Exploiting the spill, for good

 

By Leah Bamberger,
Climate Fellow
Clean Air – Cool Planet

 

 

Leah Bamberger did her undergraduate studies in political science and environmental studies at the College of Charleston in Charleston, SC and is now at UMass Amherst pursing a master’s degree in regional planning, where her primary research area of interest is planning for climate change mitigation and adaptation.

 
Oil spill or not, we need comprehensive climate legislation!

After addressing the nation from the Oval Office last week,  President Obama was criticized for exploiting the crisis in the Gulf in order to pass comprehensive climate and energy legislation.  Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., said Obama “is trying to exploit this disaster to pass his national energy tax.”  The word exploit carries a very negative connotation.  Is he really that evil?  Let’s first explore the definition of the word exploit.  Merriam-Webster gives two definitions for the verb. 

Definition one: “to make productive use of: utilize.”  Okay, that’s not so bad.  Growing up, I was told this was called learning from ones mistakes.  In his speech, the President acknowledged that “we need better regulations, better safety standards, and better enforcement when it comes to offshore drilling.”  Furthermore, he pointed out that “oil is a finite resource” and “the reason oil companies are drilling a mile beneath the surface of the ocean (is) because we’re running out of places to drill on land and in shallow water.”  I guess “drill, baby, drill” has some pretty devastating consequences.  We need clean energy.  We need green jobs and clean industry.  We need the savings from energy efficiency improvements.  We need comprehensive climate and energy legislation and we need it now. 

Definition two: “to make use of meanly or unfairly for one’s own advantage.”  Bringing climate and energy legislation back to the Senate floor is in no way advantageous to the President.  Democrats no longer have a super majority in the Senate, and even if they did, they can’t come to an agreement on what the bill should look like.  A climate and energy bill could prove to be just as much as a political death sentence as the healthcare bill was.  Furthermore, only a few months ago President Obama was opening more of our waters to offshore drilling.  It does not seem that climate and energy legislation was on his agenda prior to the spill.  

So it appears to be true; the President is exploiting this disaster (according to definition one at least).  He is utilizing it as a learning opportunity.  He’s not profiting from it, he won’t experience personal gain and no one will suffer as a result.  He is merely asking Congress to come up with a bipartisan solution to wean this country off fossil fuels and prevent disasters like the one in the Gulf from ever happening again.  He has been reminded, along with the rest of the nation that more oil means more problems.

Whether $35 or $135 per barrel, oil must remain a priority in America

By Krista Macomber,

Clean Air-Cool Planet

As the summertime approaches and gas prices begin to climb, I am reminded of last summer when oil peaked at an incredible $147 per barrel. In today’s economy, very few can afford to fill their cars’ gas tanks at such prices. It definitely hurt our wallets, but it was beneficial to the environment because people were burning a smaller amount of fossil fuels by driving less. Fuel efficiency became an issue, but since gas prices have dropped I think it has become a less pressing matter to the public.

This is why I am relieved that President Obama announced a new fuel efficiency policy last week. The policy aims for a national, industry standard in cars sold in the US of 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016. President Obama hopes to reduce America’s carbon footprint, strengthen and unify what he describes as the “inadequate, uncertain, and in flux” regulations currently governing the country’s fuel economy, and reduce its outrageous demand for oil with this policy.

President Obama says that, over their useful life, the new, efficient cars that will be produced as a result of this policy can save the typical driver $2800 with better gas mileage. “As a result,” he said, “we will save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold in the next five years. Just to give you a sense of magnitude, that’s more oil than we imported last year from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Libya, and Nigeria combined. Here’s another way of looking at it: This is the projected equivalent of taking 58 million cars off the road for an entire year.”

This will be huge because our nation’s oil dependency contributes significantly to climate change and also makes us reliant on often unstable and volatile foreign relations. We use 25 percent of the world’s oil for 5 percent of its population and currently import about 66 percent of that oil. These numbers are incomprehensible to me. Consuming so much is so dangerous that I really can’t grasp it. It is destructive to our environment and puts our nation in such a vulnerable position. I can’t believe we haven’t taken comprehensive steps sooner to correct our oil driven lifestyle and economy sooner.

Americans are going to have to reprioritize and sacrifice in order to attain President Obama’s goals. As a society, we cannot maintain our current lifestyle much longer. Our planet simply will not be able to support it. Science tells us this – in fact, it has been for several years now. Regardless, I do not think that we will change until we are forced to, or until the planet’s resources collapse. Obama’s policy will be a major step forcing America as a whole to begin alleviating its contingency on oil. Since the country is the leading consumer of oil, and more than half of this oil is burned in its vehicles, this policy has the potential to make a dent on global greenhouse gas emissions.

With all of the gains that come from fuel efficiency, it is difficult for me to understand why some people oppose this new policy. A major argument against the new policy is that its restrictions will hinder our already hurting economy and auto industry. The reality, as I have found, is the contrary. Paying less money at the pumps will send less money overseas to oil giants, leaving more money to be spent at home and support the American economy. Also, car shoppers will benefit  from these new vehicles – they will make back the extra money they may spend on a more sustainable vehicle within just three years’ time in gas money, says President Obama.

Our new president is reminding us that, while gas might not currently cost us $4 or $5 per gallon, we still need to be wary of the amount of gas we are burning for the sake of the planet and our economy. Gas is contributing just as heavily to global warming whether it costs $5 per gallon or $1.80 per gallon. At either price, it is still going to run out. We still import the large majority of it from nations which we do not have secure relations with. This is dangerous news, considering how vital this resource is to the American way of life and economy.