CA Op-Ed: CAPAF: Rep. Duncan Hunter Stands in the Way of Energy Independence

CA Op-Ed: CAPAF: Rep. Duncan Hunter Stands in the Way of Energy Independence
New study finds house Republicans participating in protest consistently voted against energy independence
Published on Aug 14, 2008 - 7:34:53 AM

ASHINGTON, DC Aug. 13, 2008 - Representative Duncan Hunter (R-CA) voted against every attempt to increase clean alternative energy sources during this Congress, according to a new analysis by the Center for American Progress Action Fund. Rep. Hunter's opposition to wind, solar, geothermal and other clean energy sources contrasts with his participation in the House Republicans protests in favor of offshore oil drilling in protected areas. These protests in the closed House chamber began on August 1st and House Republican Leaders announced that they will continue through August 22nd.

"Rep. Hunter wins the gold medal for wasted energy due to the hours he spent agitating for big oil's ocean drilling agenda while opposing real clean energy solutions," said Daniel J. Weiss of Center for American Progress Action Fund. "Meanwhile, California families suffer from record gasoline and energy prices."

"Rep. Hunter and his protesting colleagues opposed relatively simple, inexpensive new sources of energy while thirsting after America's beaches and coasts. Wind farms can be built and produce energy in two years. Meanwhile, the Department of Energy determined that drilling in protected areas of the Outer Continental Shelf would not have a â€˜significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.'"

The CAPAF analysis examined the protesting Representatives' votes on six different bills or amendments in the 110th Congress that would support clean energy alternatives.

* Three votes on closure of some tax breaks for big oil companies and invest the money in wind, solar, and geothermal energy, and in efficiency.

* Two votes to extend existing tax incentives for renewables and efficiency beyond their expiration at the end of 2008. These provisions also included new incentives for the purchase of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

* One vote to establish a renewable electricity standard that would require utilities to use wind, solar and other renewables to supply 15% of their electricity by 2020.

The average participant in the protests to urge drilling in protected coastal areas voted against clean renewable energy 93% of the time.

The United States has massive potential for wind, solar and geothermal energy. The Department of Energy determined that wind energy has the potential to provide 20% of all US electricity needs by 2030. Scientists found that the solar energy hitting an area of 100 square miles in the Southwest is enough to supply the entire United States with all its electricity needs via 10% efficient photovoltaic cells. Domestic resources of geothermal energy have the capacity to fully meet energy demands for a period of 30,000 years.

According to a study by the House Natural Resources Committee, big oil companies already have access to nearly 80% of all offshore oil and gas in the lower 48 states. These companies hold leases for 44 million acres offshore, but are only producing oil or gas from 10 million of these acres. Before opening the protected coastal areas from Malibu to Miami to Maine, oil companies should develop existing leases.

"Renowned oil man T. Boone Pickens is promoting wind power as a clean alternative to oil," continued Weiss. "He has said â€˜This is one emergency we can't drill our way out of. But if we create a new renewable energy network, we can break our addiction to foreign oil.'"

"Yet Rep. Hunter continues his devotion to big oil's demands for more of our coastal waters while opposing common sense clean energy solutions that can quickly provide energy."

Full chart of House votes on clean alternative energy sources.

In the interest of fostering civil and issue-oriented discourse, YubaNet does not publish reader comments identified by anonymous Internet "handles" (fake user ID names like "farfromthinkin"). Your full and real name will be published with your comment. Your email address will not be shown, unless you specifically "uncheck" the box 'Hide my email.' By submitting a comment you consent to our rules.

Comments

Nolan Nelson
25 Aug 2008, 16:30

Propaganda attacks and show trials on “BIG OIL” obscure profit percentages in line with other industries. So-called windfall profit taxes are government fraud. Economics teaches corporations are tax collectors, and not taxpayers. Corporation budgets include income tax provisions as a cost of doing business. All oil companies face increased costs from a windfall profits tax, but would easily pass the cost on to consumers. Congress would receive the windfall profit by enormous tax enrichment from consumers, while expending no effort except deception.

Failed legislation subsidizing ethanol requires burning in our gas tanks food people should eat. We experience reduced mileage and higher prices, while 10,000's of people starve to death in other countries.

The only price collusion and obscene profits are found within OPEC. They in turn question, as do the American people, why we don’t drill for oil off our shores, in the west, and in the Alaskan wilderness (really a desert)? Why don’t we build refineries, and allow factories for conversion of oil shale and coal deposits to oil products?

Drilling for our own oil and building refineries makes us energy independent in the short term. Heavily subsidized so-called alternative energy sources provide miniscule additions to the national power grid. The only real alternative energy source (not sun radiation derived) providing prodigious energy increases is nuclear power. Building nuclear power plants provides long-term energy independence.