"Global"
John McCain makes a play for enviros in a new ad running in unspecified battleground states and on national cable. The spot focuses on McCain's plan to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
The ad doesn't mention, however, that during a speech in Houston today McCain will call for the federal moratorium on offshore drilling to be lifted. News of his announcement brought wide criticism from green groups yesterday ...
League of Conservation Voters president Gene Karpinski:
“Just mentioning the words ‘renewable energy’ doesn’t hide the fact that Senator McCain is now embracing the outdated energy policies of the past. If Senator McCain is serious about ending our addiction to oil and helping working families with inefficient cars, why has he voted against or missed every fuel efficiency bill since 1990? Drilling in protected areas offshore won’t solve our energy needs in the short term and in the long term, will increase the threat of global warming. We need to break our addiction to oil — not look for another fix.”
Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club:
“The truth is that drilling our coasts will not solve our energy problems. Additionally, the federal moratorium exists because one state could jeopardize beaches in neighboring states with risky offshore drilling. An oil spill off the coast of Virginia would impact beaches, marine life, and tourism in New Jersey. More importantly, lifting the ban would do nothing to reduce gas prices for the average American family. It would take a decade to bring new leases into production and then they would only line the coffers of the oil industry, which raked in tens of billions of dollars in record profits last year.
“Oil companies are not even using the nearly 6,000 offshore leases they already own. Issuing new leases is just a license for them to destroy more of our public resources for their own profit, while doing nothing to help ease pain at the pump. Senator McCain has said that he supports fighting global warming and clean energy solutions—more off-shore drilling is antithetical to that approach. To protect consumers and get us on the path to a clean energy future, Senator McCain should instead support the Consumer-First Energy Bill currently in the Senate.”
Brent Blackwelder, Friends of the Earth Action president:
“If John McCain were looking for a way to prove he’s running for George Bush’s third term, he couldn’t do better than this. Maybe we should start calling him ‘Exxon John.’
“More drilling is not the answer to our energy crisis. Fortunately, Barack Obama is focusing on real solutions that are good for the planet and will ease pain at the pump. Obama is talking about fuel-efficient cars, expanded passenger rail, mass transit, and other clean ways of reducing demand for oil that can lighten the burden on Americans’ pocketbooks immediately. That’s the type of leadership we need.” (Friends of the Earth Action has endorsed Barack Obama.)
(JENNIFER SKALKA)
Great post Jen.
Glad you are calling him out on the TRUTH.
That he talks out of both sides of his mouth.
***Greenwashing*** is the word of the day re: McCain and his "environmental policies".
But would you expect any less from a neoconservative hypocrite (was tortured, but supports Bushian torture... hmm...)
Here's one liberal who will vote for Obama, and thinks that he has the best energy plan. BUT, I'm glad to see that McCain at the very least will campaign on and would address climate change. In the coming years, I predict, Energy will become THE issue. Not only because of climate change, but because we are close to a global "peak" in oil production. Things are going to get worse before they get better. Frankly, I don't see alot of straight talk from either McCain, Obama, OR the press about the realistic options to oil addiction. 1) just using less 2) Public transportation 3) long-term electrification of transportation 4) biking, walking (WOW, imagine that) 5)A more local and less intensive agriculture 6) a re-commitment to RAIL transportation. Europe does these things and uses less than half the oil per capita. We need to get there.
The United States is the only major country I know of which has placed a substantial part of its potential oil and natural gas off limits. No one knows what we have, but an Interior Department study estimated 19 billions of oil and 84 trillion cubic feet of gas. Deposits may be even higher.
A survey showed the people who suffer most from the high fuel prices are the poor rural folk who have no access to mass transportation. Truckers farmers, and energy intensive people are also vulnerable. A truck driver may pay $1000 each time his/her truck is fueled. Likewise for farmers' tractors.
The price of natural gas is higher than normal in this off season. Next winter threatens much higher heating costs, and that combined with expensive gasoline will force the government to spend money to in some cases, save lives.
We wasted many years because our addiction to cheap fuel was the easy way. Now, we face recession, jobs lost, and inflation as the world competes for a shrinking supply of oil.
Current alternative fuel must be developed and new sources found. We need an energy Manhaten project, but until scientists can find something new, we are stuck with oil.
Bill has some good ideas, but they are useless for someone who lives 50 or 80 miles from the nearest town as is the case in Cherry County, Nebraska and other places. What about the family we know who's bread winner commutes 40 miles each day because there are no jobs in the town of 300 where they live?
Even the act of announcing the intention to drill in restricted places would have a psychological effect on energy prices. To preserve our economy until alternative energy replaces oil, we need to increase the supply. The Cubans and Chinese plan to drill within fifty miles of Florida. We should too.
I will support restrictions on off shore and other drilling when someone is able to offer coping solutions to the denizens of America's Third World. Any ideas?