Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Obama and The Politics and Money of Offshore Drilling

Here is an excellent article that describes the United State's incoherent national energy policy perfectly.

For over three decades, we’ve heard endless rhetoric from politicians lamenting our dependence on foreign oil— yet over that same time span, Congress has enacted legislation that has resulted in a 25% decline in domestic oil production while our oil consumption has increased 20%. The statistics are clear— we’ve failed in our stated intentions to become less dependent on foreign oil, and our domestic production margins have only gotten worse.

One would think that the rationale behind not drilling more here in the U.S. was environmental. If that's true, then doesn't the environment of the rest of the world count?

We certainly can’t look to the Obama Administration for any rational leadership on energy policy. Brazil recently discovered a huge underwater oil field off its coast— now known as the Tupi Oil Field— and is wasting no time extracting the oil off its own coastline. But in an act that betrays the national interest— as well as his own self proclaimed environmentalist rhetoric— President Obama is lending billions of dollars to Petrobras, Brazil's state-owned oil company, for offshore oil development within that same oil field.

Is the preservation of the coastline of Brazil somehow less important than the coastlines of Florida? Petrobras and the Brazilian people understand that they can responsibly drill for oil off their coastline, and they are moving ahead affirmatively— with our full financial backing. It is beyond outrageous hypocrisy that we, the American people, are denied the right by our own Congress and President to further utilize the energy resources right under our own feet, while at the same time we assist countries such as Brazil in exploiting their own energy resources. This must change.

So we lend billions for offshore development, but deny our own interests in the U.S. This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Except of course, if you follow the money. What people in the oil industry say is that people in the Obama administration have interest in the offshore development in Brazil. Who has the biggest interest? None other than the Democrat's own sugar daddy, George Soros. The Soros Fund Management, LLC sold 22 million shares of Petrobras common stock in exchange for nearly 6 million shares of Petrobras preferred stock a few days before the Ex-Im Bank announced the loan guarantee from the U.S. Now, it makes perfect sense, right? It's always all about the money. Obama sure didn't bring change that way.

One of the first things the Obama administration did regarding oil exploration here in the U.S. is put a six-month halt on oil and natural gas exploration off the Alaska coast(so they could study the local wildlife). The most promising location was the Chukchi Sea, which was bringing lease revenues worth $2.1 billion to the US Treasury. The Chukchi Sea is believed to hold reserves of over 15 billion barrels of oil and over 77 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, almost the amount of oil and natural gas removed from the Gulf of Mexico since the late 1940s.

Yet we shut that down to please the environmental lobby, and give billions to Brazil so Soros can make a fortune, which he will in turn, share with the Democrats politically. I think this is called Party before country.

I'll wait here while you find a place to scream.

And while the Obama administration pretends to cater to the environmental lobby, China and Japan are having none of it:

China and Japan recently reached a bilateral agreement to drill and share the natural gas fields located under the international waters between their countries. In Europe, 40 new large-scale coal plants are set to be built within the next five years. India has very ambitious plans for coal production in the near term as well as in the coming decades.

What we have in the Obama administration is what we have wanted to avoid; a continuing dependency on foreign oil. But now we do it at the expense of the United States and the profit of other other nations.

This was the "change" we voted in. It doesn't seem to be working out, does it?