Climate Politics

Cheap oil: Be careful what you wish for

This guest essay was originally published on TomDispatch and is republished here with Tom's kind permission.

-----

Only yesterday, it seems, we were bemoaning the high price of oil. Under the headline "Oil's Rapid Rise Stirs Talk of $200 a Barrel This Year," the July 7 issue of the Wall Street Journal warned that prices that high would put "extreme strains on large sectors of the U.S. economy." Today, oil, at over $40 a barrel, costs less than one-third what it did in July, and some economists have predicted that it could fall as low as $25 a barrel in 2009.

Prices that low -- and their equivalents at the gas pump -- will no doubt be viewed as a godsend by many hard-hit American consumers, even if they ensure severe economic hardship in oil-producing countries like Nigeria, Russia, Iran, Kuwait, and Venezuela that depend on energy exports for a large share of their national income. Here, however, is a simple but crucial reality to keep in mind: No matter how much it costs, whether it's rising or falling, oil has a profound impact on the world we inhabit -- and this will be no less true in 2009 than in 2008.

The main reason? In good times and bad, oil will continue to supply the largest share of the world's energy supply. For all the talk of alternatives, petroleum will remain the number one source of energy for at least the next several decades. According to December 2008 projections from the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE), petroleum products will still make up 38 percent of America's total energy supply in 2015; natural gas and coal only 23 percent each. Oil's overall share is expected to decline slightly as biofuels (and other alternatives) take on a larger percentage of the total, but even in 2030 -- the furthest the DoE is currently willing to project -- it will still remain the dominant fuel.

A similar pattern holds for the planet as a whole: Although biofuels and other renewable sources of energy are expected to play a growing role in the global energy equation, don't expect oil to be anything but the world's leading source of fuel for decades to come.

Keep your eye on the politics of oil and you'll always know a lot about what's actually happening on this planet. Low prices, as at present, are bad for producers, and so will hurt a number of countries that the U.S. government considers hostile, including Venezuela, Iran, and even that natural-gas-and-oil giant Russia. All of them have, in recent years, used their soaring oil income to finance political endeavors considered inimical to U.S. interests. However, dwindling prices could also shake the very foundations of oil allies like Mexico, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia, which could experience internal unrest as oil revenues, and so state expenditures, decline.

No less important, diminished oil prices discourage investment in complex oil ventures like deep-offshore drilling, as well as investment in the development of alternatives to oil like advanced (non-food) biofuels. Perhaps most disastrously, in a cheap oil moment, investment in non-polluting, non-climate-altering alternatives like solar, wind, and tidal energy is also likely to dwindle. In the longer term, what this means is that, once a global economic recovery begins, we can expect a fresh oil price shock as future energy options prove painfully limited.

Clearly, there is no escaping oil's influence. Yet it's hard to know just what forms this influence will take in the year. Nevertheless, here are three provisional observations on oil's fate -- and so ours -- in the year ahead.

Obama's Labor pick expected to champion green jobs

President-elect Obama's Labor Secretary nominee, Congresswoman Hilda Solis (D-Calif.), will face a Senate confirmation panel on Friday morning headed by one of her most ardent fans, the ailing but powerful Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee.

Longtime GOP lions Orrin Hatch (Utah) and Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) could also be on hand to grill her, but the presence of Kennedy at the gavel, who presented Solis with the "Profile in Courage" award in 2000, is tangible proof that after a career spent battling Republican governors, presidents, industry lobbyists and even moderate Democrats, she could now be in the cat bird's seat. [UPDATE: News from the hearing.]

"No one else was even going to fight for the stuff that she's fought for her whole career. Now it's not about fighting, it's about governing, and I've seen Hilda Solis, she's effective at governing," said Ian Kim, director of the Green Collar Jobs Campaign at the Ella Baker Center in Oakland.

As Labor Secretary, Solis would in fact be in charge of implementing the Green Jobs Act she fought to "smuggle through" a hostile Congress and Bush administration in 2007, said green jobs guru and best-selling author Van Jones.

The act authorized $125 million annually to train 30,000 workers in environment-friendly jobs such as installing solar panels or weatherizing homes. But it went unfunded in 2008, due to opposition from manufacturers and other industry groups angered by its mandate to include organized labor.

Fast forward to a year later, with a tanking economy and a new president, and matters look decidedly more green. Obama made clear in his economic policy speech Thursday that such jobs will be a key component of his massive stimulus package. And no one is better qualified to make that happen than Solis, say her fans.

"She is the 21st century, Hilda Solis represents the future of this country both demographically, and in terms of her vision," said Jones, who shrugged off criticism by some that the appointment was minor compared to other Cabinet posts. "We need new, clean, green jobs for the 21st century, and in her we've got somebody who connects both those things."

'Climate change' is climate change by any other name

In his famous essay, "Politics and the English Language," George Orwell wrote: "The English language ... becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." He warns that "Political language ... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." The importance of language and rhetoric is a subject near to my heart.

This post is by ClimateProgress guest blogger Bill Becker, executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project.

-----

Washington, D.C., is to the English language what Paris is to fashion. Every season, perfectly good words go out of style and new ones are trotted out on the national runway of rhetoric. Some words are considered so worn out, politically incorrect, or laden with baggage that they can no longer be used in public discourse. When that happens, people like me find ourselves scrambling for suitable synonyms.

That was the case a few years ago with "sustainable development." I operated the Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development at the U.S. Department of Energy, helping communities understand and apply the practice. Before long, signals came down from Capitol Hill that the words "sustainable development" had become the kiss of death for any program that used them. The term "smart growth" was invented to take "sustainability's" place.

More recently, Congress has avoided using the word "climate" in legislation that clearly is meant in part to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions -- legislation such as the "Energy Security and Independence Act of 2007." The Bush people call torture "enhanced interrogation" and call kidnapping "rendition." Healthy Forests and Clear Skies became the titles of the Bush Administration's programs to cut trees and pollute the air, respectively.

Our elected leaders aren't alone in manipulating the English language. Lobbyists and extremists, left and right, regularly play the game too, to obscure facts, incite emotions, insult opponents, or get attention from the media, where conflict is red meat.

Coal executives try to persuade us there's such a thing as "clean coal" and oil executives talk about "energy independence" when they really mean more drilling. In 2003, Orwell protégé Frank Luntz counseled in a confidential memo that the Administration and conservatives should stop using the term "global warming" because it was too frightening. Luntz suggested that Republicans refer to themselves as "conservationists" rather than "environmentalists," since the latter term, in Luntz's view, is associated with tree-hugging and extremism.

Enviro and labor leaders welcome four new, green House members

The Natural Resources Defense Council and the Blue Green Alliance today hosted a meeting with several newly elected Democratic members of the House, welcoming the "next generation of green leaders."

The four new members the groups touted come to the House with experience working on green issues in their home states: Debbie Halvorson (Ill.), Steve Driehaus (Ohio), Tom Perriello (Va.), and Mark Schauer (Mich.). At the presser, each spoke about likely committee assignments and goals for the first year in Congress.

Perriello has a background in environmental and human rights issues, and previously served as the assistant director of the Center for a Sustainable Economy (which is now part of Redefining Progress) and as a consultant on youth and environmental campaigns. This summer, he could be seen campaigning on a float pulled by a biofuel-powered tractor, as his opponent cruised by in a Hummer. Perriello, who has been assigned to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said the economic crisis should fuel the desire for an overhaul of the energy system.

"Now is the time to look for game changers. We have to get people to work right away but we have to get them to work on things that are going to make America competitive again," Perriello told Grist. "We are getting out-competed, and we are being made incredibly vulnerable by our energy dependence."

Commentary Magazine warms to Obama

Jennifer Rubin, Commentary Magazine:

So let's get this straight: Robert Gates will be the Defense Secretary, we're ramping up U.S. forces in Afghanistan and providing a reasonable period of time for a hand-off in Iraq, there isn't going to be a windfall oil profits tax or income tax hike but there is going to be a huge set of business tax cuts -- and Rick Warren is giving the invocation at the Inauguration. Who won in November?

Enviros praise Obama's stimulus package, but call for transit funding to be added

Environmental leaders gave a big thumbs-up to Barack Obama's economic stimulus proposal on Thursday, though they pledged to continue pushing to make the bill as green as possible, particularly on transportation issues.

"This morning, President-elect Obama reaffirmed his commitment to invest in efficiency and clean energy technologies as part of his economic recovery package," said League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski in a statement. "Ready to hit the ground running, he offered specific details that offer great hope for America's future success."

Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope was also effusive in a statement: "These initiatives are a win-win for a strong economy and a healthier environment. They will create good jobs here in America and reduce our dependence on dirtier energy sources like oil and coal by promoting the shift to wind and solar power and high-energy-performance, low-carbon cars and buildings."

Said Cathy Zoi, CEO of the Alliance for Climate Protection, "This increased investment in renewables, efficiency, and our energy infrastructure is a crucial first step in boosting our economy, ending our reliance on dirty coal and foreign oil, and solving the climate crisis."

Last chance to pick your top hero/villain of 2008

Just before the holidays, we put up a list of green heroes and green villains for 2008 and asked readers to vote for their favorite (or, um, unfavorite).

Readership is low around the holidays, so I just want to bring those lists to your attention one last time, because voting closes in 24 hours! At that point we will declare winners and start handing out prizes, as soon as we come up with some prizes.

Currently the top hero is Sierra Club's anti-coal activist Bruce Nilles, with 661 votes -- a healthy lead over the second place hero James Hansen at 437. (Guess it helps to have a very large club at your back.)

Third is Barack Obama with 399 and fourth is Michael Pollan with 258.

Dead last? Poor Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke Energy, with 6 votes.

Meanwhile, flaccid apparatchik Stephen Johnson, head of the EPA, is walking away with the top villain spot. He's got 397 votes, far outpacing second place Sarah Palin (240) and third place (and personal favorite) Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship (236).

Amusingly, Jim Rogers is losing this one too -- just 12 votes. Perhaps we should come up with a new category for this dude.

Anyway: Go vote now while you still can! We'll announce the final winners tomorrow.

Obama lays out his economic stimulus plan

On Thursday, President-elect Barack Obama called for doubling production of alternative energy in the United States over the next three years as part of his "American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan." In a speech officially rolling out the plan, he also set a goal of retrofitting more than 75 percent of federal buildings and 2 million homes to make them more energy-efficient.

"In the process, we will put Americans to work in new jobs that pay well and can't be outsourced -- jobs building solar panels and wind turbines; constructing fuel-efficient cars and buildings; and developing the new energy technologies that will lead to even more jobs, more savings, and a cleaner, safer planet in the bargain," he said. (He did not say, nor is it entirely clear, why jobs manufacturing turbines and cars can't be outsourced.)

Obama also pledged to make major investments in infrastructure, including not just road and bridge repairs but construction of a new, national "smart grid" that "will save us money, protect our power sources from blackout or attack, and deliver clean, alternative forms of energy to every corner of our nation."

A draft of the full plan [PDF] circulating on Capitol Hill outlines more specifics, including a call for a federal renewable-energy standard of 25 percent by 2025 and an extension of the production tax credit for renewable energy.

The draft includes $50 billion in loan guarantees to help the auto industry "retool, develop new battery technologies, and produce the next generation of fuel-efficient cars here in America." This figure is double what Congress allotted last year, and the Obama plan calls for speedier dispersion of the funding as well.

The plan also calls for the creation of an Advanced Manufacturing Fund that would be used to support promising new manufacturing strategies. There's no dollar figure on the fund, but the plan says it would be based on a peer-review process and similar to Michigan's 21st Century Jobs Fund. It calls for a doubling of the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, which works with manufacturers to improve efficiency and spur new technologies, but whose funding has been cut in recent years.

ZOMG BREAKING! Carol Browner is a commie!!1!

"Seriously."

Court to hear case that interprets Clean Water Act's purview over mine fill

The future of America's streams, rivers and lakes is on the agenda of U.S. Supreme Court justices this Monday, Jan. 12, when they hear arguments on whether a pristine Alaskan lake may be killed by operators of Kensington gold mine.

Earthjustice attorney Tom Waldo, who has kept the lake alive through a series of successful battles in lower courts, will again take the lead in this final showdown -- but the stakes have become much greater.

"The whole reason Congress passed the Clean Water Act was to stop turning our lakes and rivers into industrial waste dumps," Waldo said. "The Bush Administration selected the Kensington Mine to test the limits of the Clean Water Act. The Army Corps had never issued a permit like this before."

That the high court even agreed to review the case is troubling because of the damage that may be inflicted on the federal Clean Water Act. A ruling in favor of the dumping scheme would allow reinterpretation of the Act so that mining waste could be dumped into waterways throughout the United States. Should the worst happen, defenders of the country's waterways would almost certainly have to rely on Congress and the Obama administration for relief.

The case is being closely followed in Alaska because of its immediate implications for Pebble Mine, a massive gold mine proposed for development above the headwaters of Bristol Bay, the world's richest sockeye salmon fishery.