Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Gilmore’s Independence-from-Foreign-Oil Plan

—

by

James A. Bacon
in ,

Because Bacon’s Rebellion focuses exclusively on state/local policy issues, I normally don’t comment on U.S. Senatorial campaigns, even those here in Virginia. But I’ll make an exception in this case because Republican Senatorial candidate Jim Gilmore has issued a proposal for a “U.S. Declaration of Independence from Foreign Oil,” which , if enacted, would have significant ramifications for energy production and the environment in Virginia.

Besides opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska for oil development, Gilmore would encourage exploration and drilling on the U.S. continental shelf. Virginia, for one, is believed to have extensive reserves of natural gas off its coast — the exploitation of which is a highly charged political issue.

Gilmore wants to streamline regulations to allow construction of more oil refineries, and “eliminate counterproductive regulations that are raising our gas prices and damaging our economy.” Unfortunately, he does not specify what those counterproductive regulations are, so there is no way to tell whether his plan would affect the State Security Commission’s regulation of natural gas tariffs.

Finally, Gilmore says he would “pursue the added benefit of nuclear power,” which would help reduce dependence on foreign oil, but offer a cleaner power source for the environment. It’s not clear, however, how nuclear power would reduce the demand for foreign oil. Nuclear power is used to generate electricity. Only a tiny percentage of the electricity in the United States (and virtually none in Virginia) is generated by oil, so there is little to be displaced by nuclear power. We could reduce oil consumption if we converted combustion-powered automobiles to electric vehicles on a large scale, but Gilmore does not discuss that possibility.

Missing from Gilmore’s proposal: any mention of conservation or renewable energy. Gilmore’s proposal is the photographic negative of environmentalist energy policies, which emphasize conservation and renewables exclusively while restricting fossil fuels and nuclear power. I’m more humble: I don’t pretend to know which approach is the most economical. My approach would be to create an equal playing field for all energy strategies, including an adjustment for pollution and other externalities created by fossil fuels and nukes, and then letting the marketplace decide which is the most cost efficient.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Then the question begged is: How much have Dominion et al contributed to the Gilmore Campaign?

  2. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Anonymous 7:35, Interesting that you asked. Here’s the link to the Virginia Public Access Project listing contributions to the American Council on Policy Reform, which Gilmore formed in July 2006 “to raise money for GOP candidates and to use as a springboard to a possible political comeback in 2009.”

    List of donors in 2006 and 2007:

    Dominion Resources: $25,000
    Paul C. Jost: $25,000
    John G. Rocovich: $14,500
    Gerrit Boyle: $10,000 Boyle
    New Majority Project PAC: $5,352
    1,000 Michael N. Pocalyko: $1,000

    Nothing reported yet for the U.S. Senatorial campaign.

  3. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    The impression one is left with when folks like Gilmore advocate on one hand – “Independence-from-Foreign-Oil” by “opening up” US Continental sources of oil – is that in doing so – we will be switching from buying foreign oil to using our own oil.

    So .. my question is – let’s assume that those currently opposed to such ideas .. drop their opposition and we go forward with finding and exploiting domestic oil.

    and let’s further assume that – domestic oil is restricted by law from being sold anywhere except in the US.

    so my question is – how much domestic oil would we have to find and use to be independent from “foreign oil”.

  4. J. Tyler Ballance Avatar
    J. Tyler Ballance

    I am glad to see Mr. Gilmore at least proposing some sort of solution, even if appears to be written for him by the corporate energy cartel.

    We need more political leaders to step up to the plate and propose REAL SOLUTIONS and debate their ideas in the public forum, based on the MERIT of their ideas.

    Our economy is being crippled by insane energy prices and our foreign policy has been subverted by the influence of the oil cartels.

    We need to secure our future and free ourselves of the extortion by foreign oil interests, as well as by our domestic oil refiners. Have you noticed that every time gas prices begin to fall, there is a major shut-down at one of the major refineries. It’s ENRON, all over again, and nobody is doing anything to stop these crooks.

    I see no reason why we can’t pursue energy independence in a way that incorporates renewable, green solutions, along with the development of domestic oil and gas resources. It needn’t be an either or proposition.

    Why is there no “Apollo” level, national program to achieve energy independence within ten years? If the People still ruled in America, we would have a national consensus for such a program, but in reality, our federal government is being subverted by multinational corporations.

    This next election, the Citizens must declare war on the multinational corporations by voting against the corporate lackeys who are incumbents in Congress. The voters must demand real solutions to the real problems, not just dressed-up new versions of the status-quo, while gas prices go past five dollars per gallon.

    So, let us congratulate Mr. Gilmore for at least putting something of a specific plan out here for debate. I haven’t seen anything from his opponent, toothy Mark Warner, but Mr. Gilmore’s primary opponent, Mr. Marshall, will likely produce an even more detailed, more thoroughly researched plan.

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Whenever I hear of people like Jim Gilmore talk about loosening regulations, my skin crawls up my back.
    With the Chesapeake Bay as stressed as it is now, all we need are new oil refineries. The last proposal — for the Hampton Roads Energy Co. facility in Portsmouth in the 1970s — was shown to have the potential for severe impacts on watermen who need clean water for crabs and what’s left of oysters. And just like Gilmore today, the backers of the abortive refinery claimed “Energy Independence” as the need for its construction of the HREC project. But, surprise, surprise,it turned out that the refinery would have actually processed foreign crude from Venezuela (Good God with Hugo today), Mexico or even the Middle East.

    Maybe we’d like to see oil and gas rigs decorating the waters just off the Virginia coast with the usual spills and other messes. That could cost the state immensely and as Jim Bacon points out, there isn’t much in the Gilmore program that addresses renewable resources.

    Given Gilmore’s record with state finances and the car tax, when he starts talking about grand projects, I start looking for cover.

    Peter Galuszka

  6. Spank That Donkey Avatar
    Spank That Donkey

    Mr Galuszka:
    When is the propaganda going to stop in regards to:
    “Given Gilmore’s record with state finances and the car tax, when he starts talking about grand projects, I start looking for cover.”

    Using Hitler’s strategy of telling the same lies over and over again is hardly something to build your credibility with.

    Gov. Gilmore’s administration diverted excess state revenues from a boom economy to deliver the largest and longest lasting tax cut in VA history in the form of Car Tax Relief PPTRA.

    He also lowered the cost of higher education, by forming a blue ribbon commission that made a four year revenue plan with our state supported colleges, and lowered tuition 20% and froze it for four years. Something that made VA more competitive, and assuredly attracted more business here.

    Transportation spending was increased, and the Woodrow Wilson Bridge project was funded along with DC & MD. K-12 got record increases, and in the end he had $1Billion in the Rainy Day fund.

    The events of 9-11 caused a recession, and as the recent smear piece by Bob Lewis in the Daily Press quotes Gov. Warner, we had a $6B dollar short fall in revenues?

    Do the Liberals and big spending Pubs blame Osama Bin Laden? No they blame Gov. Gilmore for diverting $950M annually to actual tax relief to the citizens of VA.

    How can we have conversations about the issues with people who conveniently deny or disregard the facts?

    I will contend that Gov. Gilmore’s car tax cut along with GWB’s $300 per tax payer effectively was putting $1,000 in net tax relief to virturally every NOVA household by 2001, and every year thereafter.

    Think that had something to do with latest stretch of an expanding economy?

  7. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    On the topic of energy reduction …

    I kept wondering about the recent hubub regarding the Hybrid Lexus and how it is the same car as the standard Lexus but with “Hybrid” written on the side and a lot more expensive. This seems to have become conventional wisdom based on something recently written in the Washington Post.

    So, instead of just taking what I read for granted I decided to look into the matter a bit further. I went to the local Lexus dealer to see what was up. It seems things are a bit different than they seem. In the interests of investigative blog commenting I forced my self to test drive both the Lexus Hybrid sedan and the non-hybrid Lexus sedan.

    What’s really going on?

    1. The hybrid sedan is a Lexus 600h L. The 600 is a model designation, the h is for hybrid and the L is for “long”. This car has an extended wheelbase.

    2. The most similar non-hybrid sedan that Lexus sells is the LS 460 L. It looks a lot like the hybrid (almost identical in appearance) including the longer wheelbase.

    3. The 600h L is considerably more expensive than the LS 460 L. Both are very expensive cars but the hybrid is about $30,000 more (once you adjust for some options that are standard in the hybrid but added costs in the non-hybrid).

    The hybrid (LS 600h L) has the following advantages over the non-hybrid (LS 460 L):

    1. The LS 600h L is an all wheel drive sedan. The LS 460 L is a rear wheel sedan.

    2. The LS 600h L is a Super Low Emission Vehicle (SULEV). This means that it is 90% cleaner than the average new model year car. The LS 460 L is an Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle (ULEV II). This means that it is 50% cleaner than the average new model year car.

    3. The 600h L has 438 horsepower. The LS 460 L has 380 horsepower. However, given the extra weight of the hybrid (especially the batteries) the 600h L is just a tiny bit better performing than its non-hybrid brother.

    4. The hybrid model is better appointed. It has more leather, a better interior, etc.

    5. The 460 L gets 16 mpg city and 24 mpg highway. The hybrid 600h L gets 20 mpg city and 22 highway. The hybrid motor helps in the city but the extra weight (and bigger engine) hurts on the highway.

    Both cars have eye-popping performance for big sedans. However, the hybrid has an adjustable suspension setting that lets the driver chose between sport performance and luxury (crusing) performance. So, it’s somewhat more difficult to comment on handling. Both cars handle extremely well.

    Are either cars worth the price? Is the hybrid worth $30,000 more? Who knows.

    However, the two cars are quite different models (especially the all wheel vs. rear wheel drive point). Simply looking at mpg misses the differences which real “car people” understand.

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Nice post, Groveton.

    But even I have to ask if there is any valid reason for a 400 plus HP sedan. My heavy trucks don’t have that much. Unless you are towing four horses, a cabin cruiser, or a pretty bi RV, what is the point?

    What does eye popping performance mean when you cna go 50 ft before striking the car in front?

    Tosays Time noted that the maker of air bus is working on an extraatmospheic airplane that can travel Lonon to Sydney in 4 hours. At present, the trip takes 21 hours and costs $1000 according tothe story. (seems low to me.)

    The new plane will take four hours and cost $315,000 for a ticket. That’s a savings of 17 hours for $315,000, assuming the schedules are the same.

    So, if your time is worth $20,000 an hour, then you can afford to take this trip.

    Talk about a HOT lane cost analysis.

    Groveton:

    When can you give us a report on this new EADS model?

    RH

  9. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    EXCELLENT report – Groveton and this blogger is very appreciative for your sacrifice in developing the info.

    While in NoVa a week ago in one of my rare visits, I stumbled upon the new Smart Car..and was wondering if you might be willing to do a similar report for that vehicle?

    🙂

  10. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Spank that Donkey,
    Maybe you should spank yourself for leaving out some key points. One of the reasons that Gilmore’s car tax failed was that the High Tech bubble burst in 2000. Gilmore had counted on the roll of easy money from telecom and Internet firms, epecially in NOVA, to keep the state budget afloat while he was playing Santa Claus.
    Too bad for him that the telecom firms overbuilt capacity and the Net companies fixed their futures to the no cash income, New Economy fantasies. They went belly up. Want a list. Try Value America, Teligent and others. This had nothing to do with Democratic taxes and spending, Bubba.
    Gilmore’s little theories went bust, Virginians got stuck with the bill, and the Democrats and a much more fiscally-savvy Mark Warner straightened it out. Remmeber that he was a businessman, not just another prosecutor.
    I’d be interested to see if you can respond to this.

    Peter Galuszka

  11. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Ray:

    It’s not quite that bad in the Dulles Sub Region (I kind of made that area up). When test driving I had plenty of opportunity to let both cars unwind on Rt 28. The 400 hp is a “hobby kind of thing”.

    On the plane – I’d love to know where the $1,000 ticket from London to Sydney can be bought. I am guessing you have to “sit” in the cargo hold at that price. I’d be happy to “test fly” the new EADS plane. However, there won’t be many real flights in my future at $317,000. The Concorde “went bankrupt” at a far lower multiple of a normal flight. But I am available for as test flight – I’ll have to call EADS.

    Larry:

    I saw a Smart Car on Rt 7 yesterday. It was buzzing along with the rest of the traffic. I may give that thing a spin although I’d been thinking more of a Norton Commando for short trips. I imagine my wife would be happier if I took the car (vs. motorcycle route). Of course, there could be a comprimise:

    http://www.teslamotors.com/

    0 to 60 in 3.9 secs?
    From an electric car?
    With 2 cents / mile operating cost?

    Yeah, I think the Tesla is the next test drive. I am very green. Green with envy about anybody who has a car that goes 0 to 60 in 3.9 secs. Holy Mackeral!

    I will submit a Tesla driving report once I find one of these places.

  12. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    You weren’t the guy that blew past me on 28 the other night running 100+, were you?

    Is there really any need of 0-60 in under four seconds? It sounds like a good way to get in a lot of trouble, to me. How did we ever get to the auto becoming both the symbol and the instrument of agression? I think we need more Civics and Cygnets and fewer Interceptors and Citations.

    On a five mile 60 mph trip it saves 2% in time.

    I’ll bet that 2 cents a mile doesn’t include insurance on that thing.

    (I gotta admit, the Tesla is pretty cool, except for the price tag.)

    Electric motors provide maximum torque at zero RPM. And there is no pause for shifting. My Prius starts off like a jackrabbit under electric “boost”, and with no shifting pause (CVT transmission) it revs right up to 40 pretty quick. I’m sure it has surprised my neighbor at the light sometimes. Compared to a car like my wife’s six speed Jetta the Prius spools up more like a turbine and less like a jackhammer.

    RH

  13. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    With a thirty thousand dollar differential and a 15% fule savings I figure the breakeven on that Lexusis 1.3 million miles.

    RH

  14. Spank That Donkey Avatar
    Spank That Donkey

    Anonymous 6:25 says:
    “One of the reasons that Gilmore’s car tax failed”

    Again more propaganda. The last time I checked the PPTRA is funding a $950M reimbursement to the localities for individuals taxes on automobiles, annually. How is that in any way, shape or form a failure?

    Anonymous Continues:
    “fiscally-savvy Mark Warner straightened it out.”

    Fiscally savvy must mean, work with Chichester-Potts et al, to raise taxes in 2004, a year we would still have run a $300M surplus in without the increased taxes.

    When will the left address the facts and actual issues, and not sloganeer every election, and attack Conservative Governor’s records without half truths and out right lies?

    How about that for an answer, care to stay on subject?

  15. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    SPD:

    The Anon 6:52 post set off the BS alarms for me, too. I didn’t analyze it he same way as you, but whatever the case was, the car tax was enormously unpopular. Even if we didn’t really save anything by getting rid of it, we are till better off, in my oppinion.

    The application of the car tax was hideously run, and egregiously unfair. There was no reasonable route of appeal.

    Whatever Gilmore and Warner and potts did, we are still better off without it.

    As for the $300 million dollar surplus, compared to the work that needs to be done, it’s a drop in the bucket.

    Look at states that are far wealthier than Virginia, like New Jersey, deep in financial crisis. Some of it, to be sure, is because they are burdened with socially driven boondoggles, like solar powered schools, impossible standards for their schools, etc.

    But, equally, a good portion of their problem is that they didn’t invest enough in the right things when they had the money. Now they are behind the power curve and those things are far more expensive.

    RH

  16. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    If we think we are running out of oil, then isn’t a policy of independence on foreign oil just a policy of using up ours first?

  17. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    There is a whole bunch that COULD be said about Energy, oil, and Virginia.

    What we heard was standard industry pablum.. regurgitated ….

    Using the word “vision” in the same sentence with Gilmore is problematical.

    You know.. a candidate could be as dumb as a stump but if they have some pretty decent staffers.. they can often dress the guy up a tad.

    I’m thinking.. what would the 2.4 million folks in NoVa want to hear from Mark Warner’s opponent that might convince them to take a second look and learn more…. about why we’d want someone to the right of Mark Warner in office.

    Will Mr. Gilmore rise to the challenge?

    well.. if this is the first salvo.. it’s a dud….

    SpankDonkey appears to be the standard cheerleader-in residence complete with fluff and pom poms.

    I swear.. I have a hard time understanding the R’s….

    you want your base for sure – but you win from the middle…

    but it appears that winning from the middle is verboten…

  18. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Ray:

    As you point out, 0 – 60 in less than 4 seconds is a consequence of electric motors rather than a design objective. I have been told that some electric car companies are putting governors on their cars to slow down the acceleration to 0 – 60 in 4 seconds!

    The Tesla is expensive. I have been thinking about a total cost of ownership calculation but I just don’t have enough information on electricity use (to charge the car) and I don’t know how long a Tesla will last.

    “With a thirty thousand dollar differential and a 15% fule savings I figure the breakeven on that Lexusis 1.3 million miles.”.

    LOL. Probably about right (if fuel mileage was the only point).

    However, with a thirty thousand dollar differential between a Prius and a bicycle I figure the Prius will never pay back.

  19. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I think the Tesla was $80,000 or something like that, not all that bad in the Corvette and sports car world. Their sedan is expected to be much less expensive.

    Your are right. The Prius won’t even pay back compared to an Echo or a Corolla if you drive a modest number of miles each year, because of the difference in capital costs.

    Another example of the good of the individual vs the good of the group. If you are in a nonattainment area, which would you rather see, 50,000 Corollas or 50,000 Prius’s?

    RH

Leave a Reply

Read More