It’s the former Utah Governor and former Ambassador to China, Jon Huntsman who said in an interview on ABC’s This Week this past Sunday that the climate change skepticism coming from Romney, Bachmann and Perry is “not a winning formula” saying he “wouldn’t necessarily trust any” of his opponents.

Since my post last week the three front-runners have attended more campaign rallies and said more crazy things. For example: At a political rally in New Hampshire last week, Rick Perry continued to deny global warming and said that “there are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects”. Michele Bachmann on the other hand said at a rally in South Carolina that she will make sure that gasoline cost less than $2 a gallon again, if she becomes president. This is of course impossible and Stephen Lacey has a great post about this crazy dream from Bachmann over at Climate Progress.

During the interview on ABC’s This Week, Hunstman attacked Romney, Bachmann and Perry and said that the Republican party will be on the “losing side” if they continue to attack science. Here is an excerpt from Huntsman’s interview where he attacks mainly Perry’s stance on global warming, evolution and science:

“I think there’s a serious problem. The minute that the Republican Party becomes the party – the anti-science party, we have a huge problem. We lose a whole lot of people who would otherwise allow us to win the election in 2012. When we take a position that isn’t willing to embrace evolution, when we take a position that basically runs counter to what 98 of 100 climate scientists have said, what the National Academy of Science – Sciences has said about what is causing climate change and man’s contribution to it, I think we find ourselves on the wrong side of science, and, therefore, in a losing position.

The Republican Party has to remember that we’re drawing from traditions that go back as far as Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, President Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and Bush. And we’ve got a lot of traditions to draw upon. But I can’t remember a time in our history where we actually were willing to shun science and become a – a party that – that was antithetical to science. I’m not sure that’s good for our future and it’s not a winning formula.”

He also attacked Bachmann’s $2 gasoline promise:

“I just don’t know what — what world that comment would come from, you know? We live in the real world. It’s grounded in reality. And gas prices just aren’t going to rebound like that.

But just as we are in a static world, that is completely unrealistic. And, again, it’s talking about things that, you know, may pander to a particular group or sound good at the time, but it just simply is not founded in reality.”

Hopefully Huntsman can bring some sanity when it comes to science and climate change to the Republican primary and the coming presidential election. You can watch the full interview with Huntsman here.

“Peak Oil is not just the end of globalization. I was saying clearly that globalization was dead five years ago. It was obvious. But Peak Oil is potentially the end of the human race and that outcome is perhaps just a few years away unless the human race essentially throws every ideological sacred cow out the window and starts with a fresh piece of paper.

[…]The collapse of industrial civilization within the next five to ten years (perhaps sooner) is inevitable. It is the degree of collapse, what is destroyed in the collapse, how many people will have to die in the collapse, and what will survive the collapse that I and many others are fighting for now. That is what every human being should be concerned about and nothing less. Pursuing options while not rapidly disengaging from the current economic paradigm of infinite growth is the only real issue confronting the entire species. To not do that will be literally to consign unborn generations and those under 40 to death or a living hell.”

Read the whole interview over at Energy Bulletin.

Also watch George Monbiot interviewing Fatih Birol, International Energy Authority’s chief economist, about the new startling and worrying prediction for the date of peak oil.

Photo credit: World Resources Institute Staff

Al Gore talked about the failing auto industry in USA, “clean coal” and the environmental work being done in China in a recent interview with Newsweek’s Fareed Zakaria.

In the interview Gore said that he thinks that the whole auto industry needs to be “transformed”, and that the auto makers in USA “should make a transition as quickly as possible toward plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.”

ZAKARIA: Would you bail out the carmakers?
GORE: Whatever assistance might be forthcoming should be focused on speeding the changes that are absolutely essential to ensure that our companies are competitive in the global marketplace. When I was vice president, I initiated a program called the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles. The federal government invested over a billion dollars in partnership with the Big Three to focus on the accelerated development of advanced high-efficiency vehicles. But as soon as they felt they were off the hook at the end of 2000, they pulled the plug and walked away.

Gore also mentioned that he is in favour of raising the gasoline tax, saying: “I don’t think that’s likely to happen, but that’s my preferred alternative”. If you are a regular Green Blog reader you probably know by now that I am a big supporter of high gasoline taxes. I think it’s a great and easy way to encourage more people to use carpools, take public transportations or bike to work etc. Of course the taxes generated should help pay for something else in return for a higher gasoline tax. This way people and families don’t end up loosing any money and there won’ be so much criticism about rising fuel costs.

Gore also, somewhat, defended developing nations such as China and India:

“China and India and other developing countries all have exactly the same excuse for not moving on the climate crisis. They say, the United States hasn’t done anything. When the U.S. acts it will be by far the most effective way to improve the odds that China and India and other smaller developing economies will also act. They know that it’s in their own interest to tackle this problem.”

Gore especially defended China saying the country “is now actively preparing a version of cap-and-trade legislation” and that “their top leaders appear to get it”. Other things Gore mentioned in the interview were that China has “the largest tree-planting program in the world. They are actively building solar and wind and exploring carbon capture and sequestration”.

But according to Gore these countries “are not doing enough by a long shot [but] the way to encourage them to do more is … for the United States to take the lead”.

Gore also continued to criticize the “clean coal” lie that the fossil companies are foolishly trying to sell to the public and politicians. Gore said in the interview that “clean coal” uses “technology that does not yet exist”, and that “we cannot allow an illusion to be the basis of a strategy for human survival”.

You can read the whole interview here.

In the interview Obama said that “the challenges that we’re confronting are enormous” and many, and that he sometimes asks himself “where do I start?” Obama also said that the American people are looking for “action” instead of “a lot of speeches”.

I would just like to add that the whole world is looking for action, not just the American people. Watch the interview below:

Obama on the rising price of oil and gas:

Kroft: When the price of oil was at $147 a barrel, there were a lot of spirited and profitable discussions that were held on energy independence. Now you’ve got the price of oil under $60.

Mr. Obama: Right.

Kroft: Does doing something about energy is it less important now than…

Kroft: Why?

Mr. Obama: Well, because this has been our pattern. We go from shock to trance. You know, oil prices go up, gas prices at the pump go up, everybody goes into a flurry of activity. And then the prices go back down and suddenly we act like it's not important, and we start, you know filling up our SUVs again.

And, as a consequence, we never make any progress. It’s part of the addiction, all right. That has to be broken. Now is the time to break it.

Obama on the failing auto industry in USA:

Kroft: You have a situation right now where you have General Motors, which is in dire straits.

Mr. Obama: Yeah.

Kroft: May run out of cash by the end of the year, maybe by the end of certainly, if we believe what we read in the papers, by the time you take office.

Mr. Obama: Yeah. Well, let’s see how this thing plays itself out. For the auto industry to completely collapse would be a disaster in this kind of environment, not just for individual families but the repercussions across the economy would be dire. So it’s my belief that we need to provide assistance to the auto industry. But I think that it can’t be a blank check.

So my hope is that over the course of the next week, between the White House and Congress, the discussions are shaped around providing assistance but making sure that that assistance is conditioned on labor, management, suppliers, lenders, all the stakeholders coming together with a plan what does a sustainable U.S. auto industry look like? So that we are creating a bridge loan to somewhere as opposed to a bridge loan to nowhere. And that’s, I think, what you haven’t yet seen. That’s something that I think we’re gonna have to come up with.

Kroft: Are there a lot of people that think that the country would probably be better off and General Motors might be better off if it was allowed to go into bankruptcy?

Mr. Obama: Well, you know, under normal circumstances that might be the case in the sense that you’d go to a restructuring like the airlines had to do in some cases. And then they come out and they’re still a viable operation. And they’re operating even during the course of bankruptcy. In this situation, you could see the spigot completely shut off so that it would not potentially permit GM to get back on its feet. And I think that what we have to do is to recognize that these are extraordinary circumstances. Banks aren’t lending as it is. They’re not even lending to businesses that are doing well, much less businesses that are doing poorly. And in that circumstance, the usual options may not be available.

A full transcript of the interview can be found here.

The EIA doesn’t expect any oil production from offshore drilling until around the year 2017. And that it won’t reach peak production until around 2030, and then it would only produce 200,000 barrels of oil per day (marked in yellow below). “This would supply a meager 1.2% of total US annual oil consumption (just 0.6% of total US energy consumption)”.

And architecture2030.org, which the chart comes from, concludes that “the offshore oil would be sold back to the US at the international rate, which today is $106 a barrel. So, the oil produced by offshore drilling would not only be a “drop in the bucket”, it would be expensive, which translates to “no relief at the pump”.”

More oil consumption charts:
- A Picture is Worth… Gasoline Consumption Per Day

Besides the fact that John McCain is not telling the truth about what Obama said he is also completely wrong about the effectiveness of proper tire inflation.

According to the gas-guzzlers at Auto Alliance of BMW, Chrysler, Ford, GM, Mazda, Mercedez Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, and Volkswagen:

• The Department of Energy estimates that 1.2 billion gallons of fuel were wasted in 2005 as a result of driving on under-inflated tires.
• Fuel efficiency is reduced by 1% for every 3 PSI that tires are under-inflated.
• Proper tire inflation can save the equivalent of about 1 tank of gas per year.
• Proper tire inflation also reduces CO2 emissions.
• Experts estimate that 25% of automobiles are running on tires with lower than recommended pressure, because people don’t know how to check their tires or don’t realize that tires naturally lose air over time.

Later at a political rally in Berea Barack Obama responded to John McCain’s attacks:

“They’re lying about what my energy plan is. They’re making fun of a step that every expert says would reduce our oil consumption by 3 to 4 percent. It’s like these guys take pride in being ignorant.”

And during a town-hall meeting in Indiana today Barack Obama responded even harder:

“Senator McCain’s energy plan reads like an early Christmas list for oil and gas lobbyists. And it’s no wonder – because many of his top advisors are former oil and gas lobbyists.”

You can read all about Barack Obama’s “Energy Plan for America” here.

But offshore drilling is not a “quick fix” and it won’t help to lower the gas prices. The only ones that will profit from this are Bush and McCain’s friends in the oil industry. While people are suffering from the high gas prices the oil companies are reporting record profits after record profits.

Greenpeace has listed a bunch of reasons why offshore drilling is not the answer to high gas prices at the pump:

“The United States burns 24 percent of the world’s oil, yet we only have 3 percent of the world’s oil reserves. Even if we drilled every drop of oil the U.S. has on shore or off its coasts, we will never be able to drill our way to lower oil prices or energy security. We simply burn more than we could ever drill.”

“Offshore oil drilling is not a short-term fix. It would take at least a decade to bring new leases into production. And, it will be years before exploration could begin and years after that before production would start. If any effect were to be felt on gas prices (most likely only a few pennies per gallon), that effect is decades away.”

“Offering up more of our coastline for drilling won’t lower gas prices. Since President Bush took office in 2000, the number of wells in federally leased areas has increased exponentially, yet gas prices have doubled during that same time. Yet, this type of evidence is never mentioned in the media or by proponents for offshore drilling.”

“Another reason that drilling for more oil in the U.S. won’t result in lower gas prices is because oil prices are set on the global oil market. What this means is that all oil produced around the world is sold all at the same price. There is no guarantee that we would even be using the oil that was drilled here in the U.S. And, we certainly wouldn’t get a discount just because we drilled for it on U.S. soil. We would pay the same rate as the rest of the world.”

The only things that will lower the fuel prices, create more jobs, solve the climate crisis and fix this fragile economy is to invest in clean renewable energy sources, setting strict mpg standards for all automobiles and transform our current society to a sustainable one.

Going green will fix many problems, one of them are high gas prices.

During a summit in California on “good jobs and clean air” Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa announced that their labor union is leaving the ANWR coalition.

“We are not going to drill our way out of the energy problems we are facing—not here and not in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. We must find a long-term approach that breaks our dependence on foreign oil by investing in the development of alternate energy sources like solar, wind and geothermal power.”

Jim Hoffa also said that if the USA invests in green renewable energy it would “reap the benefits of curbing its dependence on oil through a revitalized economy with the creation of millions of new jobs in a rapidly growing industry”.

“Our economy is in shambles. Gas is climbing to $5 a gallon. The dollar has collapsed. Inflation is on the rise. Americans are seeing their paychecks shrink. Their family health care is being slashed. Finding a long-term solution has a tremendous upside. It will be environmentally friendly and will serve as a much-needed boost to our sagging economy.”

“We’re going to look at this barren, Arctic desert where I’m hoping to see some wildlife,” Boehner said. “But I understand there’s none there. But I’m still going to look for it. If I find any, I’ll let you know.”

Check out the video below where CNN interviews John Boehner, shortly after the press conference, while showing b-roll of actual wildlife moving around in the Arctic Wildlife National Refuge.

The republicans are travelling to Alaska and the Arctic Wildlife National Refuge this weekend to check out their potential oilfield which is said to produce around 10 billion barrels of oil.

“The total production from ANWR would be between 0.4 and 1.2 percent of total world oil consumption in 2030. Consequently, ANWR oil production is not projected to have a large impact on world oil prices.”

So even if the Republicans get permission to drill for oil in the Arctic Wildlife National Refuge there won’t be any impacts on the rising oil and gas prices. And the minor impacts it is expected to have will not be felt until after 15-20 years.

And don’t you think (for our own good) that 20 years from now we should have come up with something else, besides oil, to run our cars on?

How would the world look like? Would we have a war in Iraq? Would we have a better climate? Would we have less terrorism? Would the US economy be in a better shape?

Chris Pummer, from MarketWatch, says that the increased gas prices in USA should be celebrated.

“Americans should be celebrating rather than shuddering over the arrival of $4-a-gallon gasoline. We lived on cheap gas too long, failed to innovate and now face the consequences of competing for a finite resource amid fast-expanding global demand.”

He also believes that $8-a-gallon gas would do the USA, and the rest of the world good.

“A further price rise as in Europe to $8 a gallon – or $200 and more to fill a large SUV’s tank – would be a catalyst for economic, political and social change of profound national and global impact. We could face an economic squeeze, but it would be the pain before the gain.”

But let’s get back to the question I asked first. How would the world look like if USA had similar gas prices as those in Europe?

Well, besides the war in Iraq and terrorism, we don’t really have to wait to see how the world could look like. We can see it already.

SUVs and other gas-guzzling cars have dropped enormous in sales, as well as in value, lately. It’s like they have been put on the endangered species list.

“If gas prices stay where they are at or continue to rise, the body-on frame SUV is an endangered species and the pickup truck as a personal car is an endangered species.”

“When they find out what you think their truck is worth, they think you’re trying to rip them off or something. Small cars are gone within a week; SUVs are sitting here since last summer.”

Americans are already now leaving their cars at home in favour of public transportation or car-pools.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) recently released their March 2008 report and it shows a massive decline in driving. In contrast to the trend the past 25 years the 4.4% drop sure says a lot.

“2008 marks the first time since 1979 that there has been a drop in miles travelled in over the month of March. This drop corresponds to 11 billion less miles traveled, according to FHWA. Over the first quarter of 2008, greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector have also dropped 9 million metric tons compared to past years, something that no amount of political posturing has yet to accomplish.”

Let’s hope that the gas prices keeps increasing but also that our politicians helps to ease the pain that comes “before the gain” with smart and long lasted solutions (and not short-sighted and stupid ones).

Image credit: Futureatlas.com. Image licensed under a
Creative-Commons Attribution license.