Energy Dialogue with a U.S. Senator

Sherrod Brown is a first-term U.S. Senator from Ohio. He took Mike DeWine's seat in the last election. DeWine had been part of the Gang of 14 as well as getting soft where he once had been a solid Conservative (he voted against ANWR drilling). Enter Senator Brown, a big-time union Liberal. While Senator Brown and I disagree on most matters of policy, he has been kind enough to respond to my written communication with him. Something that George Voinovich (Ohio's soon-to-be-leaving, non-Conservative Republican Senator) does not do. So I want to begin by thanking Senator Brown for his time and his openness. I recently wrote to him to urge him to draft and/or support legislation that would open our domestic oil reserves. His response follows...

Dear Dr. Gates:

Thank you for contacting me regarding increasing energy costs. I share your concern regarding rising energy prices -- the high cost of gasoline and home heating oil hurts Ohio families and businesses.

I appreciate your view that our nation's energy needs should focus on expanding domestic supplies of traditional energy sources. I support economically sound, environmentally responsible extraction of our nation's energy reserves and efforts to develop clean coal technologies. However, I believe our major focus should be on shifting away from fossil fuel dependence and toward the development and production of clean, renewable energy.

I oppose opening ANWR to drilling.

There are a number of issues surrounding the costs versus benefits of expanding the domestic supply of traditional fuel sources. I oppose opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to drilling, and to drilling in the Great Lakes, because the limited additional energy output is simply not worth the cost. We wouldn't see a drop of oil from many of these places for 10 to 20 years and a report issued by the Energy Information Administration, the nation's energy forecasting agency, found that drilling in ANWR would likely reduce the price per barrel of oil by only $.30 to $.50.

While there is no quick fix for our energy problems, I believe there are steps that can be taken to offer some short-term relief for consumers. I support temporarily suspending contributions to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, greater oversight of energy speculators manipulating the cost of oil, and tougher enforcement against energy cartels like the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. To solve these problems in the long-term, we must expand research and development programs that bring affordable alternative and renewable energy sources to the marketplace. These efforts would bring jobs to our state, reduce our reliance on foreign oil, and create a thriving renewable and alternative energy sector.

While you and I may not agree on all facets of our nation's energy policy, I value your input and hope you will continue to share your thoughts with me. Thank you again for writing.

Sincerely,
Sherrod Brown

To which I replied:

Thank you for your recent reply to my first e-mail.

Your views on pursuing alternative, renewable energy while leaving our own oil in the ground in ANWR and off of our coasts is misguided and simply wrong. You speak of rising costs hurting Ohio families, yet you are opposed to pursuing the very legislation that will lower costs.

First of all, I've heard the "we won't have oil for 10 years" if we drill ANWR before. Bill Clinton said that 14 years ago. We'd have that oil today. And as an aside, you and I both know we'd have ANWR's oil in less than 10 years.

Being a U.S. Senator ought to require vision for the future, and while considering alternative fuels is admirable, nothing on the horizon has even the most remote promise of replacing oil as our nation's primary source of energy. The type of vision that will help Ohio families is to say, "It may be a few years before we get this oil, but when it's here it will help Ohio's families."

Secondly, you have no idea how much drilling ANWR, etc., will reduce the cost of oil. Has anyone checked the EIA's track record? In fact, if congress passed the legislation today, the cost of a barrel of oil would decrease tomorrow. The law of supply and demand, combined with speculation, would kick in and traders would know that their $150 barrel of oil today would be worth less very soon.

Thirdly, if you want to bring jobs to our state, how about building an oil refinery?

Finally, when you speak of drilling domestically as "not worth the cost," have you run that by your constituency? I would imagine that many of the Ohio citizens that elected you would be in favor of drilling domestically if they knew the facts instead of the environmentalist and media propaganda that we've been fed on a daily basis.

Thank you, again, for your consideration.

rg

6/7/2008