Former Shell Executive Predicts $5 a Gallon Gas Prices and a Potential Political Crisis for Obama
Matthew C. Nisbet, Ph.D. is Associate Professor of Communication Studies, Public Policy, and Urban Affairs at Northeastern University. Nisbet studies the role of communication and advocacy in policymaking and public affairs, focusing on debates over over climate change, energy, and sustainability. Among awards and recognition, Nisbet has been a Visiting Shorenstein Fellow on Press, Politics, and Public Policy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, a Health Policy Investigator at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and a Google Science Communication Fellow. In 2011, the editors at the journal Nature recommended Nisbet's research as “essential reading for anyone with a passing interest in the climate change debate,” and the New Republic highlighted his work as a “fascinating dissection of the shortcomings of climate activism."
Former Shell Oil president John Hoffmeister has been gaining considerable news attention this week for his warning that gas prices might reach $5 a gallon by the 2012 election. His efforts at elevating attention to national energy policy are perfectly timed to take advantage of the year's slowest news week, pegged to Holiday travel as well as a 2010 end-of-the-year high in gas prices which have crested to 3.052 a gallon nationally, the highest ever for the Holiday week. Hoffmeister's success at gaining attention and driving discussion is an example of the type of "rapid response" communication strategies I've recommended that expert organizations invest in leading up to the 2012 election.
Perhaps most prominently, Hoffmeister appeared as the lead story at CNN in primetime last night, interviewed by Kathleen Parker and Eliot Spitzer. You can watch a segment from his interview below. Hoffmeister strongly supports a pricing system such as Cap and Trade to control for the externality of greenhouse gas emissions from oil and gas. But he also strongly criticizes the Obama administration for lacking a "hydrocarbon" policy, ignoring the need to pursue strategies such as increased domestic drilling to guard against escalating gas prices and to invest significantly in new technologies such as coal sequestration. He supports wind, solar, and other renewable technologies along with eliminating the internal combustible engine through battery powered cars, but argues that it is unlikely these technologies will wean the country off of oil and gas in the foreseeable decades. Instead complementary efforts at increasing the supply of oil and gas while reducing their greenhouse gas emissions are needed. As Hoffmeister laments, the hyper-partisan debate over climate change has eliminated the possibility of having a serious, realistic discussion about energy.
Yet as Hoffmeister warns, gas prices are likely to spike in 2012 just as Obama is seeking re-election. Lacking a policy to directly deal with gas prices, it's likely that Obama's handling of this issue, or lack thereof, will be a major criteria by which swing voters will evaluate the president.
Few issues catalyze the direct attention of Americans as much as gas prices. Americans' personal experience with gas prices represent both an urgent need and overlooked opportunity to elevate policy discussion about energy at the regional and local level. The problem is that we lack the communication infrastructure to do so. By failing to invest in regional and localized communication efforts, expert organizations overlook perhaps the single best opportunity to move beyond the identity politics of climate change and to increase civil discussion and broader engagement about the energy challenge.
These five main food groups are important for your brain's health and likely to boost the production of feel-good chemicals.
We all know eating “healthy” food is good for our physical health and can decrease our risk of developing diabetes, cancer, obesity and heart disease. What is not as well known is that eating healthy food is also good for our mental health and can decrease our risk of depression and anxiety.
Infographics show the classes and anxieties in the supposedly classless U.S. economy.
For those of us who follow politics, we’re used to commentators referring to the President’s low approval rating as a surprise given the U.S.'s “booming” economy. This seeming disconnect, however, should really prompt us to reconsider the measurements by which we assess the health of an economy. With a robust U.S. stock market and GDP and low unemployment figures, it’s easy to see why some think all is well. But looking at real U.S. wages, which have remained stagnant—and have, thus, in effect gone down given rising costs from inflation—a very different picture emerges. For the 1%, the economy is booming. For the rest of us, it’s hard to even know where we stand. A recent study by Porch (a home-improvement company) of blue-collar vs. white-collar workers shows how traditional categories are becoming less distinct—the study references "new-collar" workers, who require technical certifications but not college degrees. And a set of recent infographics from CreditLoan capturing the thoughts of America’s middle class as defined by the Pew Research Center shows how confused we are.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.