How do you know which parts of Obama’s energy speech were either lies or misrepresentations?  The parts where his mouth was moving. This morning President Obama outline his energy policy which is comprised of trying to pull the energy policy wool over America’s eyes.

Once again he wants to present “incentives” for the energy industry to drill on existing leases.  You see, his feeling about the oil executives is the same as his feeling about the American people, they are complete and total idiots,paying for leases but not bothering to take the product out of the ground so they can make money.  All of those stupid executives (according to the POTUS) run their companies by paying fees instead of collecting revenue.  getting the product out of the ground so they can make money.  This is nothing but Presidential subterfuge.

What the President is not telling you is that these oil leases purchased by oil companies is for  exploration and drilling, not just drilling. Oil is not equally distributed across the each potential drilling location, there are unlucky oil companies that get stuck with a lease for a parcel that doesn’t hold any oil. What make those companies really unlucky is that the parcel right next to them might be the new Saudi Arabia.

Even if the leased location is a bonanza of black gold, that oil  company still might not be drilling. This may be surprising (not), but there is a lot of red tape to get through once you find oil on a site before you start drilling.  This red tape has gotten even more complicated during the Obama administration. Even if everything runs smoothly, it can take years for companies who own a lease to complete their exploration activities, and more years to move from exploration to drilling.

The Institute of Energy Resources explains it clearly with this chart

(more…)

While many people are cheering the revolts going on throughout the Middle East and shudder at the horrible violence few people are discussing the possible effect that these revolts will have on the world/US Economy.  Should these revolts continue to spike up the cost of oil, the world will be thrown into an economic crisis worse than the recession that began in 2007.

Certainly the crash of the sub-prime housing boom, which was caused by the progressive belief that owning a home was a right, is the primary reason behind the financial crisis and what was to become known as the  “great recession.”  The part that most people forget is that the “pin” that pricked the housing bubble, and led us down the economic abyss was oil prices.  In fact every rescission we have had since the mid-1970s has shown an accompanying spike in oil prices. It is not a coincidence that the worst recession in that period has been accompanied by the largest oil  price spike.

Economist Jeffrey Rubin said in 2008:

Curiously, an over-500% increase in the real price of oil gets virtually ignored as a culprit behind today’s economy, eclipsed by the ongoing crisis in financial markets. Yet the run-up in real oil prices this cycle is over twice the spike in oil prices that occurred during the first or second OPEC oil shock. And those oil shocks produced two of the deepest recessions in the entire post-war period, including the 1980-82 double dip.

The price of oil influences more than just how you heat your house or drive your car.

(more…)

Lost in the news of the elections is a blockbuster story soon to be swept under the carpet, Politico reports:

“The White House rewrote crucial sections of an Interior Department report to suggest an independent group of scientists and engineers supported a six-month ban on offshore oil drilling, the Interior inspector general says in a new report.

In the wee hours of the morning of May 27, a staff member to White House energy adviser Carol Browner sent two edited versions of the department report’s executive summary back to Interior. The language had been changed to insinuate the seven-member panel of outside experts – who reviewed a draft of various safety recommendations – endorsed the moratorium, according to the IG report obtained by POLITICO.”

In weasel words that even make this Washingtonian of twenty years blush, the Department of the Interior Inspector General writes:

“’The White House edit of the original DOI draft executive summary led to the implication that the moratorium recommendation had been peer-reviewed by the experts,’ the IG report states, without judgment on whether the change was an intentional attempt to mislead the public.” (emphasis added)

One can certainly “lead to an inference“. But … led to the implication? Oh, right. You are trying not to say “implied“.

This is Exhibit A why law school drill into every first year’s head do not use the passive voice. It obscures meaning, begs questions, and diminishes confidence and credibility in the speaker. You come off as trying to weaselly avoid saying something. Like this guy.

(more…)

From The Hill:

President Obama should use the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina to inject new energy into the unfinished task of repairing New Orleans, according to officials from the region.

Obama will deliver a speech here Sunday to mark five years to the day that Katrina made landfall, devastating the city and tarnishing the presidency of George W. Bush.

Showcasing the progress in New Orleans under his administration could also help boost the president’s sagging approval ratings, and with it the fortunes of his party in November. His speech, officials say, should offer a way to find balance between further oil exploration and protecting the region’s sensitive coastline.

“We’re also going to impress upon him how difficult this recovery is going to be,” Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) told The Hill. “We’re going to remind him about the importance of coastal restoration and accelerating revenue sharing.”

(more…)

In a visit to Washington, D.C., yesterday, a group of about fifty energy industry workers and representatives from the Gulf of Mexico area told lawmakers, reporters and bloggers that if the Obama administration and Congress are serious about creating and saving jobs, they will lift the moratorium on energy exploration in the Gulf.

The workers were joined by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and former Rep. John Peterson (R-Pa.), outspoken opponents of both the moratorium and tax changes proposed by Democrats that opponents charge would hammer the energy industry.

Thomas Pyle, President of the American Energy Alliance, a group focused on maintaining energy industry jobs in the Gulf area said in a statement, “In an economy like this, the President and Congress should be looking for ways to strengthen U.S. businesses, not weaken them.”

Several of those who traveled to the Hill for meetings with members of Congress say they are suffering financially in the wake of the moratorium’s imposition, and that layoffs and business closures will be unavoidable should it remain in effect.

“My job matters,” said Thomas Clements, co-owner of Oilfield CNC Machining in Broussard, Louisiana. “So I’ve come to Washington to find somebody to hear me, to see my hopelessness, my no-man’s-land that I’m in because of these proposed tax changes to the energy industry and the moratorium.”  Clements elaborated, saying that he had planned to hire more workers this year, but the six-month moratorium on drilling has halted those plans.  All orders for new metal parts used in drilling have been canceled and no new orders are anticipated, said the small businessman, who questioned how his business could survive for the full six months of the moratorium during a lunch attended by Washington, D.C.-based reporters and bloggers.

(more…)

In a rebuke to President Obama, a Senate panel last week gave a thumbs-up to the creation of an alternative Gulf oil spill commission to rival that previously announced by the President.

The bipartisan commission was approved by five Democrats and ten Republicans on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

Its members would be determined mainly by Members of Congress, on a 50/50 Democrat/Republican basis, with President Obama retaining the power to appoint the Chairman.

The move followed intense criticism of President Obama’s own announced commission—composed in substantial part of anti-drilling members like Natural Resources Defense Council President Frances Beinecke, and several individuals professionally focused on environmental law— from Democrats and Republicans alike.

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), one of those involved in the alternative-commission effort, said earlier this week that the Obama Gulf oil spill commission “appears to me to be stacked with people philosophically opposed to offshore drilling.”

(more…)

From the “Imagine if a Democrat did this” files – say, in the context of opposing President Obama’s effort to transform our health care insurance and delivery systems . It seems that a Republican Senator has been outed as hopping in the sack with an advocacy group from the other team, itself exposed as financing ads on his behalf in support of his abandoning what has become a marquee issue for his party.

Oh, and to top it off, his staff began by deceiving about it and end (for now) by telling a whopper in the struggle to avoid scrutiny over the mess.

That is, however, precisely what’s going on in the Palmetto State, at least according to this report about the latest twist in the long, strange saga of Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Without reciting the story ably summarized by a Gamecock writer, the whopper told in the scramble is this, offered by “Graham’s top South Carolina strategist, Richard Quinn” – as well as to others I have spoken to who have recently called the Senator’s office seeking to inquire about the oddity:

“‘Lindsey doesn’t support Cap & Trade and he will not support Cap & Trade,’ Quinn told us flatly.”

Except when he does.

(more…)