Oil Policy: Stupidity on Steriods

Can anyone hazard a guess as to why our illustrious government has been pumping oil out of the North Slope, transporting to Texas, and then pumping right back into the ground? That is essentially what the Bush administration has been doing for the last 7 years as the Strategic Petroleum Reserve has been filling up.  I suppose it must be the Republican version of a jobs program moving the oil from one US storage facility to another. I don't see any new infrastructure in place but that, of course, is the beauty of it.  The continuing success of the Republicans in their war to impoverish the American government and all it stands for.

It never got on the radar until the high gasoline prices finally got the Senate, on a vote of 99 to 1 to tell the moron in chief that the game was over.  But this is merely the tip of the stupidity iceberg.

The movement of the oil from Alaska to Texas is the reality when oil is traded on a world market.  The oil being put into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is oil from anywhere and the oil being sucked out of the North Slope is oil sent to the same nebulous anywhere.  The real United States strategic petroleum reserve is all the oil within the sovereign control of the United States government.  It does not matter if it is stored in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve or the North Slope or in the ANWR or in the Gulf of Mexico or offshore or, when push comes to shove, under some Texan's ranch.  But for the undeniable fact that it takes time and bucks to "develop" an oil field, all of this oil is American oil and that is what "dependence on foreign oil" and "strategic" is all about.

And this brings us to the real point of the discussion:  I Do not want anyone to be caught flat footed by the tap dancing righties when it comes to responsibility for the current price of gasoline. Pride yourselves on being rational and somewhat apologetic for the moratorium in the Florida Straight and the gulf of Mexico.  But do it while sticking it to em about the ANWR and the deregulation of the oil futures markets.  It is the futures market deregulation and Republican destruction of the dollar that are major contributors to the oil bubble. In point of fact, the delivery of oil from the ANWR at best projected extraction rates would reduce the price of gasoline by an estimated 2 cents a gallon, and that is at the current ridiculous bubble prices. Drilling the ANWR is/was not a solution to this problem even if it had been started 10 years ago.  (the discussion of dollar devaluation and market speculation will wait).

As the Republicans prance around screeching about the ANWR it is important to understand that the oil that exists in the Florida Straight (estimated at 4 billion barrels) is as much Cuba's oil as it is America's oil. The stupid stuff is the refusal of the Bush regime to talk to the Cubans so as to pursue a proper development of the these shared oil fields. Such a joint venture would be in the interest of both parties but Republican rightardedness stands firmly in the way.  Speaking strategically, while Bush moves oil from Alaska to Texas, the Cubans cut a deal with the Chinese to suck that oil right back out of Florida and a lot more.

The Republicans wave the "Green Environmentalists prevented drilling the ANWR and caused the price of gasoline to soar" flag. But you never hear a peep about the Florida Straight where Cuba is about to tap in to our "strategic reserves".  The Greens are guilty of forcing a moratorium on drilling within 50 miles of the coast.  It is time to eat a little crow and make an exception to that while dealing with the Cubans.  The Cuban problem is why the righties will always flail the ANWR distraction.  Believe me, the oil in the ANWR is not going to jump up and run away to Cuba or disappear as the City of Atlantis. Yet all you will hear from Republican apologists is ANWR, ANWR, ANWR.

On closer examination this is because the Alaskans and Ted "Bridge to Nowhere" Stevens are going to get a 50% cut on the "Alaskan oil".  It's time to rethink this entire deal, kids.  Time to ask who really owns the oil that lies in the American Public Domain; in the American Commons; in the non private REAL strategic reserves.  That is OUR oil.  It doesn't belong to Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Alaska or the Republicans or the Oil Companies.  No more Three Card Monty, please. Let the real games begin.  Who really owns the oil?

•  Your comments are solicited

  by TheTrucker on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:17:20 AM PDT

  •  Very nice diary

    Laid out all the issues.

    However, when I saw the title, I figured it was about Roger Clemens :-D

    by ChurchofBruce on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:34:49 AM PDT

•  Needs new headline

  Got to get the word Oil in there somewhere. Just read this by accident and found it interesting. How about:

  Oil policy: Stupidity on Steroids.

  That should work.

  by makemefree on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:44:23 AM PDT

•  It's just a reserve, y'see.

  Hell, it's an investment.  Boy howdy, that oil reserve is worth more every day!  If we sold it on the market - ? - rebate checks all around!

  According to an article I read (no source, I'm drinking wine) the reserve is 97% full.  I'm no expert, but I have a good idea that it wouldn't last long if external supplies were cut off.  Like, y'know, if the Shah of Iran got mad at us.

  It makes ya shudder ta think of it, right?

  by willb48 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 01:04:44 AM PDT

•  You make some valid points

  I have some contrarian positions in regard to enery as well.

  I believe ANWAR should be developed soon. This is because I, like you, believe that the oil there represents reserves owned by We the People. I also believe that they are too valuable to not be extracted at some time. I would recommend that the oil be extracted soon before the Trans-Alaska pipeline decays to the point of unsafe operation. It has a few decades left. If the oil is brought to market after the pipeline is inoperable, a port of some sort would need to be constructed which would be extremely damaging to the environment.

  I agree with you about the straits of Fla. and I think the natural gas fields in Colorado should be developed in order to fuel our power stations.

  Most importantly, wind and solar by a guaranteed price for private producers along with a limited backbone of nukes for baseload.

  The ultimate goal would be 100% renewables, but I believe these hydrocarbon and nuclear sources will be needed to bridge the gap.

  by Inventor on Sat May 17, 2008 at 01:11:33 AM PDT

  •  Get the oil, screw up the climate

    Apparently still nobody realizes that it makes no sense to rip up the ecosystem that tamps down greenhouse gases to get the oil under it so we can add more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. STOP DRIVING YOUR FUCKING CARS SO MUCH. STOP USING SO MUCH ELECTRICALLY-POWERED CRAP. Jeez, you're like the people who think taking a pill will let them go on gorging themselves on high-chloresterol food without detriment. We Americans think we can flim-flam everything and get away with something for nothing, but nature does not work that way.

    by fourthcornerman on Sat May 17, 2008 at 01:23:53 AM PDT

    •  Only one way out...

      Gotta move away from combustion-based energy.  There may be transitions needed.  Steps like higher mileage requirements, hybrid vehicles, energy efficiency standards and lots of other conservation measures all help.

      But ultimately, oil is finite.  The demand for energy, so long as global population continues to grow and continues to industrialize, doesn't seem to have a very finite end in sight.

      Atmospheric greenhouse gas levels continue to increase with a combustion-based economy; it's just that simple.

      by AnnCetera on Sat May 17, 2008 at 01:47:37 AM PDT

    •  And think of the Native People who

      rely on the Caribou for food and clothing. What will these smart, not book learned , people do to exsist?

      by Owllwoman on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:57:02 AM PDT

•  to be fair . . .

  The function of the "strategic reserve" is to maintain a stock of immediately available oil in the event of import disruption.  North Slope oil does not provide that since it is already producing at near maximum rate . . . there is no "extra" capacity to tap if needed.  The "strategic reserve" is located pipeline close and pumps at the ready to large refineries now dependent on imported oil supplies which might well be interrupted if we start yet another Middle East war.

  You might argue that the current North Slope production now going mostly to Japan, Tiawan and Korea could be diverted to the Gulf, but the Japanese et.al. who have contracted for it might disagree.  Plus, until the Arctic ice finally all melts it's a long haul going from Valdez all the way around South America to Houston . . . even if enough tankers were available to do it.

  So you're right in general . . . American energy policy is "stupid on steroids" . . . but wrong in the particular regarding the petrolium reserve.

  by Deward Hastings on Sat May 17, 2008 at 01:45:08 AM PDT

  •  remnant of the cold war?

    pumping the oil from alaska and "hiding" it in Texas sounds like something from the cold war - when concerns that the USSR could take out the pipeline with a missile. That act would have cut off all the Alaskan oil, ostensibly during a war (which likely would have ended minutes later; victory for the roaches!!). In the context of Mutually Assured Destruction and Brinkmanship, that policy made a certain amount of mad sense.
    Now, all that makes sense is getting off the drug, asap.

    by kamarvt on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:49:57 AM PDT

    •  It was instituted

      after the oil shocks of the '70s. It was the only thing about Carter's energy plan Reagan kept. It has been in the process of being filled for decades.

      by Inventor on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:43:52 AM PDT

  •  You make a good point

    And I missed it when I first did this article in Usenet.  I got a similar response there from another rational and reasonable soul.

    Nonetheless, it appears that the vote was 99 to 1 to pull the plug on this deal at present due to the ridiculous price of oil.  There is even a lot of talk about reversing the flow to the tune of 2 or 3 million barrels a day to break the current price bubble.

    The fact is that the piggy bank for the oil was created as a defense for something that cannot actually happen in today's economic environment. It is important to understand this as we contemplate what to do NOW.

    If you think I am wrong about my claim that the "disruption" is nie impossible due to the many suppliers that are currently on line then please say so.

    The probem we are having is too much dollars and no place for them to go but commodities -- especially oil.

    by TheTrucker on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:39:34 PM PDT