Skip to main content

Stripper well
Although Mitt Romney always manages to slip "wind" and "solar" into one of the pauses of his energy discussions, his overall plan consists of drill-baby-drill, dig-baby-dig and frack-baby-frack. Fossil fuel foolery. This in the face of what all but the most industry-tied shills and scientific illiterates acknowledge are burgeoning impacts of climate change. The GOP candidate's myopic approach was on full display in Wednesday's debate even though "moderator" Jim Lehrer didn't ask a question on climate change, the major issue of our era. Or on energy, for that matter. But Romney brought it up anyway and mangled the truth repeatedly.

Today, he walked it back a little.

Three of his lies Wednesday in Denver:

• Romney said: “About half of [the clean energy companies that] have been invested in [by the government] have gone out of business.”

Not even close. Most companies invested in are succeeding. A handful have failed. The default rate on the Department of Energy's $16.1 billion energy loan guarantee program, according to Bloomberg, is at worst, about 3.6 percent. But that is only if none of the guarantee could be recovered from the failed companies. Greg Kats, who worked at the Energy Department from 1994 to 2000, including five years as the department’s director of financing for energy efficiency and renewable energy, said the defaults might rise to as much as five percent, but “I do not see a scenario in which the default rate gets out of single digits.” Michael Grunwald, a Time reporter who wrote the book on the stimulus, The New New Deal: The Hidden Story of Change in the Obama Era, said Team Romney has told him that the candidate misspoke and didn't mean to say "half." Uh-huh. Grunwald puts the default loss at from around one to two percent.

• Romney said: “In one year, you provided $90 billion in tax breaks to green energy.” He also laid this against $2.8 billion in breaks to the fossil fuel industry, the implication being that the Obama administration had provided 30 times as many breaks for green energy as oil and gas have received.

False. During Obama's entire term of office, not a single year, the government investment for public transit, energy-efficiency measures like better insulation for homeowners, demonstration projects (including for "clean coal"), renewable research and development projects, competitive prizes and similar projects have amounted to $90 billion. Some $5 billion went to clean up old nuclear power sites. Most of this spending did not come in the form of tax breaks.

Double Bottom Line Venture Capital reported that for the period 1918-2009, oil and gas received $446.9 billion in subsidies. The nuclear industry took in $185.7 billion from 1947 to 2009. Up until 2009, the renewable energy sector, excluding biofuels, had received $5.9 billion, DBL concluded.

• Romney said: “All of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened on private land, not on government land.”

False.

A Congressional Research Service report, U.S. Crude Oil Production in Federal and Non-Federal Areas, found that oil drilling on federal lands has risen under Obama when compared to 2007. As is often pointed out in these discussions, the industry that keeps demanding more access to public land is currently sitting on 7,000 approved drilling permits that it hasn’t begun exploring or developing.

Whether you call them Pants-on-Fire or Pinocchios or Flat-out Falsehoods, Romney operates no differently in the energy arena than when he's talking about anything else. If he's talking, he's lying.  

Originally posted to Meteor Blades on Thu Oct 04, 2012 at 09:36 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site