June 7, 2008

The Costanza Energy Policy

Very interesting list of reasons why oil is so expensive and here are just the first 8:
1. Limited areas available for offshore drilling;

2. Stopped the rise of CAFE standards for automobiles;

3. Restricted nuclear power generation of Electrical;

4. Federal Reserve policies since 2001 led to a very weak US dollar (raising Oil prices);
5. Energy conservation policies? None

6. Iraq and Afghanistan wars contributing to Middle East tensions

7. No major United States funding for R&D on energy;

8. Kept CAFE standards for light trucks/SUVs much lower than autos

Read the whole list and you get a picture of one hell of a lot of blame to spread around. The Bush admin has done very little to help us here, but their policies (or lack of) are only part of the mess.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Drill for oil wherever it is. Build more refineries. Build nuclear power plants. Continue building hybrid cars/trucks. Continue research on hybrids.
Drive less. Vacation close to home.

Tony said...

Question: Are refineries/power plants built through private corporations or through tax dollars or some combination?

leighton said...

Every American refinery the firm I work at has represented is 100% privately or corporately owned, funded, etc. They typically have a great deal of their income coming from government contracts, whether federal, state or foreign--particularly given that access to the offshore locations they mine are governed not by ownership as such but by international treaty. To the best of my understanding (I'm not a lawyer at all, let alone a contracts or corporate lawyer), this is comparable to Boeing or McDonnell-Douglas doing most of their business with the Air Force, yet still being privately owned.

I don't know how typical this is of all American refineries, or of refineries in general. My understanding is that most or all power plants are government-owned and funded, but I don't have any relevant first-hand experience there.

Streak said...

One of the things I kind of liked about this list is that it is a combination of unintended consequences from well-intended action (limiting offshore drilling, nuclear energy fears, etc) and those that seem (seem) less well-intended (low CAFE standards and tax breaks for large vehicles). As far as I know, the limits on refineries come from probably a combination of both reasons. Environmental and health concerns about refineries (Cancer Alley) combined with Oil companies resistance to investing in safer and cleaner refineries.

I think our first step (If I were king) would be to ban Hummers and raise Cafe standards to 40 mpg (including light trucks), but realistically perhaps we should just start with an actually energy policy that isn't "consume, consume, consume."

steves said...

One of the things I kind of liked about this list is that it is a combination of unintended consequences from well-intended action (limiting offshore drilling, nuclear energy fears, etc)

Good intentions are not a substitute for good science. In some cases, the fears are not justified. There was a push about 10 years ago to use directional drilling to get at natural gas under the Great Lakes. Environmental Groups convinced the legislature to not approve the drilling.

The arguments against drilling centered around the process, which they called slant drilling and painted it as some experimental technique that was dangerous. I spoke to my dad, who was at that point working as the head of the sub-surface mining division of the DEQ (Michigan's version of the EPA). He had also worked as mining engineering professor and has a PhD in Geology, so this is somehting that he is familiar with. He is also most certainly a Democrat and not someone to side with big business.

He explained that directional drilling had been going on for decades and was very safe. He also explained that many of the arguments of the environmental groups lacked evidence. The Canadians had no problems and drillend under the lakes that border them and they now sell us the natural gas (at a higher price) that we could have gotten ourselves.

I am certainly not suggesting that all environmental groups are wrong or have bad intentions, but they certainly warrant scrutiny just as much as any other group.

Anonymous said...

CARTWRIGHT?! CARTWRIGHT?!