Search anytime by typing below

Thanks for joining the AEA efforts to help combat rising energy prices. We don’t want to bug you that often, so let us know what energy issues interest you, and we’ll keep your inbox happy.

*Please fill in all items

In the Pipeline: 7/5/13

July 5, 2013 by Leave a Comment

You read that right. China burns five times more coal than the United States. Now that we’ve learned about the scope of our government surveillance of us, what, exactly, is our selling point over the Chinese? The Daily Caller (7/2/13) reports: “The climate change policy that President Barack Obama proposed last week panders to environmentalists’ visions of a pollution-free, energy-efficient world, but is so out of touch with the economic and energy realities of today, it’s sure to remain just a dream. Through presidential decree, Obama aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which are said to cause global warming, by nearly one-fifth by 2020. His proposal accomplishes this by giving the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate and cap carbon emissions from existing power plants, all without any congressional input. The president’s plan is dependent on the notion that the U.S. will lessen its reliance on coal, which now powers about 40 percent of U.S. electricity.”

McKitrick proposes that we base climate change policy on science, and that people put their money down instead of just babbling. My guess is that he will not get a good tent in the reeducation camp. The Global Warming Policy Foundation (PDF) reports: “The basic mechanism involves building a tax per tonne of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions into the price of all forms of fossil energy (oil, coal and natural gas). CO2 is uniquely suitable for taxing in this way because in almost all cases there are no abatement options: once burned, the entire carbon content of the fuel ends up as CO2 in the air. So if we know how much fuel is used, we know how much tax should be paid. Users of the fuels will then economize by reducing the most carbon-intensive forms of energy consumption. Since purchasers in the market are motivated to save money, any emission reduction option that costs less than the tax that would otherwise be paid will be adopted. The result is that the market will discover all the least-costly ways of reducing CO2 emissions, in the process making use of far more information than would ever have been available to government planners and rule-makers.”

We like Quin Shea a lot. But the court did not compel EPA to do what they are doing. He needs to stop saying that, because it is wrong. The Associated Press (7/1/13) reports: “After several years of taking a beating from the poor economy, new pollution rules and a flood of cheap natural gas, the coal industry was on the rebound this year as mining projects moved forward in the Western U.S. and demand for the fuel began to rise, especially in Asia. But almost overnight, coal is back on the defensive, scrambling to stave off a dark future amid President Barack Obama’s renewed push to rein in climate change. The proposal, with its emphasis on cuts in carbon dioxide emissions from new and existing power plants, would put facilities like the 2,100 megawatt Colstrip electricity plant in eastern Montana in regulators’ cross hairs. That has profound spin-off implications for the massive strip mines that dot the surrounding arid landscape of the Powder River Basin and provide the bulk of the nation’s coal.”

Flying planes at buildings? Wonder where they picked up that strategy. Charlotte Business Journal (7/1/13) reports: “Lynn Good, the new chief executive of Duke Energy Corp., got a special greeting from Greenpeace on her first day as CEO Monday. The environmental activist group flew a banner around the Charlotte energy giant’s headquarters in uptown Charlotte with a message for Good. It was a to-do list that read: ‘Duke Energy CEO’s 1st Day: Key to the executive restroom, Quit coal & nukes, Go solar.’ Only the first item on the list had a check mark next to it.”

About the only thing the good doctor forgot to mention is that the entire states that will be impoverished under this global warming plan are currently red and therefore inconsequential to His Majesty. The Washington Post (7/4/13) reports: “But it is something that the very complex global warming models that Obama naively claims represent settled science have trouble explaining. It therefore highlights the president’s presumption in dismissing skeptics as flat-earth know-nothings. On the contrary. It’s flat-earthers like Obama who refuse to acknowledge the problematic nature of contradictory data. It’s flat-earthers like Obama who cite a recent Alaskan heat wave — a freak event in one place at one time — as presumptive evidence of planetary climate change. It’s flat-earthers like Obama who cite perennial phenomena such as droughts as cosmic retribution for environmental sinfulness.”

The New Republic. Chris Matthews. The New York Times. Now onto R Street to no doubt help us understand the wisdom of a carbon tax. Sore losers like Inglis, Leftists like this dude; at what point does this become embarrassing for the other side? R Street Institute (7/2/13) reports: “The R Street Institute today announced that author, columnist and policy expert Reihan Salam has joined its team as a senior fellow. In his new role, Salam will undertake a number of research projects for R Street, including forthcoming studies on carbon taxes, nuclear power and congestion pricing and road usage. He also will represent R Street in a variety of media appearances and op-ed writings.”

We know Helen Bentley. We know Frank O’Donnell. We think she could take him in a fight. National Legal and Policy Center (7/3/13) reports: “The latest corporate example of “I’ve had enough” is Carnival Cruise Lines, which announced last week it would end service from the harbors of Baltimore and Norfolk, Va., due to government requirements that its ships burn low-sulfur fuel within 200 nautical miles of the U.S. coast (with even stricter standards coming in 2015). According to reports in the Baltimore Sun and the Virginian-Pilot, Carnival has been trying to gain approval for a plan to install emissions-reducing “scrubbers” on its ships, and also get a waiver from compliance with the standards until its plan could be fully implemented. The cost for the added technology would have been $200 million, but that still hasn’t been a strong enough offer to budge EPA.”

Filed Under: Blog, In the Pipeline Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

In the Pipeline: 7/4/13

July 5, 2013 by Leave a Comment

 

Filed Under: Blog, In the Pipeline

In the Pipeline: 7/3/13

July 5, 2013 by Leave a Comment

At least he’s stopped beating around the bush and is outright telling us that our lives will be worse off with his policies. CNS News (7/1/13) reports: “President Barack Obama said at a town hall event in Johannesburg, South Africa, on Saturday that unless we find new way of producing energy ‘the planet will boil over’ if people in Africa are allowed to attain air conditioning, automobiles and big houses. ‘Ultimately, if you think about all the youth that everybody has mentioned here in Africa, if everybody is raising living standards to the point where everybody has got a car and everybody has got air conditioning, and everybody has got a big house, well, the planet will boil over — unless we find new ways of producing energy.’”

Alternative lyrics: I believe the children are our future. Teach them cronyism and let them lead the way. Show them how the government wastes taxpayer money. Give them a false sense of pride in green utopia. Renewable Energy World (7/1/13) reports: “The majority of public schools in Campbell County, Tenn. are going solar in a bid to make $960,000 over 20 years, without raising any additional taxes. That’s under a new partnership with residential and commercial solar installer Efficient Energy of Tennessee (EETN), which is installing solar at 12 of the county’s 21 schools. The 12 schools in the program are installing 50-kilowatt solar systems, which will sell the power generated to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) through its local power distributor.”

Of course, we can’t drill our way out of this. Investors Business Daily(7/2/13) reports: “As of February, the most recent month for which international oil production data are available, Texas would be the 12th largest oil producer in the world if it were a separate country, only slightly behind Kuwait and Venezuela. This is due to an oil boom that’s added the equivalent of the Bakken formation in North Dakota to the state’s output in just the past 16 months. At the current pace of output gains, Texas’ production will likely surpass 3 million bpd by year-end, pulling it ahead of Venezuela, Kuwait, Mexico and Iraq to become the equivalent of the ninth largest oil-production “nation” in the world.”

And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. The New York Times (7/1/13) reports: “Elected officials and political analysts said the president’s crackdown on coal, the leading source of industrial greenhouse gases, could have consequences for Senate seats being vacated by retiring Democrats in West Virginia and South Dakota, for shaky Democratic incumbents like Mary L. Landrieu of energy-rich Louisiana, and for the Democratic challenger of Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader. In ordering limits for the first time on carbon dioxide emissions from up-and-running power plants, Mr. Obama jabbed that opponents belonged to ‘the Flat Earth Society.’ But in coal country, it was Mr. Obama who was called out of touch, with predictions of job losses and spiking energy bills.”

A natural move really. Reason 24/7 (7/2/13) reports: “A Mongolian neo-Nazi group has rebranded itself as an environmentalist organisation fighting pollution by foreign-owned mines, seeking legitimacy as it sends swastika-wearing members to check mining permits. Tsagaan Khass, or White Swastika, has only 100 or so members but it is one of several groups – others have names including Dayar Mongol (Whole Mongolia), Gal Undesten (Fire Nation) and Khukh Mongol (Blue Mongolia) – that are linking nationalism and resources as foreign firms seek to exploit the mineral wealth of the vast country, landlocked between Russia and China. Based in an office behind a lingerie store in the Mongolian capital, the shaven-headed, jackbooted Tsagaan Khass stormtroopers launch raids on mining projects, demanding paperwork or soil samples to be studied for contaminants.”

Filed Under: Blog, In the Pipeline

In the Pipeline: 7/2/13

July 5, 2013 by Leave a Comment

An entire continent full of largely undernourished people plagued by disease, corrupt government, and some of the worst living conditions in the world, and our President sees it as a great opportunity to keep peddling snake oil and other fairy tales, rather than affordable, reliable energy that Africans need. Breitbart (6/30/13) reports: “President Barack Obama unveiled his “Power Africa” program on Sunday that will spent $7 billion in U.S. taxpayer money to fund a sub-Saharan Africa electricity program that will also develop geothermal, hydro, wind, and solar power. The International Energy Agency says achieving universal electricity access to sub-Saharan Africa by 2030 would require $300 billion.”

Next proposed rule, we are going to give away a gun. Washington Free Beacon (7/1/13) reports: “A top Republican senator accused an environmental group of “bribing” supporters into commenting on a federal environmental study by offering them a chance to win a free fishing trip. The group, Trout Unlimited, encouraged visitors to its website to comment on a proposed Environmental Protection Agency draft environmental assessment of the impacts of a proposed Alaska copper and gold mine on a nearby watershed. Commenters who also told a friend to comment on the draft were automatically entered into a drawing to win a free fishing trip at the Bristol Bay, a nearby salmon fishery.”

They wanted to make sure he was ‘looking environmentally friendly’. So they bought him a car with some of your money that uses a bunch of rare earth minerals that is powered by coal. IEEE Spectrum (6/30/13) reports: “Last summer, California highway police pulled over pop star Justin Bieber as he sped through Los Angeles in an attempt to shake the paparazzi. He was driving a hybrid electric car—not just any hybrid, mind you, but a chrome-plated Fisker Karma, a US $100 000 plug-in hybrid sports sedan he’d received as an 18th-birthday gift from his manager, Scooter Braun, and fellow singer Usher. During an on-camera surprise presentation, Braun remarked, ‘We wanted to make sure, since you love cars, that when you are on the road you are always looking environmentally friendly, and we decided to get you a car that would make you stand out a little bit.’ Mission accomplished. Bieber joins a growing list of celebrities, environmentalists, and politicians who are leveraging electric cars into green credentials.”

How unusual is this really? I mean, he has appointed people to the Department of Energy who are opposed to energy, people to the Department of Labor who don’t work, people to the Department of Health and Human Services who oppose both health and humans. Why should the Native Americans be any different? Censored News(6/26/13) reports: “President Obama created a council of non-Indian bureaucrats and deceptively named it the ‘White House Council on Native American Affairs’ on Wednesday, fooling many into believing that it was actually a council of Native Americans In an act of typical US paternalism and inappropriate irony, the US Secretary of Interior was placed as the chair of the new council to honor Native American treaties, resources and rights. The non-Indian, British born Secretary of Interior Sally Jewell worked previously for Mobil oil in Oklahoma and the banking industry.”

Blocking our largest energy reserves? Not if Dan Kish can stop it.  

 

Filed Under: Blog, In the Pipeline

In the Pipeline: 7/1/13

July 1, 2013 by Leave a Comment

We offer this without comment. The Telegraph (6/27/13) reports: “There has not been a sighting of the species in Britain since 1991 when a single bird was seen four times – in Kent, Staffordshire, Derbyshire and finally Shetland. Now 22 years later another White-throated Needletail turned up in the UK, but after more than 80 twitchers flocked to Harris – with scores more on their way – the bird flew into a wind turbine at Tarbert, witnessed by around 40 people. Josh Jones of Bird Guides said: ‘It was seen by birders fly straight into the turbine. It is ironic that after waiting so long for this bird to turn up in the UK, it was killed by a wind turbine and not a natural predator.’”

See, pretty much everyone wants a market-based approach to climate change. So do we. Except our preferred “market-based approach” is economic growth. The Wall Street Journal (6/27/13) reports: “President Obama unveiled his vast new anticarbon-energy agenda this week, which he plans to impose by executive fiat. Crucial to pulling off this exercise is a decision the federal bureaucracy made last month to change the way it accounts for carbon emissions—a decision that received almost no media attention. In late May the Administration slipped this mickey into a new rule about efficiency standards for microwaves, significantly raising what it calls the “social cost of carbon.” Team Obama made no public notice and invited no comment on this change that will further tilt rule-making against products and industries that use carbon energy.”

You knew this already, but everything is not as the President would say it seems. The Institute for Energy Research (6/27/13) reports: “The newly released ‘President’s Climate Action Plan’ is aptly named, for ‘planning’ is the traditional term that socialists used when trying to centrally run the economy. Indeed, the president’s plan dabbles in: emissions of hydrofluorocarbons and methane; forest growth; promotion of so-called clean energy; task forces at the state, local and tribal levels; building integrity; resilience in health care; conserving land and water resources; insurance leadership; launching a ‘climate data initiative’; mobilizing ‘climate finance’; and a host of other items. Beyond the audacity and hubris of such a plan, is the fact that it relies on dubious economics. Even taking the peer-reviewed mainstream literature at face value, much of the action plan document is unjustifiable.”

It turns out the President supports a market-based approach to climate change. Still not quite sure what that means. National Public Radio(6/28/13) reports: “Climate change seems like this complicated problem with a million pieces. But Henry Jacoby, an economist at MIT’s business school, says there’s really just one thing you need to do to solve the problem: Tax carbon emissions. ‘If you let the economists write the legislation,’ Jacoby says, ‘it could be quite simple.’ He says he could fit the whole bill on one page. Basically, Jacoby would tax fossil fuels in proportion to the amount of carbon they release. That would make coal, oil and natural gas more expensive. That’s it; that’s the whole plan.”

Love boat, soon we”ll be making another run (just not from Baltimore, thanks to the EPA)… The Baltimore Sun (6/27/13) reports: “Carnival Cruise Lines announced plans Thursday to leave the port of Baltimore, a move that could cost the region scores of jobs and millions in economic activity generated by big-spending passengers and businesses servicing the ships. The Miami-based company said that without federal approval of its plan for curbing air pollution, it would cut back on the number of cruises and move the Pride to a dock in Tampa, Fla., in November 2014. The Pride, a 2,124-passenger ship, sails weekly from Baltimore to the Bahamas and Caribbean. The move would leave the city with one other large cruise ship, Royal Caribbean’s Grandeur of the Seas, still sailing regularly from the South Locust Point terminal. It also left state officials, who had been lobbying the Environmental Protection Agency on Carnival’s behalf, scrambling to prevent such a blow to the cruise industry here. ”

Filed Under: Blog, In the Pipeline Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Misleading on American Manufacturing

June 28, 2013 by Leave a Comment

Those of us involved in policy debates over the energy sector know that it is hardly a fair fight. The people advocating greater government intervention routinely use phrases such as “clean energy,” “green energy,” “greenhouse gas pollution,” and other such loaded terms. It’s difficult to have a rational discussion about carbon taxes or chemical plant regulation when the debate is cast between those who are for and against “clean energy,” for example.

As yet another example of loading the deck in favor of more government intervention, consider the interactive map established by the Center for Effective Government, following a Louisiana chemical plant explosion in June. When you go to the map, here is the default view of facilities with flammables that have reported at least one accident:

Wow, looks like the US is being overrun by chemical plant accidents, doesn’t it? Yet if you click on the tab to show facilities with zero accidents, here is the new picture:

Quite a different view isn’t it? And there are other problems, too. For one thing, according to the legend in the top left of the map, a facility merely handling propane would count. Yes, propane is flammable and needs to be handled properly, but the phrase “chemical plant explosion” conjures up a different mental picture, than what might be a minor fire involving propane.

Another problem is that it’s not obvious from the map what the time frame is. If those numerous red dots referred to accidents within the last 12 months, that would be one thing. If it refers to the number of accidents over the entire history of reporting for each facility—which it seems to be—then that’s something else entirely.

Nobody denies that certain chemicals can be dangerous, and that proper procedures should be taken to safeguard the public. However, the mere fact that accidents do occasionally happen, is not proof that government must “do something.” The one truly effective safety measure would be to stop using chemicals altogether, but that would (of course) be a cure worse than the disease.

In any event, the interactive map put out by the Center for Effective Government is designed to give the default view of a very dangerous status quo, when the actual situation is much calmer. By the same token, someone could create a map of drownings in public swimming pools, with a default view that would make it seem as if swimming needed to be tightly regulated by the federal government. Swimming and chemicals both carry risks, but they also confer substantial benefits for the modern American way of life. Any discussion of further regulation should be balanced and based on a sober assessment of the facts.

Filed Under: News, Products and Power Tagged With: , , , , , ,

In the Pipeline: 6/28/13

June 28, 2013 by Leave a Comment

What is the one thing His Majesty says to the Keystone XL pipeline? Not today. Human Events (6/27/13) reports: “President Obama’s declaration of dictatorial, Congress-be-damned war on “climate change” was particularly welcome to hedge-fund billionaire and megabucks Obama donor Tom Steyer. And why not? Steyer stands to make a bundle from his beloved President’s decision. You see, President Obama seems intent on killing the Keystone XL pipeline. And what do you know? Steyer’s Farallon Capital just happens to have major holdings in a competing pipeline company called Kinder Morgan, whose TransMountain pipe is carrying tar sands oil from a different part of Canada to Asian customers. And they’re looking to expand this operation until it’s bigger than Keystone XL would be!”

It is all in here — carbon pricing, taxes, redistribution. The only thing missing is the reeducation camps. The International Monetary Fund (6/12/13) reports: “It has been twenty years since world leaders first went to Rio to commit to the noble goal of protecting the planet for future generations. And now, twenty years on, we will be journeying back to Rio to affirm our commitment to sustainable development—the idea that we should strive for economic growth, environmental protection and social progress at the same time. The idea that different economic, environmental, and social objectives can be seen as distinct aspects of a single vision, essential parts of a connected whole. But while those bound for Rio might have the best of intentions, they do not face the best of circumstances.”

Isn’t this like a bankrupt pizza shop going into the brick-making business? Business Week and Car and Driver report: “Coda Automotive, a Los Angeles-based electric carmaker, announced today that it is filing for bankruptcy. Coda’s parent company says it plans to sell its auto assets to focus on energy storage. The demise of the 4-year-old startup, which was backed by billionaire Philip Falcone, comes as a surprise to almost no one.”… “After filing with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware, Coda said it wanted to continue supplying batteries for utilities and commercial buildings. Its automotive arm will be put into mothballs.”

Well, four is more than three. Business Green (6/27/13) reports: “The government has today confirmed only four households have signed up to its flagship Green Deal energy efficiency scheme, despite the fact it has been in operation for five months. However, figures released this morning also show that 241 households are currently poised to sign up to Green Deal financing packages, while the number undertaking official Green Deal assessments has risen to over 38,000.”

For the Constitution: Chris Horner. Politico (6/28/13) reports: “After years of digging political dirt on the climate movement, Chris Horner has suddenly struck gold in stoking the GOP’s transparency crusade against the Environmental Protection Agency. Horner’s near-obsessive focus on unearthing federal officials’ emails, instant messages and other digital records inspired the congressional flap over former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s secondary “Richard Windsor” email account, as well as howls from the Hill about the agency’s alleged ideological bias in charging for document searches. Another of Horner’s targets was a regional EPA administrator who stepped down after the revelation that he had used personal email accounts for agency business.”

The colonies are getting uppity and the (other) Crown is taking notice.


The team is still very much opposed to a carbon tax. Please contact us at nocarbontax@energydc.org if you wish to join our growing ranks.
Tom Pyle, American Energy Alliance
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
Rich Collins, Positive Growth Alliance
Craig Richardson, American Tradition Institute
The Honorable George Allen, American Energy Freedom Center

Correction: It has come to our attention that Jim Connaughton does not, in fact, favor a carbon tax. Apparently he does favor market-based alternatives to command and control regulation (whatever those are). So, today we note his opposition, correct the record, and apologize for our mistake

Filed Under: Blog, In the Pipeline Tagged With: , , , , ,

In the Pipeline: 6/27/13

June 27, 2013 by Leave a Comment
A little more Tom Pyle hype you can believe in. Breaking Energy (6/24/13) reports: “The Washington, DC-based Institute for Energy Research’s message is clear: Government intervention in energy markets is counter-productive. The organization believes this to be the case even in dealing with climate change. The IER is a think tank with an emphasis on a free market approach to energy. Its papers cover issues ranging from carbon taxes to power plant closures to the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, and invariably find that policy efforts to shape the US energy landscape are more costly than beneficial. ‘If you look at what’s going on in Washington, DC there’s sort of a major effort to reorganize where we get our energy sources from, how we get our energy sources and how we should be enlightened to choose alternatives to what has historically worked pretty well for various policy reasons,’ IER President Tom Pyle told Breaking Energy.”

David Banks: surrender monkey. But at least he is not yet publicly in favor of a carbon tax, like his mentor, Jim Connaughton. Politico (6/25/13) reports: “Republican lawmakers may be irate over President Barack Obama’s climate change plans, but there may be little that Congress can do to stop the push for new landmark Environmental Protection Agency rules to cut emissions from power plants. Since the previous Congress, House Republicans have exercised their majority power to pass measures calling for expanded oil and gas production, restricting EPA and cancelling other Obama environmental and energy initiatives.”

Kish cuts through the chatter:

ICYMI: Whitfield Stands Up for Jobs, Responds to President’s War on Coal. The Wall Street Journal (6/25/13) reports: “President Obama’s climate speech on Tuesday was grandiose even for him, but its surreal nature was its particular hallmark. Some 12 million Americans still can’t find work, real wages have fallen for five years, three-fourths of Americans now live paycheck to check, and the economy continues to plod along four years into a quasi-recovery. But there was the President in tony Georgetown, threatening more energy taxes and mandates that will ensure fewer jobs, still lower incomes and slower growth. Mr. Obama’s “climate action plan” adds up to one of the most extensive reorganizations of the U.S. economy since the 1930s, imposed through administrative fiat and raw executive power.”

When the palace guards start calling things by their true names, you know it is bad. The Washington Post (6/25/13) reports:

MARK SMASH:

 

Filed Under: Blog, In the Pipeline Tagged With: , , , , ,

The New Effort to Repeal the RFS

June 27, 2013 by Leave a Comment

A bipartisan trio of Senators, including John Barrasso (R-WY), Mark Pryor (D-AR), and Pat Toomey (R-PA), introduced legislation last week in the hopes of repealing the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) in place since 2005. Under that legislation and subsequent revisions, 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels are required to be blended into the country’s transportation fuels by 2022.

Advocates of the RFS say that the policy protects the environment by lowering greenhouse gas emissions and lowers prices at the gas pump. Additionally, proponents believe the EPA policy will encourage acceleration of alternative energy innovation and create jobs in a developing industry.  They also cite the usage of U.S. biofuels, primarily corn-based ethanol, as a tool to increase energy security as the nation becomes less dependent on foreign energy sources.

Opponents of the RFS say that the bill, known as “The Renewable Fuel Standard Repeal Act” (S.1195), is essential to curb rising costs of food for Americans resulting from the increased usage of the nation’s corn crop as fuel. They also claim a reversal of the RFS will protect consumer vehicles against unproven fuel compatibility claiming that increased ethanol blending will create widespread damage to various motors and open automobile and other engine manufacturers to liability and litigation. Finally, RFS detractors refute the idea that fuel blending helps lower costs at the pump and feels that repeal of RFS will actually lead to more affordable fuel costs for consumers.

The RFS came into existence as part of the 2005 Energy Policy Act (EPAct) and was expanded in 2007 as under the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA). Recently, parties on both sides of the RFS debate have been concerned with the possibility of the approaching “blend wall”, which may restrict the RFS from being implemented at the levels previously prescribed.  The blend wall is the theoretical point at which technology, infrastructure and markets make it impossible to meet current RFS mandates. Some studies predict the industry will reach this “blend wall” within the next 2-3 years.

Identical language to S.1195 was offered as an amendment to this year’s Farm Bill (S.954) by Senators Toomey and Barrasso in May but was not adopted by the Senate. By issuing the act as a stand-alone bill with bipartisan support the trio hopes to encourage dialogue and reconsideration of the controversial renewable fuel standard.

Policy Associate Landon Stevens contributed to this post. 

Filed Under: News, Products and Power, Renewable Fuel Standard Tagged With: , , , , ,

It’s Time to Repeal the RFS, Not Expand it

June 26, 2013 by Leave a Comment

WASHINGTON D.C. – The American Energy Alliance and eleven other free market organizations sent a joint letter to Congress today opposing H.R. 1959, the Domestic Alternative Fuels Act of 2013. This bill would expand the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) by allowing ethanol derived from natural gas to count toward the mandatory blending targets established by law. AEA President Thomas Pyle released the following statement opposing the RFS:

“The federal biofuel mandate is a misguided policy that distorts energy markets at the expense of the consumer. Expanding the RFS to include natural gas is just another example of the federal government trying to solve a problem it created with another mandate. Instead of expanding this already broken policy, we should move towards a common sense solution to eliminate the mandate altogether. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and Senator Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) recently introduced a bill to repeal the RFS and it is our hope that others in Congress will follow suit. The American Energy Alliance is always willing to work with those who oppose mandates that distort markets and harm consumers.”

The joint letter states:

“…Natural gas has no need of special privileges to flourish in the motor fuel market, as two articles in the June 20, 2013 Wall Street Journal clearly show. Worldwide, gas demand in road transport increased tenfold from 2000 to 2010. The International Energy Agency expects gas in road and maritime transport to “do more to reduce the medium-term growth in oil demand than both biofuels and electric cars combined.” This spring Cummins released two new long-haul truck engines that run on gas rather than diesel. The company developed the engines “without a penny of government support.

“We applaud the shale revolution and support the freedom of gas producers to export their product. However, the appropriate cure for a market-rigging scheme like the RFS is repeal, not giving other industries a share of the spoils…”

The other signatories of the letter are:
60 Plus
American Commitment
Americans for Prosperity
Club for Growth
Commonwealth Foundation
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Freedom Action
FreedomWorks
Frontiers of Freedom
Let Freedom Ring
National Taxpayers Union
To read the full text of the letter, click here (PDF).
To read a recent study by the Institute for Energy Research on ethanol from natural gas, click here (PDF).

 

###

Filed Under: Press Releases Tagged With: , , , ,
Previous
Next