NM believes in responsible energy exploration

Comments

  1. Dr. J says:

    Thank you arti, I was certain you are an educated and logical, as well as economically rational, individual.  Unlike some others here who seem to think economic reality is not reality at all, but rather anachronistic.

  2. artiofab says:

    ”  I’m sure you meant to say “when the technology and economics of same allows us to do so, didn’t you???
    The only reason petroleum replaced whale oil was because it became economically more feasible to use.
    So, yes, as a civilization, we will transition away from hydrocarbon fuels when technology and economics allow us to. As an individual, I’d rather that cost not control ours lives, but I of course recognize, practically, that asking someone to pay double, triple, or more for the same amount of energy is not feasible or electorally sensible.

  3. stever says:

    everywhere

    Please elaborate, I’ve only lived and worked in 8 states and one foreign country, for private industry, the federal government and in education. 

    It is a good way to hack someone off who wants and expects an answer. 

  4. IcarusPhoenix says:

    Dr. J:
     
    Actually, I’m rather sure artiofab meant exactly what he said (though, of course, I can’t speak for him); that you place an equal or greater value on artificial economy as you do on long term health and viability of natural resources rather speaks to why you continue to spout hopelessly anachronistic soundbites every time someone tries to discuss energy policy.
     
    Stever:
     
    I meant to say this the other day when you tried to chide Hemingway over the “Tejano” comment, but you are hardly the person to be giving others lessons in civility.  Complaining that someone made what you see as a “not so subtle dig” at your intelligence when they were merely responding to you making a direct attack on the intellect of another makes you look hypocritical, näive, hopelessly self-centered, or all three.  This is to say nothing of the fact that the real world is not black-and-white, and if you insist on acting as if your unsubstantiated opinions are the same as facts, then it is frankly no wonder that you apparently think nuance is only necessary in politics rather than, say… everywhere.

  5. stever says:

    “NeoCons”  ??

    You left out the Koch Brothers.  Haven’t you read the whole manual?

  6. qofdisks says:

    Let’s take just one paragraph out of the pro-big energy and gas propagandist screed.

    “We share the concern of many Americans that our country has grown too dependent on foreign energy sources, particularly from unfriendly countries like Iran and Venezuela. This is why we believe we should make the most of the energy that comes from right here at home and from our allies, like Canada. This will help cushion the United States from spikes in oil prices, just like the one we are experiencing now because of threats from Iran’s totalitarian regime.”

    Oil and gas wherever it is produced, is a globalized commodity.  Just because it comes from NM or anywhere in this nation does not mean that New Mexicans or any American has any access to our locally produced resources because it is destined to the highest bidder in Asia. Drilling here will alleviate high energy prices not one iota.
    Venezuela is unfriendly enough to donate heating oil as charity to our distressed NE states in times of shortage.  Nationalized oil burns just as dirty as corporate oil.  Venezuela would not hesitate to sell the U.S. oil if we bid high enough for it.  
    Americans were lied into a war with Iraq, a major Middle Eastern oil producing country.  That war in Iraq has only served to destabilize the country cutting off access of that oil to the multi-national energy corporations.  Even with the tremendous expense of waging that war, Americans stand in line behind the highest bidder to any oil that comes from Iraq.  The ignorant may think that Americans are somehow entitled to Iraqi or American energy to meet our needs first, but that is just not the case.  Now, threatening Iran with neocon rhetoric is why gas prices are climbing. 
    BTW, to the extent that Iran is totalitarian, it is via the fact that it is a theocracy first.  Neo-conservative threatening of Iran only serves to empower the religious extremists even more in the entire Middle East including Iran.  If we just left them alone, they would naturally liberalize as was the case before Bush took the reins in this country.  Why would they naturally liberalize?  Because, the common people cannot and will not tolerate an oppressed existence unless whipped up by the strong Fascist tactic of nationalism especially in the face of threat from the United States.  We should look to calming ourselves down. 
     

  7. Dr. J says:

    arti says:  “stever, there’s a difference between wanting to immediately stop oil and natural gas exploitation (this is not something any adult thinks should happen) and being in favor of a transition away from them when technology allows us to do so.”  I’m sure you meant to say “when the technology and economics of same allows us to do so, didn’t you???

     

  8. stever says:

    Stever, I believe that a lack of astuteness is better ascribed to someone who clearly can’t tell the difference between stopping and transitioning rather than to someone who understands such quite frankly elementary nuance

    As is usual for you IP you are quite able to make a great and snarky political point, including a not so subtle dig at some one’s intelligence.  I’ll stipulate that you are smarter than me and very good at what you do.  “(E)lementary nuance”  ?  Where besides politics does that matter? 
     

  9. artiofab says:

    Sure, stever. Small and Steinborn should leave NMWA while they are in office or running for office, or they should leave politics while they are lobbying.
    It’s one <a href=”http://riograndefoundation.org/content/elected-officials-payrolls-environmental-groups”>of the few things</a> the Rio Grande Foundation has suggested that I agreed with.
    Of course, they didn’t go far enough, as usual. Consistent rules such as that should be followed for any member of politics: they should not be on the payrolls of any organizations which would influence their voting, even if they, like Small, commit the token action of not being present for some votes. Maybe the Las Cruces City Council would do good to actually pay their members something, rather than allow them to be employed, and thus financially holden, to something besides the city.

  10. artiofab says:

    stever, there’s a difference between wanting to immediately stop oil and natural gas exploitation (this is not something any adult thinks should happen) and being in favor of a transition away from them when technology allows us to do so.

    Mr. Scott’s article doesn’t focus on the latter, it instead focuses on the former. For example:
    What we are surprised about is the rhetoric from some in Santa Fe and Washington that discounts the important role of fossil fuels in our energy supply…
    Who in the New Mexican or American government doesn’t admit that our energy supply is built on fossil fuels?

  11. IcarusPhoenix says:

    “If you don’t actually think they amount to the same thing, you aren’t very astute.”
     
    Stever, I believe that a lack of astuteness is better ascribed to someone who clearly can’t tell the difference between stopping and transitioning rather than to someone who understands such quite frankly elementary nuances.

  12. stever says:

    Let it never be said that political lobbyists are diligent in trying to appear grass-roots

    Nathan Small:  Las Cruces City Council, NM Wilderness Alliance
    Jeff Steinborn: Former and aspiring NM State Representative, NM Wilderness Alliance

  13. artiofab says:

    As a point of order, Hemingway, the website still has three references to Iowa, along with that interesting way of spelling New Mexicans.

    Let it never be said that political lobbyists are diligent in trying to appear grass-roots.

  14. stever says:

    Who are these New Mexicans who “are determined to stop production of oil and natural gas”? Is Mr. Scott confusing them with the New Mexicans who want us, as a state, to transition away from production of oil and natural gas?

    Are you confusing them?  If you are being honest and not snarky you would admit to both positions.  If you don’t actually think they amount to the same thing, you aren’t very astute. 

  15. Hemingway says:

    Gerges Scott, who works for  the communications firm DW Turner, has clients like Conoco Philips, The American Petroleum Institute and BHP Billiton,  If elected as State senator, who will Mr. Scott represent? Special interests? Oil and gas industry?

  16. Hemingway says:

    Mr. Scott forgets to mention he is a VP of the Energy Unit of DW Turner!!!!!!!!!!
     
    http://www.dwturner.com/Gerges_Scott.aspx
    http://www.dwturner.com/
     
     

  17. Hemingway says:

    This was on the New Mexico Energy Forum until corrected:
    “This Energy Forum wants to educate our fellow New Mixicans so we can ensure our elected officials are pursuing sound policies that bolster a strong economy and create Iowa jobs.  If you support our mission, please click here to tell others about the Iowa Energy Forum.”
    This is not a New Mexican organization. It is a carbon copy of the Iowa Energy Forum. Both groups are part of the American Energy Forum, sponsored by the American Petroleum Institute.

    The New Mexico group  uses  the same language as the Iowa group:  “This Energy Forum wants to educate our fellow Iowans so we can ensure our elected officials are pursuing sound policies that bolster a strong economy and create Iowa jobs.” Except the New Mexico group can’t spell or really thinks we are New Mixicans.

  18. artiofab says:

    Gerges Scott works as an advocate to various energy companies in New Mexico in his capacity as Director of the New Mexico Energy Forum.
    Oh, then his article is just him advocating for a cause. That’s neat.

    Scott also just announced he is seeking the Republican nomination for State Senate District 18 seat in Northeast Albuquerque.
    Oh. So the article is him advertising for his political run? Or is the cause he’s advocating for his own election?

    Anyway, besides the interesting logistics of being a director of a forum and a political candidate at the same time, this article seems to be attacking a vocal minority who is never given an identity. Who are these New Mexicans who “are determined to stop production of oil and natural gas”? Is Mr. Scott confusing them with the New Mexicans who want us, as a state, to transition away from production of oil and natural gas?