Editorial Comment

Apr. 2002 Vol. 223 No. 4  Editorial Comment

Thomas R. Wright, Jr.,  Publisher

Admirable, but . . . Recent news stories describe two commendable decisions reached by oil giant BP. The first will have little impact on the company’s day-to-day operations, and thus, might be considered more of a PR ploy; however, the other could have significant repercussions.

In deference to the Lakota family, who consider it sacrilegious to use the name Crazy Horse outside of a spiritual context, BP has renamed its Gulf of Mexico field Thunder Horse. While this may be exactly the right thing to do in terms of principled, corporate responsibility, one must wonder why, with the untold hundreds of establishments, products and places named for the famed Oglala Sioux war chief, that the family focused on BP.

Actually, BP was not the only entity to feel heat from the Lakota. The Stroh Companies (of brewing fame) reached a settlement with the family over the use of the chief’s name on a malt liquor. Stroh’s CEO even visited the Lokata reservation and offered seven thoroughbred racehorses, wool blankets, tobacco and sweet grass, along with an apology. Apparently, this was not taken as an insult (the family reciprocated with a quilt), which is amazing, given the long controversy over Indians being paid a handful of beads for what is now New York City.

However, based upon a quick Internet search, the Lakota have a lot of work to do. Besides the famous nightclub in Paris named for the chief, here are just a few of the things we found named in his honor: a group of saloon dancers, tack and gift shop, bingo hall, campgrounds, Neil Young’s (a grunge rocker) band, several casinos, a few gentlemen’s clubs, steakhouse, dog kennels, horse club, UK sports bar, country club in Germany, a starfleet ship and a "superterrestrial planet in an extremely close orbit with a small black hole orbiting through its core."

BP’s second action was to announce that it would make no more political donations anywhere in the world. This decision will primarily affect its business in the U.S. where some $840,000 in "soft money" contributions were made last year, split almost evenly between Republicans and Democrats (no surprise there). Those donations were a legacy of the company’s Amoco and Arco acquisitions.

BP says it has been reviewing its political contribution policy for two years, and that "the Enron affair helped focus our deliberations, but didn’t drive the decision."

Again, this is an admirable position for a corporation to take. But if other firms, and, especially the NGOs (non-governmental organizations, e.g., social and environmental activist groups), do not follow suit, then BP could be placing itself at a disadvantage. These types of organizations have raised huge sums, which are being invested as political contributions and PR campaigns.

We certainly agree that political donations approach outright bribery, especially when going to U.S. politicians, and BP is to be commended for opting out of the charade. We just wish the company would work to outlaw these donations by all companies and NGOs, rather than acting unilaterally.

Windmills everywhere. Senators Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut and John Kerry of Massachusetts are two Democrats strongly opposed to development of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Mr. Lieberman says, "To suggest we can drill our way out of the energy problem is not the way out of the problem." And Mr. Kerry prefers expanding renewable energy sources on public lands, such as wind, solar, geothermal and biomass energy.

The Washington Times took this as a challenge and calculated what it would take using wind alone to offset the energy potential of 2,000 acres along the coastal plain of ANWR. Following is the Times reasoning:

One bbl of crude oil (42 gal) generates approximately 520 kilowatts of electricity. On average, one operating windmill on property managed by the Bureau of Land Management generates approximately 178 kilowatts of electricity per day. Thus it would take about three windmills to equal the electricity from one barrel of oil. Windmills on BLM land take up about three acres of land each.

If ANWR ultimately produces one million bbl of oil a day, then it would take three million windmills covering nine million acres of land to equal the energy tapped from a tiny strip of ANWR.

Or, when the Times puts it in perspective, nearly every acre of Connecticut (3.1 million acres) and Massachusetts (more than 5 million acres) would have to be blanketed by windmills. Now that’s an interesting coincidence.

Gasoline signs revisited. In the December 2001 issue, my bride of many years contributed her thoughts to this column by pointing out that gasoline vendors are the only marketers to put their prices on large outdoor signs for everyone to see. The problem with this, she says, is that everybody is constantly reminded of every price increase.

She must have struck a chord, since we have received numerous comments agreeing with her, and others suggesting additional changes.

One recommendation that makes terrific sense is to do away with the 9/10ths of a cent quoted by most gasoline vendors. Yes, it’s a commonly accepted marketing ploy, just like selling a shirt for $29.95. But if you buy one shirt, you can pay the establishment $30 and get back 5¢ in change. If you buy exactly one gallon of gas, you won’t get back 1/10¢.

One of the best ideas came from Terry Donze, who suggested that gasoline prices be advertised less taxes, just like most other consumer goods. The goal here is to make the consumer aware of the large part that the various taxes contribute to the gasoline they buy, thus shifting some of the blame from Big Oil to Big Government.

Can’t you imagine the pandemonium that would occur as several drivers of SUVs with 30-gal tanks went to pay their $24 after filling up with $0.80 gasoline, only to be told that the bill was actually $36?

The potential bedlam would be worse in the UK. Consider the driver of a car with a 15-gal (56.78-liter) tank filling up at a station advertising gasoline for £0.14/l. Instead of paying £7.96 to fill up, the bill, including tax, would total £39.75.

Comments? Write: editorial@worldoil.com