Obama on Energy, the Good and the Bad
| January 24, 2012 | Posted by Lisa Sharp under Energy |
President Obama just gave his third State of the Union address and energy was a key issue. However, what he had to say left a bad taste in some environmentalists mouths. One of the first things he said about energy was that he wants to increase offshore drilling saying that he is “directing” his Administration to “open more than 75 percent of our potential offshore oil and gas resources.” He went on to say oil isn’t enough and we need an “all-of-the-above strategy” when it comes to energy.
The President did say he is requiring all companies drilling for gas on public lands to disclose the chemicals they use. He also said “America will develop this resource without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk.” But many argue fracking can never be done without risking our health and safety.
He also talked about American having nearly one hundred years of natural gas but is this number true? This number comes from a report done by the Potential Gas Committee, an organization of petroleum engineers and geoscientist. The report was far from impartial, as contributors came from the industry-supported Colorado School of Mines.
“Its website consists of a single press release announcing the April report, with a link to a brief summary slide deck. A more detailed slide deck issued by the committee presents some optimistic estimates of potential resources, including a “future gas supply” estimate of 2,170 trillion cubic feet (tcf). At the 2010 rate of American consumption—about 24 tcf per year—that would be a 95-year supply of gas, which apparently has been rounded up to 100 years,” says Chris Nelder at Slate.com
Understanding how they got to this 95-year supply estimate is a post in of itself. Go to Nelder’s article on Slate.com for all the info. But once you get all the numbers and facts it boils down to really only an 11-year supply of natural gas is certain. The other 89 years’ worth, well it’s not been shown to even exist or to be recoverable. Some say even the 11-year supply is optimistic.
Okay so back to the State of the Union. There were great promises of real clean energy.
“I will not cede the wind or solar or battery industry to China or Germany because we refuse to make the same commitment here.”
The President also called for an end on oil subsidies saying,
“We have subsidized oil companies for a century. That’s long enough. It’s time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that’s rarely been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that’s never been more promising.”
There was some other promising news,
“I’m directing my Administration to allow the development of clean energy on enough public land to power three million homes. And I’m proud to announce that the Department of Defense, the world’s largest consumer of energy, will make one of the largest commitments to clean energy in history – with the Navy purchasing enough capacity to power a quarter of a million homes a year.”
The President also called on businesses to reduce their consumption of energy, saying he will give “businesses incentives to upgrade their buildings.” He also called for the power grid to be updated as it wastes to much energy. And here is my favorite quote of the night.
“…I will not back down from protecting our kids from mercury pollution, or making sure that our food is safe and our water is clean.”
That quote should help us all breath a little easier. I have mixed feelings about the address as far as it concerns energy and the environment. I hope the President will push harder for clean energy and less for the dirty ones, but there were a lot of good things as well. If you missed the address you can read the transcript on Politico.
I would love to hear everyone else’s thoughts on this part of the address. Did you like it? Do you feel he is relying to much on dirty energy? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
I think it’s a miracle that he addressed any of these issues at all given the last president and the current campaigner’s of the republican party. Wanting to become a world leader in green energy takes a lot of foresight. All in all, it may not be enough but it’s still huge compared to what a republican would ever address. Most of them don’t care at all and some even deny climate change exists (despite this thing called science).
I agree, but the push for natural gas scares me since I live in Oklahoma and we have to deal with lots of fracking. But it is better than before!
I’m pretty much where Jessica is. Some things bothered me but for the most part it’s a heck of a lot better than what we’ve had in the past and WAY better than what the Republicans have to offer.
I’m planning to write a blog post on the SOTU speech today so I’m glad I saw this first. You’ve saved me some time as I’ll just link to you for some of what I planned to write.
i share your hesitancy about natural gas being the silver bullet for several generations’ energy needs. i’m also hopeful that federal subsidies can be used to push solar and wind power over that hurdle to become more efficient and wide-spread to become a main power source for americans.