All of the Above Energy Policy?

President Obama has said that his energy plan is an all of the above strategy. That sounds like a great strategy. We need energy and getting it from whatever sources are available is just what the economy ordered. But some of his policies seem to contradict his words. Let’s look at a few options for energy creation:

Coal: The Environmental Protection Agency has, thanks to the Supreme Court, been given the authority to regulate Carbon Dioxide. Therefore, the EPA ruled that new coal-burning plants must produce 43% less C02 than current plants. That’s quite a hurdle. Keep in mind that as the Chief Executive, President Obama has considerable authority over EPA but seems entirely content with stifling coal plants. As of 2008, Coal accounted for 51% of electrical power generation in the US.

Nuclear: Obama is supportive of nuclear energy. For the first time in more than 3 decades, permits have been approved for the building of nuclear power plants. In 2008, nuclear accounted for 21% of electrical power.

Natural Gas: Obama is supportive of natural gas, having recently issued an executive order to stream-line the various agencies that oversee its production. Hydraulic Fracturing – commonly known as Fracking – has had a dramatic impact on the production of natural gas such that the price is falling as more and more natural gas comes to market. In 2008, natural gas accounted for 17% of electrical power and 2% of transportation.

Oil: Obama is opposed to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. ANWR is the size of South Carolina and the area that would be developed for drilling would require a little more than 3 square miles, 2000 acres out of 19 million. Still, the answer is no. Can’t drill. Then there is the moratorium on off shore drilling virtually anywhere, most notably the Gulf of Mexico since the BP spill. Obama nixed the XL Pipeline that would take Canadian Oil to the gulf coast of Texas. Moreover, though drilling in the US is up, permits on federal lands – where Obama has a say – are down by a third. In Colorado, where oil shale is plentiful, the Bureau of Land Management is hindering efforts to exploit them. If all that isn’t bad enough, Obama has regularly attacked oil companies and threatened windfall profit taxes and revocation of tax write-offs that all companies get. Taken together, this indicates Obama is hostile to oil. As of 2008, Oil accounted for 95% of the transportation energy needs.

Solar: Obama is extremely supportive of solar energy, having made billions of dollars in loan guarantees to a variety of solar companies. Solar accounted for 0.02% of electrical power in 2010, about a hundredth of what wind generated.

Fossil fuels (oil, coal, and gas) supplied 70% of US energy needs in 2010. Nuclear accounted for another 19%. The beloved renewable energies only managed 10%, and hydroelectric was 60% of that with wind turbines a distant second. Burning wood produced more energy than solar. Like it or not, fossil fuels power this economy and will for decades to come.

Though Obama may say all of the above, it is clear by the actions of his administration that he does not mean all of the above. He claims he wants to free us from our reliance on foreign oil but is extremely hostile to domestic production of oil. Switching from a fossil fuel economy is unrealistic so, when the economy finally takes off, look for oil imports to skyrocket and thus make us more dependent on foreign oil.