Bio
Nancy Pfotenhauer is a senior policy adviser on domestic issues for the John McCain presidential Campaign.
 
 
 
 

Recent Comments

Energy in the Executive

  • Share This Post
  • submit
  • 3
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Recently, Rep. Jo Ann Emerson posted a guest blog here, in which she talked about energy policy as it impacts her state, Missouri. Feedback from that post indicated that a lot of BlogHers are looking for more information about the energy policy being advocated by the McCain-Palin ticket. So, I thought I’d take this opportunity to fill you in on some specifics of the Lexington Project, John McCain and Sarah Palin’s forward-thinking, comprehensive energy plan.

Our country faces an economic crisis that is squeezing American pocketbooks now more than ever before. When families sit down at the kitchen table, they are worried about saving for the future as well as stretching their paychecks to cover the high costs of goods and services they rely on every day. Adding to the crunch are escalating energy bills and gasoline prices that still reach as high as $3.50 a gallon in many states. John McCain and Sarah Palin understand that energy independence is critically important for our economic, national, and environmental security; and they have developed the right strategy to accomplish it. We must end our dependence on foreign oil and stop sending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas so we can relieve the burden on family budgets caused by the constrained resources providing our energy.

The Lexington Project that McCain and Palin propose will put us on a clear path to energy independence and promote economic prosperity in the U.S. Implementing this bold, “all of the above” plan for the 21st Century will be a top priority in a McCain-Palin Administration. The Lexington Project will also work to make America’s energy portfolio much cleaner and greener as part of our efforts to combat and address climate change, an issue that both John McCain and Sarah Palin have worked on for years.

Americans who watched the Republican National Convention know that one plank of the Lexington Project calls for increased domestic oil exploration and production in the Outer Continental Shelf. This is important not only to ensure that we are doing everything we can to bring gas prices and energy bills down, but also to put an end to the practice of sending so much of our money overseas to countries that may not have our best interests at heart. By some estimates, U.S. importation of foreign oil accounts for 41 percent of our trade deficit, and that number is growing. We cannot allow this problem to get even more out of control and simply leave it to the next generation to address.

The Lexington Project, and quelling our demand for foreign oil, is about far more than increasing domestic oil exploration. It is about advancing clean coal technologies for use here in the U.S. and for export abroad. And it is about the development of nuclear power as a primary source of energy.

Why nuclear, you ask? Nuclear-generated energy is cheap and technological advances enable it to be developed safely. It is a proven, zero-emission source of energy. One of the major areas of policy where John McCain has differed from President Bush has been how to address climate change, an issue where John McCain has shown consistent and principled leadership (even garnering praise from Barack Obama during a Senate floor speech). John McCain knows that the more Americans who shift their reliance towards nuclear and green sources of energy, the better we will be able to combat climate change as a nation. While talk of nuclear is one thing, he has given the U.S. a call to action to construct 45 new nuclear power plants before 2030.

Of course, building those plants also will create jobs, as will working to develop the market for alternative energies such as wind, hydroelectric and solar power, as well as commercially-viable green technologies. The Department of Energy indicates that wind power could provide up to one-fifth of our electricity by 2030; meanwhile, the solar energy industry has experienced tremendous growth in recent years. These energies still have tremendous potential. One obstacle to making them viable slices of our nation’s energy portfolio is the current temporary patchwork of tax credits – which reflect the handiwork of lobbyists in Washington – that stifle investment and development. That is why John McCain and Sarah Palin want to rationalize the uneven tax credits available to companies that develop the technologies to harness these renewable energies.

We

  • 3
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
missbritt 5 pts

It concerns me that all of the options I'm reading here are for other nonrenewable resources.  The problem isn't just that we're getting our energy from other countries - the problem is also that we're relying on resources that are LIMITED in supply.

What about wind energy? Solar energy?  Other naturally renewable sources?  Is there any plan for that in McCain's energy plan?

Miss Britt

http://www.miss-britt.com

"Dignity is Overrated"

shelleyp 5 pts

PS As for your nuclear energy plan, I grew up in what is known as the Hanford Shadow. Do you know what that is? Don't talk to me about "clean, efficient nuclear power".

Nuclear energy results in the production of highly dangerous waste, as well as being inherently unsafe. It requires access to a natural resource that is also about as finite as oil (uranium), and nuclear plants are extremely vulnerable to both terrorism (domestic or foreign), as well as accident and natural disaster (such as earthquake). The problem with nuclear is that it is a nowhere solution.

As for clean coal, the term is an oxymoron -- there is no such thing as coal that doesn't damage the environment. No coal plant is without dangerous emissions, as I noted in my comment to Emerson's post. In addition, mining for coal is incredibly destructive on the environment.

As for Palin, drll, baby, drill. She wants to drill in this country's last pure, pristine wilderness. Well, after she shoots all the wolves, first.  Both McCain and Palin want to drill offshore in areas rich with food fish, and fragile marine ecosystems. This, when it's a fact that the amount of American oil that can be pulled anywhere in the country is only a fraction of what we need -- too little to really be an impact. And too long in development to be an effective strategy. 

Frankly, the offshore oil should be preserved for a future time for possible use in medicine and other industrial uses -- not for burning up in cars. Also, have you also forgotten that offshore oil deposits are also in the direct path of hurricans in our country? Why do you think the Carolinas had so many problem after this year's storms? Because the hurricanes shut down production and drilling for oil in the Gulf. 

McCain and Palin's energy plans only benefit the corporations -- they won't make us independent of foreign oil. They could, though, add to the growing problems of global warming, as well as destruction of environmentally sensitive land in the US.