News

I guess that once you’ve done all the damage you can do, it is time to move along.  I wonder if Ron gets the concept of moral hazard yet E&E News (8/10/11) reports: Ron Bloom, an Obama administration official who helped oversee the auto industry bailout, will leave his position as a presidential adviser on manufacturing policy at the end of the month, the White House announced today…Bloom had previously served as the administration’s “auto czar” and helped work on the restructuring of General Motors and Chrysler. He also participated in White House negotiations on fuel efficiency standards for model years 2017-2025…”I am grateful to have been given the opportunity to serve under President Obama and alongside so many talented individuals who worked tirelessly to strengthen the economy and help communities across the nation,” Bloom said in a statement. “We’ve faced many tough choices and dealt with numerous challenges over the past two and a half years — from restructuring the American auto industry to developing historic fuel efficiency standards. I am confident in this Administration’s ability to build on these accomplishments and continue our efforts to revitalize the manufacturing sector.”…Bloom will return to Pittsburgh to spend more time with his family, according to the White House.

OK, we’ve ignored this as long as we can.  But Al seems to be coming unglued.  No wonder why Tipper left ABC News (8/9/11) reports: The ice caps are still melting, the ozone layer is still disappearing and Al Gore is getting pissed…In a speech at the Aspen Institute last week the former Vice President hid no emotion when he disputed claims that global warming was not happening by repeatedly shouting “bullsh*t.”…“They pay pseudo-scientists to pretend to be scientists to put out the message: ‘This climate thing, it’s nonsense. Man-made CO2 doesn’t trap heat. It may be volcanoes.’ Bullshit! ‘It may be sun spots.’ Bullshit! ‘It’s not getting warmer.’ Bullshit!” Gore said, without knowing that his comments were being streamed online.

Maybe this is why Al is so distracted…Reuters (8/9/11) reports: A worsening global economic outlook has dented prices for emissions permits which depend on a robust economy belching greenhouse gases into the air, and has also impacted oil, grains, coal and natural gas…Carbon offsets have fared uniquely badly because a U.N. climate panel continues to print new offsets, regardless of a widening glut in emissions permits in the main demand market, the European Union’s carbon market…Countries and companies in the developed world can buy offsets as a way to meet emissions caps agreed under Kyoto, paying for cuts in developing country projects instead, but the financial crisis has left a global oversupply…”If the European economy goes through a double dip (recession) it could be a lethal threat for the carbon market,” said Marius-Cristian Frunza, analyst at Schwarzthal Kapital…The U.N. scheme for generating certified emissions reductions (CERs), called the clean development mechanism (CDM), faces additional problems besides the economy…Failure by countries to agree a new round of carbon caps after 2012 under drifting U.N. climate talks, has further curbed prospective demand…The financial crisis has blown off course talks to agree a global climate deal, which now seems years off. The CER market had a traded value of $18.3 billion last year, down from $26.3 billion in its peak year 2008.

Finally, something the rich folks (think Robert Kennedy and clan) have in common – happy to make us pay for these white elephants, and happy to give us happy talk about them, but not really that excited about having the ridiculous things next door Guardian (8/10/11) reports: Donald Trump has pledged to use “any legal means” to block the building of an offshore windfarm near his championship golf course in Aberdeenshire, claiming the development would spoil his view…The proposed windfarm in Aberdeen Bay, about 1.5 miles from the golf resort, would install the next generation of offshore wind turbine technology…The £200m energy scheme has just been formally submitted to Marine Scotland for approval. It has been cut back from up to 33 turbines to a maximum of 11 after safety concerns were raised by shipping agencies and Aberdeen heliport, the world’s busiest, which serves the North Sea oil industry…Trump, who hopes to open his first course at the Menie estate, near Balmedie, next July, in a development spanning about 500 hectares (1,235 acres), has renewed his long-standing complaints about the project. He believes the smaller proposal is still unacceptable: some of the turbines could stand up to 195 metres in the water, more than double the height of the Big Ben clock tower…George Sorial, managing director of the Trump Organisation, said the windfarm would compromise the golf resort. “We are here to stay and I don’t think it’s a good idea to interfere with our investment. We are not going to support a project that compromises what we have done. We will use any legal means in our jurisdiction.”

This is coming from a city that imports all their water from the North and most of their electricity from the East. Now, they are saying Alaska shouldn’t drill for energy? Los Angeles Times (8/10/11) reports: Shell Oil’s proposal to drill three exploratory wells in the Beaufort Sea off Alaska’s North Slope received a conditional go-ahead last week from the Obama administration even though the Interior Department has not yet approved the company’s plan for responding to a catastrophic oil spill. That plan fails to adequately address many of the harsh realities of drilling in Arctic seas. It’s too early for any approval, conditional or otherwise…Exploratory offshore drilling in the Arctic doesn’t present the same potential for danger as, say, BP’s offshore rig in the Gulf of Mexico. The hazards of drilling in the Arctic are quite different and in ways worse…Shell’s wells would be just 160 feet underwater, as opposed to the 5,000-foot depth of BP’s Deepwater Horizon well, source of the largest offshore oil spill in U.S. history. That, at least theoretically, would make the Arctic wells easier to cap. But there are other important differences. BP’s rig was located in generally calm waters that happen to contain oil-degrading bacteria. The gulf’s concentration of oil rigs also makes it a hub for Coast Guard rescue equipment and drilling expertise…Shell’s response plan contends that it can clean up 95% of spilled oil, an unprecedented percentage even in much less hostile environments. But the skimmers and booms that are usually employed to clean up spills don’t work effectively in waters with large amounts of floating ice. Nor is there any guarantee that Shell would be able to get disaster equipment to the wells. Canada’s National Energy Board recently reported that on one day out of five, conditions in the Arctic, including the Beaufort Sea, are too harsh to send out spill-response teams. Meanwhile, the nearest Coast Guard station is 1,000 miles away, and the agency told the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation that it cannot be counted on to respond to spills off the North Slope.

For those of you scoring at home, Mitch used to be chief of staff to Senator McConnell and once upon a time ran the NRSC.  So maybe we might get some sort of pushback against the Obama Administration’s attempts to make sure that:  1) people have to pay more (a lot more) for cars; 2) automobile fleet turnover is consequently retarded (delaying all the environmental benefits that come with turnover; and 3) more people die in highway crashes than would have otherwise E&E News (8/9/11) reports: The nation’s automakers today announced that Recording Industry Association of America head Mitch Bainwol will be named president and CEO of their chief lobbying group…Bainwol, who has led the RIAA since 2003, will head up the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers effective Sept. 1. Before becoming a celebrated lobbyist, Bainwol worked as a budget analyst for the Office of Management and Budget and served as chief of staff to two Republican senators during a 25-year federal career.”It’s a great privilege to join the auto industry at such a dynamic time in its rich history,” Bainwol said in a statement. “From fuel efficiency to safety, the industry’s innovation is nothing short of remarkable. Americans love cars and just as importantly, understand that the economic destiny of our country is linked to the success of this sector.”Bainwol replaces Dave McCurdy, who stepped down in December to take a post with the American Gas Association…Bainwol comes on just after the industry reached a deal with the White House on fuel economy standards that will require a fleetwide 54.5 mpg standard by 2025. The industry must still deal with the fine details of the rule. The group could also be facing new safety and alternative fuel regulations, plus continuing economic pressures as automakers battle back from bankruptcy…The auto alliance represents 12 of the world’s largest auto manufacturers, including the Detroit Three and Toyota Motor Corp.

And now, for my impersonation of President Obama “Folks, we can all agree that what we need to win the future are unicorns for transportation.” The Hill (8/9/11) reports: President Obama will unveil the first-ever federal fuel efficiency standards Tuesday for a range of heavy-duty trucks, a move the White House is casting as a key part of its plan to cut foreign oil imports and slash harmful air pollution…The planned announcement comes amid growing economic uncertainty and increasing jitters on Wall Street. Obama is expected to argue that the standards will result in major benefits to the ailing economy… The standards mark the latest effort by the Obama administration to ratchet up vehicle fuel-economy rules. Late last month, Obama announced a plan to set an average standard of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025 for cars and light-duty trucks. The standard builds on rules finalized last year for model year 2012-2016 cars and light-duty trucks…Obama will travel to Interstate Moving Services in Springfield, Va., Tuesday to unveil the efficiency standards. He’ll be joined by officials from truck manufacturers, industry groups and environmental groups who have signed off on the deal, according to a senior administration official…Similar to how previous fuel-efficiency rules were made, the Obama administration worked closely with industry groups to develop the heavy-duty truck standards. Navistar, Volvo, Chrysler, Conway and others all support the standards, the official said.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Monday that his problem with allowing energy development to occur in Alaska is that there is no infrastructure, which of course, his government won’t let Americans go to work building.  He also supports a thriving American economy and getting rid of federal programs that don’t work.  How, exactly, does Secretary Salazar sleep at night? Anchorage Daily News (8/8/11) reports: Interior Secretary Ken Salazar came to Anchorage on Monday and said the Obama administration supports more oil drilling in Alaska, potentially including offshore Arctic development… Salazar joined Alaska Sen. Mark Begich and Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed for a meeting with Alaska business people and said the president’s feeling toward Arctic offshore drilling is “Let’s take a look at what’s up there and see what it is we can develop.”…But any Arctic oil development must be done carefully, he said. Salazar said the Arctic lacks needed infrastructure for responding to potential offshore oil spills and cited painful lessons from the Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico last year…”Not the mightiest companies with multibillion-dollar pockets were able to do what needed to be done in a timely basis, and the representations of preparation simply turned out not to be true from the oil companies that had a legal obligation to shut down that kind of an oil spill. …,” Salazar told Alaska reporters. “When you look at the Arctic itself, we recognize that there are different realities — the ocean is a much shallower ocean, conditions are very different than we had in the Gulf of Mexico. (But) there are challenges that are unique to the Arctic.”…Salazar said a step toward a solution is “having an agency within the United States government and Interior, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and Regulation, that can in fact do its job.” The agency is the successor to the Minerals Management Service, which was discredited after the Gulf spill.

No good swindlers want more of your money to build a second rat hole in California. The best part of the story? Obama’s nomination for Commerce Secretary is their CEO CNET (8/9/11) reports: BrightSource Energy has proposed a second, utility-scale solar power project in California, offering a changed plant design in an effort to avoid environmental permitting problems…The Oakland, Calif.-based company today said it submitted an application to the California Energy Commission for two solar power plants able to generate 250 megawatts each in Inyo County, Calif. Called the Hidden Hills Solar Electric Generating System, the project would generate power by using a field of sun-tracking mirrors to create high-temperature steam that turns a standard electricity turbine…BrightSource’s Ivanpah solar power plant in Southern California is one of the few large-scale solar thermal projects to get through the regulatory process, get financing, and begin construction. That plant has been slowed by a number of environment-related concerns, including the amount of water used and the impact of construction on a endangered desert tortoise…With the Hidden Hills plants, which would take up 5.12 square miles, BrightSource said it has changed the design in an effort to address environmental issues. It hopes to have the plants online by the end of 2015, according to a company representative…The updated plant design has a taller tower–going to 750 feet from about 450 feet–which will allow the project developer to place heliostats closer together. The mirrors will be placed directly on poles, which means they can be placed into the ground without having to grade the ground underneath.

Even when we disagree with him (which is a lot), Andy Revkin is a very good guy and a thorough reporter.  He will no doubt get pounded by the “science is settled” crowd for this particular bit of heresy National Review Online (8/8/11) reports: Andrew Revkin, blogger for the New York Times, posts (emphasis mine): For more than a decade, I’ve been probing changes in Arctic climate and sea ice and their implications for the species that make up northern ecosystems and for human communities there…There are big changes afoot, with more to come should greenhouse gases continue to build unabated in the atmosphere. There will be impacts on human affairs in the Arctic, for worse and better, as we explored extensively in 2005 and I’ve followed here since…But even as I push for an energy quest that limits climate risk, I’m not worried about the resilience of Arctic ecosystems and not worried about the system tipping into an irreversibly slushy state on time scales relevant to today’s policy debates. This is one reason I don’t go for descriptions of the system being in a “death spiral.”…The main source of my Arctic comfort level — besides what I learned while camped with scientists on the North Pole sea ice — is the growing body of work on past variability of conditions in the Arctic. The latest evidence of substantial past ice variability comes in a study in the current issue of Science. The paper, combining evidence of driftwood accumulation and beach formation in northern Greenland with evidence of past sea-ice extent in parts of Canada, concludes that Arctic sea ice appears to have retreated far more in some spans since the end of the last ice age than it has in recent years…And here’s an excerpt from one of the reports Revkin is basing his analysis on:..Our studies show that there are great natural variations in the amount of Arctic sea ice. The bad news is that there is a clear connection between temperature and the amount of sea ice. And there is no doubt that continued global warming will lead to a reduction in the amount of summer sea ice in the Arctic Ocean. The good news is that even with a reduction to less than 50% of the current amount of sea ice the ice will not reach a point of no return: a level where the ice no longer can regenerate itself even if the climate was to return to cooler temperatures. Finally, our studies show that the changes to a large degree are caused by the effect that temperature has on the prevailing wind systems. This has not been sufficiently taken into account when forecasting the imminent disappearance of the ice, as often portrayed in the media…Imagine that. The science wasn’t as settled as we were told.

Real brave of you NYT to come out and say America can save money by raising taxes on oil and gas companies.How about we stop jerking energy producers around on a short leash and let them go back to work. New York Times (8/7/11) reports: If the Republicans are truly determined to slash the budget and end government waste, they will start with two obvious and long overdue cuts: ending the web of tax breaks enjoyed by the rolling-in-dough oil industry and terminating the ethanol subsidy. Together these cuts would save up to $100 billion over 10 years, without hurting the poor and middle class or slowing the economy.,, If only. The oil industry’s well-paid defenders — lobbyists and lawmakers in unison — will surely scream “tax hike” and claim that ending $4 billion a year in sweetheart subsidies will decrease production and increase prices at the pump. All of which is nonsense…In 2005, with oil nearing $60 a barrel, James Mulva, the head of ConocoPhillips, told the Senate that his industry did not need these breaks to keep exploring for oil. They need them even less when oil is $100 a barrel…According to the Congressional Research Service, ending the subsidies would have no effect on gas prices and a trivial effect on profits. The Big Five — Exxon Mobil, BP, ConocoPhillips, Chevron and Shell — reported combined profits of $35.1 billion for just the second quarter. Yes, you read that right…The ethanol subsidies are just as unnecessary. The big one is a 45-cents-per-gallon tax credit that costs between $5 billion and $6 billion a year and goes not to corn farmers, as commonly supposed, or to ethanol producers, but to the refineries that blend ethanol with conventional gasoline. Which is to say, the oil companies.

Alaskans’ response to the NYT time hit piece on Shell and energy workers — American business is business and our business is energy, now get out of our way Anchorage Daily News (8/7/11) reports: Shell can’t count on drilling in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas yet but the oil company got closer last week with a conditional federal permit for exploration in the Beaufort Sea beginning next summer. That’s good news… We need to be wise in where and how we go about the business — and make conservation and efficiency part of the process. As Sen. Lisa Murkowski said, “Produce more, use less.” That’s a good, succinct description of intelligent energy policy…Done right, Shell’s Arctic exploration fits that policy…BOTTOM LINE: Shell’s Arctic drilling should be a go in 2012.

For whom the bell tolls — the NYT rejoices on killing off those who have the least among us to spare New York Times (8/7/11) reports: As John Broder and I report in The New York Times, Shell won a big victory by gaining conditional approval from the Interior Department for its plan to drill for oil in the Beaufort Sea off the North Slope of Alaska. The decision takes the company a giant step closer to drilling oil wells in the Arctic after five years of trying to break through court and regulatory hurdles. But the battle is not over, and environmentalists will surely redouble their efforts…Shell executives say that their discussions with the White House, Interior Department, Environmental Protection Agency and other agencies have gone extremely well in recent weeks, reflecting a will by the Obama administration to move forward — perhaps because thousands of jobs are at stake and consumers are upset about high gasoline prices…Here is something of a road map for the fight ahead…Last year, drilling appeared to be on track until an E.P.A. appeals panel delayed an air quality permit because it wanted more time to consider the potential impact of exploration rigs’ diesel emissions on local indigenous communities. Shell decided six months ago to put off drilling until 2012, fearing it would not have time to get equipment in place for the summer drilling season…Complicating the political calculus was last year’s deadly accident and oil spill at a BP well in the Gulf of Mexico…Shell executives say that the climate for negotiations has since improved and that the E.P.A. is moving the process along at a faster pace. They also complimented the Bureau of Ocean Energy, Management, Regulation and Enforcement for moving quickly in submitting data to a federal court in Alaska in a lawsuit challenging Shell’s 2008 lease sale in the Chukchi Sea, west of the Beaufort in the Arctic.

Sagging Poll Reserve release fails; Washington tries sinking economy.  Memo to president:  You can’t grow with No-Growth policies Washington Times (8/8/11) reports: More than a month after the Obama administration said it would tap the country’s emergency oil reserve to try to combat supply disruptions in the Middle East, gas prices at the pump actually have risen 10 cents…President Obama had hoped the move, coming at the onset of the summer driving season, would temper the loss of supplies due to the ongoing civil war in Libya. Working with international allies, the U.S. said on June 23 that it would release 30 million barrels of oil over 30 days, while other countries with strategic reserves agreed to release another 30 million, in staggered sales during July…And prices at the pump did dip, at first, from a nationwide average of $3.61 down to $3.55, according to AAA. But by last week, they had rebounded and the price per gallon stood a dime higher than when the administration first made its decision…“Although it helped initially to pull down prices it was probably too little,” AAA Mid-Atlantic spokesman John Townsend said, pointing out that the nation consumes as much as 20 million barrels of oil a day. “This is just a drop in the bucket.”…Prices may be about to see some relief, though for unwelcome reasons. Last week’s stock market drop and fears of the lingering sour economy have already begun to put downward pressure on oil, which analysts said will translate to lower pump prices — potentially trumping even the administration’s oil release.

Sen Mark Warner of Virginia does his Cuba Gooding Jr. impression on the Senate Floor and yells, “Show me the Money!” National Journal The oil industry is courting a powerful new friend in the Democratic Party­—on the East Coast, no less—just when it needs one most…Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., has no history of warm relations with Big Oil. Indeed, in past years he has been a vocal critic of the $4 billion in annual tax breaks that oil companies receive from the federal government—tax breaks that will be in the crosshairs this fall as the new congressional super committee looks for ways to slice $1.5 trillion off the federal deficit…But now Warner wants Virginia to become the first East Coast state to allow offshore drilling, which he sees as a pragmatic way to bring jobs and new revenue to his state, and perhaps a way to keep his job in the face of an increasingly red constituency…Warner is also vocally vying for a seat on the new super committee, which would give him an outsize influence on the fate of Big Oil’s corporate tax breaks. Even if he doesn’t land a seat, he is likely to continue to be an influential voice in shaping the debt debate, which oil companies say is sure to target their bottom line…Corporate oil currently has just two reliable Democratic friends in the U.S. Senate—Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Mark Begich of Alaska—both from red states where offshore drilling provides thousands of jobs and millions of dollars to state coffers and local economies. Landrieu and Begich consistently break with their party to defend Big Oil’s tax breaks and to back bills that would expand offshore oil drilling and direct more offshore drilling revenues directly to states…But Virginia is taking fledgling steps toward joining the ranks of offshore drilling states, which could significantly change its politics. The federal government estimates that the waters off the coast of Virginia hold 130 million barrels of oil and 1.1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell has made a push for offshore drilling a cornerstone of his administration.

President Obama figured out how to drive down the price of gasoline by lowering demand. The downside? His policies have wiped out an entire year of wealth creation Fuel Fix (8/5/11) reports: Oil prices extended sharp losses, falling to near $85 a barrel today in Asia amid expectations a slowing global economy will weaken demand for crude…Benchmark oil for September delivery was down $1.31 to $85.32 a barrel at late afternoon Singapore time in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Crude tumbled $5.30 to settle at $86.63 on Thursday…In London, Brent crude was down $1.56 at $105.69 per barrel on the ICE Futures exchange…Oil and other commodities were dragged down by a plunge in global stock markets as traders lost confidence in U.S. economic growth. The Dow Jones industrial average sank 4.3 percent Thursday and stock markets in Asia opened sharply lower Friday…Investors fled to lower-risk assets, such as the U.S. dollar, which exacerbated oil’s decline. Crude usually falls when the dollar gains since a stronger U.S. currency makes commodities more expensive for investors with other currencies…All eyes will be on Friday’s July jobs report for evidence about the strength of the U.S. economy. Economists expect that 90,000 jobs were created in the U.S. last month, which is not enough to lower the unemployment rate, currently at 9.2 percent.

‘Interior OKs Shell Arctic Drilling Plan’ — E&E had you fooled with that headline didn’t they?  Don’t worry greenies, Shell is still waiting on the Chukchi Sea permits…E&E News (8/5/11) reports: The Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement today gave conditional approval for Royal Dutch Shell PLC’s revised exploration plan to drill up to four wells in Alaska’s Beaufort Sea over two years starting in July 2012…Shell for years has been working to start drilling in the region and has invested billions of dollars there. But regulatory and legal setbacks have prevented the company from drilling any wells so far….Today’s long-awaited conditional approval is contingent on Shell securing other permits from U.S. EPA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service. But a spokesman for the company called it “welcome news and adds to our cautious optimism that we will be drilling our Alaska leases by this time next year.”…Environmentalists are concerned that the project could harm the fragile Arctic ecosystem….”The biggest problem with this plan is that it doesn’t contain any realistic oil spill-response plan,” said Rebecca Noblin, Alaska director for the Center for Biological Diversity…She said Shell’s proposed plan to mechanically recover 95 percent of the oil would be impossible. She also noted the lack of spill-response infrastructure in the Arctic and unpredictable icy waters.

Wind tax credits are “not spending programs”.  Got it?  They just take money from taxpayers and give them to a favored few companies to produce very expensive, very unreliable electricity. This is his how politicians launder money E&E News (8/5/11) reports: The wind industry continued to boost capacity during the second quarter of this year, but its main trade group warned today that strong policy signals are needed to keep the industry on a strong growth pattern…In its latest market report, the American Wind Energy Association today said the United States wind industry installed 2,151 megawatts of electrical generating capacity in the first half of this year, up 72 percent from the 1,250 megawatts installed in the first half of 2010…But that growth could stall out soon because of uncertainty over federal incentives, the trade group said…”Clearly Congress cannot take for granted all the wind energy manufacturing and construction jobs that have been a bright spot through the recession,” said Denise Bode, CEO of AWEA, in a statement…The group would like to see Congress extend a production tax credit that is set to expire in 2012.

Are you sure?  Because I thought you could get rid of nuclear power and run the whole world on wind.  Turns out I was wrong New Scientist (8/5/11) reports: FOR decades, Germany has had some of the most enlightened energy policies in Europe. It has long been admired for setting world-leading growth in wind and solar. But its decision to ditch nuclear by 2022 will set back efforts to decarbonise the electricity supply by 10 crucial years, and could prove expensive for every household in Europe…Germany’s abrupt about-turn, like all decisions on nuclear, was highly political. Last year the government, headed by Angela Merkel, made the sensible but unpopular decision to extend the life of Germany’s nuclear plants to 2036 as a “bridge technology” towards “the age of renewable energy”. But after the disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in Japan, public hostility intensified and Merkel retreated. The U-turn may help her in the 2013 federal elections but it is a major reversal for the climate…Around 23 per cent of Germany’s electricity comes from nuclear and 17 per cent from renewables. That’s a 40 per cent share for zero-carbon in total – one of the highest in the European Union…The German government has admirable plans to raise renewable electricity to 35 per cent of consumption by 2020. But even this planned increase falls 5 per cent short of filling the hole in zero-carbon electricity left by abandoning nuclear…How will Germany fill that hole? With coal and other fossil fuels. It has plans to build 20 gigawatts of fossil-fuel power stations by 2020, including 9 gigawatts of coal by 2013. The government now describes fossil-fuel power stations – apparently without irony – as “the new bridging technology”. Some of this may never be fitted with carbon capture and storage because German environmental campaigners don’t like this technology either.

Everybody’s Out To Get Me!  IHS/CERA’s Wrong!  Everybody’s Wrong!  All the people in the Gulf are wrong!  I’m a lawyer!  Oil and gas engineers don’t know anything!  Those jobless people are just faking it! Fuel Fix (8/2/11) reports: The United States’ top offshore drilling regulator is calling out one of the nation’s top energy research firms, accusing IHS CERA of issuing a biased and “fundamentally flawed” report that suggested Gulf drilling projects were caught in a government permitting logjam…The industry-funded analysis, released July 21, concluded that there was a backlog of offshore drilling permits awaiting government approval, with the delays costing coastal states jobs and tax revenues…But Michael Bromwich, the head of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, says the IHS CERA report presents “misleading conclusions about the current state of offshore oil and gas drilling.”..In a letter to IHS CERA Chairman Daniel Yergin, Bromwich today said the report overlooks the sweeping changes in drilling safety and environmental reviews that the government implemented after last year’s spill. That includes a mandate that oil and gas companies be prepared to contain crude from a blown-out underwater well — a requirement that industry was unable to satisfy until early this year…Bromwich said:“Even though all of these developments are absolutely central to understanding the pace of plan and permit approval in the period covered by your report, they are barely mentioned. The six-month period covered by your report cannot be properly understood without context, and yet your report is altogether incomplete and superficial in describing the context.”

Seriously, what could go wrong? SMH (8/2/11) reports: FARMERS fear a new rush of environmental plantings for biodiversity and carbon offsets will accelerate the loss of land for food production…In an emerging trend, carbon traders are starting to buy farms to generate carbon credits for sale under voluntary schemes or – assuming legislation clears the Senate – the federal government’s Carbon Farming Initiative…Storing carbon dioxide through reforestation and other techniques such as soil carbon opens up a potentially vast new market opportunity for rural Australia. The president of the NSW Farmers Federation, Fiona Simson, said while farmers supported the CFI, ”carbon farming with a focus on forestry plantations is just another land-use conflict that’s going to take land away from food production”…The first acquisition linked to the CFI occurred last week. The federal government and R.M. Williams Agricultural Holdings combined to pay $13 million for Henbury Station in the Northern Territory outback, to be transformed into the world’s largest carbon farm…In NSW the value of land bought by carbon traders for carbon offsets in 2010-11 was tiny: the Herald has confirmed one sale last year, of a 1700-hectare sheep and grain farm, Lorraine at Tullamore, in the state’s far west, to the stock exchange-listed CO2 Group and utility ACTEW Corporation…The chief executive of CO2 Group, Andrew Grant, said the property was marginal farming land and had been planted with blue leaf mallee eucalypt, a species endemic to the region. Reforestation was a priority for combating dry land salinity and restoring catchment health.

Next time someone blathers on about how federal bureaucrats really want to help people, send them this link WUSA (8/2/11) reports: Eleven-year-old aspiring veterinarian, Skylar Capo, sprang into action the second she learned that a baby woodpecker in her Dad’s backyard was about to be eaten by the family cat…”I’ve just always loved animals,” said Skylar Capo. “I couldn’t stand to watch it be eaten.”…Skylar couldn’t find the woodpecker’s mother, so she brought it to her own mother, Alison Capo, who agreed to take it home…”She was just going to take care of it for a day or two, make sure it was safe and uninjured, and then she was going to let it go,” said Capo…But on the drive home, the Capo family stopped at a Lowes in Fredericksburg and they brought the bird inside because of the heat. That’s when they were confronted by a fellow shopper who said she worked for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service…”She was really nervous. She was shaking. Then she pulled out a badge,” said Capo…The problem was that the woodpecker is a protected species under the Federal Migratory Bird Act.  Therefore, it is illegal to take or transport a baby woodpecker.  The Capo family says they had no idea.

Employment Prevention Agency is about to miss the gravy train thanks to the House Wall Street Journal (8/3/11) reports: The White House lookback on “excessive” regulation has concluded and—breaking news—there’s more work left to do. So let’s commend those in Congress trying to force the Administration to conduct a credible cost-benefit test…Last month the House Energy Committee passed a bill that reforms the Environmental Protection Agency’s process for creating new rules and mandates, which it has been doing with a special fervor under administrator Lisa Jackson. Known by the acronym the Train Act, the bill would help expose some of the true costs that the agency is trying to hide…One major improvement is that the Train Act broadens the definition of costs. Under the status quo, the EPA can define almost anything as a benefit, and does. But the EPA rarely considers more tangible economic consequences, like its effects on employment, the price and reliability of energy, or the competitiveness of U.S. companies…The Train Act would also require the EPA at least to gesture at the costs of its larger agenda. The agency is now tightening nearly every eco-regulation in existence, abusing in particular traditional air pollutant laws to shut down coal-fired power plants. This cluster of overlapping rules will cause far more cumulative damage than merely one or another rule would by itself…A utility, for instance, might be able to comply with a single new rule, but under the EPA firehose it might be forced to retire some of its operations. Beyond the direct costs to the utility, plant closures would lead to job losses and higher prices for consumers and business, with their own knock-on effects…This cost-benefit bias may explain why Ms. Jackson could claim at a “green jobs” conference in February that under the Clean Air Act, “For every $1 we have spent, we have gotten $40 of benefits in return. So you can say what you want about EPA’s business sense. We know how to get a return on our investment.”

Now with some extra money to spend with the debt limit increase, lawmakers are turning to renewable energy projects New York Times (8/3/11) reports? Congress’ debt deal leaves climate advocates grappling with a decade of potentially declining environmental budgets and narrowing hopes of attaching a tax on greenhouse gas emissions to pay down the deficit…The deadline measure, passed with bipartisan support in the House last night, promises $917 billion in discretionary cuts over the next 10 years, with decreases of up to $1.5 trillion more ushered in later this year. Huge chunks of funding would be eliminated from the Pentagon and government agencies, prompting concerns that programs related to renewable energy, climate science and technology research could come under the knife for years to come…It’s unclear where the deepest craters will occur, but clean energy supporters urged lawmakers to avoid painful reductions at the Energy Department’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, which searches for breakthrough technologies to radically alter the nation’s energy use. Other vulnerable programs include energy grants, loan guarantees, and tax credits for wind, solar and other clean energies…Specific cuts aren’t known, but Joshua Freed, vice president of clean energy at Third Way, a centrist Democratic think tank, described a vivid choice that the Republican-led House will soon be faced with: Cut agency budgets with modern medical precision or hack away with practices used on Civil War battlefields.

Drill, Wyoming, Drill Fuel Fix (8/3/11) reports: Three companies expect within weeks to submit a plan to vastly increase the number of gas wells in central Wyoming…The targeted area now has about 500 producing gas wells…Encana Oil and Gas, Noble Energy and ConocoPhillips are talking about adding some 4,200 deep gas wells in the remote sagebrush country about 30 miles east of Riverton…Encana spokesman Randy Teeuwen says his company is taking the lead on the project and will turn in a plan of development to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management within a few weeks…The project would cover 400 square miles of mostly BLM land. The companies would tap deep, tight sand formations over 15 years of drilling…The gas field would be among Wyoming’s largest if fully developed.

Environmental groups, eager to increase the price of energy for Americans, urge NJ Governor Christie to ban fracking New Jersey News (8/1/11) reports: Twenty-four environmental organizations submitted a letter to Gov. Chris Christie on Monday asking him to sign legislation prohibiting the use of hydraulic fracturing for the purpose of natural gas exploration or production in New Jersey…The Legislature approved the proposal (S-2576/A-3313) by a large majority on June 29 and sent it to Christie for consideration…Natural gas drilling is proceeding in Pennsylvania in the Marcellus Shale, a deep geologic formation that underlies much of Pennsylvania and a portion of New York, including areas located within the Delaware River Basin. Utica Shale, now also being explored by energy companies, is located beneath the Marcellus and can be found in northwestern New Jersey…While no drilling in underway, environmentalists fear it could begin in the Utica Shale in the future…Drillers must use hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” to force the gas out of the tight shale formations. Fracking can cause water and air pollution, and water depletion due to the million of gallons of water required to frack. It also can lead to the degradation of streams, landscapes and habitat due to large scale of natural gas development.

Marcellus Shale is an unstoppable force for job creation and energy production Wall Street Journal (8/2/11) reports: On the edge of the Mahoning River, where once stood dozens of blast furnaces, more than 400 workers are constructing what long has been considered unthinkable: a new $650 million steel plant…When complete, it will stand 10 stories tall, occupy one million square feet and make a half million tons of seamless steel tubes used in “fracking” or drilling for natural gas in shale basins…France’s Vallourec & Mannesmann Holdings Inc., one of the world’s largest makers of steel tubes for the energy market, has decided to build the plant here next to an existing facility for two main reasons. Youngstown has an experienced steelmaking work force and the city is at the door of the Marcellus Shale, a natural-gas basin beneath New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio…”We’re confident we can get this built and running quickly and when we do, there will be a growing marketplace,” says Joel Mastervich, who runs the company’s existing Youngstown plant, the V&M Star. The company, a unit of Vallourec SA, also has operations in Houston and other North American cities…The shale market is partly responsible for expansion at other steelmakers, as well. U.S. Steel Corp. is investing $95 million to expand and upgrade its plant in Lorain, Ohio, which makes tubular steel. Timken Co. is spending about $50 million to upgrade its plants in Canton, Ohio…The steel and shale-gas industries are symbiotic to some degree. Shale drilling, with its network of horizontal pipes, consumes huge amounts of steel tubes and pipe. Steel also is needed to build rigs and excavators for extracting gas.

Simple English translation of Rep. Honda’s energy  efficiency mandate bill, “Electronics makers and electronics users are too stupid to make good choices about energy efficiency and that’s why I’m here to tell them what to do.” The Hill (8/2/11) reports: Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.) will introduce a bill on Monday to make electronic devices more energy efficient…Honda’s bill is attempting to take aim at the explosion of iPods, iPads, smartphones, gaming consoles and other electronic devices that are fast becoming a new dilemma for groups trying to save energy and control greenhouse gasses…“This proliferation of electronic devices, if not made more energy efficient, will undermine efforts to increase energy security and reduce the emission of greenhouse gases responsible for global warming,” Honda said…The Smart Electronics Act would require the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection Agency to assess the potential for adding electronics such as cellphones, gaming consoles and MP3 players to the Energy Star program, which designates energy efficient devices…The Energy Department and the EPA would also have to issue a report on the global growth of electronics usage and energy consumption…The bill would create a new “smart” designation for devices that are designed to limit their energy consumption and impact on the electricity grid.

And he doesn’t even mention that moving biofuels through a war zone can be dangerous, too, since the real Taliban is different than the green Taliban Wall Street Journal (8/2/11) reports: Although few realize it, the military is just as susceptible to fads and political correctness as any other government agency. Thus, in response to prodding from the executive branch, both the Air Force and Navy have announced plans to get half their fuel from “renewable resources” by 2020…”We have already tested the F-18 Hornet on biofuels, the Green Hornet,” Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus explained in a speech last year. “The biofuel it used was made from camelina, a member of the mustard family. . . . [T]he Marines, who are not known as leaders of the environmental movement, have embraced this wholeheartedly.”…There are good reasons to consider powering forward bases and combat vehicles with something other than gasoline. Studies have shown that while the army can purchase gasoline for $1 a gallon, it costs $400 to deliver that gallon to the front in Afghanistan. In Iraq and Afghanistan, one soldier or civilian was killed for every 24 fuel convoys. But are biofuels the answer?…The military’s flirtation with green energy began a decade ago when the Department of Defense started taking advice from environmental guru Amory Lovins. In his 1976 book, “Soft Energy Path,” Mr. Lovins proposed getting one-third of our fuel oil from domestic crops. We could do this, he said, by building a distillery complex only 10 times the size of the combined beer and wine industries’ complexes.

IER’s Dank Kish schools Center for American Progress on energy policy and also provides a psychological diagnosis of their behavior Washington Examiner (8/1/11) reports: Reading the latest ravings of the Center for American Progress (CAP, but increasingly recognized as the Center for Reversing American Progress) is akin to a family being forced at holiday to listen to the crazy old Uncle George repeat the same old complaints about some injustice he suffered when everyone knows what he suffered was of his own making…CAP’s latest screed is no different, screaming as they do about the profits of oil companies. What they never mention is that their policies – and the policies of other anti-energy groups including the Obama Administration – are what are making and keeping gas prices high. In psychology, it’s called projectionism; in politics, hypocrisy…We’ve all heard it before: “Big Oil Pumps Up Profits With Americans’ Cash” – the Left says the same thing with a different title every quarter when earnings reports are released…It’s been happening a lot under President Obama, since gas prices have doubled under his presidency. The subtitle of the piece is the real key to their objection, however: “Higher Gas Prices Lead to Healthy Balance Sheets in the Second Quarter.”…The Obama administration and CAP don’t seem to understand or like “Healthy Balance Sheets.” Just look at the federal budget. And it’s no wonder that the White House and CAP are simpatico on this feeling: CAP’s president, John Podesta, was the head of the transition team for Obama and together, they designed the policies and picked the personnel who have overseen the doubling of gasoline prices.

Someone get Rep. Issa a drink! He put auto makers on notice that he is investigating the CAFÉ negotiations and new regulations The Hill (8/1/11) reports: House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) launched an investigation Friday into a series of closed-door meetings between Obama administration officials and major automakers that resulted in beefed-up vehicle fuel economy standards…Issa sent out letters to executives of the country’s major automakers Friday alerting them to the investigation and requesting that they keep all documents related to meetings with administration officials on the standards… In the letters, which were obtained by The Hill, Issa says the administration’s efforts to negotiate the fuel economy standards “raise serious concerns.” The new rules, which were announced Friday by President Obama, will also limit consumer choice, Issa says…“I am concerned about the agreements lack of transparency, the failure to conduct an open rulemaking process, as well as the potential for vehicle cost increases on consumers, and negative impact on American jobs,” the letters say…Obama outlined a plan earlier Friday to ratchet up fuel efficiency and cut harmful carbon pollution for model year 2017-2025 cars and light-duty trucks. The plan sets a fleet-wide average standard of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025…The plan, Obama said, is “the single most important step we’ve ever taken as a nation to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.”Along with patio heaters, SUVs and incandescent lightbulbs, flat-screen TVs became one of the products most loathed by environmentalists over the past decade. But improving energy efficiency means they have become greener than the hulking cathrode ray tubes they replaced, and cut their average electricity consumption by more than half, new figures show.

Do you know what is the best part about this article? Technology, unimpeded by government mandates, made flat screens cheaper and more energy efficient The Guardian (8/1/11) reports: Technology advances have driven down the energy use of all new TVs by 60% since 2006, leaving a 42-inch LED TV today costing just £14 a year to run compared with around £80 for a plasma screen in 2006, in present day prices. Over 9.5m flat-screens were sold in the UK last year..Globally TVs account for about 6-8% of electricity consumption in homes…Ross Lammas, the founder of energy efficiency site Sust-it, who compiled the data by looking at 1,800 models, said new lighting developments were largely responsible: “The main thing that’s driving it is the LED technology to backlight the TV.” “..So-called ‘LED TVs’, which use light-emitting diodes only began to appear in significant numbers around 2009, despite the technology debuting in a Sony TV five years earlier. As well as using less energy, the sets are thinner and are becoming increasingly popular with buyers, accounting for as much of a fifth of LCD TV sales according to some reports…The research also shows that modern flat-screens now use less energy than the boxy TVs they were initially criticised for replacing. A new 32-inch LED TV uses about 75% less energy than a 32-inch cathode ray tube, costing £8 a year to run rather than £32.

It’s simple, really — when you can’t drill for oil, we all have less to go around Wall Street Journal (8/1/11) reports: Most European major oil companies posted a surge in quarterly profits last week, but their results were overshadowed by a trend that continues to trouble Wall Street and corporate boardrooms: Nearly every major oil company reported year-to-year oil-and-gas output declines, often in the double-digits…Big Oil is throwing huge resources at the problem with more open embrace of unconventional petroleum developments, high-risk exploration in frontier areas and corporate restructuring. But even if these strategies work in some cases, there is little doubt that anemic petroleum output signals a long-term challenge confronting the sector…The particulars varied across the sector. BP PLC’s 11% output drop was fueled in part by the continued hit from its reduced activity in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico after last year’s disastrous spill. Italian giant Eni SpA’s production fell 15% due to its disproportionate exposure to war-ravaged Libya. Spain’s Repsol YPF SA, whose output fell 17%, was affected by both Libya and the U.S. Gulf, as well as by labor unrest in Argentina. Norway’s Statoil ASA saw a 16% output decline largely on production outages and maintenance in its home market in the North Sea. French oil major Total SA’s output slipped 2% from a year earlier, mostly due the loss of Libyan crude…Oil giants are more vulnerable to operational problems in part because of their declining dominance over key resources. Whereas in 1973, independent oil firms controlled three quarters of the world’s reserves, they hold as little as 10% today, according to some estimates. That has forced oil majors to rely to a greater extent on costly unconventional plays such as shale gas, deepwater exploration, and Arctic exploration.

Why not?  Once you become an adjunct of the federal government, who cares how ridiculous you look? Detroit Free Press (8/1/11) reports: General Motors’ venture capital arm said today it has invested $7.5 million in Sunlogics, a Rochester Hills-based solar energy system provider, which will lead to the creation of 310 jobs….Sunlogics plans to use some of the funding to establish its corporate headquarters and open a manufacturing facility in Rochester Hills, and to set up a manufacturing plant in Ontario. The headquarters is to eventually employ 200 and the Canadian facility will support 110 jobs…Michael Matvieshen, CEO of Sunlogics, said the company moved into the 190,000 building in Rochester Hills about two weeks ago. Matvieshen spoke at an event today attended by about 75 officials and local community leaders…He said Sunlogics expects to begin hiring structural engineers,

Step One — write an article the explains how solar energy is cost competitive in the marketplace with subsidies Huffington Post (8/1/11) reports:This past weekend, I attended the Aspen Institute’s Clean Energy Roundtable, an annual gathering of business, political and policy leaders working in clean energy. Inspired by the many insights and ideas presented, here are my thoughts on the state of clean energy today and what lies ahead…First the good news. Prices of key clean energy technologies are plummeting, bringing many technologies such as distributed solar and energy storage closer and closer to mass deployment. The cost of solar panels today is about 20% below that of a year ago. And it should continue dropping for the forseeable future. In other words, the performance/price ratio is improving exponentially, like computer chips if not quite as fast and for different reasons, cost economies for the most part as opposed to breakthrough technologies. The main driver of the plummeting costs is volume and successful efforts by the Chinese government to vertically integrate the Chinese solar industry — that now supplies over half of the world’s solar panels. (In advanced thin films, costs per watt are also coming down.) Even more dramatic price drops are occurring in battery storage across a range of chemistries with prices halving in the the last year. Plummeting prices that translate to rising performance are good news for developers, electric car-makers and the global industry at large…The story is more complicated, however, in the United States, where we are in what might be described as the best and worst of times. This past year saw torrid growth in solar deployment in the US with solar capacity doubling; wind installations also grew and wind is now a very competitive source of power. Solar — already competitive with subsidies — will be competitive without them in several years. That is the good news. The bad news is that solar generation still supplies only .2 percent of US electricity and, what’s more, growth has been driven by the 1603 provision in the tax law that allows tax credits to be redeemed for cash.

Step Two — argue that by removing those subsidies, renewable energy will be doomed forever Huffington Post (8/1/11) reports: Clean energy could be among the hardest-hit sectors if the U.S. government does not raise the debt ceiling and then defaults on the national debt…If there is a default, it could hurt in direct ways, by stopping payments for cash grants and loan guarantees that support many renewables projects. It could also hit innovation, by putting the Department of Energy program for cutting-edge energy technologies, ARPA-E, at risk…A default could also hit indirectly, by pushing down the value of the U.S. dollar, as well as pushing up interest rates, which would affect financing for renewables projects that require large up-front investment…Leaving Energy Subsidies, Credits Behind..Any kind of budget deal will have to include large spending cuts. According to a survey of experts by the National Journal, most energy subsidies and tax breaks could be cut back. Subsidies for wind and solar may fly under the radar and survive cuts–at least for a little while.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times — the tale of two states and their use of natural gas Wall Street Journal (7/26/11) reports: Politicians wringing their hands over how to create more jobs might study the shale boom along the New York and Pennsylvania border. It’s a case study in one state embracing economic opportunity, while the other has let environmental politics trump development…The Marcellus shale formation—65 million acres running through Ohio, West Virginia, western Pennsylvania and southern New York—offers one of the biggest natural gas opportunities. Former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, a Democrat, recognized that potential and set up a regulatory framework to encourage and monitor natural gas drilling, a strategy continued by Republican Tom Corbett…More than 2,000 wells have been drilled in the Keystone State since 2008, and gas production surged to 81 billion cubic feet in 2009 from five billion in 2007. A new Manhattan Institute report by University of Wyoming professor Timothy Considine estimates that a typical Marcellus well generates some $2.8 million in direct economic benefits from natural gas company purchases; $1.2 million in indirect benefits from companies engaged along the supply chain; another $1.5 million from workers spending their wages, or landowners spending their royalty payments; plus $2 million in federal, state and local taxes. Oh, and 62 jobs…Statistics from Pennsylvania bear this out. The state Department of Labor and Industry reports that Marcellus drilling has created 72,000 jobs between the fourth quarter of 2009 and the first quarter of 2011. The average wage for jobs in core Marcellus shale industries is about $73,000, or some $27,000 more than the average for all industries.

Do you think it is possible that Bill Daley took a look at a map and figured out that all the voters he wants in 2012 would hate this idea? E&E News (7/27/11) reports: Controversial new U.S. EPA standards for smog won’t be ready this week, the agency said today, as business groups and other critics on Capitol Hill pushed the White House to declaw the rules that were submitted for final review earlier this month…Administrator Lisa Jackson is getting ready to finalize new air quality standards for ozone, the main ingredient in the smog that can blanket big cities on hot summer days. She told a federal court that EPA would be done with the national standards by July 29, but they won’t be ready by then, said Brendan Gilfillan, the agency’s press secretary, in an email…It is the latest delay for the standards, which were proposed in January 2010. A final decision will be made “shortly,” after the rule clears the interagency review process led by the Office of Management and Budget, Gilfillan said…The process has prompted intense lobbying from industry groups and environmentalists. John Engler, a former Republican Michigan governor who is now president of the Business Roundtable, wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed today that a crackdown on ozone would cost $20 billion to $90 billion annually, making it “the single most expensive environmental regulation in U.S. history.”…Those concerns were echoed in a letter yesterday from 34 senators, most of them Republicans.

Flow, baby, flow — House passes bill that forces the State Department’s hand on the Keystone XL Pipeline Wall Street Journal (7/27/11) reports: The House of Representatives on Tuesday voted to speed up the decision-making process for a controversial oil pipeline that TransCanada Corp. wants to build from Canada to Texas…In a vote of 279-147 Tuesday, the House approved a bill that forces the Obama administration to either approve or deny the Keystone XL pipeline proposal by Nov. 1. The pipeline, if constructed, would stretch nearly 1,700 miles and cross six U.S. states. Among them are Montana, Nebraska and Oklahoma…The U.S. government has been reviewing the Canadian company’s pipeline since the end of 2008. The Obama administration has vowed to make a decision on its construction by the end of this year…The White House said in a statement Monday that the imposition of a Nov. 1 deadline is “unnecessary” and “could prevent the thorough consideration of complex issues.” The Democrat-controlled Senate is also unlikely to approve the bill…Environmental groups oppose the Keystone XL pipeline, in large part because it would transport a type of oil known as tar sands oil. The groups contend the process of producing this type of oil causes more damage to the environment than traditional oil. The groups also say tar sands oil is more corrosive to pipelines and present a greater risks of leaks.

Friend of the cause, Nick Loris explains that Americans are energy dependent…on the government for subsidies Heritage (7/27/11) reports: Americans are becoming too energy dependent. But it is not dependence on foreign sources of energy that is the problem; it is growing dependence on the federal government. According to the Energy Information Administration, the United States spent $8.2 billion on energy subsidies in 1999. That spending more than doubled to $16.6 billion in 2007, and with the stimulus funding and other provisions, it promises to have a much higher price tag in the years ahead. With direct expenditures, targeted tax breaks, mandates, loan guarantees, and other preferential treatment, Washington is deciding how Americans produce and consume energy. Increasing America’s access to energy resources creates competition, lowers prices, drives innovation, and creates economic opportunity. Subsidies do the opposite. Congress should make it a priority to ensure that no new subsidies are put in place and remove the ones already in place…What Are Subsidies and Why Are They Harmful?…In public policy, subsidies come in many shapes and sizes and are thus often difficult to define comprehensively. The definition “direct transfer of money to a group or industry” is too narrow, so for the purpose of this paper, a better definition is “Using the political process to support the production or consumption of one good over another.”

See, this is the sort of ‘transformative change’ Barry kept talking about.  These poor people, like everyone else, thought he was kidding Baltimore Sun (7/26/11) reports: Baltimore Gas and Electric stood by its PeakRewards program Saturday, even as participating customers’ tempers continued to flare after thousands of air conditioning units were turned off for hours as part of the energy-saving program during the intense heat of the day before…The extreme heat triggered the first “emergency event” in the four-year history of the program, and the effects were different from what customers had come to expect — many wondered why they couldn’t override the shutdown. Without air conditioning for up to 10 hours, many customers’ homes reached 90 degrees and higher. In the past, air conditioning has only been turned off for a few hours at a time…Customers had trouble getting through to BGE’s customer service line and were confused when online records said that the air conditioning had been turned back on, even though it had not.

Governor Moonbeam almost sounds like a man here.  Makes you wonder if Linda Ronstadt made a mistake.  But it really makes you wonder what could be accomplished if his focus was better E&E News (7/26/11) reports: California Gov. Jerry Brown yesterday promised to overcome those working to block widespread renewable energy…”When local communities try to block installation of solar like they did in San Luis Obispo, we act to overcome the opposition,” Brown (D) said, referring to the city where environmental groups have been protesting two large-scale solar plants over environmental and endangered species concerns…”In Oakland I learned that some kind of opposition you have to crush,” the former Oakland mayor said. “You can talk, but you have to move forward.”…Brown’s goal, being fleshed out this week at an invitation-only conference at the University of California, Los Angeles, is to build 12,000 megawatts of distributed renewable energy, building on and extending former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s target of 5,000 MW by 2020…Local, small-scale solar, biomass and other renewables avoid the need for expensive transmission lines, Brown said, and, at least in theory, don’t take as long to build as traditional utility-scale projects…The two-day conference at UCLA is a far cry from Republican Schwarzenegger’s star-studded events that focused on brokering “subnational” agreements.

“as a result, all may not survive.”  Are you sure?  Because the really smart guys from Harvard – you know, the Administration appointees who are destroying the Nation – keep telling us that these guys are money Boston (7/26/11) reports: In Massachusetts – one of the leaders in alternative energy policy – it is far from monolithic. The state counts at least 1,200 companies spread across several industries, from new-age batteries, to fuel made from plant waste, to technologies that help business and households use electricity more efficiently…That diversity has been promoted by state and federal leaders offering subsidies to alternative technologies of all kinds, and pushing mandates to encourage their adoption. But the sector, which has depended heavily on government support, could be reaching a crossroads as Washington moves to slash multitrillion-dollar deficits, and states deal with their own tight budgets…Just over a week ago, executives from several local alternative energy firms traveled to Washington to meet other industry leaders and discuss challenges to the sector, including competition for financing. Among the concerns: the future of ARPA-E, a federal agency that has doled out hundreds of millions of dollars to advanced energy projects across the country since 2009, and tens of millions in Massachusetts…“One of the big challenges with the federal budget is whether ARPA-E is going to be funded,’’ said Peter Rothstein, president of New England Clean Energy Council, a trade group in Boston…Ultimately, both government and venture capitalists may need to abandon scattershot approaches that seed an array of firms and begin to target investments – analyzing which companies, industries, and activities may have competitive advantages to succeed. As a result, all may not survive.