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: 1/14/13

January 14, 2013 by Leave a Comment

Coming in at number 3 on the laundry list of your progressive rights (after condoms and the Internet), you have the right to pursue sunlight that may or may not hit your outrageously expensive solar panels that have been installed by the ‘market’ – cough, coercion – but who cares!  You won’t have to worry about going over the threshold for the tax break, because there’s no way you’ll even have access to anything that resembles a reliable source of energy.  Now we just have to decide how much energy everyone needs and call it a day! Christian Science Monitor (1/10/13) reports: “A benefit of consumers paying for the tax is that they would be encouraged to make important choices – such as adjusting their thermostats, changing their light bulbs, or refusing to do so and paying the tax. As with any tax on consumption, however, poorer Americans would suffer more than wealthier ones… A simple exemption, however, could make the tax burden much lighter for poorer Americans, while at the same time encouraging even greater conservation. The idea is simple: Each household would be exempted from the tax for a modest amount of electricity per month or year; the exemption would be most effective if the system also imposed only minimal usage charges for electricity below the cutoff. The system would recognize almost all households need to use some electricity, but that consumption beyond the minimum would be taxed.” [Emphasis added]

 

Blue Ribbon Commission on Delaying and Obfuscation recommends more delay and obfuscation.  The House and Energy Commerce Committee is rude enough to point out that we probably need less of both. Energy & Commerce (1/11/2013) reports: “We cannot have a serious conversation about solving America’s nuclear waste problems without talking about Yucca Mountain. There remains a gaping hole in this implementation plan because President Obama precluded the commission from considering Yucca Mountain in its report. The Blue Ribbon Commission emphasized the need for a long-term storage repository, and Yucca Mountain remains the most viable and thoroughly studied option.”

 

So, let’s review.  A large government agency that would benefit from government regulation of GHG emissions produces a questionable report designed to support (wait for it) . . . government regulation of GHGs. Washington Time (1/11/13) reports: “Strangely, NCDC changes temperature data even from the distant past without notification. For example, NCDC now asserts that the average temperature in July 1936 was 76.4 degrees, a full degree cooler than the 77.4 degrees that they claimed for the month in the July 2012 SOTC report. This allows them to continue to say that July 2012 set a record… Mr. Watts found that in the 23 monthly SOTC reports between October 2010 and November 2012 (three SOTC reports did not list average temperatures), 22 of them do not match the NCDC database, presumably due to later updating when all the data are received and analyzed. In all cases except one, the country cooled when all the data were incorporated.”

 

Gosh, we didn’t realize the bad guys were running out of talking points, but apparently fracking is going to ‘kill’ the whole world. NY Daily News (1/11/13) reports: “Fracking kills,” Ono said at a press conference with other drilling opponents. “And it doesn’t just kill us, it kills the land, nature and eventually the whole world.”… “Actors by nature are narcissists, and so it is no surprise that they ‘imagine’ themselves as scientists, engineers, farmers and economists,” said Karen Moreau of the state Petroleum Council… “They are also hypocrites of the first order,” Moreau said. “Wealthy urbanites who live in expensive energy consuming mansions, happy to burn natural gas in their gourmet eight-burner cooktops and to enjoy the benefits of low-cost heat and electricity as a result of ‘fracked’ gas.”

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , , ,

In the Pipeline: 1/11/13

January 11, 2013 by Leave a Comment

This boggles even me. Washington Examiner (1/10/13) reports: “A new video game featuring a black alien female superhero delivered to Earth to fight global warming is about to hit the market thanks to a $100,000 grant from the Obama administration… The National Endowment for the Arts is funding the Spelman College of Atlanta, Ga.’s multi-episode game called “HERadventure.” In the grant announcement made last year, the NEA said the story ‘focuses on a young female superhero sent to Earth to save her own planet from devastation because of climate changes caused by social issues impacting women and girls.’”

 

The Keystone Cops of the Obama Administration succeed.  Their horsing around means china will get more oil from Alberta than Keystone XL would send to the US. Financial Post (1/10/13) reports: “The Canadian arm of Dallas-based Kinder Morgan Energy Partners LP is upping by 20% the capacity of its proposed Trans Mountain pipeline expansion to Canada’s West Coast, extending its lead over transportation rival Enbridge Inc.’s Northern Gateway project in the race to deliver Alberta oil to new markets… Kinder Morgan Canada Inc. said Thursday it has enough support from shippers to boost capacity on the Pacific-bound line to 890,000 barrels per day, up from a previous target of 750,000 barrels daily.”

 

Why does this remind us of the proctologist with both hands on your shoulders who keeps saying, “everything will be fine.” E&ETV(1/10/13) reports: “How would a bottom-up approach to environment policy help engage conservatives and promote the conservative environmental agenda? During today’s OnPoint, Ed Schafer, former secretary of Agriculture and former governor of North Dakota, and Gale Norton, former Interior secretary, discuss their work with the Conservation Leadership Council and explain why they believe limited government is the best approach to managing the United States’ environmental challenges.”

 

Come on, guys.  Everyone can see your hands (yes, both hands) reaching into the cookie jar. Politico (1/10/13) reports: “Dow Chemical denied Thursday that it’s trying to corner a potential natural gas export market while urging the Energy Department to limit its approval of other companies’ applications to export liquefied natural gas.”

 

Yea, sure we have nice competitive advantage right now in the U.S.  But wait, who is the “we”?  Because usually it’s “we the people” who take it in the shorts when the bad guys and good guys start to play footsie with each other in Washington.  Politico(1/10/13) reports: “What does the Sierra Club have in common with chemical company Dow Chemical?… They’re both opposed to exporting natural gas, even though it’s for different reasons… ‘The concern is that you have this tremendous competitive advantage in the U.S. right now — don’t squander that. Don’t give that away,’ Biltz said.”

 

“The Unwelcome Renaissance”?  Really?  Energy that your average Joe can afford is awesome, and a rare change from the dreary plight most humans suffered through over the course of our existence.  Why are humans so ashamed of being awesome these days? The Economist (1/5/13) reports: “WHILE coal production and use plummet in America, in Europe “we have some kind of golden age of coal,” says Anne-Sophie Corbeau of the International Energy Agency. The amount of electricity generated from coal is rising at annualised rates of as much as 50% in some European countries. Since coal is by the far the most polluting source of electricity, with more greenhouse gas produced per kilowatt hour than any other fossil fuel, this is making a mockery of European environmental aspirations. How did it happen?”

 

This is a little scary, a little weird, but totally worth the read. Mother Jones (1/9/13) reports: “It was the kind of meeting that conspiratorial conservative bloggers dream about… A month after President Barack Obama won reelection, top brass from three dozen of the most powerful groups in liberal politics met at the headquarters of the National Education Association (NEA), a few blocks north of the White House. Brought together by the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Communication Workers of America (CWA), and the NAACP, the meeting was invite-only and off-the-record. Despite all the Democratic wins in November, a sense of outrage filled the room as labor officials, environmentalists, civil rights activists, immigration reformers, and a panoply of other progressive leaders discussed the challenges facing the left and what to do to beat back the deep-pocketed conservative movement.”

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

In the Pipeline: 1/9/13

January 9, 2013 by Leave a Comment

This dude is the rock for our roll. Energy Guardian (1/9/13) reports: “The effort by conservative Republican lawmakers and anti-tax groups to end tax breaks for renewable energy didn’t go anywhere in Congress last year, but that’s not stopping Rep. Mike Pompeo from trying again… The bill has the backing of key conservative groups that oppose renewable energy tax breaks, according to a letter Pompeo is circulating to colleagues.”

 

With the right energy policy, this could be America. Bloomberg(1/7/13) reports: “Legislators in Texas, the biggest energy producer among U.S. states, will begin deliberating its next two-year budget with a surplus forecast today to match an $8.8 billion record set in 2007… The Texas economy has topped budget projections over the past 15 months, as booming energy output fueled job growth and an 11 percent fiscal first-quarter gain in sales-tax receipts, the biggest source of general-fund revenue. Even after paying off $7 billion in health and school bills, Comptroller Susan Combs said today that the state will be flush heading into 2014.”

 

I guess now that they can’t lobby for cap and trade, or for an environmentally and economically destructive ethanol program, or against access to our natural resources, or screw up wetlands policy, these retreads from the catastrophic Bush “Administration” figured it was time to work the other side of the street.  And just in case we missed the point, the whole thing is being funded by the collectivists over at the Environmental Defense Fund. E&ENews (1/8/13) reports: “The CLC has spent plenty of time in recent months thinking about the costs associated with the country’s many environmental challenges and has sought to provide solutions that conservatives can embrace… Formed last year and featuring several former George W. Bush administration officials, CLC hopes to be a new voice for free-market, limited-government conservation efforts that can garner support and reignite environmental debate in conservative and libertarian circles.”

 

Seriously dude, the science is settled.  Shut up and stop asking questions about the data. The Telegraph (1/8/13) reports: “Although the first decade of the 21st century was the warmest on record, warming has not been as rapid since 2000 as over the longer period since the 1970s,” he said. “This variability in global temperatures is not unusual, with several periods lasting a decade or more with little or no warming since the instrumental record began.”

 

Wait, really?  That’s all the debate boils down to?  It has nothing to do with millions of people trying to improve their lives with access to affordable and reliable energy?  Nothing to do with silly things like science, markets, technology and BTUs? Forbes(1/2/13) reports: “The clean energy subsidy debate is one of the most contested, but unsophisticated policy debates in Washington today. It largely boils down to a specific energy industry fighting to extend its preferred subsidy and anti-clean energy advocates fighting to eliminate said subsidy. As a result, little attention is paid to how these policy incentives impact clean energy innovation and whether energy technologies need different types of support or better deployment support all together.”

 

In all fairness, he left out that the royal house of Qatar also bankrolled Matt Damon’s propaganda flop. Forbes (1/8/13) reports: “Al-Jazeera, the anti-Israeli network funded by Qatar, closed a deal with the struggling left-wing cable station Current TV founded by Al Gore which gives the them access to 40 million U.S. homes. Unfortunately for Mr. Gore, the purchase wasn’t consummated until January 2nd, depriving him of success in his efforts to beat the clock on an estimated $100 million payback before higher tax rates kicked in on January 1.”

 

What do you get when you live in a society where the predators start to outweigh the producers? Monkey-Wrenching America (1/7/13) reports: “The industry has ebbed and flowed a bit as various direct subsidies have waxed and waned. But wind’s most sustained growth spurt coincided with the renewable energy portfolio fad that swept the states, mandating markets where little or no natural market existed… Dr. David Dismukes, of Louisiana State University, examined the role various government interventions have played in the growth of the industry in a recent report, ”Removing Big Wind’s Training Wheels: The Case for Ending the Federal Production Tax Credit.” Here’s part of what the report had to say about renewable energy production mandates.”

 

Bonner does solid work.  This is no exception. National Center for Public Policy Research (1/8/13) reports: “The Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to bypass normal regulatory procedures to stop a mining project in a remote part of Alaska could have profound implications for domestic mining across the U.S., according to Dr. Bonner Cohen in a scathing new report, “The EPA’s Pebble Mine Assessment Puts Politics Above Sound Science.”… The report, available athttp://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA646.html, has been submitted to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee for use in an investigation of the EPA related to the proposed Pebble Mine project.”

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

In the Pipeline: 1/8/13

January 8, 2013 by Leave a Comment

You mean those roughnecks and coal miners aren’t kidding when they say they like to hunt and fish in their own back yards? For some reason I used to think it was more sensible to listen to “real” environmentalists from places like Manhattan. WSJ (1/4/13) reports: “The inescapable if unfashionable conclusion is that the human use of fossil fuels has been causing the greening of the planet in three separate ways: first, by displacing firewood as a fuel; second, by warming the climate; and third, by raising carbon dioxide levels, which raise plant growth rates.”

 

Even the New York Times understands that biofuels are taking food out of the mouths of the world’s poor. NYTimes (1/5/13) reports: “In the tiny tortillerias of this city, people complain ceaselessly about the high price of corn. Just three years ago, one quetzal — about 15 cents — bought eight tortillas; today it buys only four. And eggs have tripled in price because chickens eat corn feed.”

 

“It was a dark and stormy night; the rain fell in torrents — except at occasional intervals, when it was checked by a violent gust of wind which swept up the streets (for it is in [Boulder] that our scene lies), rattling along the housetops, and fiercely agitating the scanty flame of the lamps that struggled against the darkness.” Denver Post (1/6/13) reports: “An army of consultants and citizen working groups are on the march in Boulder, trying to determine whether Xcel Energy, the state’s largest electric utility, can be replaced with a municipal power authority.”

 

Gore’s Oil bet pays off while his solar stocks sink. Must be because of global warming. WSJ (1/7/13) reports: “Al Gore’s big payday courtesy of a Middle Eastern oil emirate couldn’t come at a better time for the former vice president. That’s because of the rough market for Mr. Gore’s investments in oil alternatives. While Mr. Gore collects an estimated $100 million selling Current TV to Qatar-backed broadcaster Al Jazeera, the recent sale of a solar company backed by Mr. Gore’s venture-capital firm reveals a green-energy disaster.”

 

The Boring Legacy: “Damon’s fracking hunt finds little good will”. E&ENews (1/2/13) reports: “Although the actors lauded the Times series, the paper’s review of “Promised Land” didn’t return the favor. Reviewer A.O. Scott opined that the film “works” but that it is “unable to fulfill its own promise.”… The Washington Post was less charitable, calling it an “attractive, well-intentioned dry well.” And the Los Angeles Times deemed it ‘an echo of a convincing film rather than the real deal.’”

 

I don’t remember this, but it appears we’re in the wrong business.AZCentral.com (4/12/12) reports: “Rob Gillette, the ousted CEO of First Solar Inc., earned more than $32 million in compensation from the struggling company for his two years of service, according to a regulatory filing Wednesday… Gillette came to First Solar from Phoenix-based Honeywell Aerospace in October 2009 and was fired by the Tempe-based solar company’s board of directors in October 2011… First Solar’s share price was greater than $143 the day Gillette’s employment contract began with the company, and it was $100 less when he was fired two years later… Most of his compensation came in the three months of 2009 that he worked, when his total compensation, including salary, bonus, stock and options awards and other perks, reached $16.55 million.”

 

What’s their REAL agenda? Clean Technica (1/2/13) reports: “The AVSP, according to estimates provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, is expected to offset more than 775,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per year. That’s the equivalent of eradicating three million cars from California’s highways over the 20 years of the plant’s projected operation (though, it’s likely to actually run longer than 20 years)… Now, if only we could also get rid of three million cars — then we’d be doing pretty well!”

 

So can we get back to real work now? All the bickering is less than productive. The Global Warming Policy Foundation (1/7/13) reports: “That the global temperature standstill (observed from 1997 to the present) could continue to at least 2017 would mean a 20-year period of no statistically significant change in global temperatures. Such a period of no increase coming at a time when greenhouse gas forcing is rising will pose fundamental problems for climate models… If the latest Met Office prediction is correct, and it accords far more closely with the observed data than previous predictions, then it will prove to be a lesson in humility. It will show that the previous predictions that were given so confidently as advice to the UK government and so unquestioningly accepted by the media, were wrong, and that the so-called sceptics who were derided for questioning them were actually on the right track.”

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , , ,

In the Pipeline: 1/7/13

January 7, 2013 by Leave a Comment

The chance to get rich off global warming is slipping away.  Which could explain why Vice President Gore joined up with the royal house of Qatar, so they can hate American domestic energy production together.  Did we mention that Al Jazeera also is backing that lousy propaganda from Matt Damon? WSJ (1/4/13) reports: “The Kyoto Protocol on climate change used to be a big deal. So big that the future of humanity was said to hinge on its implementation. Did you know it expired on New Year’s Day? We’re guessing you didn’t, but don’t worry. It’s no big deal.”

 

I wonder what this dude has in mind.  I bet it is taxes on carbon.  I personally think we should tax dangerous, regressive, economically destructive, pointless policies. NYTimes (1/5/13) reports: “NO one enjoys paying taxes — and no politician relishes raising them. Yet some taxes actually make us better off, even apart from the revenue they provide for public services… Taxes on activities with harmful side effects are a case in point. Strongly favored even by many conservative Republican economists, these levies are known as Pigovian taxes, after the British economist Arthur C. Pigou, who advocated them in his 1920 book, “The Economics of Welfare.” In today’s deeply polarized political climate, they offer one of the few realistic hopes for progress.”

 

Good news for Alaska: Unwanted yuppies will continue to be kept at bay. Anchorage Daily News (1/5/13) reports: “The overwhelming majority of Alaska is getting colder and has been since 2000, according to a study by researchers with the Geophysical Institute at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. But the authors stop short of saying the lower temperatures contradict that idea that the earth, and Alaska in particular, is warming. Instead, they conclude that the findings show a temporary variation.”

 

We’d want to ask the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund (renamed as Earthworks) whether this also applies to Global Warming research. CBS Pittsburgh (1/6/13) reports: “‘In its inability to find a single company willing to test water quality before and after drilling and fracking, the EPA is being thwarted in perhaps the most important part of its study of fracking’s impacts,’ Earthworks said in a statement… ‘Computer simulations are not enough,’ Alan Septoff, a spokesman for Earthworks, said.”

 

Let a thousand Bakkens Bloom: Fed Reserve reports Bakken income up 19% while U.S. is flat. INFORUM (1/4/13) reports: “The Bakken oil boom is now five times larger than the area’s 1980s oil boom, according to a new report by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.”

 

Trick question: What’s the one country in the world that embraces opportunity, investment, and adding tangible value to society? Edmonton Journal (1/1/13) reports: “Alison Redford’s cabinet is expected to decide in January whether the government will spend $10 million to study the idea of building a rail line to ship oilsands products from northern Alberta to a port in Alaska… The money would help pay for a $40-million study that will investigate the feasibility of a proposed 2,400-kilometre rail line to carry landlocked oilsands products from Fort McMurray to Delta Junction, Alaska… From there, Alberta’s oil would flow through the Trans-Alaska Pipeline system to the Valdez Marine Terminal, and on to booming Asian markets.”

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

In the Pipeline: 1/4/13

January 4, 2013 by Leave a Comment

Why has Gov. Cuomo been sitting on a state report that shows that hydraulic fracturing is safe? What does he have against job creation and economic growth in upstate New York? NYTimes(1/3/13) reports: “The state’s Health Department found in an analysis it prepared early last year that the much-debated drilling technology known as hydrofracking could be conducted safely in New York, according to a copy obtained by The New York Times from an expert who did not believe it should be kept secret… The analysis and other health assessments have been closely guarded by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and his administration as the governor weighs whether to approve fracking. Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, has long delayed making a decision, unnerved in part by strident opposition on his party’s left. A plan to allow a limited amount of fracking in the state’s Southern Tier along the Pennsylvania border is still seen as the most likely outcome, should the drilling process receive final approval.”

 

Can I get an amen? I said, can I get an AMEN?! Washington Times(1/3/12) reports: “At a time when jobs and the economy were, as they still are, in the forefront of each American’s mind, the president turned down an opportunity that would have created upward of 20,000 new jobs in the energy and manufacturing industries… At a time when unrest in the Middle East disrupted global oil supply, the president declined a pipeline that would have prevented the United States from spending $70 million per day to purchase oil from this volatile region… At a time when cash-strapped states were struggling through an anemic economic recovery, the president wrote off $585 million in potential state and local tax revenue the pipeline would have generated… None of this makes sense.”

 

Did you know that Al sold this thing to Al Jazeera rather than Glenn Beck because Al Jazeera was more in line with his ideology?  Think about that for a second. WSJ (1/2/13) reports: “Al-Jazeera, the Pan-Arab news channel that struggled to win space on American cable television, has acquired Current TV, boosting its reach in the U.S. nearly ninefold to about 40 million homes. With a focus on U.S. news, it plans to rebrand the left-leaning news network that cofounder Al Gore couldn’t make relevant… The former vice president confirmed the sale Wednesday, saying in a statement that Al-Jazeera shares Current TV’s mission ‘to give voice to those who are not typically heard; to speak truth to power; to provide independent and diverse points of view; and to tell the stories that no one else is telling.’”

 

I dig contrarianism.  Especially when it is directed at folks like EPA. Energy Tribune (1/2/13) reports: “The Supreme Court, in Mass v. EPA, stated that the EPA must treat CO2 and other Greenhouse Gases (GHGs), as “pollutants” and then carryout an analysis to determine whether the increasing concentrations in atmospheric CO2 may reasonably be anticipated to endanger human health and welfare. The Court did not mandate regulation; rather it mandated that EPA go through an Endangerment Finding process.”

 

“A multiyear extension in conjunction with a well-crafted phase-out”?  Who in the world does Senator Udall think he is kidding?  This thing is the poster child for everything wrong with Federal energy policy.  And by the way, when has Senator Udall come up with a well-crafted anything? National Journal (1/3/12) reports: “The battle to get Congress to renew the wind-energy production tax credit before year’s end strained relationships among utilities, splintered support within the industry’s biggest trade group, and is setting up the industry—and its supporters in Congress—for a 2013 even more contentious than 2012… Many utilities, environmental groups, and lawmakers from both parties are cheering the news that the production tax credit was extended by one year as part of the fiscal cliff deal. But the bruising fight over the last year doesn’t bode well for the sector as it must now agree on how to ramp down the tax subsidy that was first created 21 years ago.”

 

How many times can a man turn his head, pretending he just doesn’t see? The answer my friend, will no doubt be uncovered by these two gentlemen. Politico (1/3/13) reports: “Lankford, in an interview with POLITICO Wednesday, said he was interested in looking into energy tax credits on his subcommittee… ‘The wind Production Tax Credit is a fertile field for congressional oversight, especially in light of the decision to expand the program’s eligibility requirements in the recent fiscal cliff legislation,” said Benjamin Cole, spokesman for the American Energy Alliance, a group that has ties to the oil industry. “The wind industry owes the American people full transparency in how this credit works at the ground level, and Chairman Issa is particularly well-suited to explore the potential for fraud in this billion dollar annual program.’”

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

In the Pipeline: 1/3/13

January 3, 2013 by Leave a Comment

Jim Lankford is the right man for this job – a solid individual. Politico(1/2/13) reports: “The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is planning a renewed focus on energy issues in the next Congress… Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) will establish a new subcommittee on energy policy, health care and entitlements next year, POLITICO has learned. The subcommittee will be chaired by Rep. James Lankford (R-Okla.).”

 

For you take the high road and I’ll take the low road, and I’ll be in Scotland afore ye.  Unless I’m a bird, then I’m probably going to die a horrific death from the blade of a wind turbine. Scotsman.com (1/2/13) reports: “The RSPB, which has objected to a number of major wind farm developments, claimed that the installation of the turbine would help improve the environmental performance of the charity’s estate. But now the charity has decided to scrap the scheme after it was blown off course by defence chiefs… More than 20 letters of objection from members of the public had already been received by Aberdeenshire Council, vehemently opposing the RSPB’s plans on the grounds that the turbine poses a risk to birdlife on the reserve.”

 

Keith Olbermann.  Eliot Spitzer.  Al Gore.  Now the royal house of Qatar.  Not sure if it is getting better or worse, but one thing is sure – the channel will continue to hate American energy production, just like it did when Al Gore ran it. NYTimes (1/2/13) reports: “Al Jazeera on Wednesday announced a deal to take over Current TV, the low-rated cable channel that was founded by Al Gore, a former vice president, and his business partners seven years ago. Al Jazeera plans to shut Current and start an English-language channel, which will be available in more than 40 million homes, with newscasts emanating from both New York and Doha, Qatar.”

 

Does anybody else smell treachery down at the EPA?  Or are we just picking up the scent of a great republic that is being smothered faster everyday?  OilPrice.com (1/1/13) reports: “The cargo of the train was owned by Bioversal Trading Inc., or its US partner Verdero, depending on what stage of the trip it was at. The companies “made several million dollars importing and exporting the fuel to exploit a loophole in a U.S. green energy program.” Each time the loaded train crossed the border the cargo earned its owner a certain amount of Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs), which were awarded by the US EPA to “promote and track production and importation of renewable fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel.” The RINs were supposed to be retired each time the shipment passed the border, but due to a glitch not all of them were. This enabled Bioversal to accumulate over 12 million RINs from the 24 trips, worth between 50 cents and $1 each, which they can then sell on to oil companies that haven’t met the EPA’s renewable fuel requirements.”

 

This battle may have been lost, but at least a few of the fat ladies in Congress have begun to warm up their pipes. The Hill (1/2/13) reports: “A recently renewed wind power credit could face more scrutiny next Congress, as House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said Wednesday that the credit is of “serious interest” to his committee… ‘In 24 hours the heavily subsidized wind industry has gone from the verge of collapse to a modern-day Gold Rush. H.R. 8 seems to create a perverse incentive to rush production of additional facilities even when there may not be adequate demand for wind, biomass, or geothermal energy,’ Issa told The Hill in a statement.”

 

Hollywood, railroads, rum producers, and phantom fuels… It turns out you’re a fool these days to not scramble for a bite of the pie.  And by ‘bite’ of pie, we mean the crumbs falling off of Uncle Sam’s scraggly beard as he wolfs down the entire U.S. economy. ABC News(1/1/13) reports: “The “fiscal cliff” compromise has been heralded as a saving grace for middle class taxpayers, their families and the unemployed… But buried in the fine print of the 150-page deal are also some lesser-known New Year’s gifts to some of Washington’s favorite industries.”

 

Stossel hits it right on the screws. Reason (1/2/13) reports: “It is scary to think about a world without regulation. Intuition leads us to think that without government we’d be victims of fraud, as I explain in my latest book, “No, They Can’t!” But our intuition is wrong… Consider this: An entire sector of the economy operates almost entirely without government controls. Complete strangers exchange big money there every day.”

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

In the Pipeline: 1/2/13

January 2, 2013 by Leave a Comment

The trusty “we’re running out of oil!” pundits are now “sure, the US will overtake Saudi Arabia and lead the world in oil production…but maybe only for a decade or so” pundits. IER(1/2/12) reports: “For decades, the proponents of so-called green or alternative energy sources have bemoaned the United States’ alleged ‘dependence on foreign oil’ as a chief rallying cry to fire up the average citizen. Americans are very reluctant to pay higher electricity and gasoline prices for abstract concepts such as ‘fighting global warming,’ but they sure don’t like having to ‘fight wars in the Middle East for oil’ either.”

 

These guys at the EPA must have done poorly at their science fairs in elementary school, and now they’re passive-aggressively taking it out on the guys who actually understand things like science and technology. WSJ (1/1/13) reports: “The USGS also noted that in constructing the monitoring wells, the EPA used a “black painted/coated carbon steel casing,” and EPA photographs show that investigators used a painted device to catch sand from the wells. The problem is that paint can contain a variety of compounds that distort test results—so it is poor scientific practice to use painted or coated materials in well-monitoring tests.”

 

Buckle up.  It’s going to be a fun year. WSJ (1/2/13) reports: “The fiscal-cliff deal approved in the Senate included a $12 billion extension of a wind-power tax credit and other support for renewable energy, sparking opposition from House Republicans who said it was an example of the kind of government spending they wanted to cut.”

 

Unfortunately, the end of one era does not always mean the start of better era: “The reign of Jackson cannot end soon enough.”National Review Online (12/28/12) reports: “Today, thousands of coal miners are without work as her power plant regulations (backed by a president who embraced Jackson’s crusade, calling global warming “one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation”) have bankrupted mining companies such as Patriot Coal and forced others such as OhioAmerica and Alpha Natural Resources to downsize. An oil opponent, Jackson successfully lobbied the president to reject the transcontinental Keystone Pipeline, costing the U.S. some 20,000 jobs. Her global warming zeal extended to autos when she took the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards (CAFE) away from the Transportation Department — mandating that auto companies meet a pie-in-the-sky standard of 54.5 mpg by 2025 in an attempt to eliminate the internal combustion engine (the industry is spending millions on lobbying to water down the rules).”

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Energy Development a Parachute for Fiscal Cliff

December 31, 2012 by Leave a Comment

A recent article at Free Enterprise outlined U.S. Chamber President Tom Donohue’s suggestion for easing the problem of solving the so-called fiscal cliff: development of U.S. conventional energy resources. This would boost employment and output, lower energy prices for consumers, and bring in more revenue for various levels of government. If policymakers are serious as they wring their hands about the stalled economy and mushrooming public debt, then they should jump at this win-win solution.

The Free Enterprise article then cited several studies confirming Donohue’s claims:

A new study commissioned by the U.S. Chamber Institute for 21st Century Energy found that unconventional oil and natural gas development will be responsible for 1.3 million new jobs by 2020, and an additional 1.8 million jobs by 2035. This activity will generate more than $2.5 trillion in tax revenues between 2012 and 2035, according to the study.

Another Chamber study, Project No Project, conducted in 2011 concluded that if the permitting process were accelerated, the planning and construction of 351 proposed energy projects would generate 1.9 million construction jobs and 790,000 permanent jobs.

Moreover, an American Petroleum Institute found that by 2018 another million jobs could be created by encouraging the development of new and existing North American oil and gas, as well as building the Keystone XL pipeline. Doing these things could also add hundreds of billions of dollars over time to federal, state, and local tax coffers.

Donohue’s proposal is the polar opposite of calls for a carbon tax as a “solution” to the fiscal cliff. A carbon tax would raise electricity and gasoline prices for consumers, and would stifle economic growth, especially if its revenues were used to fuel government spending, as opposed to offsetting cuts in other taxes. Because a carbon tax is more economically damaging than even an income tax, the projections of the extra trillion-plus in revenue it will bring to the Treasury are probably optimistic, as the overall tax base will grow more slowly because of the onerous burden on energy. One could argue that the environmental benefits (in the form of mitigated climate change damages decades in the future) are high enough to justify the costs of imposing a carbon tax, but the point is that a carbon tax would hurt the conventional economy.

In contrast, Donohue’s proposal to liberalize federal constraints on oil and gas development would bring in extra revenue while boosting the conventional economy. There is a fundamental difference between collecting more tax revenue because of a new tax (like a carbon tax), versus collecting more tax revenue because previously forbidden activities are now permissible. In a sense, it would be as if the Obama Administration currently has an “infinity tax” on the Northern Pipeline, but would be reducing it to the standard income tax rates by approving the project. Thus, even though more revenue would flow to the Treasury, the move should be interpreted as a “tax cut” in the grand scheme.

As policymakers fret about the tepid economic recovery, the horrible job market, and the ballooning debt, the obvious solution is staring them in the face: Stop restricting entrepreneurs from developing the generous deposits of oil and gas on U.S. land.

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

In the Pipeline: 12/31/12

December 31, 2012 by Leave a Comment

Maybe peering over the edge of a cliff will attune these bozos in Washington to mortality.  I wouldn’t count on it, though. AEA (12/31/12) reports: “With our nation’s economic future in their hands, Senate leaders are negotiating behind closed doors in the latest round of political brinkmanship to avert the so-called fiscal cliff. Early reports indicate that some leaders are insisting on an inclusion of the wind production tax credit into any final package, and precisely at the moment they are attempting to raise taxes on small business owners and American families who must pay for it. Billion dollar giveaways to special interests are among the leading drivers of our present fiscal strain, and yet Senate leaders are planning to increase corporate welfare to the most intermittent and unreliable energy sources in our national electricity portfolio.”

 

Having a second email account isn’t illegal or even immoral.  But conducting government business on that account is a strict no-no. They tell you that in the first hour of orientation when you join up. Is the United States Attorney for DC investigating?  Because he should be. Mail Online (12/27/12) reports: “A Washington attorney suing the Environmental Protection Agency for refusing to disclose information about the creation and use of the ‘secondary’ email accounts, says the agency’s chief is resigning in part because of the Justice Department’s decision to publicize thousands of secret alias emails she was responsible for.”

 

Mary Nichols was a catastrophe when she was the AA for Air and Radiation during the Clinton Administration.  It’s doubtful that a few years in the Jerry Brown Administration have improved her. SFGate (12/28/12) reports: “The woman who led California through the development and implementation of some groundbreaking environmental policies could soon be headed to Washington, D.C. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson announced her resignation this week, and already people are speculating about who will next head the agency. One name on nearly every pundit’s short list: California Air Resources Board Chairwoman Mary Nichols.”

 

That’s right, the shale boom is so big you can see it from space. I wonder how long it will take until our politicians and bureaucrats can see the huge potential. Scientific American (12/28/12) reports: “This image is originally from NASA’s Earth at Night series that I’ve been following. The Eagle Ford Shale shows up as bands of lights below San Antonio, stretching from where the “Tex meets the Mex” to Interstate 10. What we’re seeing on the shale is not city or town lights that have sprung up because of the fracking activity. More than likely, we’re seeing well flares that are picked up by the imaging sensors aboard the Soumi NPP satellite, which detects both city lights and gas flares using a “day-night band”. You can also see flaring from offshore oil and gas platforms in the Gulf of Mexico, spreading out like silt from the Mississippi River, and some more flaring out in West Texas.”

 

At least we live in country where our defense capabilities are not jeopardized by silly rules, right…? The Telegraph (12/29/12) reports: “The fighting capability of the [British] Army’s new generation of armoured vehicles could be limited by European rules on greenhouse gas emissions… To avoid breaching the EU rules, the 3,000 vehicles must be specially designed to limit the damage to the environment in the battlefield.”

 

Tanton knows where the bodies are buried. He’s been following Big Wind’s racket in California for 40 years. Forbes (12/21/12) reports: “But it could be getting a lot worse for wind. A fascinating new report by George Taylor and Tom Tanton at the American Tradition Institute called ‘The Hidden Costs of Wind Electricity’ asserts that the cost of wind power is significantly understated by the EIA’s numbers. In fact, says Taylor, generating electricity from wind costs triple what it does from natural gas… That’s because the numbers from the EIA and wind boosters fail to take into account a host of infrastructure and transmission costs.”

 

I suppose it wouldn’t be surprising if a beetle were to spell the downfall of the U.S. by burrowing into our rotten shell of a republic.  At least that’s the way things seem to be going these days. Heritage (12/21/12) reports: “While it is likely a silly argument that this beetle’s preferred habitat is dotted with pipelines, it’s as reasonable as the idea that the greens seek to stop the Keystone Pipeline for the beetle. It is not about the beetle or even really about the effect of the pipeline on habitat. It is about what would flow through the pipeline—energy. From the radical greens’ view, what is worst about this energy isn’t even that it would be a source of CO2. What is worst is that it would be affordable and reliable.”

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: , , , , , ,
Previous
Next