The American Future Fund, a shady right-wing front group incorporated as a 501 c(4), is running a radio ad in Colorado criticizing Rep. Mark Udall (D-CO) for “blocking American energy.” The ad, promoting an offshore drilling bill sponsored by 87 House Republicans, is replete with falsehoods:

Here are a few things to think about next time you pull up to the pump. The U.S. actually has more oil resources than Saudi Arabia. But Congress has put up to 85% of these resources off limits. Cuba is drilling for oil off the Florida coast but Congress continues to stop U.S. companies from doing the same thing.

Listen here:

The “things to think about” are simply incorrect. In fact, Saudi Arabia has ten times as much oil as the United States, most offshore oil is available for drilling, and there is no drilling taking place in Cuban waters:

The U.S. Has 2 Percent Of The World’s Oil, Saudi Arabia Has 20 Percent. The best estimates of the world’s proved oil reserves are that the United States has 22 to 30 billion barrels of oil, out of 1.2 to 1.3 trillion barrels worldwide — 1.6 to 2.5 percent of total reserves. Saudi Arabia has by far the greatest supply of oil, with 20 to 22 percent of total reserves. [Energy Information Administration, 2007]

75 Percent of U.S. Offshore Reserves Are Available For Drilling. “Most of the country’s estimated offshore reserves – about 75 percent – lie in areas that have been drilled for years or are being opened for exploration. Roughly 48 percent of the nation’s estimated reserves, or 41 billion barrels, lie beneath the western and central Gulf of Mexico, where oil companies armed with new drilling technology are pushing into ever deeper water. Another 27 percent of the estimated reserves, or 23.6 billion barrels, are believed to lie off the north coast of Alaska, where the federal government sold oil exploration leases this spring, despite fears that the work would hurt the polar bear population.” [San Francisco Chronicle, 7/22/2008]

No Drilling Is Taking Place In Cuban Waters. “Cuba’s state oil company, Cupet, has issued exploration contracts to companies from India, Canada, Spain, Malaysia and Norway, according to diplomats. But many oil companies from those countries have expressed reservations about how to turn potential crude oil into product. Cuba doesn’t have the refinery capacity, and the Cuban embargo prohibits the oil from coming to U.S. refineries.” According to Jorge Piñón, a senior energy fellow at the University of Miami specializing in Latin America, “[N]o one is currently drilling in any of those concessions.” [McClatchy, 6/11/2008]

In exploiting high gas prices to promote a Big Oil agenda, the right wing is telling falsehoods, over and over again.

Transcript: Read more

Carbon Retirement — you read it here first (or maybe second).

I don’t normally endorse individual companies. But I have long thought European allowances were the best alternative to offsests and am delighted someone has made a business out of it.

The business opportunity is clear — offsets suck. At a policy level, they can destroy the environmental value of climate legislation (see “Boxer bill update: Probably no U.S. CO2 emissions cut until after 2025” and “McCain speech, Part 2: Relying on offsets = Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic“).

At a personal level, lots of vendors are selling very dubious offsets, including CCX (see here and here and here). I can’t imagine why you would waste your money on the most popular offsets, trees (see no trees and certainly not a Northern forest — heck, even offset seller Terrapass disses trees). And don’t get Climate Progress started on the other popular offset, RECs (see “Schendler Part II: Good RECs vs. Bad RECs“).

But I know some of you out there really want to be carbon neutral, and while you have bought 100% renewable power for your superefficient home that uses a geothermal heating and cooling system to replace natural gas, and you bought a Prius for the family car and you telecommute, you just haven’t figured out how to avoid some driving and flying.

What to do? Buy real emissions credits from the European market and retire them permanently! Now that is the best idea since solar baseload.

Read more

At a summit on good jobs and clean air in Oakland, CA, yesterday, Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa told labor and environmental activists that his union — representing 1.4 million workers across a broad array of careers — is rejecting the drill-drill-drill rhetoric of the conservative allies of Big Oil. Saying that we should not drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Hoffa embraced a future of jobs built on clean, renewable energy:

We are not going to drill our way out of the energy problems we are facing — not here and not in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. We must find a long-term approach that breaks our dependence on foreign oil by investing in the development of alternate energy sources like solar, wind and geothermal power.

Hoffa’s call on behalf of workers is echoing leaders of the environment, energy, and economic justice:

“If you’re in a hole, stop digging!” — Al Gore

“We can’t drill our way out!” — T. Boone Pickens

“We cannot drill and burn our way out of this problem. If we do, we will burn this planet!” — Van Jones

Hoffa’s rejection of drilling in the Arctic Refuge is a remarkable turnaround. From 2001 to 2005, the Teamsters led the charge in favor of opening the refuge, before top Teamsters lobbyist Jerry Hood became the head of the pro-drilling front group Arctic Power.

The day before, a coalition of “more than 3,000 environmental, community and labor advocates” led by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums rallied for “clean air and good jobs” at the Port of Oakland, the fourth busiest container port in the United States. They marched for a clean trucks program modelled after the coalition’s amazing success with the busiest port in America, the Port of Los Angeles. That landmark plan involved an “employee model” that mandates that the Port of Los Angeles deal only with trucking companies who employ their drivers, making it dramatically easier for the port to meet state and federal public health, environmental, and national security standards — and making it possible for the drivers to unionize. Shippers, trucking companies, and retailers continue to challenge this plan.

“Americans are suffering in this difficult economy,” a Teamster spokesperson told Gristmill’s Kate Sheppard. “[President Hoffa] really realized, like a lot of people have, that there needs to be a long-term energy solution.”

Digg it!

UPDATE: At Daily Kos, TomP writes, “Great news for all of us who seek a Blue/Green Alliance!”

At the Compass, Heather Moyer says, “The Sierra Club is happy to stand with labor and encourage clean energy, which will boost the economy and create jobs.”

At Brightbend, Raj Shukla concludes, “Politics, economics and ecology all converge in one answer — no fossil fuels for energy.”

UPDATE II: At the Huffington Post, Doug Kendall writes about the Senate Judiciary testimony on the Supreme Court Exxon Valdez damages ruling of Osa Schultz, “an Alaska fisherwoman and remarkably energetic small-business entrepreneur from the coastal town of Cordova. She and her husband were partners in a thriving fishing cooperative that nearly went bankrupt after the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill”:

Osa isn’t an environmental activist by choice or trade; this was one of her first visits to Washington. And she has long been open, like many Alaskans, to the development of drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, but now she’s not so sure. Much like Teamsters President Jim Hoffa, she recognizes that drilling our way out of a dangerous addiction to oil is both impossible and pointless, and is directly tied to the mindset that caused such devastating results in her community.

Texas Arizona tea.

The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley just can’t catch a break. Not only does TVMOB have to deal with well-deserved mockery for his un-peer-reviewed paper. He also has to deal with factual debunking from real climate scientists, in this case, the scientists at RealClimate. Here is a taste:

Read more

Oops. That was a typo. This was not a Phil Gramm, we have “sort of become a nation of whiners,” moment for the EPA. The headline should read:

Bush EPA says Americans are worth less

Last week, EPA marked down the value of a generic American from $8.04 million to $7.22 million. This is the value that EPA will use to judge “whether potentially lifesaving policy measures are really worth the cost.”

Normally, economists would say the value should rise over time, since Americans historically have become wealthier while incomes and productivity keep rising, meaning the lost income from a premature death should rise over time.

Now some have described nefarious motives to the EPA:

Read more