The OC Blog Back Issues Our Mission Contact Us Masthead
Sudsy Wants You to Join the Oregon Commentator

Eugene’s in the News!

I was just glancing through this story about opposition to gasoline derived from oilsands, when I noticed that Eugene’s own Kitty Piercy is sponsoring a resolution to forbid municipalities from using oilsands-derived gasoline in city vehicles. Quoth Kitty:

We don’t want to spend taxpayer dollars on fuels that make global warming worse … . Our cities are asking for environmentally sustainable energy and not fuels from dirty sources such as tarsands.

Last I heard, people were asking for cheaper gas…

Anyways, is global warming the only thing we should be concerned about? Weaning America off of oil purchased from despotic regimes in Africa, South America, and the Middle East (and giving some of that money to our friends in Canada) seems like a pretty good short-term goal, especially since no one has really come up with a better solution (and no, plugging your car into the wall outlet that gets its power from a coal-burned power plant doesn’t count as a “better idea”).

One also wonders if Kitty Piercy is aware that the biofuels she so loves to talk about so much are evidently sending 30 million or so people into poverty and driving up the price of food.

Maybe Kitty could spend her time more wisely by trying to find a way to repair Eugene’s decaying roads instead of working on silly non-binding resolutions that amount to little more than political grandstanding.

  1. orwellduk says:

    This is all totally SUSTAINABULL!

  2. Timbo says:

    I’ve never actually heard anyone complain about high gas prices. I’ve heard lots of people comment on it, but nobody is all “SOMETHING MUST BE DONE” like reporters and politicians would lead us to believe.

  3. Boobie says:

    Are you sure that Kitty thinks that biofuels are the only form of environmentally sustainable energy?

    She seems to be the type that would be for supporting several kinds of alternative energy sources.

  4. Olly says:

    antaganisticly [sic] fantastic: “Pretty much yes, since global warming will be the number one security threat in the future(according to the pentagon), will help spread tropical viral diseases(national geographic), destroy the world economy, and cause wars, talking about anything else is pretty much wasted time.”

    “Common fucking sense” with a definite emphasis on the “fucking”, here.

  5. Sakaki says:

    They can always drill up in Northeast Montana. I want my money, dammit.

  6. Timothy says:

    There’s also that new oil-producing bacteria, which could be awesome in a few years.

    The issue with oil sands and oil shale is that they mostly exist in places where there is not enough water to process them, and shipping them before processing isn’t economical. I know that Shell was doing a pilot program in Colorado using large heating elements instead of water about a year ago, but I never really heard about the results.

    What’s further interesting to me is that the same people who complain about global warming complain about high gas prices. Fucking hippies, learn some economics.

  7. Vincent says:

    1) Since when is using food to fuel cars “common fucking sense”?

    2) No one is ignoring science. I fully believe that global warming is a reality that needs to be dealt with.

    3) In the spirit of “providing solutions,” I might mention that I think that oilsands-derived petroleum is a fine short-term solution. It reduces dependence on foreign oil, it takes the squeeze off of the poor in this country, and it reduces the need to drive into poverty millions of people in the 3rd World.

    Is it a panacea? No. But I haven’t seen anyone providing any serious alternatives to petroleum. We’re told that nuclear is too scary, NIMBY-ism defeats most serious efforts toward wind power, salmon advocates are trying to un-dam as many potentially hydro-power producing rivers as they can, and people are being sold on the absurd idea that shifting carbon emission from automobiles to coal-burning power plants by producing plug-in electric cars makes any sort of economic or environmental sense whatsoever.

    “Global efforts to reduce oil consumption” only make sense if there are practical alternatives in place. Walking, biking, and taking mass transit are all excellent alternatives for lots of people, but the infrastructure isn’t there in most places, to say nothing of the money to build it.

    Furthermore, the geography of American cities has been basically automobile oriented since the 1950’s, meaning that simply telling people to walk or hop on a bike is, in many cases, literally ignoring the reality on the ground.

  8. Chris Holman says:

    I guess Gore was right about the doomsday scenario(s). hehe

    In any case, what I find more interesting (and relevant) is how people act outside of places like Eugene. I mean, people in Eugene are lucky to be in a place that facilitates a lot of the things in that last post (walking to work, etc). It’s amazing.

    However, sitting here in the heartland of Mizzou, there is no recycling…no chance at walking to work…gas is a bit cheaper actually…there is no bus system…and Wal-Mart is the only supermarket for 50 miles.

  9. antaganisticly fantastic says:

    “Last I heard people were asking for cheaper gas….” actually since the gas hike, I’ve been walking more, riding the bus more, and since food is more expenesive I eat less junk food, processed meat, and more produce. It sucks that gas is expensive, yes, but I totally agree with Kitty and know several people (i.e. the majority of people living in Eugene apparently, at least during the last election) that do as well.

    “Anyways, is global warming the only thing we should be concerned about?”
    Pretty much yes, since global warming will be the number one security threat in the future(according to the pentagon), will help spread tropical viral diseases(national geographic), destroy the world economy, and cause wars, talking about anything else is pretty much wasted time. Not to mention efforts to decrease oil consumption will in fact lead to less dependance on foreign oil so your second reason is already incorporated into trying to help combat global warming so I don’t know what you’re bitching about anyway.

    In the article you mention, the EU is clearly making efforts to use biofuels that are waste or second use products. Theres a lot of debate on this issue and clearly lots of things do need to be in consideration, but I have no doubt that Kitty Piercy is aware of that. We have plenty of biowaste in this country. I’ve always thought of biodiesal as 1/8 of the solution personally. Anyway, I love Kitty Peircey and thank her for putting Eugene on the map, in terms of making local environmental issues get more press. I’d totally do her.

    I enjoy how libertarians and organizations like the CATO institute and reason magazine act like logical, skeptical, objective thinking enterprises that point out the folly of mainstream political movements, but in the end they ignore science, reason and frankly common fucking sense. And point out weak arguments against solutions that might work while providing no solutions themselves. It’s lazy discourse that’s fun but provides no benefit to the American people or the world.

    All that being said the commentator is still sadly, probably the best on campus publication.
    good luck and god bless

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.