Republican VP candidate pushes oil over clean tech
Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin on Wednesday called for more domestic oil and natural gas drilling, pulling the McCain ticket further from the clean-tech industry.
In her acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention, Palin touted her accomplishments in laying more pipelines and creating more competition among oil companies as governor of Alaska.
Alaska governor Sarah Palin
If elected, she said that a McCain-Palin administration would tap more oil and gas from Alaska, while investing in nuclear energy and so-called clean coal, where pollution is stored underground at coal power plants.
"We Americans need to produce more of our own oil and gas. And take it from a gal who knows the North Slope of Alaska: we've got lots of both.Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America's energy problems - as if we all didn't know that already.
But the fact that drilling won't solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all," she said.
McCain, too, has called for more domestic oil and gas production but has opposed drilling in Alaska's North Slope. He advocates a massive increase in nuclear power, with the goal of building 45 new reactors by 2030.
In policies generally favored by the clean-energy industry, McCain supports national cap-and-trade carbon emissions regulations and tax credits for people who purchase fuel-efficient cars. Both McCain and Palin promised investments in renewable sources of energy--solar, wind, and geothermal.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama also advocates tapping domestic natural gas reserves but has outlined more aggressive steps to promote alternative energy. As senator, he has voted for extending existing renewable energy tax credits, which McCain has not.
From Obama's speech last Thursday:
As President, I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology, and find ways to safely harness nuclear power. I'll help our auto companies re-tool, so that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built right here in America. I'll make it easier for the American people to afford these new cars.
And I'll invest 150 billion dollars over the next decade in affordable, renewable sources of energy - wind power and solar power and the next generation of biofuels; an investment that will lead to new industries and five million new jobs that pay well and can't ever be outsourced.
McCain on Wednesday gained the endorsement of two high-tech executives--former eBay CEO Meg Whitman and former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina.
Click on this image to get a summary of the presidential candidates' energy policies.
(Credit: New Energy Finance)Yet Obama's energy policies have garnered significant support from clean-tech investors and business people. High-profile clean energy investor Nancy Floyd endorsed Obama in her speech at the Democratic National Convention last week.
His campaign is backed by a group called Clean Tech and Green Business for Obama, a fund-raising and outreach group which has Dick Swanson, president and chief technology officer of solar manufacturer SunPower, on its board.
On Wednesday, research firm New Energy Finance published an analysis of Obama and McCain's energy positions and concluded that McCain's free-market ethos would dominate his energy policies, while Obama would seek a more active role in promoting the clean-energy industry.
Martin LaMonica is a senior writer for CNET's Green Tech blog. He started at CNET News in 2002, covering IT and Web development. Before that, he was executive editor at IT publication InfoWorld. E-mail Martin. 
By choosing Palin, who favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and does not believe humans are playing any role in climate change, McCain is showing his true colors. As Tom Friedman recently said, McCain has now "completed his makeover from the greenest Republican to run for president to just another representative of big oil."
McCain refused to vote on all eight attempts to pass a bill extending critical tax credits and production subsidies to expand wind and solar industries. He also supports lowering the gasoline tax as a political pander that will only promote more gasoline consumption and intensify our addiction to oil. McCain has also made more oil-drilling the centerpiece of his energy policy; it's a shameful attempt to mislead voters into believing more drilling today would translate into lower prices at the pump in the coming weeks and months---when it would more likely take a decade for even a slight reduction. McCain is the phony "green" candidate. Talks a good game; delivers the exact opposite.
Does McCain believe that if he flashes a few images of wind turbines and solar panels in his TV commercials that we'll believe his claims to be a supporter of non-polluting energy? Why was McCain AWOL when it was time for the Senate to vote for support of these new technologies?
Palin did in fact make lots of references to clean energy policy, the jobs that would be created by clean energy tech etc..etc.., she merely said that drilling was needed in the mean time.
The right wing media spins obama as a nut job, the left wing media spins mccain as a fascist. They are both just politicians vying for the most ego stroking job in the universe.
We have to ability to make the changes now but stalling and say go find more oil is reckless and will postpone to our detriment our dependence on oil, sounds like the oil companies are speaking when I heard Sarah Palin speaking at the RNC. I mean did you hear the audience say drill, drill, drill. I am a Republican at heart and I was shocked at hearing this. If you believe in Country First think Democrat this election!
It really is too bad that our journalists no longer have the integrity to report the truth, but instead feel they must manufacture it because it does not fit their preconceived notions of the way things should be.
I say we cannot legislate our way out.
The free market will decide what the next technology will be. Governent will not discover it - some private group will discover it. We cannot force an as-of-yet undiscovered technology on the public and expect it to replace oil. Like it or not, oil is what drives our economy. I'm all for clean energy but let's be realistic. Where is the electricy that is to power our electric cars going to come from? We need oil UNTIL we can find an acceptable alternative. There is nothing on the horizon that will realistically replace oil so for now we need to drill for more oil.
"The market" is great---for certain things. To rely on it, in an advanced and educated society, as "the" determinant for our social and environmental policies is terribly foolish and non-productive.
There seems to be a fear in the clean energy industry that if we do anything to alleviate costs now that we'll never get around to developing these technologies. It doesn't do families struggling to fill up their gas tanks any good to tell them to just wait 10-15 years for solar or wind power to catch up. It also doesn't do anyone any good to dump tons of tax money into bad projects.
We have the tech and resources to alleviate the burden of higher energy costs now and develop good alternatives for the future. Both sides need to stop trying to score political points by painting the other as something they are not.
We'll have to wait 10-15 years for drilling to produce oil regardless, and it won't appreciably lower prices at the pump ten years from now. So what's the argument for spending money on drilling when it could be spent on alternative fuel research? None.
How is Palin's support for "so-called clean coal" different to Obama's "invest[ment] in clean coal technology?"
Your assertion in the headline that Palin "pushes oil over clean tech" simply doesn't line up with the speech I saw last night or with what I've heard McCain say before: basically, use every means at our disposal to end dependence on foreign oil as quickly as possible. This is exactly the opposite of favoring some solutions over others.
As to renewable energy sources like wind or solar power, are you aware that, according to the Wall Street Journal, liberals and environmentalists are currently blocking efforts to implement these things?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121901822110148233.html
Frankly, at this point, I'd settle for some coherent thinking on these issues as opposed to the sort of schizophrenic behavior we're seeing.
Seriously - I have heard Palin and McCain both say that domestic oil should be explored more, but only as an interim solution (until renewable energy becomes commonplace and commercially viable, as well as an infrastructure to use it).
Obama has said pretty much the same thing.
Please leave the op-eds and misleading to the papers and cable TV channels. Thanks in advance,
/P
From what I've been able to gather, big oil companies DON'T LIKE Gov. Palin; she helped to break up the "old boy network". Alternate energy is a great idea, and Gov. Palin listed a number of technologies we need to develop, but tomorrow isn't here yet. There are no viable electric cars at this time. The Chevy Volt is not expected until late 2010, and the jury is out on whether current technology hybrid cars are environmentally better than traditional gasoline cars, due to the highly toxic batteries they require. Other technologies are less further along (hydrogen fuel cells, compressed air, etc). If wind farms are such a great idea, how come we can't get any put out on Cape Cod (plenty of wind there)? A real Republican knows the answer to THAT question.
Nuclear power is even sillier, as the left-of-center mindset has done a complete 180 here...first, we get Silkwood, The China Syndrome, and jokes about nuclear waste, now it's a fine technology, even though there have been no breakthroughs in nuclear remediation technology. Spent fuel rods still dangerous as heck.
Altenative technologies will reduce and eventually replace oil and natural gas, especially at the current prices of fuel, but what do we do in the mean time? I'm a New Englander, and I'd prefer not to have to move south every winter...
Why are you spreading misinformation?!? Everything I've seen on Palin has been to push toward "clean-tech" while using our own national resources in the intermediary instead of resources from unstable, terrorist ridden, anti-american regions!
I think Palin is as real as they get. She's also very intelligent and makes sense. She's all for alternative energy but is very realistic in recognizing the transition period to get there.
Please do your homework next time. If you did, then please consider writing unbiased articles in the future instead of biased ones.
This argument is such nonsense. She is exactly what this country needs: and honest, passionate leader who stands up for America instead of chipping away at our sovereignty, patriotism, and historical traditions. Liberals in this country are primarily socialists bent on "changing" our country away from its roots (which was mostly founded in Chrsitian/Judeo beliefs). I am not totally for republicans or totally against democrats. I think the Bush administration has actually done some good things for our country that we may never be able to quantify, but I also believe he's had a negative impact in some ways. One of those negative impacts is that government has more control over it's citizens all in the name of "security". Get and keep government away from our freedoms and out of our business, continue (democrats) to allow citizens to bear arms, and keep extreme environmentalists out of Alaska and other resource rich regions (as well as congress's pockets).
Also, as others have said, she is NOT in the pockets of the big oil companies. On the contrary, she has stood up against them when necessary. She wants America, as millions of other Americans want, to get away from the control of unstable, terrorist breeding, countries.
Take your blinders off and see the real world. I think this is the best decision McCain could have made and liberals, like yourself, are scared for that very reason. It brings me great joy that so many liberals are "shakin' in their boots". The fact that there is so much "hissing" from liberals and the liberal media tells me McCain and Palin are doing something right and have a MUCH greater chance of beating Obama than before Palin was nominated.
This will be an interesting election year for sure.
Mr. LaMonica, here is the transcript from her speech - read it before you publish another piece of trash like this:
"Our opponents say again and again that drilling will not solve all of America?s energy problems, as if we didn?t know that already.
(LAUGHTER)
But the fact that drilling, though, won?t solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all.
(APPLAUSE)
Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we?re going to lay more pipelines, and build more nuclear plants, and create jobs with clean coal, and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal, and other alternative sources. We need?
(APPLAUSE)
We need American sources of resources. We need American energy brought to you by American ingenuity and produced by American workers."
Can't get much clearer than that.
Is this what we can expect from CNet now that CBS has taken over? If you lie openly about this, what other wrong tech information are we getting?
Yes, it's true that McCain/Palin support an energy strategy that calls on drilling for oil domestically, because drilling domestically will reduce gas prices at the pump. But their strategy also calls for funding new sources of energy - specifically nuclear and natural gas. To those of us who are fans of truly clean fuels, like hydrogen, we look forward to using the excess electrical capacity from the nuclear plants to power hydrogen generation facilities. We also look forward to using natural gas fuel cells to create energy in our homes and produce hydrogen for our cars as a byproduct (see Bloom Energy).
These are real solutions that make sense for America. Not drilling is not a solution. Waiting on nuclear is not a solution, solar power (at the moment) is not a solution. Taking food crops to make fuel is not a solution. Obama's energy policy is not a solution.
Here it is. . . if you care to look.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F1qV90zGrE
Alternative energy will be great, when it is cost effective. Green thinking has been to artificially limit the supply of oil, coal, and natural gas. That makes them more expensive and allows alternatives to begin to become competitive. The trouble is there is not enough alternative energy supply. It always seems to be about ten years away.
Can we please come to our collective senses? Don't just give alternative energy tax breaks. Don't tax them at all!! Let them work like crazy to get the investment, perfect the science, build the infrastructure, and get the economies of scale they need to be competitive. In the meantime, we need to use the resources we have in abundance to keep our economy running. Why destroy our standard of living and bankroll unfriendly governments while we wait for technology that isn't ready for prime time?
And no, it does not take ten years to put in an oil field and a pipeline. It also doesn't take ten years to tap coal and natural gas supplies that are currently off limits. Well, it would if Congress were in charge. Fortunately, all American business needs is Congressional permission. I'll save the discussion of enumerated powers for another time.
- by skimike4 September 4, 2008 9:59 AM PDT
- Did Palin push oil over clean tech? Or is she just pushing oil? The bias of the writer is obvious and un-Cnet worthy.
- Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (49 Comments)