Who Needs OPEC?

If this is even half true, it's going to completely change US relations with the Middle East.

America is sitting on top of a super massive 200 billion barrel Oil Field that could potentially make America Energy Independent and until now has largely gone unnoticed. Thanks to new technology the Bakken Formation in North Dakota could boost America’s Oil reserves by an incredible 10 times, giving western economies the trump card against OPEC’s short squeeze on oil supply and making Iranian and Venezuelan threats of disrupted supply irrelevant.

Whatcha wanna bet the Party of the Donkey will try to block drilling, preferring to cozy up to people like Bashar al-Assad and Ahmadinnerjacket?

Get Ready for the Blood For Oil Meme to Rise Again

Looks like lefties will have to switch memes again... which shouldn't be hard for them, as they have no core beliefs except hatred of George W. Bush.

First, the outgoing meme:

BAGHDAD (AP) - Iraq's government, seeking protection against foreign threats and internal coups, will offer the U.S. a long-term troop presence in Iraq in return for U.S. security guarantees as part of a strategic partnership, two Iraqi officials said Monday.

There goes the "Iraqis don't want us there" meme down the tubes. If the democratically elected and sovereign government asks us to stay, how can anyone say with a straight face that they don't want us there?

However, there's another one coming up... the old, familiar, tired, "blood for oil" meme:

The two senior Iraqi officials said Iraqi authorities had discussed the broad outlines of the proposal with U.S. military and diplomatic representatives. The Americans appeared generally favorable subject to negotiations on the details, which include preferential treatment for American investments, according to the Iraqi officials involved in the discussions.

The two Iraqi officials, who are from two different political parties, spoke on condition of anonymity because the subject is sensitive. Members of parliament were briefed on the plan during a three-hour closed-door meeting Sunday, during which lawmakers loyal to radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr objected to the formula.

Preferential treatment for U.S. investors could provide a huge windfall if Iraq can achieve enough stability to exploit its vast oil resources. Such a deal would also enable the United States to maintain leverage against Iranian expansion at a time of growing fears about Tehran's nuclear aspirations.

So get ready for the great hue and cry that it was all about oil... nevermind that this is just an offer, not a firm deal, and that it is a free and democratically elected Iraqi government that is making the offer with the only valuable resource it has to bargain with. I mean, what else are they going to offer the US for our continued troop presence? Sand?

Ethanol and Food

Looks like certain people are getting the idea that pushing ethanol isn't a magic solution to all of our problems. Turns out there's some side effects that were entirely predictable, but that short-sighted politicians in search of sound bites apparently ignored... or they just didn't think the problem through.

It takes over 450 pounds of corn, enough calories to feed one person for a year, to produce 25 gallons of ethanol. Pressures on world food crops caused by increased ethanol production mean higher world prices for both processed and staple foods.

While ethanol subsidies and mandates benefit corn producers, consumers, especially those in poor countries, are hit with the shock of much higher food prices. The World Bank estimates that nearly 3 billion people live on $2 a day or less. Consider the devastating impact of the increased cost of staple grains.

Rolling Stone magazine recently nailed the problem in an article by Jeff Goodell, "Ethanol Scam: Ethanol Hurts the Environment And Is One of America's Biggest Political Boondoggles." Goodell says, "The great danger of confronting peak oil and global warming isn't that we will sit on our collective [behinds] and do nothing while civilization collapses, but that we will plunge after 'solutions' that will make our problems even worse. Like believing we can replace gasoline with ethanol, the much-hyped biofuel that we make from corn."

I dunno which is worse, if politicians wouldn't think the problem through and realize that pushing ethanol will take corn away from the food industry, or if they knew it and ignored it.

Congress and Gas Prices

This is what you get when you elect Democrats, America:

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) is pushing the Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act. Backed by 86 Democrats and three Republicans, the bill would make it a crime to "sell crude oil, gasoline, natural gas, or petroleum distillates at a price that is unconscionably excessive or indicates that the seller is taking unfair advantage [of] unusual market conditions (whether real or perceived) or the circumstances of an emergency to increase prices unreasonably."

The legislation provides corporate penalties of $3 million a day for civil action and $150 million for criminal conduct, as well as a fine up to $2 million and ten years in prison for individuals. State attorneys general -- usually ambitious governor-wannabes -- also could bring civil actions. Let the lawsuits begin!

To be fair, there are Republicans, notably Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, pushing similar bills, but if the GOP were in the majority they'd have little trouble stopping this ridiculous idea.

But with the Democrats in control? Well... expect to see de facto price controls soon if Bush doesn't get the veto pen out again.

CAFE and Demonizing the Auto Industry

OpinionJournal takes the occasion of an Obama speech in which he speaks of "the tyranny of oil" to point out some much needed common sense on CAFE standards:

Since 1974, domestic fuel economy has risen by about 60%. The gains initially came through sharp reductions in the size and weight of cars; think of the Pinto or Chevette. Since the 1990s, improvements have been driven by technological advances. But over the same period, oil imports have increased; Americans use more gasoline than ever and hence emit more as well.

That's because the indirect tax of mileage standards is an exceptionally inefficient way to influence consumption. CAFE doesn't affect how many vehicles are on the road (a figure that keeps going up). And by making cars and trucks more fuel-efficient, it may encourage people to drive more. If you get more miles to the gallon, then driving becomes cheaper, so driving demand goes up and offsets any overall efficiency gains.

Designing high mileage vehicles is relatively easy--they're all over Europe--and such cars have been introduced to the American market in the past. Consumers have plenty of such options to choose from now. But aside from fads like the Prius, Americans have proved unwilling to buy them. The miles-per-gallon advances over the last 30 years have translated into bigger, more powerful cars with more features. These are the vehicles Americans actually want.

Not without reason, either: There is a tradeoff between safety and efficiency. The National Academy of Sciences concluded that CAFE standards contributed to as many as 3,200 additional fatalities each year, because downsized cars are less safe in accidents. Other studies from the Brookings Institution and the Competitive Enterprise Institute put that number significantly higher.

(Emphasis in original.)

Obama apparently thinks that the way to the Democratic nomination is to lecture the American people on how they use too much oil. My gut instinct is that Americans generally don't like being lectured to like that.