Last week John McCain changed a long-held position and endorsed lifting a 27-year moratorium on off-shore oil drilling, President Bush asked Congress to end the ban and arguing that it was one part of his plan to lower the price of gas (now $4.30 in Pottersville).
Democrats, including Barack Obama, are opposed to McCain and Bush’s plan, calling it a political ploy that will not lower prices, and instead another handout to Big Oil. Obama wants a windfall profits tax on oil companies with heavy investment in renewable energy.
Since there is little hope of passage of anyone’s plan, some see a meaningless political debate that is being used to sidetrack and divide voters much in the way the Gay Marriage Debate did in the 2004 Elections.
Let’s assume that the oil wasn’t located off-shore, but in the High Peaks.
The New York Times reports that:
A 2007 Department of Energy study found that access to [High Peaks] energy deposits would not add to domestic crude oil and natural gas production before 2030 and that the impact on prices would be “insignificant.”
The National Petroleum Council estimates that beneath the [Au Sable River], there might be 36.7 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 5.2 billion barrels of oil — numbers that would require extensive exploration to verify. . . .
What would you want to do? I’d love to hear from the Adirondacks wind project supporters – oil or wind project – does it matter?