Partial transcript -And I think both Japan and nuclear technology and Libya and this dependence we have on this imported oil have both once again highlighted the need for the United States to have a renewable energy agenda going forward.
 
…But it all goes back to the 5 million barrels of oil that we import from OPEC on a daily basis and the Republicans in Congress — and I’m just going to finish on this note — last week in the House of Representatives, in the Energy and Commerce Committee, stripped the Environmental Protection Agency of their ability to increase the fuel economy standards of the cars and trucks and planes and trains that we put the oil into. And, by the way, in a bill that passed three weeks ago, zeroed out all the loan guarantee money for wind and solar, while leaving in the money for nuclear power.
So, this is the time for a great debate: Japan and Libya, oil and nuclear.  
What is our future? And if we are going to have one, shouldn’t it be one where we tap into our own technologies, our own abilities, to be able to provide the electricity we need with the indigenous natural resources we have in our own country rather than dangerously playing games with OPEC countries or with the nuclear technology which is inherently unsafe.
So, I think that all Americans know why the president made this strike. As long as American soldiers are not on the ground, as long as no bloodshed is attributed to our young men and women, then I think its a good decision for the president.
Mitchell: Thank you very much, Ed Markey.

Washington’s Blog- Remember that Alan Greenspan, John McCain, George W. Bush, a high-level National Security Council officer and others say that the Iraq war was really about oil. And according to French intelligence officers, the U.S. wanted to run an oil pipeline through Afghanistan to transport Central Asian oil more easily and cheaply. And so the U.S. told the Taliban shortly before 9/11 that they would either get “a carpet of gold or a carpet of bombs”, the former if they greenlighted the pipeline, the second if they didn’t.  See this, this and this.

Libya’s exports oil to many countries, including Italy (32 percent), Germany (14 percent), France (10 percent), China (10 percent), and the United States (5 percent), according to Reuters. Many of these nations, including Italy, France, and the U.S., are part of the international coalition gathered to enforce the UN no-fly zone over Libya, according to Defense News. China continues to pursue its diplomatic strategy of letting the West secure its access to natural resources in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, while speaking out against such efforts.

China’s position is well calculated. Shukri Ghanem, chairman of Libya’s National Oil Corporation, explained that future oil deals from Libya will depend on whether or not nations joined the international coalition against it, the Gulf Daily News reported. “A friend in need is a friend indeed,” he said. “If someone stood with you, you cannot tell him no.” Ghanem said he is looking to work closer with China, India, and Brazil in the future.

As Oil & Gas Journal reported on Friday that the West’s access to oil in Libya is in doubt if Gadhafi remains in power.


DISCLAIMER: Environmental, Health and Safety News is not affiliated with or maintained by ANY for profit or non-profit entity. It is a 100% volunteer effort free from advertising or sponsorship of any kind. This site is intended to be an educational and not-for-profit website providing useful information for security, environmental, health, sciences, transportation, and public safety professionals and the general public. It is not “for the purpose of trade, to induce the sale of any goods or services.”
In the Webmaster’s opinion, any incidental use of any pictures and graphics, or quoted words on this site is not a violation of any trademark for the any reasons stated above. The webmaster will fully cooperate with any and everyone that believes any section of the site are in violation of fair use.

The use of any and all copyrighted works in the creation of this site is, in the Webmaster’s opinion, protected by 17 USC 107 (see Creative Commons License below). If the owner of a copyrighted work used in the creation of this site believes that 17 USC 107 does not apply to the use of their work, the site’s creator will cooperate to the fullest extent possible.

FAIR USE NOTE: The site provides information of a general & public nature regarding national or other developments. None of the information contained herein is intended as legal advice or opinions relative to specific matters, facts, situations or issues. Additional facts, information or future developments may affect the subjects addressed in this site. You should consult with an expert about your particular circumstances before acting on any of this information because it may not be applicable to your situation. This site contains information and links to sites which are not owned or maintained by this site. This site is not responsible for the content, linked sites, and the views expressed on linked sites do not necessarily reflect our views or opinions. The information contained herein is provided for personal, non-commercial, educational, entertainment and informational purposes only and does not constitute a guarantee of information or facts. This site makes no claims, expressed, implied, or statutory regarding the accuracy, timeliness, completeness, or correctness of any material contained herein. Since the conditions of use are outside my control, the individual visitor is entirely responsible for determining the appropriateness and applicability of all information contained herein.

This website is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Back to Top