Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) doesn’t think battery-powered cars aren’t a commodity to U.S. citizens. Sen Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) disagrees with Bunning using some personal testimony. (0:58)
Fmr. Speaker of the House Newt Gingich says energy has become a “policy crisis.” Gingrich also remarks on why he believes any future energy policy must include oil and coal. (1:57)
Speaking on the issue of offshore drilling, Fmr. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) said, “You have to maximize oil production in the United States.”
In a discussion at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), Gingrich advocated for clean coal technology calling the use of this technology “green conservatism.” Gingrich cautioned that if the United States tries other forms of technology too quickly, there is the possibility that the U.S. “doomed [itself] to no energy.” He called the costs of changing to other forms of energy such as wind, solar, and natural gas “a breathtaking investment.”
Gingrich was adamant that the U.S. does not have an energy crisis, but a “policy crisis.” He claimed that with its total range of resources, the U.S. “has the capacity to have ample energy at a reasonable price.”
Robert Hahn, Senior Fellow at AEI, said that offshore oil drilling would make little or no impact of domestic gas prices “anytime soon.” Hahn advised President -elect Obama to “limit his focus” on the issue of energy to potential investments and climate change. Hahn said that the potential jobs that would be opened by energy reform should not factor into Obama’s decisions. Hahn also cautioned that Obama not allow energy to turn “into complete political pork barrel” with potential wasted spending.
Irwin Stelzer, Senior Fellow and Director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Economic Policy, said the U.S. cannot run solely on domestic oil because it is “too few and too costly.” However, he said that renewable energy cannot replace fossil fuels because it is too difficult and expensive to attain. He put down the idea of nuclear energy because he believes Congress will not solve the issue of nuclear waste disposal. Stelzer was not in favor or natural gas because he doesn’t believe it can replace liquid energy. He said that the U.S. could practice conservation if U.S. citizens want to live “as the Japanese.” Stelzer said that the U.S. will probably remain “heavily dependent” on other countries for oil.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies held a discussion on the “Making Sense of Gulf Economic Trends.”
The Gulf has now become the epicenter of the Middle East, anything that happens in the Gulf effects the entire region, said Mohsin Kahn, Director of the Middle East and Central Asia Department at the International Monetary Fund. He pointed out that other countries in the Middle East and the world invest heavily in the countries in the Gulf, and that these countries have 40 percent of the world’s oil reserves and a combined GDP of over $1 trillion.
Countries in the Gulf face many challenges and problems, said Khan; they are facing high inflation rates, they face dilemmas in how to manage oil revenues, they have to deal with the current financial crisis and they are trying to create a monetary union in the area.
These countries need to invest in their infrastructure in order to develop their economies, said Khan. He pointed out that since their main source of income, oil, is a limited resource, they also have to save some of their money to ensure the well-being of future generations.
A high amount of government spending on infrastructures leads to high rates of inflation, currently the average rate of inflation in the Gulf countries is around 11.5 percent, said Khan. Fluctuating oil prices also have an effect on how governments choose to spend their budgets – in 2005 oil was $50 a barrel, earlier this year it ran up to $147 a barrel, and currently it is just below $60 a barrel.
Khan concluded that improving the infrastructure should be one of the top priorities for Gulf countries, because when the world economy starts to pick up and the Middle East doesn’t have the capacity to supply enough oil, “$147 a barrel will be cheap.”
General Petraeus discusses the economic potential that the country of Iraq has.
According to New York Times columnist and author Thomas L. Friedman, the world is not going through a green revolution.
“Have you ever been to a revolution where no one got hurt? That’s the green revolution. In the green revolution everybody is a winner. Exxon’s green, BP’s green, GM is now green,” said Friedman during a discussion of his new book “Hot, Flat and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution–and How it Can Renew America.”
“That’s not a revolution my friends, that’s a party…it has no connection whatsoever to a revolution. You’ll know it’s a revolution when somebody gets hurt.”
Friedman explained that recent threats to the environment has made a revolution of this magnitude necessary, and that it can be carried out through innovation in energy technologies (ET).
“Whichever country, company, or community can come up with a source of abundant, cheap, clean, reliable electrons…will actually have the answer for energy resource supply and demand, will be able to undermine petro-dictatorships, will be able to mitigate climate change, will be able eliminate energy poverty, and will certainly be able to slow down bio-diversity loss.”
Friedman said that with the opportunity to provide so many benefits, energy technologies will be the next great global industry, and the country that dominates the field will have the greatest economic, national, and energy security.
“That country has to be the United States of America. If we don’t own ET the way we owned [information technology], the chance that our kids having the same standard of living we did will be zero…it’s still up for grabs.”
Co-Founder and Executive Director of EarthRights International Ka Hsaw Wa says the way workers in Burma are treated by the military are unbearable. He also says that American companies in Burma don’t do anything about it. (1:18)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) thinks the burden of preventing human rights violations sometimes falls on private companies that choose to work abroad. (0:57)
Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) discusses how the $700 billion we paid for oil could have been invested domestically (0:23).
According to the Senate Republican Conference, offshore oil drilling will help mend the economy, increase jobs, lower gas prices, and strengthen national security.
“Last year Americans sent more than $700 billion overseas in the form of oil payments, this is the largest wealth transfer in the history of the world,” said Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) during a hearing on domestic energy supplies.
“That is $700 billion in foreign bank accounts that could have been invested in American firms, local communities, and American jobs.”
Associate Director of the Center for Energy Studies at Louisiana State University David E. Dismukes touched upon the potential energy supply, claiming that there are 41 billion barrels of oil and 210 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves in the restricted areas of the outer continental shelf.
Environmental concerns were addressed as well. Group Director for Upstream and Industry Operations for the American Petroleum Institute Doug Morris explained,
“The offshore industry today has an outstanding environmental record. According to the U.S. Minerals Management Service, since 1980 offshore operators have produced 4.7 billion barrels of oil and the total spills equal only 0.001 percent of this amount.”
