THE OIL FEVER
By Daniel Shoer Roth - Published Sunday, June 22, 2008 - El Nuevo Herald
In South Florida we live in an environmental maelstrom.
The drought and the elevation of the oceans are exhausting our fresh water sources and are eroding our beaches; the majority of coral reefs have turned white and have lost their function as a protective barrier against hurricanes; the excessive urban sprawl to the west is affecting the farm lands and the Everglades ecosystem, our community’s lungs…
As if this perspective was not enough to concern us, in the horizon we foresee oil drilling platforms that will contaminate our beaches and kill our marine fauna.
Charlie Crist, who projected the image of a “green” governor, supports this alternative to solve the high costs of gasoline and our dependence on oil-producing countries such as Venezuela and the Persian Gulf nations. False. The reality is that his support is a result of his wish to be the country’s vice president.
This polemical subject has been on the headlines since last Wednesday, when President George W. Bush proposed the elimination of the federal prohibition on offshore drilling. Environmentalists loudly expressed their opposition. This has forced me to reflect on how disassociated our commissioners are about the global energy crisis.
The United States are addicted to oil, as it consumes one fourth of the total world production. Fossil combustion causes global warming. The price of gas is destroying the country’s economy.
The situation has reached such a level of irrationality that it is now being considered drilling along the coasts of Florida.
Meanwhile, the Miami-Dade commissioners continue to allow a galloping urban sprawl, by approving, left and right, constructions in distant areas from the urban core, even outside the Urban Development Boundary and by rezoning “agri-residential” areas to multi-use developments. I will explain this in my next column.
In other words: “Hooray to gasoline!”
Lack of an efficient public transportation system and the bad administration of the existing one, which to a degree serves the suburbs, also increases our thirst for oil as in South Florida it is more convenient to fill up your automobile tank than to ride buses and trains despite the frustrations caused by traffic jams.
Alan Farago, a local activist expressed: “We have to ask whether this model of at-any-cost urban sprawl is bankrupt”.
Response: It is absolutely bankrupt!
The advantage of building housing in the most remote sections of the county has traditionally been its lower cost per space. But with the high cost of gasoline, anticipated to continue to increase –in Europe the cost is more than $8 per gallon—the most affected residents are those that live farther away.
Therefore, drilling offshore of Florida will not solve anything unless we wait until 2030, when, according to the Energy Department, we will see the benefits if the prohibition is lifted at a national level.
If we are astute and listen to the call of nature, such wait is not a prudent one.
The key is to promote urban density within the metropolitan core, not only by building high-rises for those that can afford to buy the units, but also housing for low and median-income families, provided funding for those projects do not end in the hands of…
The authorities should promote the use of alternative energy such as solar, the most logical in South Florida, and URGENTLY improve the public transportation system.
And, before I forget, can somebody explain the Miami-Dade commissioners the basic concepts or urban development and its relationship with environmental conservation?
10 comments:
A great report. Why doesn't the English edition repeat this column?
I will watch for it.
Yes you would think something like this would be printed in the English edition, But then again this is the Herald and this is Miami.
We have to depend on blogs like this to inform the people what is going on and then they wonder why readership is down.
To be fair, I believe every Tuesday in the Metro Section, they have been printing translatons of Shoer's El Nuevo articles in the Miami Herald.
I will read the Metro section carefully.
You loco weeds will never learn, petroleum is the fuel for the world economy.
Go live in your fantasyland of so-called green-fuels and public transportation.
Freedom is about having the ability to get in the car and go from here to California when you want, not when some breaucrat decides when the train station closes.
I myself am glad gas is at $4+ a gallon because it is now demonstrating the reality of our pitiful energy policy.
One of the reasons I voted for GWB in 2000 is that his campaign called for drilling for oile in ANWR. He was blocked at every attempt by both Democrats and Republicans.
For as dumb as this hick from Texas is portrayed. He sure looks like a visionary given the change in the National debate.
The good news out of this is that oil companies will get richer which has enhanced my life by allowing me to fill up my car to go from Florida to California on my terms. Also as a shareholder in these companies, it has kept my meager portfolio continue to grow.
For the Pump Pimp above...
Previous poster, you are listening to too much AM radio. I am a moderate Republican and even I can't handle those guys.
I tend to agree that global initiatives need to be global so that they don't hurt US iterests while allowing third world nations to steal our jobs and pollute with their factories. There are a lot of Republicans who would agree with me. However, that does not mean we should pursue an global initiative vigorously. We can put some teeth in it.
I tend to agree that $4./gallon could be a blessing right now, but for different reasons than you. This will cause consumers (voters) to focus on the real challenges. We need alternative fuel, alternative technologies and conservation minded living.
Personally, I don't give a crap how your portfolio is doing, bud. I care more about what my grandkids are going to be dealing with -- and if you are trading in energy futures, you are more than likely a big part of the problem at the pump. Maybe we should call you a Pump Pimp.
Even though I don't agree with you, Pump Pimp, please write back. The debate is invigorating. We don't have enough people like you here. I am sure the other bloggers would love to liven up the debate. Bring it on! (And have a nice day!)
Pump Pimp good name. Will have to borrow it from time to time...I also think people focused on their portfolio do not care about the generations to come...if all they have to give is money and not a healthy lifestyle and planet, they are short changing in hideous ways the very people they are squirreling away their money for. Spend ALL the money in your portfolio...that is the best use you can put it to.
"Pump Pimp." I like that. Quite catchy and acurate even.
I just get tickled by people who think that we have an unlimited supply of finite resources.
Not only do these folks not understand the fundamentals of economics (drilling in ANWR would still be at least 2 years from delivering the first drop of crude if GWB got the thumbs-up from Congress in 2000, and the Fed's own Energy Information Agency said that it would clip a penny off the cost of gas because it was a tiny blip on the supply side) but they also lack the general understanding of how this business works.
First, there are millions of acres of existing leases that have not been drilled by Big Oil. Additionally, there are thousands of wells in easy to reach places (like in the middle of the Texas plain) that have been capped even though they can still produce oil. Why? Because it's not in the financial best interest of the company controlling the lease. You see, at some point, it takes a barrel of oil - or worse, two barrels of oil - to pull one barrel out of the ground. Often that oil is "sour" requiring more energy to clean it up (and selling for far less than "sweet"). Anyone think this is a good business model? Sounds like a job for the Pump Pimp.
Finally, runaway speculation has everyone guessing. The Saudis are adding to production (more oil than Florida would produce at full tilt - ten years from now) even though they say that supply/demand has zippo to do with the current price - demand is flat and declining in the US and Europe and even China has pulled back on subsidies they provide to keep the price artificially low in an effort to curb their demand. US production is higher than it was last year, while demand for gasoline is dropping fast.
This is a complex issue with no one thing to blame (more like about a dozen over the course of decades) but for those simpletons who think poking holes in the ground will reveal an eternal wellspring (maybe the core of the earth is really inhabited by dinosarus - i.e. oil), then I guess we're all to blame for getting in the way.
Daniel writes a Spanish article for Sunday El Nuevo and an English column for Herald on Thursday. They are not the same articles. It is good to have the English translation on EOM and would be even better if both were translated for the 2 papers.
I am sad. I think I frightened the Pump Pimp away. Come back PP. You keep things lively!
Post a Comment