News - American Energy Alliance

“Stop the War on Coal” Bill and Regulatory Transparency

September 25, 2012 by AEA Leave a Comment

On Friday September 21, in its last action before the election, the House voted 233-175 to pass the provocatively titled “Stop the War on Coal Act” (H.R. 3409). Although it is given little chance of passing the Senate, the act contains several proposals to reduce federal constraints on energy production and job growth.

The media have focused on the portions of the act that would change current policy. For example, here is the coverage in The Hill:

The legislation is a combination of five bills that would overturn or prevent an array of regulations that Republicans say would harm the coal industry and the economy. Among other things, it would block the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and other sources, and prevent rules on the storage and disposal of coal ash and limit Clean Water Act rules.

It would also prevent potential Interior Department rules to toughen environmental controls on mountaintop removal coal mining, and thwart other air emissions rules, including air toxics standards for coal-fired power plants.

Republicans say the bill is needed because power companies plan to close some coal-fired plants due to the EPA’s air emissions rules, and because of additional EPA and Interior Department rules affecting coal mining. The GOP says that taken together, the Obama administration’s regulations on the industry amount to a “war on coal.”

In prior posts, we have covered much of this ground in detail, including the dangers of the EPA’s regulation of greenhouse gas emissions and other air emission standards, as well as Utility MACT regulations. In the present post, we want to focus on a particularly interesting feature of H.R. 3409, namely its “Title III: Transparency in Regulatory Analysis of Impacts on Nation.” The following excerpt gives an idea of what this section proposes:

SEC. 301. COMMITTEE FOR THE CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS OF REGULATIONS THAT IMPACT ENERGY AND MANUFACTURING IN THE UNITED STATES.

(a) Establishment- The President shall establish a committee…to analyze and report on the cumulative and incremental impacts of certain rules and actions of the Environmental Protection Agency…

SEC. 302. ANALYSES.

(b) Contents- The Committee shall include in each analysis conducted under this section the following:

◦ (1) Estimates of the impacts of the covered rules and covered actions with regard to–

▪ (A) the global economic competitiveness of the United States, particularly with respect to energy intensive and trade sensitive industries;

▪ (B) other cumulative costs and cumulative benefits, including evaluation through a general equilibrium model approach;

▪ (C) any resulting change in national, State, and regional electricity prices;

▪ (D) any resulting change in national, State, and regional fuel prices;

▪ (E) the impact on national, State, and regional employment during the 5-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, and also in the long term, including secondary impacts associated with increased energy prices and facility closures; and

▪ (F) the reliability and adequacy of bulk power supply in the United States.

The transparency on the EPA requirement is intriguing, since the EPA so often imposes onerous reporting rules on private businesses. This section of the Act turns the tables, as it were, and forces the EPA into the awkward position of quantifying the actual impacts of its proposals on items such as competitiveness, small business, and so forth.

To give an example of why these exercises can be humorous at the very least, the EPA was forced to admit that the new standards for light-duty truck greenhouse gas emissions would cost American consumers $36 billion in higher vehicle prices in the year 2030 alone, but would only reduce mean global temperatures by 0.02 degrees Celsius by the year 2100. (That’s not a typo: They actually reported that their models projected a reduction of 2 one-hundredths of a degree, and that’s the upper bound of their range.)

The House-approved “Stop the War on Coal Act” contains many proposals that dovetail with the warnings outlined at this website concerning the federal government’s regulatory overreach. One of the more interesting ideas is to force the government to officially report the impact EPA policies will have on energy prices, job growth, and other issues of concern to Americans.

Filed Under: Emissions Standards, News, Products and Power, Threats Tagged With: air emissions, EPA, greenhouse gases, Stop the War on Coal, Utility MACT, war on coal

In the Pipeline: 9/25/12

September 25, 2012 by AEA Leave a Comment

It looks like Pyle and Quinlan are unequivocally opposed to a carbon tax. Any other think tank heads care to put themselves in that category? We will post every Friday for any others who wish to put themselves in that camp. Forbes (9/23/12) reports: “With the economy sputtering toward what can at best be described as a meager recovery, it seems like an obviously poor time to consider raising taxes on any form of energy. That’s particularly true when it comes the gasoline which fuels not only our cars, but also the nation’s economic engine. Yet that is also precisely what an unholy coalition of big spending liberals and misguided conservative economists is proposing – to raise taxes on carbon and send the economy spiraling toward another recession.”

So let’s review. Closing coal plants and increasing the price of electricity ostensibly because of global warming is OK. Having rich folks pay a few extra bucks on their flights to Europe to fight global warming is not OK. Tell me again under what circumstances a revolution is morally licit. CNBC (9/24/12) reports: “The Senate unanimously passed a bill on Saturday that would shield U.S. airlines from paying for their carbon emissions on European flights, pressuring the European Union to back down from applying its emissions law to foreign carriers.”

Every time a coal-fired power plant gets shut down in America, we’re one step closer to getting back on the boats for Europe. Bloomberg (9/21/12) reports: “European utilities are poised to add more coal-fired power capacity than natural gas in the next four years, boosting emissions just as the era of free carbon permits ends.”

Going to Extremes: Ed Markey and Henry Waxman are now (mad) scientists. Committee on Natural Resources (9/25/12) reports: “The United States and the world experienced a barrage of extreme weather events over the last several years consistent with what climate scientists have been predicting from global warming pollution. Indeed this summer, U.S. weather was almost apocalyptic: searing heat, ferocious fires, hurricanes, and severe storms left people injured, homeless and in some cases, dead.”

The politicians in Washington are a bunch of children who throw a temper tantrum every time a shiny new toy comes along. We’re trying to teach the virtue of patience. E&ENews (9/24/12) reports: “Congress has been juggling and unable to pass the “NAT GAS Act,” a package of tax incentives that would promote the conversion of autos from oil to natural gas. The legislation — commonly called the Pickens Plan — had long been hailed as a bipartisan approach to cutting U.S. oil dependence while promoting a cheaper and cleaner alternative fuel.”

It’s fun watching Rob tear down smokescreens. Forbes (9/24/12) reports: “At the Democratic National Convention, President Obama proclaimed that voters will face “the clearest choice of any time in a generation” on energy policy this November. If he were truly concerned about our energy future, though, he’d scrap his wasteful green-energy zealotry — along with his smokescreen slogan “all of the above.” Better policies are there for the taking.”

Does Dan Kish know anything about this? Forbes (9/24/12) reports: “Meanwhile, just as Beijing may be considering taking another stride toward a more market-based economy, President Obama wants to move the United States toward a more state-directed one. He does so, moreover, in the name of competing with China. It is one thing for ordinary citizens to make faulty policy judgments based on projecting a past growth trend too boldly into the future. Surely, a president should know better.”

Filed Under: Blog

In the Pipeline: 9/24/12

September 24, 2012 by AEA Leave a Comment

Just as a rule, anything that these guys issue on a Friday is terrible. This is no exception. Environment & Public Works (9/21/12) reports: “In typical EPA fashion, the agency released yet another late Friday afternoon statement – this time to inform us that Ron Curry will replace Al Armendariz of ‘crucify’ fame to oversee the largest oil and gas producing region in the country,” Senator Inhofe said. “The timing of the announcement is the first red flag, and while I look forward to learning more about Mr. Curry, various public comments attributed to him raise concerns.”

The NYT discovers that the Internet runs on electricity. NYTimes(9/22/12) reports: “A yearlong examination by The New York Times has revealed that this foundation of the information industry is sharply at odds with its image of sleek efficiency and environmental friendliness… Most data centers, by design, consume vast amounts of energy in an incongruously wasteful manner, interviews and documents show. Online companies typically run their facilities at maximum capacity around the clock, whatever the demand.”

See, it is not really a loss for the utility. It is a loss for the ratepayers of Idaho. But I bet FERC, whose commissioners come from Nevada, Washington, North Dakota, Iowa, and Massachusetts don’t really care about that. KTVB (9/20/12) reports: “The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission says Idaho Power’s long-term purchase agreement with wind farms means that it must buy electricity from the farms even when demand for power is low.”

Government does not create jobs. It simply moves them from one group to another. In this case, it moves them from taxpayers to wind “developers”. Oh, and somewhere along the way, the federal government takes its cut off the top, just to make sure the whole mess is as inefficient as possible. Senator Wyden is an overseer of this process. Politico (9/23/12) reports: “It’s vital for Congress to lead on this issue. My home state is a good example of how wind energy can create jobs and help local communities — when government policies lead to successful investments.”

I’ll take my mandate medium rare, please. CBS Los Angeles (9/18/12) reports: ““For comparison, an 18-wheeler diesel engine truck would have to drive 143 miles on the freeway to put out the same mass of particulates as a single charbroiled hamburger patty,” said Bill Welch, the principle engineer.”

Filed Under: Blog

ICYMI: New York Times Talks to AEA About Wind PTC

September 20, 2012 by gthornton Leave a Comment

Today, The New York Times profiled the challenges facing the wind energy companies given their dependence on government handouts. With renewal of the Wind Production Tax Credit in jeopardy, many wind energy businesses may not survive in the free market. The American Energy Alliance’s Director of Communications, Benjamin Cole, spoke to the New York Times and explained IER’s opposition to continuing subsidies for the wind industry.

“Tax Credit in Doubt, Wind Power Industry Is Withering”

The New York Times

Diane Cardwell

Opponents argue that the industry has had long enough to wean itself from the subsidy and, with wind representing a small percentage of total electricity generation, the taxpayers’ investment has yielded an insufficient return.

“Big Wind has had extension after extension after extension,” said Benjamin Cole, a spokesman for the American Energy Alliance, a group partly financed by oil interests that has been lobbying against the credit in Washington. “The government shouldn’t be continuing to prop up industries that never seem to be able to get off their training wheels.”

But without the tax credit in place, the wind business “falls off a cliff,” said Ryan Wiser, a staff scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory who studies the market potential of renewable electricity sources.

Industry executives and analysts say that the looming end of the production tax credit, which subsidizes wind power by 2.2 cents a kilowatt-hour, has made project developers skittish about investing or going forward.

Click here to read more

Filed Under: News

AEA to Congress: Stop the War on Coal

September 20, 2012 by Benjamin Cole Leave a Comment

WASHINGTON D.C. — American Energy Alliance President Thomas Pyle sent a letter today to all members of the U.S. House of Representatives to urge their support of H.R. 3409, the “Stop the War on Coal Act of 2012.”

“For nearly four years, the Obama administration has directed an aggressive regulatory assault on American families, pumping billions of taxpayer dollars into failed renewable energy industries while actively harming the domestic coal industry,” Pyle wrote.

“By supporting H.R. 3409, Members of Congress will stand with U.S. coal against the growing regulatory hostility from Washington and an onslaught of misleading advertising campaigns by special interests beholden to well-funded extremists on the environmental left. These efforts — some of which are now led by former EPA Administrator Al Armendariz, who promised to ‘crucify’ fossil fuel industries — must be stopped. Now is the time.

“The objective of the current ‘war on coal’ is clear: weaken America’s position in the global economy, handicap fossil fuel industries to make the administration’s favored renewable sources appear more affordable, and deny the American people the right to access abundant coal resources that have the potential to power our economy for hundreds of years . . . Will you stand with President Obama, who famously promised to bankrupt the American coal industry? Or will you stand with American energy — powered by affordable, reliable coal that provides heat, light, and jobs for millions of American homes.”

To read Pyle’s entire letter, click here.

###

Filed Under: Press Releases Tagged With: coal, energy independence, EPA, Obama energy policies, obama epa, war on coal

"A Refinery Rescue Reconsidered"

September 19, 2012 by AEA Leave a Comment

The incredible people we’ve met out on the American Products American Power bus tour know that you’re not a hero for calling the doctor after deliberately breaking someone’s legs. But that’s what the Obama Administration effectively did by driving a refinery out of business with regulations and then calling in a rescue operation.

As we noted recently, the Sunoco refinery in Philadelphia, PA was facing certain closure due to the cost of regulations. Hundreds of jobs were on the line, not to mention the potential for increased pain at the pump at a time when gas prices have already broken record highs. Never missing an opportunity to intervene in the private economy, the Obama Administration stepped up to the plate and “rescued” the Sunoco refinery. The irony here is not lost on the people who have signed the American Products and Power bus and are standing up against the Obama administration’s war on affordable energy.

A recent editorial in the Philadelphia Inquirer, highlights the questions that weigh heavily on the minds of the hardworking Americans we have met on the bus tour: “But what about all the other refineries and companies that aren’t getting special deals and waivers? They still have to comply with the growing thicket of costly regulations that the administration continues to promulgate. It’s not just the cost of current regulations that plague these companies, but the uncertainty about what’s next. What other regulations will the administration issue and at what these regulations cost? Will the administration decide to waive the rules for more politically connected competitors, leaving other firms at a disadvantage?”

While the regulatory threats to the refining industry are directly felt, the thousands of Americans we have met on the American Products American Power bus tour also feel the pain from the rising cost of energy and the regulatory drain on the economy. The American Energy Alliance team met a small business owner and landscaper at NASCAR in Richmond, VA who noted that as fuel prices rise, he is forced to raise prices on his clients and consequently his business suffers.

For the sake of all Americans, we need energy policies allow production and manufacturing, not political maneuvers that pick and choose which businesses will be spared from the regulatory tidal wave coming out of Washington. Until then, small business owners and refinery workers alike will continue to suffer from the costly regulations on the energy industry.

Click here to join the thousands of Americans who have signed the petition in support of affordable energy and more sensible regulatory policies.

Filed Under: News, Products and Power, Renewable Fuel Standard, Threats, Tier 3 Standards Tagged With: EPA, gas prices, hero syndrome, NASCAR, Obama Administration, plant closures, refineries, regulations

In the Pipeline: 9/19/12

September 19, 2012 by AEA Leave a Comment

Even the British – who we beat in two wars – have managed to figure out that the shale plays are a winner. How far behind can Josh Fox can be? Global Warming Policy Foundation (9/18/12) reports: “Dr Tim Fox, Head of Energy and Environment at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers said: “Shale gas has the potential to give some of the regions hit hardest by the economic downturn a much-needed economic boost. The engineering jobs created will also help the Government’s efforts to rebalance the UK’s skewed economy.””

Health problems with wind? Whatever happened to their beloved precautionary principle? Daily Mail (9/8/12) reports: “The symptoms they claim to have suffered may vary – dizziness; balance problems; memory loss; inability to concentrate; insomnia; tachycardia; increased blood pressure; raised cortisol levels; headaches; nausea; mood swings; anxiety; tinnitus; palpitations; depression – but the theme remains the same… Here are ordinary people who settled in the country for a quiet life only to have their lives and property values trashed at the stroke of a bureaucrat’s pen.”

We missed this yesterday. Three things. First, Evan Lehmann is a really solid reporter. Second, it is instructive that none of these heroes of the revolution had the courage to go on the record. Third, they are all going to be important people in both the Romney transition and the Romney Administration. E&ENews(9/18/12) reports: “Three of Mitt Romney’s most visible economic advisers have expressed support for pricing carbon, leading some economists to believe that the Republican candidate is receiving climate advice as he faces criticism about his mysterious tax plan.”

Let justice be done, though the heavens fall. At least that is what my friend Cicero used to say. Fuel Fix (9/17/12) reports: “Harvard University’s graduates are earning less than those from the South Dakota School of Mines & Technology after a decade-long commodity bull market created shortages of workers as well as minerals.”

The bleeding continues. Energy & Commerce (9/18/12) reports: “The news today that Alpha Natural Resources will be scaling back its coal production and eliminating 1,200 jobs is yet another reminder of the destructive consequences of the Obama administration’s war on coal. The company announced today it will eliminate 1,200 jobs, including 400 jobs that will be terminated as a result of immediate mine closures in Virginia, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Alpha’s Chief Executive Officer, Kevin Crutchfield, lamented “a regulatory environment that’s aggressively aimed at constraining the use of coal.””

This is a good read. Enjoy. Saulstar (9/17/12) reports: “The answer is technically yes — the NDP support cap-and-trade, not a carbon tax — but in practical terms it’s a distinction without a difference, since cap-and-trade is a carbon tax by another name… Both carbon taxes and cap-and-trade are designed to do exactly the same thing — put a price on industrial carbon dioxide (a.k.a. greenhouse gas) emissions, caused by the burning of fossil fuels, for which the public ultimately pays.”

Filed Under: Blog

In the Pipeline: 9/18/12

September 18, 2012 by AEA Leave a Comment

Well now. Grover Norquist opens his kimono on the energy tax. Guess what? It turns out that the pledge would allow an energy tax, provided it was initially offset by reductions elsewhere. So at least we now have some idea why Jim Hansen (the dude who gets paid by NASA but spends most of his time lobbying for larger government and less economic growth) was given time to sell his wares at Grover’s Wednesday meeting last week. Bloomberg(9/13/12) reports: “I called Grover Norquist — lord of the anti-tax pledge — to run my fantasy scenario by the Republican Party’s chief anti-tax enforcer. “If one cut the income tax dollar for dollar and had a carbon tax in its place, it would not be a violation of the taxpayer protection pledge,” he said.”

If you stop paying for our free lunch, it won’t be free any more. Politico (9/18/12) reports: “As major U.S. employers and some of the largest non-utility purchasers of renewable energy, we urge you to extend the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind energy before the end of the 112^th Congress.”

Senator Feinstein. Senator Alexander. But not Senator Inhofe. Or Chairman Upton. And the President and Governor Romney are about the same. I have no clue why nuclear power isn’t doing better. I really don’t. Although they might want to think about getting some better help. Politico (9/17/12) reports: “It doesn’t take all that many members as long as they’re in the right positions, they invest the time, the effort and the energy into it,” the Nuclear Energy Institute’s top lobbyist Alex Flint told reporters Monday, citing Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) as both engaged on the issue.”

Sure the EU is screwed up in many ways, but unlike the federal government, they understand that you shouldn’t mandate the burning of food. WSJ (9/17/12) reports: “The European Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, said Monday it plans to limit the use of biofuels derived from food crops to 5% of transport fuel, in a radical change to its biofuel policy.”

If you are thinking about an ethanol waiver, this may not be very helpful. But if you are trying to make the case that global warming is harming crop yields (like that moron in Politico yesterday), it is disastrous news. Tom Nelson (9/16/12) reports: “Globally, USDA is still projecting the second-largest corn crop in history”, for the U.S., “farmers are likely to harvest the eighth-largest corn crop on record this fall…”

Jeff Kueter and crew remind us that there is no link between global warming and national security, except in the heads of the kinds of people who let the attack in Libya happen last week. Marshall Institute (9/17/12) reports: “In summary, efforts to link climate change to the deterioration of U.S. national security rely on improbable scenarios, imprecise and speculative methods, and scant empirical support. Accepting the connection can lead to the dangerous expansion of U.S. security concerns, inappropriately applied resources, and diversion of attention from more effective responses to known environmental challenges.”

Does any of this sound familiar? Wind Power Monthly (9/17/12) reports: “Energy regulator SWERC has decided to cut tariffs for all existing wind energy projects by ten per cent and those for solar even more, in a move Bulgarian wind energy association BGWEA says will push the majority of renewable energy projects into bankruptcy and could endanger the country’s financial stability.”

And I’m optimistic that I will become tall and good-looking next year. Nebraska Radio Network (9/14/12) reports: “A top TransCanada official expresses optimism the Keystone XL oil pipeline will win approval early next year.”

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: biofuels, carbon tax, production tax credit, wind energy

In the Pipeline: 9/17/12

September 17, 2012 by AEA Leave a Comment

Brother Tom and his merry band continue to preach on. AEA (9/17/12) reports: “Go behind the scenes with the American Energy Alliance’s 2012 Bus Tour.”

What a surprise. EPA does something destructive and contrary to the national interest deep on Friday afternoon. AFPM (9/14/12) reports: “EPA’s decision to increase the biomass diesel volumes is wholly discretionary and irresponsible. It only serves to increase our nation’s fuel bill. Given the exorbitant cost of biodiesel, its poor performance qualities, significant fraud in the biodiesel industry, and the drought facing our nation’s farmers and ranchers, this is a bad decision at the wrong time.”

Maybe if they were paying attention to business, instead of shipping tens of millions of dollars to the Sierra Club and their pals to attack Republicans, this would not have happened. Fuel Fix (9/12/12) reports: “Chesapeake Energy Corp. (CHK), facing claims by mineral rights holders in multiple states over canceled oil and gas lease offers, lost a bid to reverse a $19.7 million judgment to a Texas lease owner.”

For those who are unsure why the public thinks their government routinely lies to them, take a look at this. You would never guess that solar provides around one-tenth of one percent of electricity generation. DOE (9/12/12) reports: “The amount of electricity the United States generates from solar power has started to grow rapidly and is projected to reach 18,000 megawatt hours per day in 2013… A growing solar industry presents a tremendous economic opportunity for the United States, and that is why the Energy Department’s SunShot Initiative supports America’s best solar energy entrepreneurs and innovators.”

Chairman Upton hits it pretty hard. He is getting to be a star. Energy & Commerce (9/14/12) reports: “An imposing wall prominently divides the visions of President Obama and congressional Republicans when it comes to economic growth and creating jobs. Solyndra is on one side and the Keystone pipeline is on the other.”

Maybe the Administration will be more enthusiastic about Chinese communists exploring for oil and gas in the Gulf of Mexico than they have been about American companies. Senator Inhofe (9/14/12) reports: “The letter outlines the Senators’ view that “ownership and operation of U.S. business operations by foreign governments via their corporate proxies becomes particularly concerning when critical natural resources such as oil and natural gas are involved. The potential for these firms to disavow their rational profit-seeking motivations in favor of state ideological goals and foreign policy objectives must be fully considered when deciding whether to approve such transactions.””

His dad liked playing Hamlet as well. Politico (9/17/12) reports: “As New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo weighs whether to allow fracking in the Empire State, environmentalists are working to make the case that the decision could affect his potential White House hopes in 2016.”

The new Scion iq hybrid gets 38 mpg. And Obama set the CAFE at 55.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: CAFE, EPA, fracking

Moving America Forward

September 17, 2012 by AEA Leave a Comment

Go behind the scenes with the American Energy Alliance’s 2012 Bus Tour and join the fight against government regulations that are strangling American energy and manufacturing: http://www.productsandpower.org/

The American Products. American Power. bus tour has traveled for over 10,000 miles to over 15 states to engage with Americans and bring their concerns about our failing energy policies back to D.C. Join the thousands of activists we’ve met on the bus tour and sign the petition today: http://www.productsandpower.org/take-action

American Products. American Power. educates Americans on the importance of domestic energy production and the hundreds and hundreds of products that are made with American power. Our goal is to not only create awareness, but also mobilize Americans against regulations that fail to properly balance the costs and the benefits, thereby stifling innovation and economic growth.

The costs of regulations are factored into the products we buy everyday. As regulations become more and more burdensome on businesses, the more expensive our products become. From high tech electronics, such as smartphones, to grocery store purchases like deodorant, the cost of regulations are passed on to us, the consumer.

Filed Under: Multimedia