

Energy Independence (Including Oil
Economics 101 states that the more of a product that is available, the lower the cost of that product will be. The Alaskan Pipeline was completed in the mid 70’s. Just about the same time the last refinery in America was built. The population has grown by nearly 50% since then. So we now have ½ again as many people, but we are still producing the same amount of oil. There are OCEANS of oil to be had in America, but The Tree Huggers WILL NOT ALLOW American Companies to drill for it or refine it! For the foreseeable future, Oil is CRUCIAL to America. Until we start Drilling Wells and Building Refineries we are at THE MERCY OF THE MARKETPLACE!
Ethanol is being promoted as an alternative fuel by The Tree Huggers. AS PER USUAL, The Tree Huggers/Liberals have gotten it ALL WRONG! To make Ethanol from corn requires LOTS of water and LOTS of heat. So FAR more energy is used to make it than energy is saved by using it Ethanol is basically, Water Based, Corn Liquor, so it is subject to condensation if left standing for long periods. Therefore it is unadvisable to use it in internal combustion engines. There is a class of Drag Racing Cars that run on Alcohol, ARE THEY WORRIED ABOUT MILEAGE! NO! They use Ethanol because it burns VERY HOT and VERY FAST! NOT because of its MILEAGE/COST EFFECTIVENESSS!
The only other cost effective alternative I can see would be if we could liquefy all The Methane created in sewage treatment plants. There is a CONSTANT supply of raw material, there is already infrastructure in place to deliver raw material to the manufacturer, tanker trucks already exist to deliver it to the consumers and EVERY AREA of the country produces it! Alternative Fuels are fine, but until one is invented that is COST EFFECTIVE, DELIVERY EFFECTIVE and CONVENIENT, folks will opt for the Alternative to Alternative Fuels, GASOLINE!

Frankly
Today's greenies are the modern Luddites.

Kroneborge
Though you're right that oil is a finite resource, and I also agree that we need to bring on line alternative and additional energy sources, you're much too pessimistic about the oil reserves we actually have on hand.

First of all, under current rules, only a small portion of current reserves are removed from a well before that well is considered depleted. But the reality is that the majority of the oil in that well's still there, and only the rules prevent use of the technology mecessary to remove it. The infusion/pressure systems are considered too "environmentally harmful" and so are not deployed. Remove this restriction, and a whole lot more oil enters the market.

Oil sands in Canada are the second largest proven reserves in the world, only behind Saudi Arabia, and could easily replace ME imports.

Our own oil shale is a vast proven reserve, again blocked by the enviro-Nazis. Our reserves off the coast, coupled with reopening currently capped wells and exploiting oil shale, would make us energy independant, if not a potential exporter!

There's plenty of oil..... if we simply tell the nutjob greenies to shove it.


markets, markets...
I favor completely drilling for oil domestically -- in ANWAR, the Gulf of Mexico, and anywhere else. But even if we could get enough for all of US domestic needs, the price of gas would not drop much. Oil is traded on a world market, and world demand for it will keep rising. We simply do not have enough oil readily available to keep up with world demand. Getting into the oil shales of the Rockies would help a lot, but that isn't cheap, and the market always chooses "cheap."

In other words: even if the markets were allowed to function absolutely freely, we would not have cheap oil.

That is why alternative energy sources are absolutely necessary. If I were Grand Royal Poohbah of the Universe, we would be building 100 large nuclear plants right now. (I happen to live with two nuclear plants in my area, about 20-30 miles away. The don't hurt anybody, but they do wonders for the local tax base, and provide well-paying jobs. I'm all for 'em.)

Unlike the pure-marketeers, I would also be throwing gov't billions at other schemes. I agree that corn-based ethanol isn't the answer, but there is some hope for butanol and certain biodiesel schemes. Something has to be done to "get ahead of the game"; there just isn't enough drillable oil out there to supply what the world wants at a low price.

Part 2
The only real solution to our current energy problems is to move towards a hydrogen based economy. There is enough wind power in the plains states to power the US 3 times over. Moreover, wind power is by far the cheapest renewable technology, and in many places, people with wind power, or paying less than those from traditional power plants. When there is excess wind energy, it can be stored in the form of hydrogen. When the wind stops blowing, you can burn or convert the hydrogen to electricity. Yes this will require an investment in America’s infrastructure, but if we spent even a fraction of the money that we waste on oil, on wind, we could be energy independent. It won’t happen overnight, but we can make it happen. The sooner, we step up to the plate the better. It’s time to stop the traditional left & right of politics, and focus on solutions. The technology is already here, we just have to make it happen.

common sense solutions
Wow, some of these posts make my head hurt. Normally TH readers seem to be pretty much common sense folks, but it seems like when it comes to energy and the environment all that sense goes out through the window. Let’s try and look at energy objectively. First, please everyone remember that both fossil fuels, and nuclear fuel are finite resources. Which means that eventually sooner or later, they will run out. As supplies dwindle, prices will increase. That’s how the market works. Yes, more drilling will slow the increase slightly, but it is generally conceded that production cannot/will not increase as fast as demand any more. IE, we cannot drill our way out of this problem. The increases in China and India’s consumption quickly eat up whatever new supplies are tapped. And remember, since oil is traded on world markets, it’s the world market that sets the price. IE, even if we could produce 100% of our own oil at $20 a barrel, and the world price was $100 a barrel, then we would pay $100 a barrel. After all, who’s going to sell a barrel for $20, if he can sell it for a $100?



loco
You are so right.
We throw gadzillions into the Middle East, Nigeria, Venezuela, et. al. at people like the Saudis who are so non-multicultural you cannot take a Bible into the country and at leaders like Chavez who just fired on demonstrators like any tin-pot tyrant who ever "ruled."
But you won't get the enviros to agree to nuclear and you can't get the rich Dems. to even go for wind power--look at the Kennedy-Kerry opposition to a wind farm off Hyannis Port, can't ruin the view for the millionaires.
Part of our problem could be ameliorated by designing communities where more people could walk and demanding trains and trolleys, which are the most efficient source of transportation ever invented.

Less Government, more free market
I guess I must be one of those “doctrinaire free-market purists”, but the answer isn’t government intervention. As oil prices rise, people will choose to use less oil land more substitutes. This will bring on the incremental changes. The only roll the government needs to play in this process is to get out of the way. And keep the hippies out of the way too.

Pocket Books
All of the common sense in the world isn't going to change the fact that there are a lot of people in this country that lack it. And if oil hits $4 gallon - you can bet that it will become and increasing issue in the campaign. Most of us will fulminate as these candidates talk about how to deal with it - when they should do nothing. But, it goes without saying that the pocket book can quickly over-ride a lot of other more important issues - and the rest of us will be left holding the bag.

Learning, on your part.
VDH, since you're at the Hoover Institution at Stanford, why don't you wander over and have a chat with Tom Sowell about this subject. He won't have any trouble explaining to you why this column is almost complete nonsense.

Our biggest worry should be
the money we are throwing into countries who are a threat to us. Forget the religious environmentalists, forget the spotted owl and the caribou in Alaska, democrats forget that you are beholden to environmentalists and do what is in the best interest in the survival of the human beings in our country. Politicians need to consider the tremendous oil resources in shale and not stand in the way of development.

Robert
"If we get cars, that get 1000mpg.,the Arabs will adjust their prices"."A text, without a context, is a pretext".Your argument is a pretext,in that it lacks a certain "REALITY",which is necessary to properly examine this circumstance.I will offer a touch of reality.How long will your conversion policy TAKE?Also,if we increase our MPG.,we will become SELF RELIANT,in that we produce a 3rd of what we consume.The average car in America, has a (MPG) of 22.3x22=66,that 75 mpg engine gives "US" 9 extra miles for CRUISING.I hope, that the MATH isn't too HARD! Be careful with those "GETS".

buzzkat
You are speaking to people who obviously have little understanding of exactly how much of their lives are touched by oil beyond the gas they put in their autos.

National Security is at stake
Our energy policy should have US National Security as its #1 priority. We (American consumers) are subsidizing Iran, Saudi Arabia (and the other nations in Chaostan), Venezuela, Nigeria, Russia, making them stronger and us weaker.

Conservation, domestic exploration, nuclear power (good point by buzzkat above), alternate fuels, new technologies are all part of the solution.

Islam is a Terrorist Organization
Its time to designate Islam a Terrorist Organization and shut down Mosques, CAIR,Muslim Student organizations, and financing. That's right, either Muslims leave this violent terror organization (which is analogous to the Mafia but far worse) or we ship them out of this country.

Their presence here has already caused us to lose our constitutional rights of freedom of movement (Airport, building, and public event searches, as well as speech by gaming the system with lawsuits to unwanted speech pointing out they are a killer organization as proved by Muslim wars all over this earth.

Simple solution
There is a dirty little fact that the media and politicians do not want anyone to know. If all oil-fired power plants in the U.S. were replaced by an alternate energy source (coal, nuclear), the U.S would not have to import even one drop of foreign crude.

Gallon Stupidity
If we get cars that get lets say, 1000 mpg. The arabs will adjust their prices accordingly. Gas will be 10,000 per gallon. We engineered their oil wells, built them, showed them how to run them, (without having to speak German!). All they did was live on the dirt the dinasauers died under and decayed under:
NUCLEAR ENERGY will stop the need and demand for oil. Our Aircraft Carriers, Subs and 60% of France dont need oil to run. So...since our planet has nuclear energy at its center, we should use breeder reactors to make our:monorails workable, electric cars available, home heating via electricity feasible and we wont need major oil bill every month to our allies, DEMOCRATS keep telling us how the MUSLIM religion is so peaceful, well, we can give them alot of time to pray, they wont have to work so hard pumping oil anylonger.

Gallon Stupidity
If we get cars that get lets say, 1000 mpg. The arabs will adjust their prices accordingly. Gas will be 10,000 per gallon. We engineered their oil wells, built them, showed them how to run them, (without having to speak German!). All they did was live on the dirt the dinasauers died under and decayed under:
NUCLEAR ENERGY will stop the need and demand for oil. Our Aircraft Carriers, Subs and 60% of France dont need oil to run. So...since our planet has nuclear energy at its center, we should use breeder reactors to make our:monorails workable, electric cars available, home heating via electricity feasible and we wont need major oil bill every month to our allies, DEMOCRATS

ML Dogg:
Let me see if I understand your argument:

Bark woof woof, bark, YELP! Muff shuff bark bark.

Does that about summarize it?

Mr. Hanson
We both, forgot to mention those 75 miles per gallon engines, that Detroit won't put into "US" cars!WHY???

Mr. Hanson
Mr. Hanson,"They want the Cars,Gadgets and Lifestyles of Americans",is not a TRUE statement.If the communist party in China, has a "BRAIN",it will never allow the "Western Lifestyle" into their country.Desires are extremely unsettling,therefore they cannot afford to have their people married to the West.This Trojan Horse, will not see Peking.It portends a loss of CONTROL."A Taste of HONEY,Is Worst Than NO Honey at ALL".Always remember;"Economics is the disguise of Politics"!

Trulib
I guess I'm running slow this morning. If you have a point to make, then make it.

My point is we would be a lot better off if the government got out of the energy business entirely and VDH is FOS.

What is your point?

Who's your Landlord?
Oil countries are buying up American Business and other properties as they have tons of dollars. You can live at my residence but you must wear a headscarf, have a beard, do not drink, hate Jews, play no music and if you fornicate be prepared to be stoned(not liquor) to death (literally).

Diversity and multiculturalism is the left's Mantra. I hope they will enjoy it all.

Victor sounds angry
and I can understand that, BUT, I am much angrier over illegal immigration, ever increasing taxes and a government that has a double standard of laws; one for us common folk and another for the privileged.

Years ago I bought a house that is less than 10 minutes from my place of employment. I have never been big on travel (I enjoy staying home after fighting crowds all week) and I drive an economy car, so I am not as angry as Victor over the price of oil. And I might be an optimist, but I do think, eventually, entrepreneurs will find alternatives to fossil fuels as a source of energy. The only thing they have lacked so far is adequate incentive because oil prices were too low. When that happens, The Mullahs will be faced with the hard reality of economics. That is, you don't work to destroy your customers unless you want to go out of business.

Econ 101.
When the price of gas gets high enough the American people will take matters into their own hands. This non-sense of turning to government to solve every personnal problem is going to result in George Orwell's 1984. We have an electon coming up in less than a year. Vote for less government not more. Vote for less intrusion not more. Vote to open up the oil fields here not keep them closed. Life has choices there is give and take. Clinton vetoed drilling in ANWAR in the 1990s partly because he claimed it would take ten years to get the oil out. Well here we are ten years later and still in the same situation having to rely on hostile governments for our energy sources. This is crazy. Would you let the government tell you not to plant a vegtible garden in your own yard because it would put growers and supermarkets out of business? Hell no then why send our money to Achmed the terrorist and Hugo Chaves? This issue needs to be put on the table for the next election.

Take back America from the fringe eco kooks.


Reality
Perspective, folks, perspective.
Crude oil, at $100 per barrel, costs $0.14 per cup. That is 8 ounces. What do you pay for your coffee at Starbucks? Be glad your car doesn't run on Folgers.
In the 60's, new cars cost $3000 and gas was about $0.30. Today new cars cost around $30,000 and gas is about $3.00.
Where is the panic?

Energy Problems Solved
So, good friends, when FORIEGN companys bring in their wells off OUR southern coasts there will be lots of oil to purchase....After all, we'll all be friendly neighbors.. No more shortages, no more high prices. Just run the pipelines to our big modern refineries... Yeah, right.
This great country was built on lots of energy, not conversation.
As mentioned earlier, dark times ahead..This ol' country boy thinks we've gone too far.

TONS OF OIL HERE
We have billions of gallons of oil in the US that we do not tap because of enviro blackmail and pol. power.

There's oil off NJ. Hasn't been drilled since the 50s.

There's oil all around FL. State laws forbid drilling.

There's oil from the Baja to AL on the W. Coast. Most drilling is prevented by enviro pressure.

There's enough shale oil in MO and WY and Canada to rival all the oil in Saudi Arabia. We haven't touched any of it.

We haven't built a refinery since the 1970s. If oil is high and gas is high, it is our own fault.

Double edged sword
What's happening comes right out of chapter one of a Basic Econ textbook. When the demand for a product increases faster than supply, the price goes up. It is actually necessary to address both sides of the equation in order to solve the problem. On the conservation side, we can do enough by employing simple measures which require little if any sacrifice, such as driving less, not letting your car warm up for ten minutes before driving, etc. While these actions, if practiced widely enough, will provide some relief, that relief is both insufficient by itself and temporary in nature. No permanent solution can be reached without a significant increase in supply. We know where the oil is, but lack the testicular fortitude to drill for it. Experience on the North Slope of Alaska has proven beyond question that we have the technology to drill, pump, and transport oil without harm to the environment. HeII, the caribou population around the Alaska pipeline has flourished since it was built. From the wrong is right files, the Cubans allow offshore drilling closer to the Fla coastline than the US does.

Vic
Do you recognize an Emily Litella moment? If I have to explain Gilda Radner's moronic character to you I will be even more disappointed than I already am.

Markets-Not Government
Rising oil prices will do more to drive conservation than anything government will do. The sound you will begin to hear, much as happened in the late 70's, is of the inefficient vehicles being sucked off the road. At the same time, ethanol is not a solution, it's an illusion of a solution. Nuclear and coal are solutions for electricity, in that they can provide all necessary electricity - and replace any plant that uses oil. Currently, for the 1st time in 30 years, we see 29 plants being planned, and many seem to have the ability to actually get built. But again, this has nothing to do with government - but with changing public opinion - driven by oil prices - not government subsidies.

As far as opening up Alaska, and the coasts of California and Florida for mor drilling, the combination of the projections for the oil to be found does not exceed 10% of our current consumption. This would enable us to increase our supplies from the current level to just under 50%. However, given how rapidly China and India are expanding, this would not have much affect on world oil prices.

Currently, alternative fuel vehicles cannot compete with those burning diesel or gas. However, that is at current prices for diesel and gas. If prices rise to $4 per gallon, then those vehicles will become competitive.

These realities asre what markets - not governments do. If we get to $4, then consumption will fall as people move to more fuel efficient vehicles, alternative fuel vehicles will become more competitive, and the pace of construction of nuclear and coal plants will pick up.


petrol prices in the UK
before starting to compare US petrol prices to those of the UK, one best make the comparison of how many fewer miles the "Brits" are required to drive annually in order to service their basic needs vs those driven by the avg US citizen.
You might find that the UK is a rather compact country compared to the US, requiring a great deal fewer of those 7.50/gallon miles to service their lives annually; that the UK is served in its compact geographical size by a much more extensive and efficient mass transit system as alternative to personal travel (whether to work or holiday excursions); you might even find that still in much of the UK, one can easily walk to their market or whatever need location from their personal dwelling.

Solutions
"Maybe someone in Silicon Valley will invent a new energy source.

Uhh, no. The uber-geeks in SV don't do that. They're too busy coming up with new cheat codes for Halo 3. The only thing they might do that was actually useful would be to develop a room-temperature superconductor to cut line loss, as per Ohm's Law. So far, they seem uninterested in trying.

Energy research is done- surprise!- by people in the energy business. For which they need capital. (That means "money not needed for other business expenses".) They usually get such capital from net profits.

Or at least they did, until our Revered Leaders started pandering to the enviroNazis by calling those profits "obscene" and passing "windfall profit" taxes. Now you know why energy research is at a standstill in this country. (Government money doesn't count- it all goes to "P.C" forms of research, which produce nothing but good feelings and good press from the NYT.)

Here in Ohio, the state legislature and Democratic governor want to put such a tax into law that would basically confiscate every penny above $1 million that an oil company earns in the state. And BTW, this bill defines "earnings" as including every penny of the at-pump cost of a gallon of gas (including the amount that is state and federal tax), and prohibits the company from passing the cost on to the consumer.

My guess is that several oil companies will soon pack up and leave Ohio, on the grounds that they will go bankrupt trying to do business here. This probably also explains those capped wells in SE OH (where I live)- along with the fact that the Ohio EPA, in concert with the Sierra Club, has spent the last 20 years threatening lawsuits against any company that tries to open them. Just like they've blocked any new nuclear plants since 1970.

We face a very dark future. Literally.

cheers

eon


Envirodolts and others
The law of Unforseen Consequences always wins...

We cannot drill in Mex Bay and ANWAR because it looks bad....Only an idiot can come with this argument, and another idiot (our gov) to accept it.

This article gets a 1
Victor David Hansen is an excellent columnist....when he sticks to topics he knows something about, such as Islamism.

We don't have an energy problem...
...we have a politician problem,and it all begins and ends in the District of Columbia.The mid-East is not the problem,Washington is!The constant political running for re-election will run this country right into the ground.

And if it wasn't for the fact that the Washington politicians have to approve term limits,we would have term limits now.

and yet....
It appears that the wisdom of the US voter is to elect into power at the Federal level members of the very politcal party that placed the USA squarely within the grasp of our current energy debacle with their pandering to "environmental" hoaxes and hysteria!
We should already be using petroleum resources, OUR PETROLEUM RESOURCES, recovered from ANWAR and the entire scope of the Gulf of Mexico, and the Pacific and Atlantic coastal KNOWN fields, but who provides the majority of the votes against the recovery of our own....THE DEMOCRATS now in power by the wisdom of the US voter.
The electrical power grid should already be substantially supplied by clean AND SAFE nuclear power, but who were in the streets and on our home TV screens decrying the evils and dangers of this source of energy decades ago...THE DEMOCRATS now in power by the wisdom of the US voters!
Why hasn't the US government been cutting subsidies adequate to enlarge the solar energy sector of private business, creating jobs and assuring that every US home and business where this type of energy is viable is equiped with it...instead of making a few large corp dairies and grain farmers "wards of the US agricultural expenditures bills"???????
The US voters deserve what they "pay for" in their Democrat controlled government; they've only placed again in power the party of the very clowns who should have acted regarding this nation's energy back in the 1970s for the future we have now reached.

Brian, Vic
Brian, Right on...ship the long-haired birk wearing, geritol-taking hippies out!!

Vic, I agree with you. Ethanol is a waste,so are the cars...And the hysteria about the potential of prices is making me laugh...
In Britain as it stands right now, they already pay almost 7.50 USD for their gas...stop the whining and start doing. ANWR, the coast of FL would be a great place to start...

Come on.
Why on earth are we delaying? We need to be allowing and encouraging exploration and drilling for oil off our coasts, in the Gulf of Mexico, and in Alaska. It's more than energy policy that's at stake here - it's national security.

I love nature and the environment, but I don't think this is an either/or situation. I think we can drill AND protect the environment, and we'd better start soon, because I have serious issues with being dependent for a critical resources on these Middle Eastern countries.

Trulib
You actually have better cars now that we did back in the 60s. In additon, you don't have a free market and it gets less free everyday.

And BTW, this was about energy, not houses and cars.

Vic
So you think that letting the free market respond will in any way work towards fixing this energy mess? Has the free market done a good job producing the other things that are vital to life? What about the lousy housing we live in and the bad cars we drive and the rotten food we.......never mind.

I remember they tapped....
many oil wells in SE Ohio back in the 80s. To the best of my knowledge, these wells are still tapped. And the owners of the wells are probably getting a gov't check to not produce. Anyone know about this?

Art
'deprived of the freedom a car gives' your statement is at the root of the collectivist push to control energy. Their efforts to combat global warming and their blocking of the developement of domestic sources that are ecomomical are all part of a larger effort to bring the most important sector of our economy completely under government control.

When they control all production and distribution of energy they will control people's ability to move. That you have the freedom to go where you want when you want is an affront to the collectivists. Luckily for us they are doing it for our own good. Don't you feel good about that?

pt 2

The last two energy bills have been nothing but pork. That is both the Republican and Democrat bills do NOTHING for energy but do a lot for spending money with the congress critters favorite buddies. Drilling in Alaska and off coast was blocked by the RINOs and the Lamocrats still bow down and worship the eco-idiots.

Wrong this time:
VDH says:
Instead, doctrinaire free-market purists and radical environmentalists, hand in glove, for years have thwarted both conservation and exploration.
____________________________________________
Where in the 4 corners did that come from? Doctrinaire free market purists? Hey idiot, if we actually had that we would not be in this mess.

The best thing that could be done for the energy problems we have is to repeal EVERY law passed by the Federal Government and get the Federal and State Governments totally out of the energy markets.

You say we need alternatives as well as drilling. No what we need is to ship all of the eco-idiots to a commune in Northern Alaska and tell them to live in the primitive splendor. Take note of the following alternative facts:

1. Ethanol does NOTHING to offset the price of gasoline, in fact it does the opposite. It also does little or nothing to help the environment. It is a political payback to the big corn growers like ADM.

2. Hybrid cars are worthless economically, in fact they are worse than worthless. According to AAA (and Toyota) last year, in order for a Toyota Prius to break even, even with all of the tax incentives, the price of gasoline would have to reach $5.00/gallon.

3. Solar power, even with tax incentives, does not become economically even until electricity rates reach $0.15/kw-hr with penalty clauses for over use, and this is in Southern CA with loads of sunshine. In States like Washington State where it rains most of the year, solar power will NEVER be economically feasible. Wind power will likely NEVER be economically feasible anywhere except in very remote applications where it would cost a fortune to bring in electricity OR fuel oil for a diesel.
cont

The problem is not SUVs
We do not own a SUV, but the people we know who have them typically have larger families or live in extended families which require them to have transporation for more people than can fit in a small and economical, car.

The Government has shown total incompetence in transportation subsidies and in grants to cities who have built rail systems which go nowhere, do not serve the needs of the public and, scandalously, have only one or two passengers in rail vehicles which can hold 100 or more people.

The problem lawmakers have in Washington is that they ride the Metro which taxpayers all over the US subsidized, and the District has high density apartments which can provide ridership to a rail system.

The Environmentalists want to get people out of cars and onto public transportation, but they don't understand what this means. I lived for 20 years in New York, and Chicago without a car. And, it was a misery: I had to lug groceries by hand, I could not visit my friends in the suburbs, I felt trapped and deprived of the freedom a car gives.

Now, I am in California and my wife and I have six cars. And we never use public transportation.

So, the solution to the Oil Hydra is not conseravation it is supply. It seems foolish to remind the readers that you can conserve only up to 100%, but you can increase supply far more if we take this problem seriously.

I have to say one of the biggest problems we have is the stupidity of the Congress and the Administration. Ethanol is not the answer, conservation is only part of the answer, the real answer is "increase supply" and do it with domestic sources or with reliable allies like Canada!


The problem is not SUVs
We do not own a SUV, but the people we know who have them typically have larger families or live in extended families which require them to have transporation for more people than can fit in a small and economical, car.

The Government has shown total incompetence in transportation subsidies and in grants to cities who have built rail systems which go nowhere, do not serve the needs of the public and, scandalously, have only one or two passengers in rail vehicles which can hold 100 or more people.

The problem lawmakers have in Washington is that they ride the Metro which taxpayers all over the US subsidized, and the District has high density apartments which can provide ridership to a rail system.

The Environmentalists want to get people out of cars and onto public transportation, but they don't understand what this means. I lived for 20 years in New York, and Chicago without a car. And, it was a misery: I had to lug groceries by hand, I could not visit my friends in the suburbs, I felt trapped and deprived of the freedom a car gives.

Now, I am in California and my wife and I have six cars. And we never use public transportation.

So, the solution to the Oil Hydra is not conseravation it is supply. It seems foolish to remind the readers that you can conserve only up to 100%, but you can increase supply far more if we take this problem seriously.

I have to say one of the biggest problems we have is the stupidity of the Congress and the Administration. Ethanol is not the answer, conservation is only part of the answer, the real answer is "increase supply" and do it with domestic sources or with reliable allies like Canada!


Environmentalists are hurting us
With oil reaching historic highs, there are feasible alternatives for America. Coal liquification, oil sands (mostly in Canada), and, longer term, some technological ways to use solar to produce liquid fuels.

The Environmentalists are proving to everyone that they are the enemies of America because their agenda has moved from protecting the environment to a rigid doctrinaire attempt to stop all development and to destroy the capitalist system.

In Hawaii, 80% of the population wants the new Super Ferry to start operating, the Governor, and the Legislature have approved legislation to permit this, but the Environmentalists have found a judge who supports the radical agenda and it seems that Environmentalists can control the state and defy the citizens, the Governor and the Legislature.

And, they will prevent America from developing any energy independence because the processes emit CO2, and this affects Global Warming. Poppycock!

No one has elected these Environmentalists, they are self-appointed extremists who take advantage of the public's naivitee about their agenda.

In Hawaii, they are recruiting people to engage in sabotage and illegal activities to stop the Super Ferry, and the Government cannot face up to them and put them in jail for illegal activities.

This reminds me of the Bolsheviks in Russia in 1917.

Exploration
Vast reserves estimated in ANWR & California coast... No refineries being built in US to process oil to gas... SUV's and other vehicles sucking down gas at 8 MPG... 20-30 years ago we could have tapped our resources, built these refineries, and "outlawed" SUV's (or at least tax them ala the "sin tax") but the left-wing hippies block it. We make the beds we sleep in. Vote Republican everywhere.

Mr. Hanson is on the money.
To suggest that a push towards energy independence makes one a socialist or a nazi shows complete ignorance. Giuliani's position is the same as Mr. Hanson's - and please read Cal Thomas's excellent article on the subject. There's no market going on here - we have no choice in the matter. They're screwing us.

We're shipping our wealth across the ocean. And for what? To get from point A to point B in a lexus suv? That's your idea of freedom?

And save the name calling for the left - it's lame.


Let's Take Their Oil and Get Bigger SUVs
It's not a war on Terror. It's a war on Islamic Totalitarianism. Islam is not a religion of peace, either. So, let's stop futzing around with bringing consensual government to these barbarians. Let's simply commandeer their oil fields and maybe liberate some of their women while we're at it.

Right, DerKrieger
It is the government, coupled with the enviro-Nazis, that create this problem. Government carries the most blame for allowing the fanatics to successfully block development, processing and selling.

Get the Birkenstock and ponytail crowd out of the way, and the bottom line is that there isn't in reality any shortage.


oil
So you really think we need more government solutions to this problem? You mean like this insane ethanol boondoggle that's raising the price of all food commodity's and using up precious mid-west water supplies just to name a few of the unintended consequences? Or maybe demanding 50 mpg cars or windfall profit taxes on oil like Hillary and other miss guided socialist want? When will "intellectuals" like you wise up and let market forces, that are already in play, work? Please, no more grand plans.

The Best short tem solution...
is to increase domestic exploration and drilling. Screw the environmental extremists that are one of the main causes for high oil prices and the funding of terrorist states.

It's absurd that Americans have to pay crushing prices for gas when we have huge domestic reserves that have been placed off limits by radicals.

We are funding the likes of Dubai Ports World and Middle Eastern Sovereign Wealth Funds and enabling their purchase of US assets.

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.