AMERICANS struggling with rising fuel costs may find no quick relief from the energy proposals being touted by the two main presidential contenders in this year's election. Plans from Republican John McCain and Barack Obama, the Democratic front-runner, to overcome the energy malaise weighing on the troubled US economy will do little to calm angry motorists, even as the issue moves toward center stage of the electoral debate, according to experts. “I would say that oil has moved front and center in the campaigns, and all the candidates have ambitious goals,” said Antoine Halff, deputy head of research for Newedge USA. “They are long on ambitious goals but short on policy.” US oil prices jumped to an all-time high $135 a barrel this week, sending up the cost of transporting goods and forcing drivers to adjust their habits ahead of the summer holiday season as pump prices hit fresh records. While a law passed this month temporarily halting shipments of oil to the US emergency reserve may help increase commercial stockpiles this summer, significant advances in weaning the world's top gas guzzler off its oil dependence are still years or decades away, experts said. Solutions offered up by Obama and McCain to reduce US gasoline use and to cut reliance on foreign oil are vague for fear of alienating voters, analysts said. “The fact is, we are five months away from electing the next president, and yet we've got no clarity on energy issues. So I am not optimistic at all, because it is politically extremely difficult,” said Eric Kalamaras, head of energy research for Wachovia Securities in Charlotte, North Carolina. Oil prices have shot up sixfold since 2002 as global supply has struggled to keep pace with surging demand from emerging economies like China and India. Big plans, big hurdles Boosting domestic oil production by opening up fresh acreage in hydrocarbon-rich areas like Alaska has been a tough sell for the Bush administration as many consumers become more environmentally aware. Also, policies aimed at reducing demand are a tough sell to voters during election years, analysts said. “No one would expect a candidate to ask voters to change their consuming ways,” said Halff. “Ultimately, energy policy needs to address the demand issues, but this is very difficult to do during an election year. Increasing subsidies for the alternative fuel ethanol drives up food prices by diverting supplies of crops like corn. Building new nuclear power stations, advocated by many experts as a way to lower reliance on hydrocarbons, stirs concerns about safety. Raising fuel efficiency standards on automobiles beyond the new targets put forward, as proposed by Obama, takes years as carmakers retool plants. “I could definitely see both candidates pushing forward on (raising fuel standards),” said Sarah Emerson, director of Energy Security Analysis Inc in Boston. “But that's one of those things that is out there in the future.” Short-term relief at the pumps through lifting the federal gasoline tax during the summer driving season, as proposed by McCain, could be quickly erased by rising prices. “Removing the gas tax is not going to result in significant savings at the pump,” said Halff. “It is likely the portion of the rent that the government gives up will be immediately recaptured by the refiners and distributors, but will not end up in the consumer pockets.” – Reuters __
