39 users responded in this post

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url
mygif

My favorite part of the article is the responses…how the liberals fear Sarah Palin, and that’s why Palin’s continuously attacked.

I was going to say something about fearing her stupidity only, but these are the same people who voted for Bush. Twice. They clearly don’t understand the fear of stupid people in charge.

ReplyReply
mygif

PS: “Now, we essentially have two options. One is that we can do nothing and get fucked. Sarah Palin is a fan of this method, because there is plenty of evidence that she loves to A) do nothing and B) get fucked, but also because she is a notoriously stupid woman who doesn’t know shit about anything, least of all the actual scarcity upon which her state’s wealth is premised.” I

ReplyReply
mygif

That was an “I heart you” but apparently the reader puked on the Less Than symbol in there. :/

ReplyReply
mygif

Does the article mention how much less oil would be used if someone took the air out of her head and put it in their tires?

ReplyReply
mygif

Minor correction: Not in the WSJ, but WashPo.

Other than that? Correct.

ReplyReply
mygif

Great post, with one exception:

“(Ironically, it turns out that we probably have just exactly enough carbon-based fossil fuels left in the ground to completely fuck over our climate.)”

That’s only ironic if you’re an optimist! And since when are you — or the majority of your readers — an optimist?

ReplyReply
mygif

Since he launched an online campaign to convince DC he should write LoSH?

I’m pretty sure MGK’s been an optimist longer than this site’s existed.

ReplyReply
mygif

I’ve been calling Sarah Palin a Canadian for weeks. I’m sorry, but you guys will have to bite the bullet on this one.

ReplyReply
mygif

This was my response to the stupidity of “Drill, baby. Drill” and the ANWR from last year (and it still works):

“Now its time to put this stupid ANWR myth to bed once and for all.

• Assuming the US Geological Survey is accurate and that there is 3.2 Billion barrels of oil there – Hell, fuck it. I’ll grant the conservatives an additional 1.8 billion barrels and make it an even 5 billion.
• Assuming the estimates are accurate that the reserve would take 50 years to pump completely.
• Assuming this oil is of high enough quality to be used without any costly purification.
• Assuming our consumption for oil stays at a constant 20 million barrels a day for the next 50 years.
• Assuming the price of Gasoline somehow magically stays at $2.50 per gallon for those 50 years.
• Assuming the oil in the AWNR could somehow magically appear in the gas pumps tomorrow instead of the estimated 10 years it would take to set up the pumps and oil lines necessary.
• Assuming no one working the oil rigs in the AWNR ever takes a holiday, a weekend or coffee break and the rigs are running 24/7/365.
• Assuming that our supply is always adequate to match our consumption.
• Assuming we continue to get the same supply of oil from all other suppliers – who will magically never dry up or sell more oil to other nations – for the next 50 years.
• Assuming no other gas refineries close down because of obsolescence or no existing refineries expand in the next 50 years.
• And finally, Assuming the economic bullshit that the “law” of supply and demand is actually a law of the physical universe that actually forces what people do in the market instead of merely suggesting what could be done as long as every company is in fair competition with each other.

5 billion barrels over 50 years (365.25 days each) works out to about 273,785.08 barrels a day.

Add that to our standard rate of consumption and we now have 20,273,785.08 barrels of oil to use each day. Just over a single percent increase. Golly, I’m so impressed.

Since a current demand rate of 20 million barrels a day has given us $2.50 per gallon prices, what would an additional 273,785.08 barrels every day do to solve that dilemma?

Since the theory is that the price of gas will go down with the more oil there is, then the price of gas is inversely propotionate to the amount of oil there is. Hence G(p) = K/T(p) – where G(p) is the present price of gas, T(p) is the total amount of oil America consumes in a present day and K is a constant between the two. Also G(f) = K/T(f) – where G(f) and T(f) illustrates the future amounts of these products after the ANWR is drilled and K is the same constant.

Using these formulas, and substituting G(p) * T(p) for K, the formula for finding the future price of gas is ( T(p) * G(p) ) / T(f) = G(f)

And the answer is ( 20000000 * 2.5 ) / 20273785.08 = 2.46

Congratulations. You’ve managed to save the American public less than a lousy nickel per gallon. WOW!!!

So Drill Baby Drill. Daddy needs a new snickers bar.”

ReplyReply
mygif
Lister Sage said on July 14th, 2009 at 12:01 pm

Pamela: The carrot symbols are used with HTML, so the reader assumed you were doing something HTMLy, but you weren’t so it died.

ReplyReply
mygif

You can get snickers for a nickle?

ReplyReply
mygif

Dear World,
We can’t inspire you with our freedoms anymore.
We can’t awe you with our military anymore.
We can’t impress you with our technology anymore.
But we sure as hell can scare you with our elected leaders.

We’re America….BOOGA BOOGA!

ReplyReply
mygif

Well, yes, this was technically in the Post and not the WSJ, but considering how the Post has been going these days, it’s really not a mistake. I mean, they still let Krauthammer talk there regularly, despite his being really wrong for decades.

ReplyReply
mygif

Scavenger,

Not for a nickle (3.4 cents, actually), but I can get one after I fill my gas tank a couple times with all of Sarah Palin’s savings.

ReplyReply
mygif

For those interested, Conor Clarke has a pretty great rundown of the myriad of ways in which Palin fails to understand cap-and-trade as a concept over at Andrew Sullivan’s Daily Dish:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/07/sarah-palin-does-not-understand-cap-and-trade.html

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/07/what-palins-oped-didnt-say.html

ReplyReply
mygif

Lister Sage: yep, I didn’t know this took HTML. (I’m a web developer by trade.) I’ll know better next time. ;)

ReplyReply
mygif

Could I ask for some links/sources on some of this? I tried googling (not very long, granted) about stuff like “losing 400 wells a day”, “Canada has the largest NG reserves in the world”, and so forth, but I’m coming up dry (for largest reserves, I get everything from the USA to Russia).
If you had some links (or hell, good books to read), I would appreciate it.

Secondly…how do you feel adding Nuclear power to the equation alters any of this (if at all)?

ReplyReply
mygif

Spartakos: a good start is here.

And I used to be anti-nuclear for a variety of reasons – not least because I think it’s only another medium-term solution at best – but now I think it’s a necessary evil to get us over the hump as we transition to renewables.

ReplyReply
mygif
ps238principal said on July 14th, 2009 at 1:30 pm

I don’t think nuclear is all that great an idea, given that a wind-powered plant takes only 1 year to come on-line vs. nuclear’s 8. Further, the Dakotas and Kansas have enough wind, it’s estimated, to more than meet our current needs (though we’d have other sources on the grid for winter or as backup). All we lack is a central trunk of power lines to carry the electricity to the rest of the country; our power grid is, sadly, a bit of a tar-ball.

ReplyReply
mygif

And the answer is ( 20000000 * 2.5 ) / 20273785.08 = 2.46

Congratulations. You’ve managed to save the American public less than a lousy nickel per gallon. WOW!!!

So Drill Baby Drill. Daddy needs a new snickers bar.”

In all fairness, the companies actually doing the drilling stand to make a substantial profit.

Still, it looks like even the might Exxon is looking towards the life-rafts on this ship. Even they aren’t looking to drill themselves out of an energy shortage.
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/07/14/14greenwire-exxon-sinks-600m-into-algae-based-biofuels-in-33562.html

Sarah Palin isn’t putting this Op-Ed out there to sell her agenda. She’s preaching to the dittohead choir. She’s fund raising. This is little more than her demonstrating her willingness to shill for her party in hopes that she can leverage herself into the party leadership’s good graces.

Sarah Palin doesn’t mean any of this swill and she’ll happily turn on a dime at her sponsors’ requests. She’s just running for President.

ReplyReply
mygif

[...] of Sarah Palin, Sarah Palin and the Scum of the Earth, Palin is Still Active in the Media, Sarah Palin is still an idiot, Your Future, and Sarah Palin Giant [...]

mygif

Overestimated the amount of coal left, surely? An underestimate would put us in better shape, wouldn’t it?

ReplyReply
mygif

I think the day I finally realized I was ashamed to be an American was the day I saw Palin interviewed by Peter Jennings about the Bush Doctrine…

ReplyReply
mygif
Lawnmower Boy said on July 14th, 2009 at 3:43 pm

Palin’s argument is great. “Cheap energy because poor people. Then magic pie!” But does she know that if she came out to British Columbia she’d have to join the NDP to use it?

ReplyReply
mygif

Hrmmm…linky no worky. I put my cursor over it and it turns blue, but I can’t click it (it doesn’t give me a http cursor).

Sorry to clutter the comments.

ReplyReply
mygif

Weird, but the link is working for me.

ReplyReply
mygif

The Guardian reprinted this article….readers are assuming they did so for shits and giggles.

ReplyReply
mygif

what else could reading anything by Sarah Palin give you?

ReplyReply
mygif
Brian Smith said on July 14th, 2009 at 7:59 pm

CB: It was Charlie Gibson, not Peter Jennings — Peter’s been gone since 2005. I say this not to try to invalidate your whole argument, but because I’ve started daydreaming. How awesome would it have been if Peter Jennings, a Canadian-turned-American who was absolutely fascinated by foreign affairs, had gotten to interview Sarah Palin?

ReplyReply
mygif

Of course! Mine the shit out of the US! It’s about time someone came up with a long term solution to the energy crisis!

ReplyReply
mygif
NCallahan said on July 14th, 2009 at 9:33 pm

When the people who write Magic: The Gathering fiction have a better grasp of the relationship between energy, ecology, and economy than you do, it’s time to get your dumb ass out of politics.

ReplyReply
mygif

For American families who are struggling to make ends meet, $175 is a significant amount, not sure why you act as if it isn’t. Other than that good stuff.

ReplyReply
mygif

For American families who are struggling to make ends meet, $175 is a significant amount, not sure why you act as if it isn’t.

Because $175 is the average, not a universal payment. The CBO scores negative costs for the bottom two income quintiles.

ReplyReply
mygif

Brian: I knew it! For some strange reason I ALWAYS get the two mixed… I have NO idea why. For the longest time I thought “Man, I keep reading all this stuff about Peter Jennings on ABC but not on Good Morning America… MAKES NO SENSE” and then I figured it out and felt dumb…

But you’re right, it would have been awesome to see Palin interviewed by Jennings.

ReplyReply
mygif

MGK: Would that mean that higher income brackets have to pay more? Logically that’s where it’s going, but just for clarification…

Also, how does I do cool quote-y thing?

ReplyReply
mygif

Yes, and it’s standard HTML blockquoting.

ReplyReply
mygif

Weird, but the link is working for me.

That is weird…weirder, when I hit “view page source” to look at the HTML, it just shows me a pair of anchor tags around the word “here”, with no hypertext link.

I’m sorry to be a pain…could you possibly write out the link? (Or, if you want to end this clutter, email it to me? But perhaps others are likewise interested)

ReplyReply
mygif

@Tom: Other than MGK’s point, I will give an extra 47 cents a day to another family so we, as a species, don’t get fucked.

And I’m sure there are many, many other people like me (on an entry level salary!) out there as willing and able, and who probably are numerous enough to outweigh the struggling families.

ReplyReply
mygif

As a Wyoming resident, I worry about many of the same issues that affect Alaskans. Such as: how fucked are we when our energy reserves/other minerals run out? How fucked are we if we ruin our scenery & tourism draw while trying to exploit our mineral wealth? At what point, economically, do we turn into West Virginia?

It seems that Alaska should have followed Wyoming’s conservative example in this instance: instead of giving refunds to the citizens, they should have squirreled that money away for when their minerals can no longer support the costs of government. Although I do think the WY legislature should save less and invest more in infrastructure …

Anyhow, America’s energy-producing states will have to answer the hard questions I mentioned, because sustainability is not just an ecological principle, it’s an economic principle as well.

ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Please Note: Comment moderation may be active so there is no need to resubmit your comments