As much as I am extremely concerned about the environmental and economic damage caused by the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, there is a cynical side to me that sadistically thinks it is ‘just desserts’ for a nation that has greedily guzzled cheap fuel while the rest of the world has economised on the use of fossil fuels.

Not just in the very recent years when ‘green’ has become popular centrist politics, but for the last forty years the US has shown that it is cheap oil that fuels its economy and any length justifies the means of monopolising the oil market. Perhaps your should read Bush Oil Administrations and Iraq Wars here.

So while the US continues to have a love affair with Hummers, gas guzzling pick up trucks, SUVs, V8s and 365/24/7 air conditioning, how can I really have much sympathy? Rather odd in my mind that the US government was ready to give the ‘green light’ to more close offshore oil drilling just days before this spill. I do not recall hearing a vocal opposition at that time. Almost everyone in the US was quite happy to find more cheap oil it seemed.

The other point that comes to mind with the advent of this disaster is the Katrina fiasco in New Orleans. Two examples now of the inefficiency of a ‘greed is good’ capitalist policy. The inability of the US to manage natural disasters is frightening for a super power state. Why is the government of the US looking on while it waits for BP to fix the problem? Where are the Federal agencies that should be responsible in such situations?

I have heard President Obama say a number of times that BP must pay for this. Well, whoopee doop! BP made $35 billion last year so money is no problem. The real problem is that President Obama is powerless to do anything. Except maybe ‘nuke’ it to plug the flow.

Oh I am really sure the population of the Gulf States would go for that.

As I recall a US general once said, America is very good at blowing things up, but not very good at fixing things. Oh too true.

Wake up America. Your Jed Clampett, Beverly Hillbillies fantasy days are well and truly over.

The Greedy Gas Guzzlers
Tagged on:                 

10 thoughts on “The Greedy Gas Guzzlers

  • 16/06/2010 at 8:24 pm
    Permalink

    I wouldn't expect someone from a place with mild temperatures to understand why we need air conditioning in places in the U.S. with 100 percent humidity and daily 95+ temps.

  • 16/06/2010 at 8:36 pm
    Permalink

    I'm originally from Australia Anonymous. So I do know about living in heat and humidity. Why do you stay cool at less than half the price the rest of the world pays? And evaporative air-conditioning is much more cost effective and has been used in Australia for over 30 years.

  • 17/06/2010 at 7:14 am
    Permalink

    Well, at least it took you two paragraphs before you brought up Bush… Anyway, not why I posted. Instead, needed to say this – your article is nonsense.

    The "green" side is the reason for the spill being as bad as it is. There never would have been drilling that far out if not for the "green" screaming; and the reason they cant kill the hole is the massive pressure which comes from drilling that deep. The oil companies are extremely confident they could have plugged this hole in shallow waters – and they should be, they have in the past. Its this depth that is the problem, and this depth is 100% on the shoulders of the “green” side. Then, burnoff was to be used to destroy much of the oil, but this was fought by the "green" side. Chemicals would have been used to disperse the oil if not for the "green" screaming. Oh, except of course for the chemicals that Nalco produces though – you know, the stuff that was latter found to have been banned by the EPA for causing serious health conditions. (Obama has personal stock in it so…) There would have been the 20+ Sand barriers that were requested (not the pitiful 6 Obama allowed) for the beaches if not for the "green" concern of oil getting in the sand. In fact, if not for the "green" side of things it wouldnt be 6 days between requests from the GOM area officials and the Governments reply, and there wouldnt be city officials saying "arrest us if you want, we need to protect our land" in their desperation to do what the government wont. Then of course, we would have been using the Dutch Sweep Arms since day 4 picking up huge amounts of oil; but alas, the "green" side assured that was impossible since the EPA bans "water with oil" to be pumped back into the ocean – apparently catching 80% oil is bad and instead having 100% of the oil in the ocean is good… (it should be noted that it doesnt matter anyway, as Obama has yet to wave the Jones Act and instead has turned away 13 countries offering to help! Have to make sure we don’t upset those Unions after all…)

    And now? The "green" side wants to use a situation they helped create and definitely made much, much worse to push the loss of jobs and destruction of the economy in an effort to "go green" across the country despite being "unsure exactly what that looks like, even if we don’t know precisely how to get there" (according to our President) But don’t worry, he will construct another committee, appoint another Czar and unveil a whole new slew of taxes while punishing anyone using fossil fuels in his quest to, well, who the heck knows…

    Its said the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Well, that sums up the “green” side of things pretty well if you ask me…

  • 17/06/2010 at 11:57 am
    Permalink

    My point is not environmental Anonymous. It is economic and political. The cheap energy policy of US administrations from Kennedy to Obama have been economically based on an abundant supply of oil. But these days are coming to an end. The same could be said for Australia which has done exactly the same for decades with the supply of cheap coal. Russia uses its cheap natural gas to politically and economically dominate its region.

    However the political upshot from this spill in the Gulf is that it shows how powerless the US government actually is when it comes to handling natural, or in this case civil disaster. For all the economic strength, the US has invested little in its own civil protection.

    I agree with you that this is why Obama keeps appointing so called 'Czars' to handle each emergency. They are really only a front for a real inability to actually do anything effective.

    It is abundantly clear that US governments of any side really don't have the power or ability to control oil companies, banks or motor manufacturers. Let alone hurricanes and floods.

  • 17/06/2010 at 5:33 pm
    Permalink

    Okay, well you are working on a flawed theory which is being forced down our throats then. That is, this "days coming to an end" stuff – it flat out isn't true and is something which will not come for generations still. Yes, eventually the world will run out of the resource, and yes, it is probably best to work towards developing real long-term solutions. But no, panicking and destroying the economy under the false pretense of "green" concerns is idiotic – that is just the Democrats chosen way to try and gain power; panic the populace into thinking they must address it now at all costs – mainly electing Democrats.

    Reality is we sit on a giant oil supply our self, and it’s mostly untapped. But if we were really worried about oil, we would first be tapping the massive amounts in Cuba – yet we leave in place the long disputed and illogical trade embargo. Instead China is tapping that oil, as it is doing in countless other countries. If not Cuba, we would be working with Canada (an extremely minor user of oil that is sitting on a largely untapped supply) – but we haven’t done that either… Iraq oil has barley been tapped so far as well, and China is using our financial issues to get its hands all over it too. It surprises people to learn Russia is actually now the leading producer of oil in the world. Why? Because they too have wisely been using others oil before their own; tapping into this ability recently because of the needed finances. China’s fingers are all over that Russia oil, as you would imagine, with a direct pipeline in place… China’s interest? Two fold…

    The US will not be the biggest consumer of energy come next year or two. In fact, China is on a pace double the US oil usage in the next 20 years. Why? Because our energy consumption has only marginally increased over the last 30 years. I will repeat; our consumption has only marginally increased over the last 30 years. Meanwhile, many EU countries and Japan have decreased their usage over that time. And this trend will continue as more and more countries go toward this “green” agenda. China is stepping into all these other Countries for financial superiority and to ensure they are not cut off from supply. You know, what we were doing for years until our recent collapse.

    Truth is, “green” will come long before oil is gone. That is why Democrats don’t run their campaign with “oil is running out”, they run it under the pretense of “global warning will kill us. Oh, and there isn’t unlimited oil”. Both are little more then a political sham – we don’t control the climate and oil will be around for a long time still; especially with so many countries jumping on the agenda’s bandwagon. By the time Oil really is in need, the technology needed will already be everywhere you look.

    Now, that issue really being a non issue you are left with just one thing – an inept President and administration. But its understandable that we are facing so many problems with his drastic attempts to put our Country on the path of Greece and so many other failed Socialism experiments. That however isn’t our biggest issue – our biggest issue is this Presidents connection to extreme revolutionaries, including people he has given jobs IN the White House. When a country elects a dictator, they get a dictator and all the problems that come along with it (and yes, based off the people he has surrounded himself with and the drastic changes he is forcing through while completely ignoring the desires of the country, that is what we have elected.) Our economy was inst great shape to begin with after the terrorist attacks and wars. But our economy had the ability to bring itself out of the problems until Democrats took over the Bush White House over the last two years, and the people elected our new dictator.

    We could have learned from 1930 Germany. Instead, we followed their follies. Now, unfortunately, Obama is no where near the ability of the good side of Hitler and we can only hope he is equally as far from the bad…

  • 17/06/2010 at 5:34 pm
    Permalink

    Now, getting past all that we will address the overall statement of Government not being able to handle natural disasters. Yes, that is true for the most part. It is not completely true however, and most of it is self destructive tendencies from within. Bush didn’t handle the Katrina situation as poorly as mainstream media tries to make it. Yes, it wasn’t good and he relied on lesser government agencies which were ripe with corruption and self-serving interests. But that should be a call for LESS Government, not more. Bush also handled 9/11 nearly perfectly though – wonder if its because everyone, for once, worked together for the better good instead of the continual Government v. People agenda of extremist within the Democrat party these days? That Big Government agenda of today’s Democrats is what is hindering our ability to respond to natural disasters (the Gulf being a perfect example), as it has always been in Socialist regimes. If Democrats continue on their extremist agenda, we will suffer the issues currently destroying the rest of the world. That is, as long as Obama doesn’t single-handedly destroy the Country first or, of course, Russia/China do not seize this opportunity to cripple us for decades…

  • 17/06/2010 at 6:32 pm
    Permalink

    American politics is a strange beast. It has two faces. One national and one international. I know from my time in the US that they are so totally different. What is called 'left' in the US would sit on the 'right' of the 'right' in Europe for example. So the public perception of US politics changes radically depending where you view it from. And not just from foes, but friends alike.

    There is no doubting the power and influence of the US, so it is natural that the world has an opinion about US politics. It affects us all, but we don't get to vote. Quite frankly, both Democrats and Republicans are seen as the same animal as US foreign policy hasn't changed at all under any administration.

    Obama's popularity outside of the US has waned since his election partly due to a perception that he hasn't accomplished anything concrete internationally. Outside the US health care is a non-issue, so that hasn't helped him at all. I think he is starting to be seen as a do nothing President. And the oil spill has now made him look even more ineffective.

    But Bush was so unpopular outside of the US, anyone was preferable. From inside the US, Bush was seen as standing firm against all enemies. What was missed locally is that he burned a lot of friends and allies along the way. Along with Blair's stupidity and lies, the US has lost the automatic support it once had from those it has regarded as allies for a long time. France has been a friend of the US since independence, but Bush did serious damage to that relationship. The US cannot now ever rely on French and UK public support or that of Europeans in general.

    The next time won't be so easy for the US as it has lost the trust it once had.

    I agree that less government is better, but it depends what you call less. Less bureaucrats and paper shufflers for sure. But not in cilvil defence. That should clearly be more as proven by Katrina.

    And lastly, I really believe that the US is being somewhat crippled or at least reduced in economic and political clout. But this can't be laid on one administration. The current decline started after Reagan but the decline has certainly gained pace in the last decade.

  • 17/06/2010 at 11:29 pm
    Permalink

    I did not create the current environmental "…love affair with Hummers, gas guzzling pick up trucks, SUVs, V8s and 365/24/7 air conditioning… ." I'm worn out with slogans such as "addiction to oil."

    Could anyone could have saved us after the Bush years? I don't think so. And that is the cynical side of me.

    You, as an outsider, may think we need our comeuppance, but in fact our middle-class is almost a thing of the past. It could never last in a greedy society like we have.

    Wall street made us and will destroy us. I believe most people live under the illusion they have some control in government. I don't believe that either.

    On the other hand, the rest of the world is not exactly Utopian. Show me a great government, anywhere. Yes, we suck at a lot of things. So does the rest of the world. Greed is universal.

  • 17/06/2010 at 11:53 pm
    Permalink

    All I can say is that I agree with you Hal. Greed is universal. But I don't think Americans need their comeuppance. Just new government policies that are not formulated soley by Wall Street and oil monopolies.

  • 19/06/2010 at 4:37 am
    Permalink

    Um, one other point. The Gulf isn't exactly an isolated water body. It's connected to the ocean, so this disastrous oil spill will end up affecting more than just the U.S.

    And, FWIW, I don't drive a gas guzzler. No one consulted me about off-shore drilling or the Iraq war, for that matter. (Thumbs down to both, I say. Or I would've if anyone had bothered to ask.)

    Also, I'm no political expert, but Bush was hardly what I'd call a popular president. His approval rating tanked during his second administration. (Though, how he got elected twice remains a mystery to me. Some stupid business about not switching presidents during a war? Head-shakingly stupid stuff.) And hard as this may be to believe (LOL), I never voted for him. Honest!

Comments are closed.