Battling Big Oil
As John McCain travels to do a gimmicky appearance on a Gulf of Mexico oil rig to argue that oil companies should be given greater freedom to wreak environmental havoc and damage coastal economies in the name of enhanced production, can we recall that it was just two weeks ago that the McCain campaign released an add touting him as the right guy to “battle big oil.”
I understand that McCain’s changed positions on a lot of issues over the past ten years — often twice — but this here is like an insta-contradiction. What’s he going to battle big oil about? Climate and energy really was an issue where McCain had put meaningful distance between himself and GOP orthodoxy as of two or even one years ago, but now he’s completely walked away from that legacy and nobody seems to be asking him what happened to the McCain who used to think reducing carbon emissions was worth battling big oil over.
44 Responses to “Battling Big Oil”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
August 19th, 2008 at 10:21 am
This is a terrible decision by the McCain campaign. With images of him on a rig, the anti-McCain ads will write themselves. It’s Bush’s “Mission Impossible” all over again, except minus the victory, patriotism, or cool pilot suits.
August 19th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Why would anyone ask him? The TradMed has no interest in finding out what, exactly, McCain stands for. He’s a certified Maverick after all. The TradMed said so.
August 19th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Barack Obama wants to take big oil’s money by taxing their profits. That’s just talk! John McCain has personally taken over 2 million dollars from big oil just during the campaign! That’s action!
August 19th, 2008 at 11:16 am
I’ve never been clear why people like Matt fear big companies – the worst they can do to me is charge me more money.
Big government is way, way less accountable – witness the proliferation of no knock raids (with often tragic results) in the name of the “war on drugs” for one of the more compelling reasons to keep government smaller and weaker.
Big oil might cost me money. Big Government might cost me my life. I’d much prefer to give most of the power to local governments, where the accountability is higher and more direct. Matt would rather have it flow to Washington, where there’s far less accountability, and far more opportunity for real abuses.
August 19th, 2008 at 11:21 am
McCain’s strategy is brilliant, he’s taking the fight against Big Oil directly to the enemy! What better place?
August 19th, 2008 at 11:29 am
James, Big Oil has cost thousands of American lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Big Government (the kind proposed by Democrats and hated by Republicans) serves as a limit on local power. In Southwest Ohio, all raids in the War on Blacks and the War on Latinos are conducted (unconstitutionally) by the Cunty Sheriffs.
So, if we don’t like having our homes raided in SW Ohio, we need the feds to come down on our Sheriffs in order to preserve the constitution. The more power is put into the County officials, the worse life has gotten.
August 19th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Let’s fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them here? Sounds familiar.
I too found that line in McCain’s ad puzzling. He also mentions that he’s taken on “Big Tobacco”.
WHAT A FRIGGIN MAVERICK THAT JOHN MCCAIN IS!!!!
August 19th, 2008 at 11:36 am
He’s hoping Big Oil will capture and hold him as a prisoner of war since it worked so well the first time.
August 19th, 2008 at 11:37 am
“James, Big Oil has cost thousands of American lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Umm, no. Our requirements for energy are why we are in Iraq. Regardless of how we buy and sell oil (privately or publicly), that requirement exists. The oil companies don’t enter into it.
And obtw, if you want to lessen the demand for oil from the middle east, you could convince people to back
– more drilling here in the US
– more nuclear power
Wind and Solar are fine too, just not terribly useful in the grand scheme of things.
As to Afghanistan, last time I looked, they don’t have oil – just poppy plants.
August 19th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Simply more of the same of McCain taking both sides of the same issue simultaneously. See Gordon and Kvaal in The New Republic for more.
August 19th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Simply more of the same of McCain taking both sides of the same issue simultaneously. See Gordon and Kvaal in The New Republic for more.
August 19th, 2008 at 11:51 am
He’s holding the line against service station fees for tire inflation.
August 19th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Why are liberals so concerned with big companies? All they are are enormous social organizations possessing staggering resources, world-wide reach, direct political power via lobbying and staff positions directly & in advisory positions, social & professional connections with our leading politicians and media figures… Who on Earth but a bunch of paranoid weirdos would pay attention to such obviously socially uninteresting organizations, and instead wouldn’t more logically focused on today’s local news about this one guy who did this or that minor crime…
August 19th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
This McCain should do something about the polution america makes not save the oil prices. Why should the whole world pay more then america?
August 19th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
“Umm, no. Our requirements for energy are why we are in Iraq. Regardless of how we buy and sell oil (privately or publicly), that requirement exists. The oil companies don’t enter into it.”
Umm, no again. The oil in Iraq was coming out of the ground when Saddam was in power, and it’s only now coming out at the same rate. But there is a difference between now and then. Back when Saddam was in power, that oil was owned by French, Russian, and Chinese companies. Now that oil will be owned by American, British, Dutch, and French companies. We haven’t changed the amount of oil coming from Iraq, we’ve only changed who profits from it. The French are getting less profits and the Chinese and Russians have been cut off completely. And our companies are getting profits that were unavailable to them before. This war has everything to do with our oil companies and nothing to do with global oil supply, which hasn’t changed.
August 19th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
“And obtw, if you want to lessen the demand for oil from the middle east, you could convince people to back
– more drilling here in the US
– more nuclear power”
Oil isn’t used to generate electricity, so nuclear power will do nothing to reduce demand for oil. Unless you are talking about cars with nuclear reactors (really bad idea). As for drilling in the US, yes, we can reduce demand from the Middle East by 2%. Woohoo! 2%! We can reduce that by much more by making more fuel efficient cars (boring, I know, but effective). And as for the nuclear vs wind and solar, nuclear power is more expensive to generate than either wind or solar. Yes, the wind doesn’t blow in one place at all times, but it does blow somewhere all the time. And solar has the advantage of generating electricity during the day, when consumption is the highest. Yes, solar plants have to shut down during the night, but so do many existing power plants. They shut down because there isn’t enough consumption during the night to make any money. The question really comes down to this: do you want electricity at 17c/KWhr, or do you want it at 30c/KWhr. If you want to pay the higher price, then nuclear is clearly the way to go. But, like most people, I’d like to pay the lower price.
August 19th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Oh, and by the way, nuclear power suffers from the same problem as oil: limited supply. While it is true that Peak Oil will happen much sooner than Peak Uranium, Peak Uranium will occur. And it will occur about 70 years from now. Peak Sun will occur about 10 billion years from now. And let’s face it, we will have much bigger problems than a lack of electricity when the sun burns out. We’ll need another planet to live on when that happens.
August 19th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Yeah, but all that cash could make Big Oil careless, and careless people eventually make mistakes. They’re being set up for a big fall.
August 19th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
“They’re being set up for a big fall.”
That’s true about the employees of oil companies. But the executives will cash out before the fall. They’ll be fine, I can assure you. And they’ll put their money into wind and solar. And since wind and solar will last as long as the earth, they’ll be fine for a very long time.
August 19th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
I’m not more worried about big companies than “big government” per se. I’m more worried about when big companies team up with “big government”, ala the Bush Administration.
August 19th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Coal, gas, nuclear and wind have comparable and overlapping cost ranges for cost of generation. Solar is much more expensive and is not likely to be a useful source of electricity without dramatic scientific developments.
The cheapest electricity is generated by nuclear plants located in ideal places. This is a bit distorted because nuclear plants provide baseline power almost exclusively. They become extremely expensive when you run them below capacity, so it is rarely done. For this reason, you can’t calculate the cost of providing electricity exclusively from nuclear power by extrapolating current costs. If coal and gas plants were run with the same consistancy, they would probably be a little cheaper than nuclear.
Wind is the most expensive of the viable power sources for generating electricity. It’s hard to determine cost trends for wind. While it is still becoming more economical due to improved economy of scale, it will soon reverse due to another effect; wind costs are highly site dependent, so as choice locations are used up, the costs rise significantly. Almost certainly, some electricity generated by wind will be the best bargain, but it is unlikely to be a large percentage of total electrical power generated.
August 19th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
“The cheapest electricity is generated by nuclear plants located in ideal places.”
Can you enlighten us to where these cheap prices are? I used to pay 30+ c/KWhr when I got my electricity from nuclear. I pay 12c/KWhr now from wind. Obviously, the wind power comes from good locations, and by your argument, my nuclear power must have come from bad locations (I’m leaving the details out so you can hang yourself by saying that my location was a good one). But that nuclear power was heavily subsidized, and still expensive. So where are these great locations for nuclear? And why do they still need to be subsidized? And why is one location better than another? It seems that all you need for nuclear is a river nearby. The uranium comes from Australia, anyway.
August 19th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
“If coal and gas plants were run with the same consistancy, they would probably be a little cheaper than nuclear.’
Actually, they are a lot cheaper. Natural gas is the cheapest energy. Coal is close, but has higher CO2 emissions than natural gas. I get some of my energy from coal when the wind isn’t blowing. And you know what, I can’t tell the difference. 110 volts is 110 volts, and both of them come at 60 Hz (which is a dangerous frequency, by the way).
August 19th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
“They become extremely expensive when you run them below capacity, so it is rarely done. For this reason, you can’t calculate the cost of providing electricity exclusively from nuclear power by extrapolating current costs.”
If running nuclear below capacity is rarely done, how does that effect the price? It’s rarely done, after all. It would seem that the nominal price would be based on what is actually done on a normal basis. And what is actually done is very expensive, and will continue to be so. How is that going to change when what is rarely done isn’t done at all? And what mechanism will suddenly make nuclear power cheap and no longer in need of subsidy to compete?
August 19th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Fostert,
What you pay and what it cost to generate are barely related at all. Both forms of power only cost about 2-10 cents per kWhr to generate. Both industries set prices to sell every last bit of power they generate. They don’t set their price depending on what it cost to generate the power, they set the price to maximize profits.
August 19th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Nuclear power is very, very cheap already. I don’t know why you think otherwise.
August 19th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
In the end, I’d like to have a real competition. Let’s remove all the subsidies and let the market work. And let’s take away the liability exemption for nuclear power. If a nuclear plant has a meltdown, they need to pay the costs. If we do that, wind and solar look a lot better. Obviously, we will need to have nuclear and natural gas to make up for the times when wind and solar can’t provide. But they will eventually become our backup power, not the backbone of electricity that is is now. And if we are to discuss this issue, it would be nice if our president could actually pronounce the word ‘nuclear’ correctly. ‘Nukular’ is wrong and only pronounced that way by dumb-asses like our current president and the rednecks that support him.
August 19th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
“Nuclear power is very, very cheap already. I don’t know why you think otherwise.”
Umm, maybe because I actually had to pay for it. If you can explain how 30 cents and less money that 12 cents, I’ll be happy to agree with you. If you can’t, then stop talking about energy policy.
August 19th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Opps. “If you can explain how 30 cents and less money that 12 cents” That should read: “If you can explain how 30 cents IS less money that 12 cents”. Sorry.
August 19th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
“If you can explain how 30 cents and less money that 12 cents”
Wow. Still got it wrong. How about: “If you can explain how 30 cents and less money THAN 12 cents”
August 19th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Can’t buy a break, can I? “If you can explain how 30 cents IS less money THAN 12 cents” I’m starting to warm up to the “let’s have a preview mechanism” argument.
August 19th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
And, by the way, I’d like to see some answers on these questions:
“How is that going to change when what is rarely done isn’t done at all? And what mechanism will suddenly make nuclear power cheap and no longer in need of subsidy to compete?”
The fact that you responded but avoided these questions is very telling. You clearly can’t answer them. If you want to defend nuclear power (or nukular, if that’ your intention), you need to do better.
August 19th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
And I’s still like to know where nuclear power is cheap. And I’d like to know what subsidies are required to make it cheap. If you can’t answer these questions, your argument is worthless.
August 19th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
And I’d still like to be able to spell. Damn, I’m as bad as Matt. In my defense, I went to the black sheep of the Ivy League: Cornell. I didn’t go to one of those fancy schools like Hahvahd. By the way, Harvard can lick the Bear’s balls.
August 19th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
What you pay is the price, not the cost. I thought I was clear about that.
The nuclear power was generated at a cost of probably 3c/kWHr and sold to you for 30c/kWHr.
The wind power was generated for probably 6c/kWHr and sold to you for 12c/kWHr.
The price differential was probably due to local demand circumstances. When you were getting power from the nuclear plant, you probably could have bought power from wind instead. You would have just had to have paid more than 30c/kWHr for it.
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:32 am
levitraExcellent site. It was pleasant to me.
March 12th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
Great site. Good info
March 14th, 2009 at 5:37 am
Great site. Good info
xanax
March 17th, 2009 at 2:31 am
Incredible site!
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:24 am
tramadol
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:32 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:21 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 7:00 am
Great site, Good info viagra
April 16th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Badly need your help. I must create a system, or be enslaved by another man’s.
I am from Zaire and learning to speak English, give please true I wrote the following sentence: “Compare airline tickets prices and find the best airline tickets price with people powered price comparison from beatmyprice.”
Regards
Jackie.