In the Pipeline: 3/22/13

The brains of this operation are hard at work. IER (3/21/13) reports: “IER President Thomas Pyle sent letters to all 50 U.S. governors this week, detailing how pro-growth policies for energy development on federal lands could redound to the economic prosperity of their states… The letters represent the next phase of IER’s nation-wide strategy to educate policy makers and the American people about the opportunity for economic prosperity that more oil and gas leasing on federal lands would create. In each letter, Pyle references state-specific data concerning budget deficits and prolonged unemployment to bolster the case for expanded energy production on federal lands.”

 

Paul Ehrlich, Obama’s “Science Advisor” and John Holdren’s co-author and colleague said, “given society’s dismal record in managing technology, the prospect of cheap, inexhaustible power from fusion is ‘like giving a machine gun to an idiot child.’” These people could care less about the environment. They want god-like control to make the world into whatever image pops into their very scary minds. Rolling Stone (3/11/13) reports: “Yoko Ono and Sean Lennon have put up billboards, run a TV ad and presented petitions in opposition of fracking, now they’ve recruited celebrity friends including Liv Tyler, Susan Sarandon and Joseph Gordon-Levitt for the new video to their song “Don’t Frack My Mother,” which debuted last summer on Late Night With Jimmy Fallon… The song is the latest entry in their Artists Against Fracking campaign to persuade New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo not to allow gas companies to use hydraulic fracturing in New York state to extract natural gas trapped deep within underground rock.”

 

And the moral of the Izembek road saga is that environmental groups care far more about grizzly habitat than the health and welfare of their fellow humans. E&ENews (3/21/13) reports: “The advancement this morning of President Obama’s nominee for Interior secretary drew cheers from some environmentalists but jeers from key conservation groups who criticized the department for postponing its decision on whether to allow a road through Alaska’s Izembek National Wildlife Refuge.”

 

The following think tank chiefs are opposed to a carbon tax. Please contact us at [email protected] if you wish to join our growing ranks. We are thinking about starting a new list – trade association heads. We fear, however, it will be pretty small.

Tom Pyle, American Energy Alliance / Institute for Energy Research
Myron Ebell, Freedom Action
Phil Kerpen, American Commitment
William O’Keefe, George C. Marshall Institute
Lawson Bader, Competitive Enterprise Institute
Andrew Quinlan, Center for Freedom and Prosperity
Tim Phillips, Americans for Prosperity
Joe Bast, Heartland Institute
David Ridenour, National Center for Public Policy Research
Michael Needham, Heritage Action for America
Tom Schatz, Citizens Against Government Waste
Grover Norquist, Americans for Tax Reform
Sabrina Schaeffer, Independent Women’s Forum
Barrett E. Kidner, Caesar Rodney Institute
George Landrith, Frontiers of Freedom
Thomas A. Schatz, Citizens Against Government Waste
Bill Wilson, Americans for Limited Government
Wayne Brough, FreedomWorks

In the Pipeline: 3/20/13

That’s odd – I thought there was a sham solar company in the US too. There must be different trademark laws overseas. Gizmodo(3/19/13) reports: “The Shams Power Company opened their Shams 1 concentrated solar power station this week in Abu Dhabi. The station generates 100 MW and can power 20,000 homes while reducing CO2 emissions by 175,000 tons per year.”

 

The President can be as proud of “our” increase in oil and gas production as he wants. But if he or any of his handlers take credit for any of it, they are flat out lying. Politico (3/19/13) reports: “White House energy adviser Heather Zichal drew a line in the sand this morning on the president’s Energy Security Trust proposal, stressing that the administration would not accept expanded drilling as part of the plan. “No. ANWR is off the table. Our existing OCS plan and nothing else,” Zichal told reporters, referring to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, which has long been a non-starter for Democrats. While Zichal’s comments are no surprise, they underscore the difficulty the administration’s Energy Security Trust proposal faces in Congress. The plan, which would funnel royalties from existing oil and gas production into research and development, has bipartisan support.”

 

Are people suggesting that competition and price signals would be better for business (and better for you)? When will these greedy capitalists just learn to take a handout? Heritage (3/19/13) reports: “More than $51 billion in unused loan guarantee authority and $4.4 billion in unused credit subsidies (to cover the government’s long-term cost of the loan) remain available under the DOE’s Loan Guarantee Program (1703) and Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) loan program… Association with the failed solar companies and troubled car manufacturers has diminished the program’s public perception. That negative “political environment” has made companies less likely to apply for the loan guarantees…”

 

There’s a new sheriff in town…  


 

The Chinese know this whole thing is a sham. It’s a terrible investment, and we should just leave it to the American taxpayer to pick up the tab. WSJ (3/18/13) reports: “Chinese auto makers have pulled back from talks to buy Fisker Automotive Inc. over a disagreement on whether to revive a loan agreement with the U.S., leaving the Anaheim, Calif., company’s future uncertain ahead of an April loan payment… Fisker management had proposed to the Chinese that as part of any sale it tap the remaining portion of a $529 million U.S. loan, a move that would commit a new owner to building Fisker cars at a former General Motors Co. GM +0.21% auto factory in Delaware, a person familiar with the situation said on Monday…The Delaware plant is big, old and expensive and the Chinese balked at the U.S. loan because they don’t want to be compelled to build cars there, another person said.”

 

This would’ve been a fun day in 8th grade science class. Slate (3/19/13) reports: “The treatment plant produces a lot of solid organic waste from the 44 million gallons of wastewater it processes daily. There’s an anaerobic digester on site to consume some of that waste so IEUA doesn’t have to pay to landfill everything it pulls out of the sewage, but the bacteria in the digester produce another kind of waste: methane, a potent greenhouse gas. IEUA is under the authority of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, one of the strictest such agencies in the country. Plant managers knew that beginning in November, 2012, it would be also under California’s statewide emissions trading program, forcing it, for the first time, to pay for the carbon dioxide emissions from the electricity it gets from the grid.”

In the Pipeline: 3/19/13

I think it goes something like: “You give them an inch, and they come after you with a chainsaw for your puppies and freedom.” E&ENews(3/18/13) reports: “A group of leading economists — including Nobel Prize winners Kenneth Arrow, William Sharpe, Thomas Sargent and Joseph Stiglitz — called on President Obama to back a carbon price on aviation… In a letter dated Thursday, the experts urged Obama to support the market-based measure as the cost-effective way to promote more efficient technology and lower emissions.”

 

Forget Rachel Hunter; not everything the Aussies create is worthwhile. Yahoo (3/18/13) reports: “The federal coalition says reports that business insolvencies are at a record high in Australia are worrying and show the carbon tax is doing damage… The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has recorded more than 10,500 company collapses for the year to March, News Limited reports.”

 

This just in: Your car stinks because manufacturers need to please a bunch of bureaucrats in la-la land, not you the consumer who is going to drive the thing. The Guardian (3/14/13) reports: “A new report reveals that carmakers routinely manipulate official UN-backed miles/gallons tests, with a series of tricks including stripping the car down to weigh as little as possible, overinflating the tyres and testing in the thin air at high-altitude tracks… The tricks of the trade are listed in a report by the Transport & Environment campaign group (T&E), which suggests the official fuel consumption cited by car manufacturers is on average almost 25% lower than that achieved in reality, and in some cases 50% lower.”

 

Quod licet Jovi, non bovi. At least that is what my friend Octavian used to say. Fox News (3/18/13) reports: “Dozens of celebrities may be running afoul of the law as they unite under the banner of one group that is seeking to prevent a method of gas drilling in New York state… Artists Against Fracking opposes hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and boasts members including Yoko Ono and actors Mark Ruffalo and Susan Sarandon.”

 

The Economist starts making the case for secession. The Economist(3/16/13) reports: “This fits a pattern. Pressed for cash, states are adopting sweeping reforms as they vie to attract investments and migrants. Louisiana and Nebraska want to abolish corporate and personal income taxes. Kansas has created a post called “the Repealer” to get rid of red tape and pays a “bounty” to high schools for every vocational qualification their students earn in certain fields; Ohio has privatised its economic-development agency; Virginia has just reformed its petrol-tax system… In this second, can-do America, creative policymaking is being applied to the very problems Congress runs away from, like infrastructure spending. While the federal government twiddles its thumbs, states and cities, which are much shorter of cash, are coming up with new ways to raise money for roads, bridges and schools.”

 

I wonder when the Sierra Club is going to launch its “Beyond Wind” campaign. The suspense is killing me. Natural News (3/14/13) reports: “Large British wind farms will actually release as much carbon dioxide as fossil-fuel power plants, according to a study conducted by researchers from Aberdeen University and published in the journal Nature… The source of the emissions is not the windmills themselves, but the land on which they are being constructed.”

 

Easy with the jokes there, tiger! WSJ (3/18/13) reports: “Institute for Energy Research senior vice president Dan Kish on how President Obama may hold up the Keystone XL pipeline and other energy and infrastructure projects.”

Ethanol “Blending Wall” Leads to Gas Exports

A recent WSJ article explained how the ethanol mandate is leading to a “blend wall” that paradoxically leads U.S. refiners to export their gasoline, raising pump prices at home. This is just another fantastic example of government policies having unintended consequences.

Before looking at just how serious the problem is, let’s set the context by quoting from the WSJ piece:

This story dates to 2007 when the Bush Administration joined Democratic greens and corn-state Republicans to pass an energy bill mandating renewable fuel standards. The law required a 10% ethanol blend in all gasoline and established annual mandates for how much ethanol the oil and gas industry must purchase each year through 2022.

The problem is that Washington’s seers were wildly wrong about how much gas Americans would keep putting in their tanks. In 2007 annual gasoline consumption was about 140 billion gallons per year, with forecasts of rising demand. But the 2008-09 recession and better fuel economy have lowered consumption to an estimated 135 billion gallons.

Refiners are now crashing into what is called a “blend wall,” meaning the feds have forced them to purchase more ethanol than they can safely put in their gasoline. Refiners are reluctant to blend more than 10% ethanol into gasoline because consumers don’t want it, and because a higher blend can damage the engines of older cars, boats and electrical equipment. [Bold added.]

Thus we see the perils of top-down government intervention. By picking an absolute number of gallons of ethanol that must be blended into the gasoline mix, officials didn’t plan for the contingency of a sharp fall in total output due to the recession. Rather than admit their mistake and revise the mandate, the policymakers (as is their wont) dug in their heels and expect the private sector to sort it all out.

Paradoxically, one of the obvious and “rational” responses is for individual refiners to export their refined gasoline abroad. As the WSJ article explains, the ethanol mandates do not apply to exported product, and so this is a convenient loophole that allows refiners to survive amidst onerous federal regulations. Look at the tremendous surge in U.S. exports of finished motor products since the EIA data begin (in 2010):

As the chart illustrates, U.S. exports of gasoline have risen almost fourfold in under three years. Now part of the growth is no doubt due to the (sluggish) recovery of the world economy, but a large factor is also the ethanol mandate, which makes it more profitable for U.S. refiners to cater to foreign motorists, rather than American drivers.

When U.S. motorists are suffering from record-high gas prices for this time of year, it is particularly odious to have federal policies that encourage refiners to export gasoline to foreign markets. This is yet another unintended consequence of the ill-advised ethanol mandate.

In the Pipeline: 3/18/13

What happens to a society when there are more takers than makers? White House (3/15/13) reports: “The President’s plan builds on an idea that has bipartisan support from experts including retired admirals and generals and leading CEOs, and it focuses on one goal: shifting America’s cars and trucks off oil entirely.”

 

I bet oil production would come to a screeching halt if President Obama’s teleprompter were turned off. Praise His Majesty, from whom all blessings flow. Washington Examiner (3/16/2013) reports: “‘We produce more oil than we have in 15 years. We import less oil than we have in 20 years,’ he said. ‘We’re producing more natural gas than we ever have before — with hundreds of thousands of good jobs to show for it.’… Those numbers are true. Between fiscal years 2010 and 2012, total U.S. oil production rose by about 1.1 million barrels per day over fiscal year 2007, and natural gas production rose 20 percent from 2007 to 2012… What the president failed to mention is that the growth he is so proud of has taken place in spite of his administration’s energy policy, not because of it.”

 

“Congress set out to create an ethanol industry . . .” With a start like that, who could have guessed that economic, environmental, and energy catastrophe awaited? Pretty much everyone. NYTimes (3/16/13) reports: “Five years ago, rural America was giddy for ethanol. Backed by government subsidies and mandates, hundreds of ethanol plants rose among the golden fields of the Corn Belt, bringing jobs and business to small towns, providing farmers with a new market for their crops and generating billions of dollars in revenue for the producers of this corn-based fuel blend… Those days of promise and prosperity are vanishing.”

 

And yet, some folks in the sector appear to be OK with a carbon tax. Apparently, that is affordable. EnergyTomorrow (3/11/13) video reports: “Billions of new oil and natural gas taxes? Washington isn’t closing loopholes it’s raising taxes. Say no to Washington’s new energy taxes.”

 

The Obama Administration is starting to get lazy. Now they are letting their newsletter dump bad news on Friday. Washington Post (3/15/13) reports: “The Obama administration is leaning toward revising its landmark proposal to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new power plants, according to several individuals briefed on the matter, a move that would delay tougher restrictions and could anger many environmentalists… The discussions center on the first-ever greenhouse gas regulations for power plants, which were proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency nearly a year ago. Rewriting the proposal would significantly delay any action, and might allow the agency to set a separate standard for coal-fired power plants, which are roughly twice as polluting as those fueled by natural gas.”

 

We don’t feel that bad for Kelsey; we’re losing money on wind ‘investments’ everyday too. Washington Times (3/14/13) reports: “Former Frasier star Kelsey Grammer told TMZ on Tuesday that wind technology was the worst investment he’s ever made… Grammer told the tabloid that though his finances are good, he lost hundreds of thousands of dollars on a small wind investment… ‘I’m OK, but I didn’t make up for it. It’s just one of those things that’s just a straight loss,’ he said. ‘You’d think it would be lucrative, but it’s not really a friendly environment for new technology, it really isn’t.’”

 

It’s like environmentalists are a band of firefighters who stay in business by going around lighting peoples’ houses on fire. Slate(3/17/13) reports: “At the same time, another 1 billion people will participate in ‘Earth Hour’ by turning off their lights from 8:30-9:30. The organizers say that they are providing a way to demonstrate one’s desire to ‘do something’ about global warming. But the reality is that Earth Hour teaches all the wrong lessens, and it actually increases CO2 emissions. Its vain symbolism reveals exactly what is wrong with today’s feel-good environmentalism.”

In the Pipeline: 3/15/13

What about newborn babies, cow farts, and electric car batteries? Is there anything that doesn’t have an impact on the climate? At what point will you have enough control? Are we asking too many questions, your Majesty? Bloomberg (3/14/13) reports: “President Barack Obama is preparing to tell all federal agencies for the first time that they have to consider the impact on global warming before approving major projects, from pipelines to highways… The result could be significant delays for natural gas- export facilities, ports for coal sales to Asia, and even new forest roads, industry lobbyists warn… The Environmental Protection Agency and activist groups say that review should be broadened to account for the greenhouse gases emitted when exported coal is burned in power plants in Asia.”

 

Do these dunderheads not remember how many problems were caused by the securitization of junk mortgages? WSJ (3/14/13) reports: “The Obama administration and some on Wall Street are laying the groundwork for bundling renewable-power contracts into securities, part of an effort to make it cheaper to finance alternative energy… The initiative aims to extend to renewable energy a financial tool already used in the mortgage and credit-card industries. The securities could be sold to pension funds or other investors, who would receive a return funded by payments from users of electricity where solar panels or other equipment is installed.”

 

You know that feeling you get when fingernails are dragged against a chalkboard very slowly and deliberately? The Hill (3/14/13) reports: Pelosi, an avid environmentalist, said Thursday that there’s a reason the pipeline is proposed through the United States and not Canada: the Canadians don’t think it would benefit them… “I met with some legislators from Canada the other day, and I said, ‘You have two coasts, actually three,’ ” Pelosi said, pointing upwards. “‘Why aren’t you taking this oil out through your own country?’

 

We’ve made it really easy to fire an email over to Secretary Kerry. Send this link out to your people, people. 

The following think tank chiefs are opposed to a carbon tax. Please contact us at [email protected] if you wish to join our growing ranks. We are thinking about starting a new list – trade association heads. We fear, however, it will be pretty small.

Tom Pyle, American Energy Alliance / Institute for Energy Research
Myron Ebell, Freedom Action
Phil Kerpen, American Commitment
William O’Keefe, George C. Marshall Institute
Lawson Bader, Competitive Enterprise Institute
Andrew Quinlan, Center for Freedom and Prosperity
Tim Phillips, Americans for Prosperity
Joe Bast, Heartland Institute
David Ridenour, National Center for Public Policy Research
Michael Needham, Heritage Action for America
Tom Schatz, Citizens Against Government Waste
Grover Norquist, Americans for Tax Reform
Sabrina Schaeffer, Independent Women’s Forum
Barrett E. Kidner, Caesar Rodney Institute
George Landrith, Frontiers of Freedom
Thomas A. Schatz, Citizens Against Government Waste
Bill Wilson, Americans for Limited Government
Wayne Brough, FreedomWorks

AEA President Joins National Leaders in Fight Against Carbon Tax

WASHINGTON D.C. — AEA President Thomas Pyle will speak today at a press conference held by Republican Study Committee Chairman Steve Scalise (R-LA) concerning the harmful impacts of a carbon tax. Chairman Scalise will announce a resolution opposing a national carbon tax. Joining Pyle will be representatives from numerous free market organizations and trade groups that oppose a carbon tax. The text of Pyle’s remarks, as prepared for delivery, follow:

Thank you, Chairman Scalise, for your invitation to speak today and your strong, principled leadership of the Republican Study Committee. The American people depend on affordable energy to power our economy and care for our families. Today’s announced resolution shows how a carbon tax on these energy sources would be harmful to American families. Proponents of a carbon tax suggest a ‘tax swap’ deal in order to offset income or payroll taxes. The Institute for Energy Research, AEA’s parent organization, recently published a study that demonstrates how a carbon tax would not only further confuse the tax code, but would be far more damaging to our economy than the existing tax system. The most glaring problem of a carbon tax, of course, is the negative effects it would have on the American people.

By its very nature, a carbon tax would put an unnecessary burden on American families and businesses by raising energy costs. This increase in costs would not only affect energy prices, such as electricity and gasoline, but will also increase the costs of food and manufactured items that we use in our everyday lives. Chairman Scalise recognizes these negative implications. He understands our need for policies that embrace America’s reliable energy sources and promote economic growth.  For all of these reasons, I am proud to stand here today in support of the Chairman Scalise’s carbon tax resolution. The American Energy Alliance will continue our fight on behalf of American families to oppose Washington’s attempts to limit access to our vast natural resources and increase the price of energy for everyone. With strong leaders like Chairman Scalise, this is a fight we can win.

To read IER’s carbon tax study, click here.
To read a coaltion letter to Chairman Scalise, click here.

What: RSC anti carbon tax press conference
When: Wednesday March 13, 2013 at 3:00 PM ET
Where: House Triangle
###

In the Pipeline: 3/13/13

I suppose China, a nuclearized North Korea, and Islamic militants in the Philippines are largely trivial matters. I also assume this means that the Navy will start shelling powerplants, refineries, and automobile factories. Boston Globe (3/12/13) reports: “America’s top military officer in charge of monitoring hostile actions by North Korea, escalating tensions between China and Japan, and a spike in computer attacks traced to China provides an unexpected answer when asked what is the biggest long-term security threat in the Pacific region: climate change… Navy Admiral Samuel J. Locklear III, in an interview at a Cambridge hotel Friday after he met with scholars at Harvard and Tufts universities, said significant upheaval related to the warming planet ‘is probably the most likely thing that is going to happen . . . that will cripple the security environment, probably more likely than the other scenarios we all often talk about.’”

 

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Washington Times (3/12/13) reports: “Mr. Vitter also released some of Mr. Armendariz’s emails, obtained in a broader investigation of EPA emails, and released several portions Tuesday showing Mr. Armendariz was pleased with new rules and restrictions EPA was pursuing on power generation… ‘We have set things in motion, including empowering and shaming the states, to clean up the oil/gas sector,” Mr. Armendariz said in the email. “Further progress is inevitable. I am extremely proud of the work that we have done collectively. Gina’s new air rules will soon be the icing on the cake, on an issue I worked on years before my current job.’”

 

Let’s hope she does to the anti-technology crowd what she did to the Beatles. The Guardian (3/11/13) reports: “An eclectic group of celebrities including Yoko Ono, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Susan Sarandon have joined forces in a music video calling for New York state to ban hydraulic fracturing… Titled Don’t Frack My Mother, the song was written by Sean Lennon, with about 25 musicians, actors and comedians performing in the video.”

 

Our friend Bryan over at the Empire was kind enough to send this along.  The author is rude enough to point out that EPA doesn’t actually have the statutory authority to do what it is about to do. Like anyone cares about such things in the post-legal Republic. Federalist Society (March 2013) reports: “With the prospect of imminent action, and growing political pressure to coerce unwilling states into unprecedented greenhouse gas regulation, whether the EPA has the authority to take these actions must be explored. . . .  This paper concludes that it does not: In amending Section 111(d) in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, Congress unambiguously provided that the subsection could not be used to set standards for industries that are also regulated under the Clean Air Act’s Section 112 air toxics program. Because existing power plants have been regulated under that program since the 2012 Utility maximum achievable control technology (“MACT”) Rule,  the EPA may not lawfully regulate them under Section 111(d).”

 

What does this have to do with energy? Plenty. The scarcity narrative has broken down everywhere.  It is being replaced by the paradigm of plenty. Which is bad news for folks, like many of our environmental brethren (yes, we mean you John Holdren), who do not like humans. CBS (3/11/13) reports: “For the first time in the history of the world, more people will die from overeating than undereating [starvation] this year. … It’s all happened in the last 20 years. … As long as you don’t ban Cheez-Its. Cheez-Its are OK. That’s my addiction.”

 

The Price of Green Energy: Is Germany Killing the Environment to Save It? Speigel Online (3/12/13) reports: “The German government is carrying out a rapid expansion of renewable energies like wind, solar and biogas, yet the process is taking a toll on nature conservation. The issue is causing a rift in the environmental movement, pitting “green energy” supporters against ecologists.”

 

We missed this yesterday, but in all fairness Brooks routinely misses things (like the surge in oil and gas production) by years. So we don’t feel too bad. NYTimes (3/11/13) reports: “People in China and elsewhere are wondering if the fracking revolution means that the 21st century will be another North American century, just like the last one… What are the names of the people who are leading this shift? Who is the Steve Jobs of shale? Magazine covers don’t provide the answers. Whoever they are, they don’t seem hungry for celebrity or good with the splashy project launch. They are strong economically, but they are culturally off the map.”

AEA Responds to ‘Ryan Budget’ Proposal

AEA OPTIMISTIC ABOUT HOUSE BUDGET PROPOSAL, CALLS FOR PERMANENT END TO ALL GREEN ENERGY SCHEMES

WASHINGTON D.C. — American Energy Alliance President Thomas Pyle released the following statement in response to today’s release of the House Budget Committee’s FY2014 Budget Resolution, entitled “A Path To Prosperity: A Responsible, Balanced Budget.”

“The House today offers a new direction for America’s energy future — one that ends a broken system of cronyism and opens taxpayer-owned lands and waters to responsible energy development. Chairman Ryan’s budget recognizes the inexorable link between affordable, reliable energy and a growing economy. Regrettably, this sensible approach to energy policy has eluded Washington for decades, despite the fact that the United States and North America are the most energy rich region in the world. Now that we know how tremendous our energy supplies are, it is time for policies that reflect this potential.”

“The ‘Ryan Budget’ is a blueprint to restore fairness in government by ending taxpayer-funded giveaways to Solyndra-style special interests that receive multi-million dollar grants, loans, and loan guarantees for renewable technologies that cannot survive in the free market. Additionally, it provides overdue permitting for major energy infrastructure projects like the Keystone XL Pipeline, which the White House continues to block at every turn.

“It remains to be seen if House Republicans will make good on the strong commitment of this budget and end the system of spoils and cronyism that continues to subvert a truly free energy market. We are hopeful that those members who offer full-throated support of today’s budget will also vow to end the huge subsidies for wind, corn-based ethanol, cellulosic biofuel, and other green energy schemes that pump borrowed dollars into their home districts for short-term political gain. A failure to end hypocrisy, in addition to cronyism, means that the ‘Ryan Budget’ will remain a distant dream of a fairer, more fiscally responsible government.”

###

In the Pipeline: 3/12/13

Thanks for the hat tip to reality, EPA. Can we get back to work now?AFPM (3/11/13) reports: “American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) President Charles T. Drevna issued the following statement following the withdrawal of its Petition for Waiver of the 2012 Cellulosic Biofuel Volumetric Requirements: ‘We appreciate the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) prompt action to rescind the 2012 cellulosic renewable volume obligation (RVO) following a U.S. Court of Appeals’ decision to vacate the 2012 cellulosic RVO. As a result of EPA’s response, AFPM has withdrawn its waiver petition, since our members are no longer required to purchase credits for fuel that doesn’t exist.  We believe that EPA should reconsider proposed 2013 volumes, which suffer from the same shortcomings, and finalize a 2013 cellulosic biofuel RVO that reflects the Court’s directive to aim for accuracy.’”

 

How does Venice Beach look today? Bloomberg (3/10/13) reports: “The only thing California’s environmentally friendly Democratic legislators prefer to regulating private industry is spending public dollars. So it’s fascinating to watch them struggle with an unfolding dilemma… The state can tap into a gusher of new revenue only if legislators resist the muscular green lobby and allow oil companies to take advantage of vast petroleum reserves in the Monterey Shale geologic formation that runs south and east from San Francisco.”

Trust us, we are from the government and we are here to help you.E&ENews (3/11/13) reports: “A major natural gas producer is leaving a voluntary emissions-reduction program run by U.S. EPA amid an ongoing dispute over how the agency used data collected through the program to justify regulations for the sector, according to a letter obtained by Greenwire… The split comes amid ongoing concern from industry that EPA is exceeding its legal authority in an effort to limit greenhouse gas emissions and could lead to tough questions in the coming weeks as EPA’s air chief faces Senate confirmation hearings over her nomination to lead the agency.”

 

We know for sure that some electrons in DC are generated by massive egos. Otherwise, the government is kidding itself if it thinks all of its energy will be coming from wind. DCIST (3/6/13) reports: “The D.C. government’s agencies will be getting all of their electricity through wind power for at least a year, according to a news release from Washington Gas Energy Services. Under the terms of a new contract, the District will purchase all of its power needs from a Washington Gas-owned wind farm in Northern Virginia.”

 

Guess who?