McCain runs into opposition over offshore oil plan
I'm just gonna post these excerpts without comment for now. I'm just both glad and fascinated that energy policy is coming to the fore so early in the election cycle. I would not have expected that.
UPDATE:
Heh heh:
McCain appeared with California's popular Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History to promote his ideas on how to wean the United States from foreign oil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.
Outside the museum, a group of protesters took issue with McCain over backing offshore oil drilling, chanting "Get oil out" and holding up such signs as, "Not off our coast" and "We can't drill our way out of the energy crisis."
Inside, during a round-table discussion, McCain heard complaints from a panelist, Michael Feeney, executive director of the Land Trust for Santa Barbara County. Feeney did not specifically mention McCain, who will face Democrat Barack Obama in the November presidential election.
Santa Barbara was the site of a major oil spill in 1969.
"It makes me nervous to think about those who are proposing to drain America's offshore oil and gas reserves as quickly as possible in hopes of driving down the price of gasoline," Feeney said.
Feeney also said he opposed McCain's plan to jump-start the building of new nuclear reactor plants for meeting America's rising energy demands.
Obama, too, criticized McCain's proposal to encourage the building of 45 new nuclear reactors by 2030. He said it lacked a plan for waste storage and was among several energy-strategy ideas that Obama said were "not serious energy policies."
Obama spoke in Nevada, a state where proposals to build a nuclear waste disposal site at Yucca Mountain have generated strong opposition. He also took aim at McCain's plan to allow more offshore U.S. oil drilling.
"It doesn't make sense for America," the Illinois senator said. "In fact, it makes about as much sense as his proposal to build 45 new nuclear reactors without a plan to store the waste some place other than right here at Yucca Mountain."
UPDATE:
Heh heh:
During a roundtable discussion on energy security at Santa Barbara's Natural History Museum, one of the panelists invited by the McCain campaign to sit onstage beside the candidate -- disagreed with the Arizona senator's energy plans and lambasted his nuclear energy proposal.
"I'm a little bit bemused that I ended up on this panel," said Michael Feeney, chair of the Santa Barbara Land Trust, a non-profit conservation group.
He excoriated a proposal McCain outlined last Wednesday to build 45 new nuclear plants in the United States by 2030 and another 55 in later years.
"I don’t understand how it’s not compromising our environmental standards to propose a crash program to build more nuclear power plants when the industry has not complied with the federal law that requires there to be safe disposal for the radioactive waste," Feeney said.
McCain responded by citing the example of nuclear technology in Europe and Navy ships powered by nuclear energy.
"My friend, the technology is there. The Europeans do it. I mean it's safe. It's being done. So, to think that that is going to require some pain on the American people economically when the Europeans-- 80 percent of the French electricity is generated by nuclear power. They are doing fine," McCain said to applause from the audience.
Labels: 2008 elections, energy
5 Comments:
SurveyUSA Off-Shore Oil Drilling Ban Poll
Currently, it is only legal to drill for oil off certain parts of the California coast. Should the law be changed to expand drilling for oil in coastal waters or should the law stay as is?
59% Change To Expand
33% Stay As Is
8% Not Sure
Have you always thought drilling should be expanded off the California coast? Or, did you only recently come to think drilling should be expanded, given the price of gasoline?
50% Always for Expanding
48% Recently Due To Prices
2% Not Sure
If drilling is expanded in water off the coast of California, will the price of gasoline go down at once? Go down eventually? Or not go down?
14% Go Down At Once
46% Eventually
35% Not Go Down
5% Not Sure
By Unknown, at 1:09 PM
Then this should be exactly what John McCain needs to put him over the top in November. Too bad Mike Huckabee didn't come up with this proposal back when it could have made a difference.
Seriously, though, isn't cheap gasoline the worst nightmare for trying to stop carbon emissions?
By Barry, at 1:21 PM
For the last 30 years Democrats, under the guise of "environmentalism", have done everything they could to choke off the nation's energy supply. No new nuclear plants, no new drilling anywhere, no new refineries, no LNG terminals, no new electric transmission lines, etc.
When people have this pointed out to them that may in fact damage the Dems in the next election. If the tide is running that way in CA, guess what the rest of the nation thinks.
(What does Huckabee have to do with anything?)
By Unknown, at 8:13 AM
You're obviously a new reader. I much preferred Huckabee to McCain as the Republican nominee for sheer entertainment value. If only he had proposed offshore drilling in California, perhaps he would have been able to wrest the nomination from McCain.
BTW - if you think Republicans have a chance in hell of winning California's electoral votes this November, especially if they run on a platform of opening up the coast to drilling for oil, i wonder how seriously we should take the rest of your judgments?
By Barry, at 8:22 AM
When people have this pointed out to them that may in fact damage the Dems in the next election.
if you think Republicans have a chance in hell of winning California's electoral votes this November
There are more elections nationwide than the Presidential one. (A party that put Dennis Kucinich on the same stage with the other candidates really shouldn't be pointing fingers.)
If the polling results are this lopsided in notoriously "environmentalist" Dem CA, what do you think they're going to be like elsewhere? A Dem candidate anywhere who says "no" to drilling is going to have to explain why.
By Unknown, at 8:08 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home