Posts
Andrew Sullivan takes a look at an interview Grist Magazine did with Ron Paul...
Grist's Amanda Griscom Little asks the question with a certain amount of trepidation. I loved this preamble:
Some of [Paul's] ideas arguably have environmental merit. Paul is known for his zealous opposition to the Iraq war, which he duly notes causes pollution and the "burning of fuel for no good purpose." He wants to yank all subsidies and R&D funding from the energy sector, which many believe would benefit the growth of renewables. A cyclist himself, he has cosponsored bills that would offer tax breaks to Americans who commute by bicycle and use public transportation. Still, his libertarian presidency would, among other things, allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, boost the use of coal, and embrace nuclear power. Moreover, it wouldn't do diddly about global warming because, Paul reasons, "we're not going to be very good at regulating the weather."
Then onto the interview on energy, where my favorite passage is his goal of removing subsidies from energy companies (take that, Cheney!):
If we're running out of hydrocarbon, the price will go up. If we had a crisis tomorrow [that cut our oil supply in half], people would drive half as much -- something would happen immediately. Somebody would come up with alternative fuels rather quickly.
Today, the government decides and they misdirect the investment to their friends in the corn industry or the food industry. Think how many taxpayer dollars have been spent on corn [for ethanol], and there's nobody now really defending that as an efficient way to create diesel fuel or ethanol. The money is spent for political reasons and not for economic reasons. It's the worst way in the world to try to develop an alternative fuel.
I can see merits in what Paul is saying about providing incentives to oil companies and for the ethanol industry. However, thinking that a solution will just suddenly appear if the price of oil doubled is basically wishing upon a star that will just leave us bummed out because we don't have electricity to run our TV to watch our Disney movies.
The problem now isn't we are passing out incentives, the problem is we don't really have a plan for our energy future.
5 comments:
I don't think Ron Paul is saying that if the price doubled, we would have a solution instantly.
What he's saying is that if the price goes up, people will have to learn to use oil less in order to save money. Whereas if we subsidize low prices, people will continue their same pattern of high use and we will run out of resources sooner, which gives us even less time to come up with an alternative solution.
It's the people who promote subsidies (and therefore accelerate resource exhaustion) who act as if they expect a miracle to suddenly appear.
I agree with you on ANWR. In my opinion, the US needs a strategic reserve of oil, and ANWR ought to be it. We should use up every drop of foreign oil before we touch ANWR. From a national security viewpoint, drilling in ANWR now is short sighted.
What about the oily seeds from hemp?
The amount of oil in ANWR is just a few months under current consumption levels. Drilling in ANWR would be pointless currently.
THANK YOU richardabny! I work at a biodiesel facility that utilizes soy and palm oil to create low emission fuel. We have to import this stuff and the world market is exploding! The problem is as soy and palm oil commodities go up, Brazil and Indonesia hack more forest down faster to plant crops. These crops are a significant drain on soil nutrients... as is corn for ethanol. The solution... wait for it... HEMP! In fact an acre of soy produce approx. 50 - 75 gallons of oil, depending on environ. That same acre of Ganga produces 175 - 250 gallons of oil. That is a 4 fold increase in production and better yet Cannabis does not drain the soil of nutrients, can grow in all 50 states abundantly and produces a textile as a byproduct. THIS IS THE SOLUTION. We CAN grow our own fuel! No wonder Cannabis is still illegal. We are fighting, big government(DEA), big textile industry, the Drug industry, and now Big Oil. That is alot of enemies. By the way Congressman Paul introduced a bill earlier this year that would end the ban on growing industrial hemp in this country and save us from having to import billions of dollars worth of Hemp from Canada and China. The future is NOW!
I’m working with a coalition to make sure Congress sends the president a strong energy bill with meaningful changes for our environment and planet. This legislation would be a monumental step toward stopping global warming. Please go to www.energybill2007.org and sign the petition. And, please, if you would, tell your readers as well.
That’s because after years of inaction, Congress finally has a chance to pass meaningful energy legislation. The bill they are about to pass includes the best fuel economy standards ever (35 mpg by 2020) and a renewable electricity standard (15% by 2020) that guarantees the growth of renewable, clean energy. But there is a chance these two key advances won’t make it through to the final bill. This is our chance for real progress, don’t let Congress back down.
Thanks!
Post a Comment