Pelosi's Full of Natural Gas

Well, House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is certainly full of something, and it isn't intelligence, as she continues to thwart domestic energy exploration and offshore drilling. Her latest clueless statements, as reported by the WSJ, tries to separate natural gas from other fossil fuels.

On NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, the speaker twice seemed to suggest that natural gas – an energy source she favors – is not a fossil fuel.

“I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels,” she said at one point. Natural gas “is cheap, abundant and clean compared to fossil fuels,” she said at another.

The speaker apparently was trying to contrast her support for expanded use of natural gas as a motor-vehicle fuel, and many Republicans’ preference for more domestic oil drilling — particularly through opening up more of the Outer Continental Shelf for exploration.

Natural gas is a fossil fuel.

Natural gas is plentiful, but when you oppose offshore drilling in places where it's known to exist, you drive up the costs. When you threaten windfall profits taxes on energy companies, you're not going to get new exploration or development of those plentiful energy deposits.

Maybe that's why other zero-growth eco-leftists like Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Gov. Jon Corzine (D-NJ) or Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) oppose any offshore drilling along the New Jersey coastline, even though natural gas deposits are known to exist there.

As the WSJ notes, even Rep. Pelosi knows that natural gas deposits are plentiful and cheaper than other energy plays. Yet, these Democrats all oppose offshore drilling that would open up new energy sources and which would drive down the costs of energy production and provide a stable source of energy for years to come.

Menendez is trying to link his opposition to offshore drilling to his opposition to the war in Iraq - claiming that it's the right thing to do even though it's unpopular.

The Democratic senator from New Jersey, -- who is sponsoring legislation to permanently bar drilling in the outer continental shelf -- said his opposition to drilling has not wavered despite two recent polls showing New Jerseyans open to the prospect of new drilling, perhaps even in their own back yards.

"The bottom line is there is real risk here," Menendez said. "Unless we want to lose the $20 billion economy of the shore and do it for a lot less energy than we'd get for pursuing the renewable energy tax credits, then I think drilling doesn't make a lot of sense."

Sorry, Bob, but you're on the wrong side of both issues. Opposing offshore drilling is not a principled stand by one of NIMBY. You claim to take the position because of the concern for the Jersey Shore tourism industry, yet blatantly ignore the fact that people simply aren't going to travel to the Jersey Shore if it costs more to get there and people will not spend if they actually do go.

Menendez wants to see energy costs soar. That's what a permanent ban on offshore drilling would bring.

I'll also note that offshore drilling would bring badly needed jobs to the state of New Jersey and could provide a lucrative revenue source to Trenton if they decided to impose severance taxes on oil and gas.