Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiBush/McCain's Gas Price Scam Is an Enron Re-Run
The Bush/McCain gas price escalation is an Enron Re-Run. It is Chapter 2 of the scam Bush crony "Kenny Boy" Lay used in 1999-2001 to steal $100 billion from California ratepayers.
Now this administration is replicating that crisis to funnel untold billions into the coffers of its oil baron backers... and to push the failed strategies of offshore drilling and nuke power.
There is no doubt that we are at the edge of the petro-abyss. Peak oil is upon us, as is the global-warmed finale of Earth's carrying capacity for burning more fossil fuels. It is the perfect storm that must end the age of fossil/nuke.
But the immediate situation is not so clear. Bush/McCain say soaring prices are due to a lack of supply, and there are those who agree.
The Saudis, and others with more credibility, argue the price rise is contrived by bankers and speculators. Their mega-theft comes not only at the gas pump, but in food prices and other essentials.
Whatever the case, remember that during the Enron con, there was no shortage of electric generating capacity. Enron's operatives laughed into their PCs as they selectively shut perfectly operable power stations and jacked up electric prices 700% and more. Enron, of course, later went bankrupt, wiping out countless thousands.
Contrived or otherwise, today's soaring gas prices are a tangible bonanza for Bush/McCain. Off-shore drilling would put billions in their cronies' pockets, but would not lower gas prices a single cent. Nuke power could mean billions more in radioactive lucre for reactor builders who may never deliver a single electron of electricity.
It's no accident that what Bush/McCain are NOT advocating is a massive shift to increased efficiency and renewable energy.
Prior to the Enron disaster, green power advocates proposed that some 600 megawatts of renewables and efficiency be installed in California. They said this "floor" was needed to protect the state from precisely the kind of gouging Enron then did.
But Southern California Edison's John Bryson helped kill the green power proposal. Bryson now likes to be photographed in front of photovoltaic arrays. But he used a deregulation package promising a "free market in energy" to help pay off failed reactors at San Onofre and Diablo Canyon. Then he stepped back while Enron cashed in.
Today, despite years of grassroots advocacy, Bush has done everything in his power to squelch the conversion to a green-powered economy. Even as gas prices soar there is no meaningful commitment to reviving mass transit, increasing fuel efficiency, or promoting renewable energy.
Indeed, Bush/McCain's two-step obsession with fossil fuels and nuke power is perfectly suited to guarantee that the public's money does NOT go to renewables and efficiency. Those technologies could actually solve both the climate and the energy supply crisis. But they would strip the fossil/nuke cartels of their death grip on the global economy.
Ironically, soaring fossil fuel prices make building reactors even more expensive. Using high gas prices to push nukes that only produce electricity (and radioactive waste) is a complete disconnect.
Today's wind and solar technologies are far cheaper than atomic energy, not to mention quicker to build, safer, more reliable and ecologically sound. The one thing certain about reactor construction is that it will stretch out years longer than planned. Capital costs are certain to at least double or triple before the first reactor could ever come on line, taking atomic energy totally out of the price range of renewables.
New drilling is also absurd. The off-shore and other protected areas Bush/McCain would destroy have limited, expensive oil beneath them. The GOP "energy plan" is that of a desperate junkie, tearing apart the planet for a few last grains of white powder to snort up its nose. That there will then be no more does not seem to matter.
The US once had the world's greatest mass transit system, which was consciously destroyed by the auto and oil industries to sell more cars and gas.
It once had a virtual monopoly on the renewable and efficiency technologies that can solve global warming and give us energy independence, with local communities taking control of their energy supply.
Enron's hucksters staged that fake electricity crisis to gouge California while pushing back the transition to a green-powered economy.
Now Enron II, the gas price crisis, is about gouging the whole nation. And about yet again postponing a community-owned, green-powered future.
The Solartopian conversion to renewables and efficiency could put the Bush/McCain barons of fossil nuke out of business. The sooner the better.
Harvey Wasserman's SOLARTOPIA! is at www.solartopia.org. His LAST ENERGY WAR, from http://sevenstories.com tells the history of deregulation and the US utility industry. He is senior editor of http://freepress.org, where this article first appeared.
25 Comments so far
Show AllImpeach bush. Stop bitching. It is the last statement you will be able to legally make against this scumbag.
http://www.impeachbush.org/site/PageServer
Kenneth Lay is alive and well, kicking it with his oil buddies in Dubai. Think about it, if you had the means and were capable of faking your death...wouldn't you?
hey poopdeck, swab that deck u lil pooper, cause ur a retard. those statistics are distorted to the max, and, "the chemical and pharmaceutical industries will continue to need tons of hydrocarbons to make "plastics" and "drugs"', well fuk them and LETS GROW A HEALTHY CULTURE INSTEAD. watta corporate luvn fuktard.
Hey Bill,
Your first paragraph illustrate my point exactly... this has been going on since the 70's. You would think cars would get about 1000 mpg by now...
Just like you would think the entire US could be on solar and wind by now... Though people can buy wind and solar power generation, subsidies have hugely favored oil instead, for the last 40+ years. Anything they can't control delivery of has remained "off the table" for consideration.
No one is keeping me from getting solar, in particular -- I plan to be off grid completely, water well included, within three years.
scoppertop,
Wind turbine manufacturers are sold out and back ordered. It is the fastest growing non fossil fuel power generation in the US.
PV solar is available from several manufacturers. It is best suited to individual homes to take the residence off grid (at least temporarily while the sun is shining). Because it scales down so well, it is better suited for this application than for commercial power generation.
Who is keeping you from getting it? Or do you just want it for less than the cost of manufacture?
Bill
The only solution is solar and wind... Go Kansas!
Bush/McCain mega thieves know that they CAN'T CONTROL DELIVERY of the sun or the wind, which is precisely why they won't let us have it.
GwNorth,
There was, for about 25 years, virtually no uranium prospecting except for Kazakstan. The price of uranium was so low (about $6/pound) that it was not worth the effort.
Russia and the US have, for several years, been flooding the uranium market with diluted highly enriched uranium from demilitarizing excess weapons. As desireable as the demilitarization is, it has wreaked havoc with the uranium market.
Since the price of uranium spiked briefly above $120/pound, it has inspired a great deal of prospecting and reserves have increased. The price of uranium has now stabilized at about $60/pound.
Much of the uranium reserves are located in friendly countries: Canada and Australia. Uranium can also be extracted from seawater for about $200/pound.
Uranium at $200/pound does not seriously affect the cost of electricity generated from nuclear power. Seawater uranium has enough uranium for over 1000 years.
Bill
Was watching members of the House on C-Span this evening talking about the gas crisis. The repugs are really pushing off shore drilling on both coasts, and the gulf of Mexico, plus exploring in Anwar; nuclear energy, and "clean" coal.
If they keep putting the message out that we have all this energy that's our, and available, at our disposal, but the dems won't allow any of it, which means gas will continue to go up, all those idiots out there who believe everything they see on the boob tube will run with it, and the dems will be toast in November.
"The Saudis, and others with more credibility, argue the price rise is contrived by bankers and speculators. Their mega-theft comes not only at the gas pump, but in food prices and other essentials."
Very interesting! "Contrived by bankers and speculators".
Maybe that's why Secretary of Treasury and former CEO of Goldman Sachs, Henry Paulson, said the following at a G8 meeting earlier this month:
"Financial investors don't create trends," he said, adding that the fundamental problem is inventories are "very tight and there's concern they will get tighter".
He also made other comments to discourage the investigation of speculators in the oil market.
The two really sick parts are: A) Greedism is so off the scale that no amount of billions is enough; B) Greedism is so off the scale that those fellow Americans who continue to lie, cheat and steal the billions that are never enough are also damning their own loved ones to a grim and painful future.
This group of Greedism sufferers are no different than the gambling addict who can't stop even after losing the car, house, wife, kids, etc. All that matters is that next "win," or fix, consequences be damned.
Sadly, too many of us are also afflicted with Greedism, which is why we fail to acknowledge - and deal with - the epidemic that is bringing America to it's knees. No alcoholic ever says to another alcoholic, "Hey, man, you need to get some help."
At current rates of consumption there an estimated 80 years supply of Uranium ore for Nuclear fuel. In the past 8 years the price of that Ore on world markets has climbed 10 fold compared to oil rising 5 fold in US dollars.
China, Europe, India and other nations all look to building more Nuclear plants. If the US doubles its reliance on Nuclear power and the rest of the World follows suits existing reserves would last around 40 years.
What will the US do to ensure it has access to that resource? Invade the nations with a surplus?
Nuclear makes as little sense as oil.
We have to move beyond CONSUMPTION of a finite resource to generate our energy. A world of 6 billion people all consuming a finite resource to produce energy will consumes itself into penury.
Wasserman's logic fails a rationality test:
"Peak oil is upon us...that must end the age of nuke(s)"
If there is sense in that argument, it completely escapes me.
It is true that oil and nuclear power are not interchangeable fuels. (Other than on a long term basis-nuclear electricity can replace oil for some transportation purposes).
Nuclear power is largely interchangeable with coal for power generation. Coal, in the US, is not in short supply. Nuclear is more expensive than coal. Some would say it is too dangerous or that the waste issue is not resolved. The major environmental reason for considering nuclear is that it has CO2 emissions equivalent to non combustion renewables. The major financial reason that some utilities are considering nuclear power is the anticipation of carbon taxation of some sort.
Bill
gus June 23rd, 2008 12:10 pm I think the Federal Government sued California to stop enactment of the CAFE standard they were ready to put in place so if the Administration is not in agreement with State Policies then the Feds say that State law does not supercede federal law.
Wasserman states:"The Saudis, and others with more credibility, argue the price rise is contrived by bankers and speculators." I am not sure why he thinks the Saudis are more credible than even the Bush administration. The Saudis have lied about their ability to produce more oil, lied about the fact that their major oil field is probably past Hubbard's Peak. I think it would be fair to say the Bush Administration will lie whenever the lie helps their political agenda and it can probably be said that they are capable of telling the truth if it fits their political agenda. The point being that even though the Administration says that there is no evidence of speculators driving the oil market-it may be true.
When the California thing started, I was telling everyone who'd listen that it was all just a planned attack on the public to get GWB elected, and as soon as he was in the white house, everything would go back to normal.
When gas prices started going up this year, I said it was another staged ploy to help get McCain elected. And that GWB (front for D.C.) would make sure those prices started going down in time to assure the dumb masses would say, "Oh, see what President Bush and the republicans have taken care of? We need to keep them in office!"
We'll see.
poopdeck June 23rd, 2008 4:11 pm
Well, I'll be darned.
Well, It all comes down to a energy and fuel comsumpion. See what happens if you just try to suggest to Americans that maybye public transportation is better then using your car every day...
You will get a response that just dumb "commies" and "socialist" use it. And of course all those poor, black and other "undesirable" people which nobody wants to have anything to do with.
Lets face it, the American dream of ownersihip is the problem here. I do not say there should be no private property, but doing things together is always less energy demending then everybody doing the same on his own.
How many cars are more then half empty when you look around yourlself when you drive your car to work every day?
Approximately 80% of all crude oil is controlled at the wells by non-US National Governments and only 20% directly by the "seven sisters." Hence, the Enron-analogy is a non-starter. Try saber-rattling against Iran.
gnken1: seismic profiling was still in its infancy in 1978 and no test-wells were ever drilled in Baltimore Canyon or at Georges Bank. Today it is possible to spot potential off-shore oil fields with much greater reliability than in 1978. That does not mean that they must be drilled now. I am against that. However, when the crunch comes, as it certainly will in the future, the chemical and pharmaceutical industries will continue to need tons of hydrocarbons to make "plastics" and "drugs". Even ANWR must be drilled then or we will swiftly return to the era of horse-and-buggy. It is cheap to say "Go figure." What is your solution for providing "plastics" and "drugs" with hydrocarbons if you have any? I think that you are just a nay-nodder without any real understanding of oil/gas/energy.
A proposal:
Let "the wonders of the unfettered market work their magic"
regarding petroleum product costs. Then let the constitutional taxing power of the Congress taketh away as much profit from the oil companies as is required to supplement the costs of needed transportation. Maybe we could fund the reinstitution of passenger rail service to replace the long distance--more than 100 miles--driving and flying that wastes so much petroleum presently).
In 1978 thur 1982-83 we had offshore drilling on the East Coast and Georges Bank. The Baltimore Canyon off the mid Atlantic States came up with "DRY Holes". I dont think Georges Bank had much oil either. Why would there be oil there now? Go Figure
The entire contemporary United States is an Enron re-run, with George Anheuser Busch playing Ken Lay and Obama playing Jeffrey Skilling and Andrew Fastow. The MSM plays Arthur Andersen and the American people, as always, play themselves, providing the naked, slapstick comic relief, staring over their shoulder into the bathroom mirror, still trying to figure out how to get that dry and splintered purple shaft out of their backsides.
Bottom line is citizens MUST become active in local politics and then build webs within State politics. Only then will people have the power to counter the Energy MegaGiants.
If you think just pulling a lever for Obama, then going back to Dancing With The Stars, will get it done - you will only get more of the same... without a lubricant.
Maybe the states can take matter into their own hands. Here in Kansas, governor Kathleen Sebelius has implemented incentives for the construction of wind farms, and has successfully blocked development of two huge coal-fired electrical generation plants due to carbon dioxide emission concerns. She did it not on the basis of political ideology, but because she wants to restore Kansas to the status of a net energy exporter once again (Kansas used to be the 5th largest oil-producing state in the US).
Can states preempt destructive federal action from ideologically- and politically driven energy policy? I sure hope so. Kansas may be seen as backwards hicks with the creationism issue of recent past, but has recently been in the progressive vanguard in party realignment and energy policy. I'd hate to see a primitive federal solution negate that.
No profit to be made, no help from Washington. Viva Che?
I love this "Bush/McCain" thing that Mr. Wasserman employs in the article! It should be utilized in every piece written and/or spoken concerning the McSame campaign. It is the type of linkage that NEEDS to be burned into the brain of every single voter in the usa.
The only improvement to it that I might suggest is: "bush/McCain".
oil is oil. one does not need to use exclusively "fossil hydrocarbons" to make plastics and drugs.
Many of the drugs made with petrochemicals have / had equivalents that were derived from hemp oils.
fabrics made with hemp outlast denim (cotton fiber fabrics), and require no pesticides / fertilizers.
Paper made from hemp does not require all the chemical processing of wood pulp paper, and 5 acres of hemp produces the same amount of paper as five acres of trees, only the trees take 10 - 15 years to grow , hemp takes one season and grows in marginal soils.
the diesel engine was built and designed to operate on hemp oil.
26,000 uses and counting for industrial hemp.
Read history and the truth about why hemp is illegal.
hemp will save our asses when the oil runs out.