

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Alan Barber, (202) 293-5380 x115
Last
week, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that lifted some
restrictions on oil drilling in America's outer continental shelf. The
bill was supported by many Democrats but was criticized by many
Republicans for not going far enough and for not opening up enough
areas to drilling. Senator John McCain supports lifting all
restrictions on drilling in the outer continental shelf. He argues that
increased offshore production will reduce dependence on foreign oil, in
addition to lowering gas prices.
However, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) has concluded that
even Senator McCain's proposal for comprehensive drilling would have no
impact in the near-term, since it will be close to a decade before any
oil can be extracted from the coastal areas in question. The EIA
estimates that actual production would not begin until 2017 and would
not reach peak production until 2030. Further, the EIA projects that
this will only increase domestic oil production by 200,000 barrels a
day (0.2 percent of projected world production), an amount too small to
have any significant effect on oil prices.1
It is interesting to compare the potential impact on oil prices of the
proposal to remove restrictions on offshore drilling with the impact of
the recently passed Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. This
legislation included regulations designed to increase production of
renewable fuels and increase energy efficiency. Most significantly, the
measure raised the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standard for
automobiles. Under the legislation, the minimum CAFE standard for
passenger vehicles must average at least 35 miles per gallon (mpg) by
2020, up from the previous minimum standard of approximately 27.5 mpg
at present.2
CAFE standards were first implemented in 1975 at 20 mpg and increased
to 27.5 mpg in 1985. The CAFE program had the direct effect of reducing
national oil consumption by compelling automakers to produce more
fuel-efficient cars. The Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
estimates that without CAFE standards, gasoline consumption (and crude
oil imports) would be about 2.8 million barrels a day greater.3 Currently, our consumption of oil is estimated at 20.8 million barrels a day.4
Figure 1 shows the relative impact on oil production of lifting
drilling restrictions on the Outer Continental Shelf, compared with the
impact on oil consumption of increasing standards of automobile fuel
efficiency.
FIGURE 1
The Relative Impact of Offshore Drilling and Increasing Fuel Efficiency Standards in 2030
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 should have a similar
impact on fuel efficiency and oil consumption, also lowering
consumption by approximately 2.8 million barrels per day by 2027, the
year when the EIA projects that peak production could be reached from
drilling in the currently protected offshore area.5
If this is the case, then the increase in fuel economy standards
contained in the recent legislation will decrease oil dependency by an
amount fourteen times greater than any comprehensive offshore drilling
effort.
Senator Obama has proposed a slightly more ambitious fuel efficiency
schedule which would increase mileage standards at the rate of 4
percent a year. This would lead to somewhat greater energy savings,
especially if the increases are continued beyond the 2020 date. In this
case, the mileage standard will reach 52 miles per gallon by 2027,
which will raise the average for all cars driven to just less than 42
miles per gallon by that date. In this case, the savings in oil
consumption would be equal to 4.2 million barrels a day by 2027.6 This amount would be 21 times as large as the impact of opening up the protected offshore areas to drilling.
While Senator McCain opposes drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge, his running mate Governor Sarah Palin strongly supports lifting
the restrictions on drilling. The EIA has estimated that drilling in
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would have no effect in the
near-term. Production would not begin until 2018, and in 2030,
production would plateau at 710,000 barrels a day. This amount of oil
is projected to decrease the price of oil by about $2.00 a barrel,
which would bring down the price of gasoline by less than 5 cents a
gallon.7
In conclusion, the increase in CAFE standards signed into law by
President Bush will have four times the impact on oil dependency as
drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and fourteen times the
impact as drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf. The addition of
Senator Obama's conservation proposal to the increased CAFE standards
would have 21 times the impact of opening up drilling in protected
offshore areas and 6 times the impact of drilling in the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge. The impact of opening drilling in either area
will be zero for close to a decade. Even when these regions attain peak
production in close to twenty years, the potential impact on gasoline
prices will still be negligible.
________________________________
1.
The projections for oil output for the protected areas can be found in:
United States. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration.
Annual Energy Outlook with Projections to 2030. Washington: GPO, 2007. https://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/archive/aeo07/issues.html. Accessed September 8, 2008.
2. White House. Fact Sheet: Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Washington: White House, 2007. https://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/12/20071219-1.html.
Accessed September 9, 2008. The current 25 miles is a rough average of
the 27.5 MPG requirement for cars and the 22.2 MPG requirement for
light trucks.
3. Board on Energy and Environmental Systems. Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards. Washington: National Academy Press, 2002. https://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10172&page=3. Accessed September 9, 2008.
4. Central Intelligence Agency, World Factbook. Rank Order - Oil - Consumption. Washington: CIA, 2005. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2174rank.html. Accessed September 11, 2008.
5.
This calculation assumes that the efficiency of the fleet of cars sold
increases at the rate of 0.85 MPG per year between now and 2020. It
also assumes that each year a car is on the road it is driven 10
percent less (e.g. 2005 cars are driven 10 percent less than 2006 cars)
and that it is pulled off the road altogether after 20 years. It also
assumes a baseline where gasoline consumption rises by 10 percent from
9 million barrels per day in 2008 to 10 million barrels per day in
2027.
6. This calculation makes the same assumption about the rate at which cars are pulled off the road.
7.
The projections for oil output for the protected areas can be found in:
United States. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration.
Analysis of Crude Oil Production in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge. https://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/anwr/pdf/sroiaf(2008)03.pdf. Accessed September, 9 2008.
By Matthew Sherman and Dean Baker
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380Governments gathering for International Monetary Fund and World Bank meetings "have a clear responsibility," said a 350.org leader. "End this illegal war, stop the flow of destruction, and make the profiteers pay."
As the Spring Meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group were held in Washington, DC during a two-week ceasefire between the United States, Israel, and Iran, over 130 civil society groups this week urged global governments to "secure a permanent end to the wars in South West Asia and break the chains of fossil fuel dependence."
The joint statement was coordinated by Fight Inequality Alliance and 350.org, which has been advocating for a windfall profits tax on oil and gas giants since the US and Israel launched their illegal war on Iran in late February, and the Iranian government responded by restricting traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, which sent fossil fuel prices soaring worldwide.
"While people struggle to afford food, fuel, and basic necessities, fossil fuel companies are profiting massively from the chaos. The IMF itself has warned of the risk of a global recession," said 350.org managing director Savio Carvalho in a statement.
"Governments gathering in Washington have a clear responsibility: End this illegal war, stop the flow of destruction, and make the profiteers pay," Carvalho argued. "Taxing windfall oil and gas profits could provide immediate relief to families and invest in the clean, affordable energy systems we urgently need. They profit, we pay. It's time to fix it now: no bombs, no barrels."
A permanent end to the war—which has killed people across the region—is the first demand of the open letter. The second is a windfall profits tax on fossil fuel giants, with the revenue being used "to guarantee public services, and provide immediate support to families and precarious workers hit hardest by soaring food and fuel prices."
Martha Tukahirwa, Fight Inequality Alliance's Africa coordinator, explained that "while thousands are killed in the war in Iran, millions of people across Africa are being crushed by soaring fuel prices that have made even the simplest meal unaffordable. In Nigeria, diesel has surged over 60%. In Malawi, the poorest households are forced to choose between cooking and eating."
"In Zimbabwe, the cost of public transport has soared, making it impossible for working people to earn a living," Tukahirwa continued. "This is no accident—fossil fuel companies and commodity traders are reaping massive profits from this crisis while our governments stand idle. Tax these obscene profits and redirect the money to shield our people from hunger and hardship. The time for half measures is over, the time for bold action is now."
The letter's third demand is to "make food and energy secure for all." The war has impacted the availability of not only fuel but also fertilizer. The coalition called on governments to "invest public money in sustainable local farming and homegrown renewable energy, and stop harmful handouts to weapons, fossil fuels, and fossil fertilizer."
The groups—which also include ActionAid International, Corporate Europe Observatory, Council of Canadians, Friends of the Earth International, GreenFaith, Greenpeace Japan, Make Polluters Pay, Oxfam in the Pacific, War on Want, and more—called for urgently rolling out "renewable energy solutions for farms, homes, schools, and clinics to protect them from this and future energy crises."
Rev. Fletcher Harper, executive director of GreenFaith, said that "our faiths call us to make peace with people and the planet alike, and to hold the powerful to account. Letting fossil fuel giants pocket windfalls while families struggle is a moral failure. Taxing windfall profits to provide energy relief is not radical. It is basic justice."
The fourth and final demand is to cancel debt payments for Global South countries, and agree to fairer debt rules. The coalition stressed that "after paying interest to Wall Street lenders, bankers, and rich governments, many Global South countries have no money left over to protect their people from this crisis."
As part of the debt demand, the coalition also urged governments to "support informal workers, farm laborers, women, and older people, and guarantee universal access to healthcare, education, and public transport."
David Archer, head of programs and Influencing at ActionAid, pointed to civil society's push for a United Nations treaty for restructuring sovereign debt.
"Billions of people across the Global South are living in countries already facing a debt crisis. This war will make their lives even harder, leading to rising prices and rising interest rates," Archer said. "We need urgent action to cancel debt and to take the power over debt away from the IMF and rich countries—through developing a UN Framework Convention on Sovereign Debt."
"Great credit to the people and state legislators of Maine for being at the forefront of a large and swelling national movement to put a halt to the reckless, unchecked explosive growth of hyperscale AI data centers."
Democratic Maine Gov. Janet Mills is facing pressure to sign what would be the nation's first statewide moratorium on artificial intelligence data centers after state legislators passed the bill on Tuesday.
The Maine House of Representatives approved the bill 79-62, and then the state Senate sent it to Mills' desk with a 21-13 vote.
"The bill, LD 307, would create a limitation on data centers with electric loads of at least 20 megawatts by preventing the state, local governments, and quasi-governmental agencies from issuing permits or other approvals until November 2027," according to the Portland Press Herald. "In the meantime, a new Data Center Coordination Council—also created in the bill—would get time to study the centers' potential impact in Maine and issue policy recommendations."
In addition to calling for a national moratorium on constructing new AI data centers, the advocacy group Food & Water Watch (FWW) has fought for related proposals in not only Maine but also California, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
"Great credit to the people and state legislators of Maine for being at the forefront of a large and swelling national movement to put a halt to the reckless, unchecked explosive growth of hyperscale AI data centers," Mitch Jones, FWW's managing director of policy and litigation, said in a Tuesday statement.
"These massive facilities suck up unimaginable amounts of water and electricity, and wreak havoc on the everyday Americans in nearby communities that are forced to foot the bills for this irresponsible, profit-hungry industry," Jones stressed. "Gov. Mills should listen to the people and legislators of Maine, and sign this smart, nation-leading bill into law immediately."
However, as Maine Public detailed on Monday:
Mills has said the measure needs to have an exemption for a proposed $550 million project at the former Androscoggin paper mill in Jay to get her support.
"The people of Jay need those jobs, with appropriate guardrails on preserving water resources, electricity resources, local generation and all those things," Mills told reporters during an event in Bangor last week.
Mills' office did not respond to an email Monday asking if the governor intends to veto the bill.
After the votes on Tuesday, The Washington Post similarly noted that legislators had rejected an amendment for the exception sought by Mills, and a spokesperson for the governor "did not immediately respond to a query about whether she plans to approve the legislation."
Mills is locked in an intense US Senate primary race with combat veteran and oyster farmer Graham Platner, who has been leading her in various polls. While the governor has released attack advertisements targeting her opponent, Platner has largely focused on his platform—which prioritizes the needs of the working class—and Sen. Susan Collins, the Republican trying to keep her seat in November.
Millions of Italians have taken to the streets in support of Palestinians and around 3 in 4 say Israel committed a genocide in Gaza.
The Italian government has suspended a military cooperation agreement with Israel in response to its attacks against Lebanon in recent weeks, which have killed hundreds of people.
Italy's right-wing prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, announced on Tuesday that it was suspending an agreement with Israel that dates back to 2003 and involved cooperation between the two countries, which traded military equipment and shared technical data.
“In view of the current situation, the government has decided to suspend the automatic renewal of the defense agreement with Israel,” Meloni said on Tuesday.
It marks a dramatic shift in policy for Italy's government, which has until recently been one of Israel's closest allies in Europe. Amid the genocide in Gaza, Meloni has faced pressure both from opposition parties and from the public to cut ties with Israel for more than a year.
The relationship appears to have finally frayed with the events of the past several weeks, when Israel launched an invasion of Lebanon that has involved the displacement of more than 1 million people, the razing of entire villages, and the aggressive bombing of civilian areas.
Tension between the two countries hit a boiling point over the past week, when the Italian government accused Israeli forces of firing warning shots at Italian UN peacekeepers, which caused damage to a vehicle but resulted in no injuries.
Italy was also among several European countries that called for Lebanon's inclusion in last week's ceasefire agreement between the US and Iran. Meloni accused Israel of "disrespecting" the two-week truce when it launched the most devastating attack yet on Lebanon the day after the ceasefire was reached, which killed and wounded more than 1,400 people, including many civilians.
Though Meloni has been an ideological ally of US President Donald Trump, she has grown increasingly critical of the American president. On Monday, she condemned what she called "unacceptable" insults from Trump against Pope Leo XIV, who criticized the war in Iran.
Trump responded with his own shots at Meloni: “I thought she had courage. I was wrong," he said.
Meloni is also facing mounting pressure from her own people over Italy's relationship with Israel, which could loom large as she faces reelection in 2027.
Nearly 3 out of 4 Italians said in a September survey that they believe Israel's actions in Gaza constitute a genocide, and 59% said they wanted Italy to cut ties with Israel. During the fall, millions of Italians took to the streets to rally in solidarity with Palestinians and support the Global Sumud Flotilla as it carried humanitarian aid to besieged Gaza.
This anger has been seized on by the opposition. Last week, during a heated exchange, the Parliament erupted in applause after opposition lawmaker Angelo Bonelli took Meloni to task for "failing" to condemn or distance herself from Trump or Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"You are stubbornly short-sighted and fail to grasp where the world is heading," Bonelli said. "A world where the logic of war is dictated by two criminals."
Responding to Israel's attacks on Lebanon on Wednesday, Bonelli asked the prime minister: "200 people were killed as if it were nothing. What is your response? What are you doing? Do you have the courage to take action?"
Riccardo Magi, a member of the center-left opposition party More Europe, wrote on social media that by suspending Italy's defense agreement with Israel, Meloni had "finally realized that something is happening in the Middle East."
"After years of massacres by Israel against Palestinian civilians, in which our government simply decided to look the other way, today Meloni has suddenly decided to suspend the memorandum between Italy and Israel, as the opposition has been demanding for a long time," he said.
However, he cautioned that the decision was "not about a renewed humanitarian spirit on the part of our government," but rather "pure electoral convenience."
"It is not enough for us, and we believe sanctions are necessary against Netanyahu and his ministers, including a ban on entry into the territory of the union," he said. "The illegal occupation of Gaza, together with the wars provoked in the area without any consideration for the lives of civilians, is now a point of no return. Israel must stop."