As the greatest domestic environmental disaster of this generation, and perhaps in the end of all generations, unfolds in the Gulf of Mexico, with literally no end in sight, the Grand Old Party has taken the extraordinary step of deciding that now is the perfect time to remind people we need to do MORE offshore oil drilling.

Yes, the House Republican Conference has assembled an “Energy Rapid Response Team” ready to convince you that more offshore drilling is necessary, for great fear of rising costs of importing oil and fueling at the pump. James does well to criticize the reps who put this together.

On the less ridiculous side, two moderate Republican governors took back their support for offshore drilling. Florida Republican governor Charlie Crist sided with McCain in 2008 in support of offshore drilling. After seeing the catastrophe in the Gulf, he now retracts his support. Flying over the spill site, Crist remarked, “Clearly it could be devastating to Florida if something like that were to occur. It’s the last thing in the world I would want to see happen in our beautiful state. … It’s clearly not clean enough after we saw what we saw today — that’s horrific — and it certainly isn’t safe enough. It’s the opposite of safe.”

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger expressed his shock and distaste for the television images of the spill and promptly rescinded his interest in lifting a 40-year moratorium on drilling off the California coast. In 1969, a Union Oil Co. drilling platform off the Santa Barbara coast blew out and defiled miles of beaches and ocean ecosystems, prompting a moratorium on offshore drilling. Perhaps forty years is enough time to forget the horror of such an event (I wasn’t born yet). Almost fortunately, the Gulf Oil spill reminded us once again of what it feels like to see habitats die on a large scale. Obama has recently been interested in lifting bans on offshore drilling as well. Hopefully, he will listen to Greenpeace and change his mind.

I know well mining companies attempt to deregulate safety measures as much as possible, causing things like the mining explosion one month ago. Mining companies often cite higher costs and loss of profits as the primary reason for not installing more advanced and reliable safety measures in their mining operations. They also invest in politicians. I’m thinking the oil industry operates very similarly.

The Deepwater Horizon accident has resulted in eleven lives lost, countless of animal lives affected and an oil spill that is growing in size every day. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have concluded that around 5000 barrels of oil is leaking every day from the destroyed oil rig managed by BP. According to reports the oil spill has tripled in size during these past days.

While touring the area at risk from the oil spill Obama blamed the “unprecedented environmental disaster” on BP while saying they “will be paying the bill”:

“Let me be clear: BP is responsible for this leak. BP will be paying the bill,” said Obama as he visited the area and pledged a “fully coordinated, relentless relief effort” in the region where the coastlines of four Gulf states are being menaced. [...]“We a dealing with a massive and potentially unprecedented environmental disaster,” Obama said.

And why shouldn’t they? After all BP is the third largest global energy company and the 4th largest company in the world. Reuters also reports that:

“The spill has also forced Obama to suspend politically sensitive plans to expand offshore oil drilling, unveiled last month partly to woo Republican support for climate legislation, one of the U.S. leader’s priorities.”

And following this suspension on offshore oil drilling Greenpeace Executive Director, Philip Radford said that while Obama’s announcement was “a welcome first step” it isn’t enough:

“The President’s announcement today, while a welcome first step, does not go nearly far enough. The only way to prevent human, economic and environmental tragedies like the BP Deepwater Disaster is to re-enact the moratorium on offshore drilling and to replace dirty dangerous fuels with clean energy.”

“If we cannot handle a spill in the Gulf of Mexico, imagine the impact even a small spill could have in the remote, pristine waters of the Arctic”, Radford said in a statement.

Greenpeace also notes that on April 2nd, just days before the BP Deepwater Spill began, President Obama said:

“It turns out, by the way, that oil rigs today generally don’t cause spills. They are technologically very advanced.”

Maybe this time BP really should go “beyond petroleum“?

Related reading:
- Documents Show BP Opposed New, Stricter Safety Rules
- Rig explosion dirties BP’s green image
- BP Deepwater Disaster and Gulf Oil Spill (Greenpeace)
- Dick Cheney and the oil spill
- BP warned of rig fault ten years ago
- BP accused as size of oil slick triples in a day
- Oil Spill Vs. Wind Spill Vs. Sun Spill.

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

“I’ve been deeply frustrated. I suspect a lot of you have been too.

We’re facing such huge challenges and all you hear through the media are demagogic chants like “drill, drill, drill.”

Skyrocketing energy prices. The climate crisis. Unraveling financial markets. Wars that just happen to be in places with a lot of oil. These are all just different faces of exactly the same thing. As I’ve said in the past, we’re borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the future of human civilization. And every bit of that has to change.

We all know what we have to do. Ask anybody on the street and they’ll tell you. We need to “Repower America” — invest in ourselves, here at home, with clean, economical energy technologies that we know work. And be the global leader as these technologies take off around the world.

And ask anyone, and they’ll also tell you why it isn’t happening: the oil and coal lobbies — and the politicians who do their bidding.”

Learn about Al Gore’s clean renewable energy challenge for USA and why offshore drilling is not the answer to high gas prices.

Update: Cathy Zoi, from the We Campaign, just sent out this email:

Wow! I just got an update on the number of donations we received from Al Gore’s email. I couldn’t believe it. Just in the first 6 hours, folks gave more than $150,000 to get our Repower America ad on the air.

With your help, we can support a national CNN buy for the next week, too. Will you chip in to keep it on the air?

If you want to contribute to the TV ad click here.

Gristmill also has a lengthy post about Sarah Palin and her record on issues related to energy and the environment. For example they list Sarah Palin’s support to build a natural-gas pipeline from Alaska’s North Slope and her suggestion to eliminate Alaska’s gas tax.

Gristmill also lists several quotes from Sarah Palin and from people who have reacted to her nomination. Such as this one from Gene Karpinski, the President of the League of Conservation Voters:

“Unfortunately, with her support for drilling in the Arctic Refuge and off our coasts, Governor Palin will simply continue the failed policies of the Bush-Cheney Administration and their Big Oil friends — policies that could make us even more dependent on foreign oil.

Governor Palin characterizes McCain’s flip-flop on drilling offshore as a positive step in his transformation from maverick to Big Oil’s best friend. She has implored McCain to change his position against drilling in the Arctic — something she will have plenty of opportunities to pursue as his running mate.

In addition to supporting backward-looking energy policies, Governor Palin has also opposed a crucial clean water initiative, sued the federal government for listing polar bears as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, and opposed other important wildlife protection measures.”

The post Sarah Palin’s awful environmental record has been updated with the new information.

Last week the Republican presidential contender John McCain announced his choice for running mate and Vice President. John McCain selected a rather unknown 44 year-old women named Sarah Palin from Alaska.

The pro-lifer Sarah Palin, a lifetime member of the NRA, was the former mayor of a town of 9,000 for nearly two years. She wants to teach creationism in schools and is “a firm believer in free market capitalism.” She is also in the centre of the “TrooperGate” scandal currently being unfolded in Alaska. During an interview with Larry Kudlow from CNBC’s “Kudlow & Co” Sarah Palin said that someone needed to explain for her “what is it exactly that the VP does every day?” According to Cindy McCain, “Palin has national security experience because Alaska is close to Russia.”

Already now it’s perfectly clear that Sarah Palin is inappropriate and incompetent for the Vice President position and being one heartbeat away from the presidency for one of the most powerful superpowers in the world.

You could ask yourself why John McCain selected Sarah Palin as his running mate, and if he really was sane at that moment. Faye Palin, Palin’s mother-in-law, also wonders that very same question as she said to a New York Daily News reporter that “I’m not sure what she brings to the ticket other than she’s a woman and a conservative.” But it seems not even John McCain liked the idea of Sarah Palin as the Vice President of USA.

We have earlier reported about Joe Biden, the Democrats nominee for Vice President, and his impressive green environmental record. So the question is. How green is really Sarah Palin?

Sarah Palin hates polar bears as she doesn’t want to add them to her nation’s list of endangered species, saying “listing the polar bear as threatened is the wrong way to get to the right answer.” She has also filed a lawsuit seeking to reverse that very decision.

Sarah Palin wants to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve. She also wants more offshore drilling.

Sarah Palin has supported and led Alaska’s efforts to shoot down wolves from airplanes and helicopters.

Sarah Palin denies that global warming is man-made, saying “I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.”

Sarah Palin is married to Todd Palin, an oil field production operator from BP. And that is something that surely will become an interest conflict between her and big oil. Sarah Palin has said that she “want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here for the rest of the U.S.” And during a phone interview with the Anchorage Daily News Palin said that “I am happy to and very honored to be asked to do this. I know it’s going to be great for Alaska.”

Jacob from the blog Force Change tells us that Sarah Palin supports mining in Bristol Bay, which could threaten salmon, bears, and caribou. He lists three other major anti-green policies from Sarah Palin and comes to the conclusion that her “overall position towards the environment is quite poor.”

Gristmill also has a lengthy post about Sarah Palin and her record on issues related to energy and the environment. For example they list Sarah Palin’s support to build a natural-gas pipeline from Alaska’s North Slope and her suggestion to eliminate Alaska’s gas tax.

Gristmill also lists several quotes from Sarah Palin and from people who have reacted to her nomination. Such as this one from Gene Karpinski, the President of the League of Conservation Voters:

“Unfortunately, with her support for drilling in the Arctic Refuge and off our coasts, Governor Palin will simply continue the failed policies of the Bush-Cheney Administration and their Big Oil friends — policies that could make us even more dependent on foreign oil.

Governor Palin characterizes McCain’s flip-flop on drilling offshore as a positive step in his transformation from maverick to Big Oil’s best friend. She has implored McCain to change his position against drilling in the Arctic — something she will have plenty of opportunities to pursue as his running mate.

In addition to supporting backward-looking energy policies, Governor Palin has also opposed a crucial clean water initiative, sued the federal government for listing polar bears as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, and opposed other important wildlife protection measures.”

Sarah Palin is, like I said earlier, still very unknown and we don’t yet know all her standpoints when it comes to the environment. As the election progress continues we will probably find out more. But one thing is for sure. Her environmental record is not even half as good as Joe Biden’s.

So if you want to vote “green” and end George Bush’s last eight years of failed economic and environmental policies John McCain, Sarah Palin nor the Republican Party should be an option for you.

Updates:
- Sarah Palin Wins 2008 Rubber Dodo Award
- Sarah Palin can’t name a single man-made cause to climate change

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.