Obama's Disastrous Energy Record

[Marshall]

Obama's Disastrous Energy Record

By Chad Stafko

The energy policies of the Obama administration have made America less safe and have significantly contributed to our nation's high unemployment rate and lackluster economic growth. At the same time, President Obama's failure to expand our oil resources has led to higher prices at the gas pump for all Americans. In short, the Obama administration has been an utter failure in managing the energy sources of the United States.
The U.S. State Department recently delayed approval of the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline until at least early 2013. This pipeline was to have run from Western Canada's Alberta province all the way down to the U.S. Gulf Coast. It would have provided for 500,000-700,000 barrels of oil per day from Canada, one of our closest allies. But the Obama administration cowered to some protests of extremist environmentalists in Nebraska and thus decided to punt the decision until after the 2012 elections.
It's been estimated that the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline would have produced 20,000 jobs across the Midwest and South as well as 118,000 spin-off jobs. These would have been real jobs created not by government loan or bailout, or by government program, but by a successful corporation located in our nearest neighbor to the north, and America's largest trading partner.
Squandered was an opportunity to put high pay into the hands of working Americans to be distributed throughout communities from the Canadian border to the Gulf of Mexico. This was exactly the project we needed during this time of lackluster economic growth. But our president, with just over a year until the 2012 election, had his State Department decide to put politics ahead of working Americans by pandering to the environmentalists, who are certain to line his pockets with millions in campaign dollars, as they did leading up to the 2008 elections.
Not only does this TransCanada delay have a negative economic impact on America, but it also represents a lost opportunity to become less dependent on oil from the Middle East. So instead of more oil flowing into the U.S. via a friendly neighbor, we will continue to rely on the same proportion of foreign oil that comes from nations in the Middle East.
In fact, it was Barack Obama who said earlier this year, "And when it comes to the oil we import from other nations, we can partner with neighbors like Canada, Mexico and Brazil, which recently discovered significant new oil reserves, and with whom we can share American technology and know-how."
President Obama is apparently more interested in giving lip service to the idea of expanding our energy relationship with Canada. Unfortunately, that same lip service has a negative impact on our national security.
Approximately 48% of our net oil imports are from OPEC nations, some of which would not be considered friends or allies of the United States. We are dependent on hostile nations to run our nation's economy and provide the fuel for our automobiles, tractor-trailers, etc. Should OPEC suddenly decide to withdraw oil exports to the United States, it would be a disaster to our economy, and gas prices would skyrocket almost instantaneously.
Canada provides the most oil to the United States among any single nation (21%) and was willing to provide more through the TransCanada pipeline. And, to counter the environmental protests against the TransCanda deal, pipelines are considered to be the safest mode of oil transportation, safer than truck or by tanker ship. When oil spills occur, they are often spills of three barrels or less.
So, instead of that oil being transported into the United States, TransCanada is instead considering selling the oil from its oil sands to Asia, including the possibility of sending the oil to communist China.
But this TransCanada pipeline debacle is just par for the course for the Obama administration.
Recall President Obama's knee-jerk reaction to the Deepwater Horizon explosion and resulting oil leak. Obama enacted a moratorium on exploration in July 2010 which lasted for six months. In addition to the disaster not having near the negative environmental impact as was thought, the moratorium itself caused massive economic damage to the region. According to a study conducted by Louisiana State University professor Joseph Mason, the moratorium resulted in 19,000 jobs lost nationally and about $1.1 billion in lost wages. Furthermore, Mason figured that the moratorium resulted in $350 million in lost federal tax revenue.
Like the TransCanada decision, Obama showed that priority number one in his energy policy is to take care of the environmentalist agenda first and then let the economic chips fall where they may.
Obama's own Environmental Protection Agency has also had its hands in the disastrous energy policies of this administration. A recent study projected that new EPA regulations would result in 183,000 jobs lost annually and double-digit increases in the cost of electricity for consumers and businesses. That's exactly what we don't need during these economic times.
Since Barack Obama took office, gasoline priceshave surged from $1.83 gallon to $3.39 gallon as of early November. Someone who drives an average of 300 miles per week in a vehicle that gets twenty miles per gallon is paying around $30 more per week, or about $120 per month, more than he or she was when President Bush left office in January 2009. This increase in prices results in less disposable income for consumers. Multiply these reductions in disposable income by the millions of Americans who own automobiles, and we can see that the rise in gas prices under Barack Obama has had a substantial economic effect on our nation -- especially given that consumer spending accounts for about 70% of our Gross Domestic Product.
Granted, a president cannot manipulate the price of oil and gas, but according to Politifact, "no other president saw such a price surge by this point of his presidency." Barack Obama could have agreed to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for drilling, and he could have given his State Department authority to proceed with the TransCanada pipeline, and he could have had his agencies allow more overall drilling permits, among other initiatives. Any and all of these actions would have resulted in a gradual decline in oil prices long-term, all other factors held constant, and would have resulted in the need for less oil coming into the United States via the Middle East.
President Barack Obama has been a failure in his energy policies. His mismanagement and foolish decisions have weakened our economy and made America more dependent on oil from the corrupt OPEC group and other nations that are hostile towards America.

[gnadfly]

Marshall, Marshall, Marshall.

Van Jones had this all figured out until some nasty Republicans had him fired. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Bad Republicans, no green energy for YOU!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by Marshall

Obama's Disastrous Energy Record

Originally Posted by gnadfly

Marshall, Marshall, Marshall.

Van Jones had this all figured out until some nasty Republicans had him fired. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Bad Republicans, no green energy for YOU!

I see that Larry (aka Marshy) and Curly (aka Turdfly) have already posted in this thread. Once Moe (aka Whirly) shares his (lack of) wisdom we will have heard from each of The Three Stooges.

[dilbert firestorm]

chad stafko must not be checking his facts. The U.S. doesn't get much oil from the middle east. I don't know what's the percentage, but it is way less than the Canada & South America ships oil to.

[waverunner234]

A pipeline from Canada?

Lol America can't even keep up maintenance on existing pipelines
What if we would employ those 20,000 people there first? Plus the 118,000 spin off jobs?

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by waverunner234

A pipeline from Canada?

Lol America can't even keep up maintenance on existing pipelines
What if we would employ those 20,000 people there first? Plus the 118,000 spin off jobs?

Well Wavey that sounds just good to me.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by waverunner234

A pipeline from Canada?

Lol America can't even keep up maintenance on existing pipelines
What if we would employ those 20,000 people there first? Plus the 118,000 spin off jobs?

are you referring to the alaskan pipeline situation?

they get leaks on some of those lines, but from what I've read, BP is the biggest offender on getting the pipelines repaired timely.

[waverunner234]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

are you referring to the alaskan pipeline situation?

they get leaks on some of those lines, but from what I've read, BP is the biggest offender on getting the pipelines repaired timely.

No, all pipelines including oil, gas, sewer and whatever goes through them, I read somewhere its millions of miles of pipelines with tens of years maintenance that has to be done. The whole infra structure is rotten. Some pipelines lacking even a hundred years of maintenance.
I can see it in SoCal, there are numerous sewer- and waterline breaks each year.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by waverunner234

No, all pipelines including oil, gas, sewer and whatever goes through them, I read somewhere its millions of miles of pipelines with tens of years maintenance that has to be done. The whole infra structure is rotten. Some pipelines lacking even a hundred years of maintenance.
I can see it in SoCal, there are numerous sewer- and waterline breaks each year.

What did you read and when and where?

Most oil and gas pipelines in the US are very well maintained and have relatively few incidents...Now the pipelines in Nigeria are another matter.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by Marshall

Obama's Disastrous Energy Record

By Chad Stafko


The energy policies of the Obama administration have made America less safe and have significantly contributed to our nation's high unemployment rate and lackluster economic growth. At the same time, President Obama's failure to expand our oil resources has led to higher prices at the gas pump for all Americans. In short, the Obama administration has been an utter failure in managing the energy sources of the United States.
The U.S. State Department recently delayed approval of the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline until at least early 2013. This pipeline was to have run from Western Canada's Alberta province all the way down to the U.S. Gulf Coast. It would have provided for 500,000-700,000 barrels of oil per day from Canada, one of our closest allies. But the Obama administration cowered to some protests of extremist environmentalists in Nebraska and thus decided to punt the decision until after the 2012 elections.
It's been estimated that the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline would have produced 20,000 jobs across the Midwest and South as well as 118,000 spin-off jobs. These would have been real jobs created not by government loan or bailout, or by government program, but by a successful corporation located in our nearest neighbor to the north, and America's largest trading partner.
Squandered was an opportunity to put high pay into the hands of working Americans to be distributed throughout communities from the Canadian border to the Gulf of Mexico. This was exactly the project we needed during this time of lackluster economic growth. But our president, with just over a year until the 2012 election, had his State Department decide to put politics ahead of working Americans by pandering to the environmentalists, who are certain to line his pockets with millions in campaign dollars, as they did leading up to the 2008 elections.
Not only does this TransCanada delay have a negative economic impact on America, but it also represents a lost opportunity to become less dependent on oil from the Middle East. So instead of more oil flowing into the U.S. via a friendly neighbor, we will continue to rely on the same proportion of foreign oil that comes from nations in the Middle East.
In fact, it was Barack Obama who said earlier this year, "And when it comes to the oil we import from other nations, we can partner with neighbors like Canada, Mexico and Brazil, which recently discovered significant new oil reserves, and with whom we can share American technology and know-how."
President Obama is apparently more interested in giving lip service to the idea of expanding our energy relationship with Canada. Unfortunately, that same lip service has a negative impact on our national security.
Approximately 48% of our net oil imports are from OPEC nations, some of which would not be considered friends or allies of the United States. We are dependent on hostile nations to run our nation's economy and provide the fuel for our automobiles, tractor-trailers, etc. Should OPEC suddenly decide to withdraw oil exports to the United States, it would be a disaster to our economy, and gas prices would skyrocket almost instantaneously.
Canada provides the most oil to the United States among any single nation (21%) and was willing to provide more through the TransCanada pipeline. And, to counter the environmental protests against the TransCanda deal, pipelines are considered to be the safest mode of oil transportation, safer than truck or by tanker ship. Safer than, not spill-free. Environmentalists are concerned about the building of, the maintenance of, and the impact of the structure itself on the local ecosystem. When oil spills occur, they are often spills of three barrels or less.
So, instead of that oil being transported into the United States, TransCanada is instead considering selling the oil from its oil sands to Asia, including the possibility of sending the oil to communist China. They will sell it to whoever pays for it. Because of the added cost of transport, China can get cheaper oil than Canada's from Russia.
But this TransCanada pipeline debacle is just par for the course for the Obama administration.
Recall President Obama's knee-jerk reaction to the Deepwater Horizon explosion and resulting oil leak. Obama enacted a moratorium on exploration in July 2010 which lasted for six months. In addition to the disaster not having near the negative environmental impact as was thought, the moratorium itself caused massive economic damage to the region. According to a study conducted by Louisiana State University professor Joseph Mason, the moratorium resulted in 19,000 jobs lost nationally and about $1.1 billion in lost wages. Furthermore, Mason figured that the moratorium resulted in $350 million in lost federal tax revenue.
Like the TransCanada decision, Obama showed that priority number one in his energy policy is to take care of the environmentalist agenda first and then let the economic chips fall where they may.
Obama's own Environmental Protection Agency has also had its hands in the disastrous energy policies of this administration. A recent study projected that new EPA regulations would result in 183,000 jobs lost annually and double-digit increases in the cost of electricity for consumers and businesses. That's exactly what we don't need during these economic times.
Since Barack Obama took office, gasoline priceshave surged from $1.83 gallon to $3.39 gallon as of early November. Someone who drives an average of 300 miles per week in a vehicle that gets twenty miles per gallon is paying around $30 more per week, or about $120 per month, more than he or she was when President Bush left office in January 2009. This increase in prices results in less disposable income for consumers. Multiply these reductions in disposable income by the millions of Americans who own automobiles, and we can see that the rise in gas prices under Barack Obama has had a substantial economic effect on our nation -- especially given that consumer spending accounts for about 70% of our Gross Domestic Product.
Granted, a president cannot manipulate the price of oil and gas, but according to Politifact, "no other president saw such a price surge by this point of his presidency."
Also from the quoted policfact answer:
First, a little perspective: Presidents can’t do anything to lower gas prices in the short term, an energy policy expert at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota recently told WCCO-TV in Minneapolis. In an April 27 post, the station quotes associate professor Elizabeth Wilson saying that the United States doesn’t have a lot of control over prices because "oil is an international commodity, fungible commodity, traded on international markets."


Our take? Gas costs $2 more per gallon than it did when Obama took office; in the past 35 years, no other president saw such a price surge by this point of his presidency. However, Williams errs by implying the president is at fault; key factors driving gas prices are beyond a president’s control. Barack Obama could have agreed to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for drilling, and he could have given his State Department authority to proceed with the TransCanada pipeline, and he could have had his agencies allow more overall drilling permits, among other initiatives. Any and all of these actions would have resulted in a gradual decline in oil prices long-term, all other factors held constant, and would have resulted in the need for less oil coming into the United States via the Middle East.
President Barack Obama has been a failure in his energy policies. His mismanagement and foolish decisions have weakened our economy and made America more dependent on oil from the corrupt OPEC group and other nations that are hostile towards America. This summary is false. We now import less than 50% of our oil. The top 15 countries we import from are in order,
(thousands of barrels a day)

CANADA 2,240

MEXICO 1,150

SAUDI ARABIA 1,075

NIGERIA 854

VENEZUELA 806

IRAQ 637

COLOMBIA 365

ANGOLA 311

ECUADOR 303

RUSSIA 252

BRAZIL 213

KUWAIT 165

ALGERIA 140

CONGO (BRAZZAVILLE) 66

OMAN

Of 8577, 1417 comes from Russia, Angola, and Nigeria, countries some might consider “hostile”. Of course they don’t define their use of the word. The petroleum industry supplied all the “facts” for this article.

Typical post. Little bit of truth, lots of lying by omission, and an analysis of the presented facts than many reputable sources disagree with.

[waverunner234]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

What did you read and when and where?

It was a 1 hour documentary on CNBC, maybe a week ago, they usually repeat their programs so I expect it will air again soon. It's called "America's Infra Structure".

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by waverunner234

It was a 1 hour documentary on CNBC, maybe a week ago, they usually repeat their programs so I expect it will air again soon. It's called "America's Infra Structure".

Turdfly is not into documentary's. He is more of a Looney Tunes kinda guy!

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

What did you read and when and where?

Most oil and gas pipelines in the US are very well maintained and have relatively few incidents...Now the pipelines in Nigeria are another matter.

except any lines maintained by BP (british petroleum)