Thursday, April 03, 2008
Barack Obama's incoherent advertising
The newest bad thing about living in the Philadelphia television market is that we are subject to an incoming bombardment of advertisements in advance of the April 22 Democratic primary. Last night I saw this ad "approved" and indeed performed by Barack Obama. It calls for "energy independence," cheaper gasoline, and lower rates of return on investment in new energy, at least if the company doing the investing is ExxonMobil. And since we are going to destroy the rate of return on private sector investment in energy (lest ExxonMobil make too much money), where will the capital come from to develop all the new energy that will make us "independent" with a lower price at the pump than we have today? From you, the taxpayer, because apparently the government knows best how to invest money in new sources of energy.
If you believe that one, then surely you want to bring back that classic boondoggle from the Carter administration, the United States Synthetic Fuels Corporation.
7 Comments:
By 
, at
Thu Apr 03, 08:40:00 AM:
"Energy Independence" and "clean fuels" are buzzwords that seem to have been around for decades, at least.
We aren't allowed to drill everywhere in the Continental US that oil is available to actually become "oil" independent; i.e., ANWR and coastal drilling off of Florida and California.
We have no plans to extract methane hydrates from the continental shelf areas where they exist in abundance off the Carolinas and New Jersey.
We have no real plans to make liquid fuels from coal, even though that technology is well researched and ready to go.
We have no plans to extract oil from "oil sands" in the west, particularly Colorado.
We have had only limited research to extract oil from oil shale in western Colorado/eastern Utah.
We can't "grow" enough "green" fuel to supply the US demand for liquid fuels, i.e., car fuels (regardless of what Zubrin and his acolytes think).
And lastly, the Bush administration has been "encouraging" the licensing for new nuclear reactors; the probable incoming Obama administration will doubtless shoot this down for politcal reasons.
So on this subject, I submit that both parties are full of it, and the Democrats moreso because normal market motives of supply, demand, and profit seem alien to their collectivist impulses.
Prediction: Four years from now we will be even more dependent on imported oil from Canada, Mexico, etc., and buying electricity from Canada.
By 
kreiz1, at
Thu Apr 03, 09:59:00 AM:
Excellent comment, Anon. A ton of lip service has been paid to US energy independence but real-world solutions are summarily dismissed (particularly in the nuclear arena). Decades come and go and nothing happens. Energy demands exponentially increase with no corresponding increases in energy supply. As in most things in life, if you're not moving forward, you're regressing- whether you realize it or not, making your prediction entirely plausible.
By , at
Thu Apr 03, 10:27:00 AM:
The US Air Force is building a $5Billion Coal to Liquid plant at Malmstrom AFB in Montana.
By , at
Thu Apr 03, 11:03:00 AM:
The US Air Force (and the rest of the Armed Services) have mandates to do that sort of thing.
Good for them.
That plant is a good start, but is only a drop in the bucket. There are several smaller plants being built in Pennsylvania and Texas, but not anywhere near the scale that we should be building. Expect the Chinese to roar ahead in this because for them it is a necessity. And they will do it quickly.
The Chinese finished building the largest integrated oil refinery in the world a year ago, and it was built in record time (~ 24 months). It is state of the art, with a lot of the newest American, Japanese and European technologies used in it.
By , at
Thu Apr 03, 11:20:00 AM:
Look BARACK OBAMA is lying already
By Charlottesvillain, at
Thu Apr 03, 03:36:00 PM:
This stuff drives me nuts. US "energy independence" is a fantasy, achievable only if we all stop driving.
Furthermore, the integrated oil companies now account for something like 10% or less of world oil production. The national oil companies hold nearly all the reserves,and the cards. I think its disgraceful and pointless for politicos (and yes, this includes Bill O'Reilly) to bash XOM everytime gas breaks $3 a gallon.
The fact is that world liquid fuel production has essentially plateaued while demand continues to increase. (This state of affairs may be seen as one of the most significant failures of the Bush administration in time).
Whoever wins the election best do more than mouth platitudes about corporate welfare and insist on vacating the Middle East if they are serious about solving this problem.
By , at
Sun Apr 06, 12:25:00 PM:
How about harnessing the use of HOT AIR that would make AL GORE and the greens more usful
