Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

More Drilling, Not Higher Taxes

The DC Examiner points out that none of the Presidential candidates have it right on oil:

ANWR’s coastal plain, about the size of Delaware, is estimated to contain more than 11 billion barrels of recoverable oil, enough to replace more than 20 years of imports from Saudi Arabia. New technology means that the area needed for actual drilling would be only about 2,000 acres, or roughly the size of a municipal airport. McCain last week insisted to talk show host Bill O’Reilly that the ANWR coastal plain is too “pristine” to consider drilling, but he couldn’t cite many facts. The area is boggy and treeless — and the vaunted caribou, about which environmentalists claim to worry so much, rarely use the area where drilling would be done. By the way, the caribou population in nearby Prudhoe Bay has gone from a mere 3,000 animals to more than 32,000 since drilling began there years ago.

McCain’s position on ANWR contradicts his own standards for governing energy exploration. In defending the ban against drilling off California’s coast, he cites “federalism” concerns, meaning that he thinks the people of California should make decisions about their own coastline.

But on ANWR, he resolutely ignores the 75 percent of Alaskans who consistently support drilling there. As the United States faces $4-per-gallon gasoline, McCain’s concern for stray caribou is an extremely harmful conceit.

McCain’s Democratic opponents propose to make things much worse at the gas pump. Obama wants a new energy profits tax to raise $15 billion a year, while Clinton would collect a total of $5 billion annually in new petroleum levies. Both candidates ignore history’s lessons. In the eight years after Jimmy Carter pushed through a windfall profits tax in 1980, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service reports that it raised only one-eighth of the revenue its advocates predicted — $40 billion rather than the claimed $320 billion.

Anyone else starting to wish that “none of the above” were a valid option on this year’s Presidential ballot?

Comments

Anyone else starting to wish that “none of the above” were a valid option on this year’s Presidential ballot?

Not just starting.


What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.


The Whistler's signature
The Whistler on May 13, 2008 at 04:45 pm
Avatar for Urainium238

The next time anyone calls ANWR “pristine” the interviewer nedd to say “No it’s not. It’s a mosquitto ridden, shit bod in the summer and a frozen crag of ice in the winter.” I know, I’ve been there. It sucks.

BTW, caribou use the pipelines for shade. Why don’t liberals let us protect them from sun stroke and skin cancer with our pipelines?

Urainium238 on May 13, 2008 at 08:26 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.