Why are expanded oil production and conservation/alternative fuels mutually exclusive? Long term we need to move beyond fossil fuels but in the short to medium term we will still depend on oil.

Grand political compromise:

1. Open ANWR and offshore.

2. Enact a carbon tax that starts low but gradually ramps up to something very significant over a period of ten to fifteen years.

This would provide the incentive for long term investments in new technology while minimizing the short term hardship.

I agree that we need a multi pronged approach. The problem is that the oil companies are saying "let us drill, then you guys enact the other stuff". Not so fast. Let's see the Republicans and Democrats get together and form a compromise bill that allows limited drilling in some offshore areas and increases the fuel efficiency requirements for cars to 40 mpg in the next 10 years while doing away with the exemption for trucks and SUVs.

That's not a bad approach; however, while I am moving toward the "let's leave it to the individual states" for off-shore drilling, I hold ANWR to be sacred. ANWR doesn't have rich folks with ocean-front properties - it was established as a result of an agreement between the Gwich'in people and the federal government in order to preserve their culture (it is inextricably linked to the land). In other words, if we drill in ANWR it will be one more treaty broken by the U.S. government.

Spiff: if we drill in ANWR it will be one more treaty broken by the U.S. government.

LeRoy: Hey, we've violated the Geneva Convention twenty ways since Tuesday. We've broken so many other treaties, especially with native Americans, that we've lost count. So who's counting? What's one more broken treaty promise gonna mean?

Other nations would just be well-advised not to sign any more treaties with us.

We can't be trusted.

We're Americans!

'Why are expanded oil production and conservation/alternative fuels mutually exclusive? Long term we need to move beyond fossil fuels but in the short to medium term we will still depend on oil.'

that's what the president said, didn't he?

Agreed. But you have to remember that this Bush-McCain argument is really less about energy policy than it is about selling a lazy pander.

Bush-McCain are presenting this as a simple causal argument: If we drill, we'll reduce our dependence on foreign oil in the long run, and the speculation market will drive prices down.

Both counts are factually incorrect. Let's say there are 10 billion barrels in ANWR and 18 billion barrels offshore.

The U.S. consumes 7.3 billion barrels a year. Right now. In 2008.

This means that all of the oil in ANWR/offshore combined will buy us 4 more years of oil. At current demand levels. Over a period of 20 years or so. And it would take 5-10 years to see any of that if we started today.

In short, all of this magic extra oil that the treehugging hippies don't want you to have amounts to a small drop in the bucket that would not significantly affect global supply (or even domestic supply, really).

Oil speculators know this. An announcement might cause a small temporary dip, but over the near-term it would do nothing for the speculation market. Supply would remain static for the foreseeable future and demand would keep spiking. The smart money would still be in rising energy prices.

At this point, I wish the Democrats would just cave and start drilling. It will create a few jobs. But it will do absolutely nothing for oil prices. And it would remove the leverage this insipid pander stands to offer Republicans who argue otherwise.

eg4190:

"Agreed. But you have to remember that this Bush-McCain argument is really less about energy policy than it is about selling a lazy pander."

Out of some lazy panders can come some pretty decent ideas. I wouldn't dismiss drilling our own oil as quickly as others here are doing. Even if it's a symbolic move, we can show Russia/OPEC/Hugo Chavez that we're taking the problem seriously and going to at least try to control our own destiny when it comes to this

With regard to prices you remain correct nonetheless, but for the wrong reasons.

Even as a Republican, I admit that Bush's motives here are both suspect and sinister.

As much as I agree that the U.S. should drill more of its own oil, The President's statements are less about energy policy and more about keeping the music playing on the trading floor for Morgan Stanley.

"Bush-McCain are presenting this as a simple causal argument: If we drill, we'll reduce our dependence on foreign oil in the long run, and the speculation market will drive prices down.

Both counts are factually incorrect. Let's say there are 10 billion barrels in ANWR and 18 billion barrels offshore.

The U.S. consumes 7.3 billion barrels a year. Right now. In 2008.

This means that all of the oil in ANWR/offshore combined will buy us 4 more years of oil. At current demand levels. Over a period of 20 years or so. And it would take 5-10 years to see any of that if we started today."

Even the most dyed in the wool ideological conservatives buy this truth (I know. I am one) No one serious who believes drilling ourselves is an answer suggests it should be done without the grandest doses of conservation and -permanent- demand destruction possible. And no one serious who believes drilling ourselves is an answer believes also that its an immediate balm for the price/bbl

As truthful as your statement is (and it is indeed truthful), something else is fundamentally broken in this economy if the U.S. is still consuming 23+million barrels a day in 10 years.

That's just not an assumption that stands.

Even us right-wing nutjobs know that given current conditions without changes in the rules of commodities futures trading, oil's rock-bottom floor for the next 15-18 months is around $110/bbl -- even if the reserves in ANWR are proven to be a recoverable 150+ billion bbls in that time frame.

"In short, all of this magic extra oil that the treehugging hippies don't want you to have amounts to a small drop in the bucket that would not significantly affect global supply (or even domestic supply, really).

Oil speculators know this. An announcement might cause a small temporary dip, but over the near-term it would do nothing for the speculation market. Supply would remain static for the foreseeable future and demand would keep spiking. The smart money would still be in rising energy prices."

Uh uh! See above.

What oil speculators know is that the economies of China and India can no more defy gravity than the U.S. economy can. Their demand will plateau even if the price/bbl drops a bit. Just because we're not seeing the symptoms yet doesn't mean the ailments $130/bbl causes aren't there. Poppycock, you say? Wait 18-24 months, particularly as recession --really-- hits here in the next 8-12.

This is precisely what the "smart money" is waiting for.

They're making money while the laws of supply and demand remain unhooked from the trading floor (or until Congress develops a backbone and replaces the ridiculous trading rules that unzipped assets from the commercial interest).

If you don't believe me, ask yourself the following question:

What in the world is so different in June, 2008 from February 2008 when oil was trading at approximately $85/bbl?

If you can provide an answer without making it sound like the last drop of crude in the world will have been pumped 3:37:28 AM EDT September 13, 2009, then I might believe something other than pure speculation is driving the price.

There is no one solution. Unfortunately McCain't and Baraq are currently only pitching one cure all solution each.

A) Drill more

B) Take steps to destroy demand (permanently)

Letting consumers feel some pain for a good long while will instill discipline in the use of a finite resource, but for Pete's sake, at $6.00 a gallon the cure becomes way worse than the sickness. It's one thing when there aren't any jobs to work. It's another entirely when people can't afford to get to work.

C) Build stuff where you sell it! How novel is that?! Those Chinese bulk freighters aren't wind-powered are they?!

D) Many, many more small things we can do.......

At this point, I wish the Democrats would just cave and start drilling. It will create a few jobs. But it will do absolutely nothing for oil prices. And it would remove the leverage this insipid pander stands to offer Republicans who argue otherwise.

HUUUUUHHHH!!!! SHAME ON YOU, eg!!!

Didn't you wash your feet of partisanship when you were given your Cult of Obama membership card???!!!