Big energy companies back Allen
2006-11-01
Source: The Roanoke Times
email this
print this
del.icio.us
digg this
rss feedKark is a retired Virginia Tech professor of interior design who lives in Giles County.
In one of his campaign commercials, Sen. George Allen touted his record on energy as being good for Virginia. But his voting record indicates otherwise. That is, Allen supports energy policies that are favorable to the oil, gas, coal and electrical utility companies and less favorable to the environment and public health of Virginians.
Allen prefers drilling no matter the consequences. Allen has voted repeatedly against a ban on drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Most Americans are opposed to drilling in this pristine area of Alaska and would welcome a ban. The amount of oil that might be obtained is trivial compared to the threats to the environment, including oil leaks similar to the recent one that shut down the Alaskan pipeline. But, Allen has ignored these concerns to vote in favor of companies that want to drill for oil in ANWR.
As a majority member of the Senate's Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Allen helped devise the 2005 Energy Policy Act that passed Congress and was signed into law by the president last year. Although the bill has some provisions for renewable energy and conservation, these measures pale in comparison to the huge subsidies given to the energy companies.
According to the Public Citizen Web site, oil and gas industries alone will receive $6 billion in subsidies from the bill, primarily to encourage more drilling. However, the oil companies' record profits in the past year should be enough of an incentive for drilling. Gas industries will be allowed new drilling techniques that destroy water aquifers.
Other energy industries receiving huge subsidies in this bill include nuclear ($12 billion) and coal ($9 billion). The devastating effects of mountaintop removal coal mining in Southwest Virginia and throughout the Appalachian mountains suggest that we should be doing less mining of coal -- not more of it. And it particularly irks me not only that more of our beautiful mountains will be destroyed as a result of this act, but that I pay for it as a taxpayer.
Click here to see the full article.
