(18)

NM believes in responsible energy exploration

Gerges Scott

Gerges Scott

A recent editorial in the Albuquerque Journal by state Rep. Brian Egolf cited a poll showing bipartisan support for conservation in New Mexico. Perhaps this result surprised Mr. Egolf, but it doesn’t surprise us at the New Mexico Energy Forum because it proves what we’ve known all along: that New Mexicans – just like other Americans – believe in responsible energy exploration and that we need energy from all sources – including renewables – to provide for our long-term energy needs.

New Mexico is blessed with so many sources of energy – from not only oil and natural gas, but also wind and solar. We are also a major contributor to the nuclear fuel cycle, providing for the enrichment of the fuel for zero-greenhouse gas emitting nuclear reactors around the country. These energy sources provide jobs to close to 100,000 New Mexicans and fund almost 30 percent of our general fund.

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, not to mention the associated jobs. It’s an indisputable fact that energy from coal, oil and natural gas provide the base load power for our current and future needs.

It’s also an indisputable fact that energy from renewable sources (mostly wind) only produces less than 8 percent of our energy in New Mexico. While technology in this space is advancing, it isn’t happening at a pace fast enough to keep up with our growing energy demand in an affordable way – demand that will only increase when our economy fully recovers from the deep recession of the last several years. We support research and development in this area – much of it done by leading conventional energy companies – and are optimistic that one day the necessary leapfrogs in technology will occur in order to see these sources play a meaningful and economical role in our energy supply.

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.

New Mexicans – like all Americans – are paying the price for this dependence in the form of higher gas prices at the pump – hurting lower income households the most and harming our economy just as it’s starting to grow again.

‘All-of-the-above’ approach needed


Advertisement

Our energy future must always consider the environmental impact. The Forum agrees that all energy exploration must always protect our air and our water. This is why we work cooperatively with regulators at the local, state and federal level to ensure that regulations do exactly that.

What we oppose are onerous policies and regulations designed by ideologues that are determined to stop production of oil and natural gas in favor of only those energy sources that they deem acceptable. These regulations drive the cost of exploration high enough to shift production to states where these job-killing regulations do not exist. In addition, policies and legislation designed to prop up or mandate renewable energy serves only to make energy much more expensive for all New Mexicans.

We encourage our leaders in Santa Fe to support an “all-of-the-above” energy strategy and create an environment for continued job creation. The right tone and policies encourage oil and natural gas production, which is why it’s no coincidence that the economy is booming in energy producing parts of our state. We also support the development of transmission lines designed to get renewable energy from source to market.

The New Mexico Energy Forum will continue the dialogue about our energy future and will make the case that we do not have to choose between protecting the environment and supplying the country with domestic energy that we rely on now and in the years to come.

Gerges Scott works as an advocate to various energy companies in New Mexico in his capacity as Director of the New Mexico Energy Forum. A grassroots, pro-energy organization with over 800 members strong, New Mexico Energy Forum believes that all sources of energy are important for the state and the country. The organization does not share the view of the vocal minority who seek to demonize the oil/gas industry in New Mexico. Scott also just announced he is seeking the Republican nomination for State Senate District 18 seat in Northeast Albuquerque.

Tagged as: , ,

18 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.

  1. 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. ”  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. 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. 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. “NeoCons”  ??

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

  6. 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. 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, 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. 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. 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. “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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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?

Leave a response

You must be logged in to post a comment.