Guest post by David Middleton
19 January 2012
Obama clean energy ad airing in Va.
A new ad from President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign that touts his energy and ethics record began airing in Virginia this week even as Republican blasted him over a decision to reject a permit for a proposed oil pipeline from Canada.
The 30-second spot (see below) makes a case that Obama’s policies have promoted clean energy jobs and reduced the nation’s dependence on foreign oil while enduring unfounded attacks funded by wealthy energy industry officials.
[…]
This campaign ad is nothing but a collection of falsehoods.
Falsehood #1: “Secretive oil billionaires attacking President Obama”… The Koch brothers (and the oil & gas industry in general) have been anything but secretive in their attacks on President Obama.
Falsehood #2: The ad implies that President Obama has created 2.7 million “clean energy industry” jobs.
The 2.7 million figure is purportedly cited from a Brookings report. The report said that there currently are 2.7 million jobs in America that “produce goods and services with an environmental benefit.”
The clean economy, which employs some 2.7 million workers, encompasses a signifi cant number of jobs in establishments spread across a diverse group of industries. (Page 4)
The report says that the “clean economy establishments added half a million jobs between 2003 and 2010.” So… Obama didn’t even “create” half a million “clean energy jobs.” He didn’t even create half a million clean economy jobs. The Brookings report refers to “clean economy” not “clean energy” jobs. The vast majority of the “clean economy” jobs are not in energy… And almost all of those jobs were created before Obama took office.
More than 82% of the “clean economy” jobs listed in the report have nothing to do with energy production…
Waste Management & Treatment … 386,116 … 14%
Public Mass Transit … 350,547 … 13%
Conservation … 314,983 … 12%
Energy Saving Building Materials … 161,896 … 6%
Regulation & Compliance … 141,890 … 5%
Professional Environmental Services … 141,046 … 5%
Organic Food & Farming … 129,956 … 5%
Recycling & Reuse … 129,252 … 5%
Green Consumer Products … 77,264 … 3%
Green Building Materials … 76,577 … 3%
HVAC … 73,600 … 3%
Sustainable Forestry Products … 61,054 … 2%
Recycled Content Products … 59,712 … 2%
Green Architecture … 56,190 … 2%
Air & Water Purification … 24,930 … 1%
Green Chemical Products … 22,622 … 1%
Total … 2,207,635 … 82%
Falsehood #3: The ad implies that President Obama somehow played a role in the increase in US domestic oil production over the last few years… That is beyond ridiculous! The plays and prospects from which the production growth was derived were worked up, leased, drilled and plumbed-up for production over the last decade or more. The effects of Obama’s disastrous anti-drilling policies won’t show up in production data for quite some time.
Obama’s anti-drilling policies began in 2009 and were ramped up in 2010. This is either the most amazingly arrogant lie to ever come out of this President’s mouth or an example of his incredible ignorance of the oil & gas industry and energy in general.
The increase in US oil production has come from two main sources:
1) Shale plays like the Bakken.
The Bakken shale play has mostly been developed on private property. Very little of the shale plays have been developed on Federal lands – And the Obama administration has actively sought to further restrict development on Federal lands. Apart from the EPA, regulation and obstruction of these sorts of plays are mostly in the hands of State gov’ts.
2) Deepwater Gulf of Mexico discoveries.
The deepwater discoveries that have been brought on line over the last three years were discovered long before Obama took office… Many were discovered while Clinton was still in office. Construction and installation of the production facilities began long before Obama took office. On top of that, much of the increase in production was the result of the ongoing recovery from hurricanes Rita (2005), Katrina (2005) and Ike (2008).
Over the last two years, the Obama administration has almost paralyzed operations in the Gulf of Mexico with an unlawful permitorium and has aggressively tried to hamper the shale plays with fraudulent EPA attacks on fracking and unlawful efforts to make BLM lands unavailable…
This is all anyone ever needs to know about President Obama’s views on energy…
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Living in Virginia, I have seen this ad on TV already. The jobs claim made my jaw drop, but I about fell out of my chair when it was claimed he was responsible for increased domestic oil production! Somebody’s pants are on fire. From what I know, he has impeded oil production and any increase has come in spite of his efforts. And this is just the beginning of the campaign. Unless I just turn off the TV, in November I imagine my head will be spinning round and round if the duct tape can keep it from exploding.
Good. Cancel the Texas pipeline and the Pacific one as well. Use the existing right-of-way of the Trans Canada Pipeline to existing refineries in Canada.
What a concept. Canadian oil in Canadian pipe to Canadian producers to create Canadian jobs. Of course if the USA runs short of gas we can sell you some; for $5.00 a gallon (price subject to change without notice but only in an upward direction).
@ur momisugly tomjtx
January 24, 2012 at 2:59 am
This site is veering offtrack, IMHO. Please stick to science and leave the political bashing to others.
Even tribes of monkeys and packs of wolves have to deal with their own brand of politics. People (usually) try to be a bit more civilized is all. But the goal is identical.
2.7 million jobs for $2 trillion investment is only $750,000 per job. Not bad for a government.
Until governments stop funding science it is politics and will remain so.
Isn’t it ironic that he will proclaim he ‘inherited’ a bad economy, but then magically claim he brought foreign oil imports down through increased domestic productivity?
Philip Bradley said @ur momisugly January 24, 2012 at 3:45 am
Does that mean Gillard et al haven’t sold those coalfields to China yet?
Also from VA, saw the ad and immediately thought “Yes we have more oil production – in SPITE of BO’s bad policies. I think I can extend that to everything our corrupt government touches.
Caleb said @ur momisugly January 24, 2012 at 4:50 am
Caleb, am I free to use your analogy, or is your IP protected under the new legislation?
Alex the skeptic says:
January 24, 2012 at 6:00 am
As a non-USA , EU citizen, I believe that whatever happens in the US effects so much the rest of the world that we should have the right to vote in US presidential elections. And if I were t ohave that right to vote I know whom not to vote to.
As they say, if the US sneezes, the world catches a cold. Now that Obama has made the US to catch a cold, the world has now caught pneumonia.
======================================================
How right you are Alex…… here’s an interesting correlation.
http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=k3s92bru78li6_#ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=txg_rpch&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=world&idim=world:Earth&idim=country:US&ifdim=world&hl=en&dl=en
But, look how the world may not also effect things in the U.S.
http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=k3s92bru78li6_#ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=pcpipch&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=world&idim=world:Earth&idim=country:US&ifdim=world&hl=en&dl=en
G. Karst says:
January 24, 2012 at 8:35 am
“On Monday, IMF chief Christine Lagarde warned the global economy could fall into an economic spiral reminiscent of the 1930s unless action was taken on the eurozone crisis.”
She must say that so all European nations agree to give their money to the unaccountable ESM. Scare the chicken.
How about we take the millions of unemployed and put them to work on government jobs picking up trash and dog poop? Would that be a green job? How about if what they collected was recycled?
We could have brigades of green shirts policing our trash, ensuring that nothing recyclable is discarded.
Just wait, the SOTU speech is tonite.
I’ve really liked this site for years, despite my friends telling me it was primarily a newsletter for right wing Americans. I always defended you, however I’m rapidly beginning to think was mistaken. It is a complete tragedy, we have lost one of the great voices for reason in climate change and seen it sell out to political lobbying. Many of us are not leaving your site Anthony, you are leaving us.
REPLY: Well sorry you feel that way, but we have long covered politics on occasion during the 5 year history of the blog. SOPA/PIPA was politics, Waxman-Markey bills and subsequent variants were politics. Energy is now a more important issue than global warming according to the latest Pew poll, and if that isn’t being represented well, it should be pointed out don’t you think? And look either side of this post, lost of pure science abounds.
I get this sort of complaint just about any time something of a political nature gets posted, and I understand your concerns. On occasion we cover a political issue if it has a relevance to some of our other topics. WUWT has always been a potpourri of things, just look at our categories and masthead, in place since day 1. This fits under news and current events.
A good antidote would be to visit Science Blogs Pharangyla or Climate Progress, and see how often politics and science are mixed there, like every 5 minutes 😉 – Anthony
Excellent post, Dave! Thanks for the ‘heads up’ on the abuse of factual science by these dishonest ads!
Yea c’mon guys. This one is a political posting but there have been lots of those in the past. I come here for the science as do most everyone else, but face it, climate science is political science.
dangerous sheep asked “Has anybody come across an honest political advertisement ?”
Yes I have, and it was in reference to Oil dividends so it’s even somewhat topical, the politician, a Governor was urging the voters to keep the oil dividends to the state in a trust-fund because if he could get his hands on them he would just waste the money. That politician was George Wallace of all people.
Pamela Gray says:
January 24, 2012 at 6:25 am
“This President is the worst mistake I’VE ever made! ”
Pamela,
Don’t feel like the ‘Lone Ranger’ on that one… I made a similar mistake when, as an impressionable new voter, I cast my ballot for Jimmy Carter some years back… Ugh – What a disappointment!
However, it really made me assess my own core principles and re-evaluate who in politics most closely emulated to them. It was a ‘teaching moment’, indeed.
‘Once Burned, Forever Learned!’
MtK
And climate science & policy are inextricably intertwined with energy science, economics & policy.
How much is North Korea´s dependence on foreign oil?…less than 50%?…then you have a long way to reach such an extraordinary positive level. Congrats!
Latitude said at 5:38 am
~100 million people did not vote for Obama….
Actually it was quite a bit more of the Voting Eligible Population that din NOT vote for him-
143,263,130, to be exact. He won with only 69,456,897 votes or 32.7% of the VEP.
81,417,295 voting eligible people did NOT vote.
BH
Just an example of horrible science driving horrible politics.
Thank goodness we’ll have an election soon that will rectify this problem.
Paul says:
January 24, 2012 at 12:42 pm
And in a similar situation, a recent governor from Alaska had oil dividends that she sent out to citizens of her state because that was the honest and fair thing to do. But it was certainly an exception rather than the rule.
People who don’t vote don’t count, except in Chicago, where they vote early and vote often. Repeatedly.
I was hurt by the picture with the solar panels and the inscription “Clear-Energy American Jobs: 2.7 million” . I make a comparison with the situation in Germany. An excellent article on solar power in that country can be found on http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,809439,00.html .
– In winter, the cost-efficiency of solar panels is very low: The days are short and the sky is overcast.
– The distribution networks are not designed to allow tens of thousands of solar panel owners to switch at will between drawing electricity from the grid and feeding power into it. Because there are almost no storage options, the excess energy has to be destroyed at substantial cost.
– As Obama, also Merkel insisted on the opportunity to create jobs with the development of solar energy. But now even members of her own staff are calling it a massive money pit.
– “The demand for subsidies is growing and growing,” says RWI [Rhine-Westphalia Institute for Economic Research] expert Manuel Frondel. If all commitments to pay subsidies so far are added together, Frondel adds, “we have already exceeded the €100 billion level.”
– Plants that were producing solar cells are closed, shedding many jobs and losing the government subsidies in the process, because Chinese competitors offer systems of equivalent quality at significantly lower prices.
Solar energy has the potential to become the most expensive mistake in German environmental policy.
Will the destiny of solar energy in the United States be different from the one in Germany?
Great expose and is definitely “on topic”…… too bad the republican candidates for office don’t come here and educate themselves. If one of the candidates had the courage to thoroughly educate themselves on the true facts of climate science and climate history, and had outstanding debating skills, they could probably win by a landslide in an election while at the same time putting CAGW in the grave – permanently.
AGW is all about politics. To ignore the politics is to ignore the most important aspect about “climate science”.