Facebook Instagram Linkedin RSS Twitter Youtube

Buffett Endorses KXL as President Delays Approval

Pipeline construction

President Obama may be reluctant to support the KXL, but American business leaders recognize that the project is a key part of continuing a profitable trade relationship with Canada. Billionaire investor Warren Buffet said yesterday that he would approve the Keystone XL pipeline if the decision was up to him. Speaking with CNBC, Buffett said he thinks the failure to permit and build the pipeline is doing damage to our relationship with Canada, the nation’s largest trading partner.

“That is a valuable resource of North America and Canada’s been a terrific partner over the decades,” he said.”And for us to kind of thumb our nose at them, you know, not what I would do.”

“I think that we have an enormous interest in working with Canada.”

Buffett supports the pipeline despite his financial interest in BNSF Railways, a company benefitting from the transportation of North Dakota crude oil in the absence of additional pipeline infrastructure.

President Obama’s recent statements about the Keystone XL pipeline have also earned him a label many politicians (and their staff) dread: Washington Post’s “four Pinocchios.” The Washington Post’s Fact Checker blog recently gave the president’s remarks during a radio interview “four Pinocchios,” the most egregious classification possible for statements by political figures and government officials, for his misinformed claims that the Keystone XL would not benefit U.S. producers and would be nothing more than an export pipeline. Fact Checker staff suggested that President Obama read the State Department’s final environmental impact statement and encouraging him to back up his argument against the KXL with the facts:

If he disagrees with the State Department’s findings, he should begin to make the case why it is wrong, rather than assert the opposite, without any factual basis. Moreover, by telling North Dakota listeners that the pipeline has no benefit for Americans, he is again being misleading, given that producers in the region have signed contracts to transport some of their production through the pipeline.

 

Bill Gates Weighs in on Energy Research

Well pad in winter

When Bill Gates gets involved, you know it’s serious. That’s why we were glad to see Microsoft founder and billionaire philanthropist pounding the lectern over the need for more funding in energy research. 

The United States Government invests billions of dollars every year to support all types of energy, including renewable power, nuclear and fossil fuels, and to discover the resources we didn’t even know existed. However, most of these funds are not allocated toward the research, development and demonstration (RDD) phase, but rather to subsidize the cost of deploying existing technologies.

Gates and six other executives have founded the American Energy Innovation Council and are urging policymakers in Washington to make energy research a strategic national priority.

Consumer Energy Alliance, like Mr. Gates, believes this should change. We need to better allocate these resources to the RDD phase and help bolster private funding in energy research. Who knows what our brilliant labs, universities and other institutions could discover.

Oftentimes, it’s the breakthrough technology that no one saw coming that can change the course of our energy future. As Mr. Gates noted at a recent event hosted by the American Energy Innovation Council, investments in energy innovation can really pay off. According to the New York Times, “Mr. Gates cited the example of hydraulic fracturing to unlock gas and oil in shale deposits, a technique developed in part with federal research money that had led to a newfound abundance of oil and gas, lowering prices for consumers.”

Yep, decisions made decades ago to help fund a research program on fracking translated years later into $2.25 gasoline. One can only guess what the next breakthrough could be…

Keystone XL Veto a Disappointment for American Energy Consumers

White House with Marine One Parked on Lawn

Washington, DC – Today, President Obama will follow through on a promise to veto legislation to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline, claiming that Congress is trying to usurp his executive authority and disrupt a review process that he believes is working. Upon news of the eminent veto, Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA), an advocate for energy consumers, released the following statement.

“We are deeply disappointed that the President has chosen to veto legislation that has been passed by overwhelming bipartisan majorities in both the House and the Senate and which reflects the overwhelming bipartisan majority of Americans that support this critical infrastructure project,” said Michael Whatley, CEA’s executive vice president.

“If the president is truly concerned about the process, he must now focus on approving Keystone XL. The State Department has taken six long years to review the proposed pipeline and produced five different evaluations of the project, all of which show that the project is in our nation’s best interest – for the environment, for national security and for economic growth.

“Last May, President Obama announced that he was launching a federal permitting center to cut bureaucratic red tape from stalling good infrastructure projects and put folks back to work rebuilding America. There is no project that needs to be freed from bureaucratic red tape more than Keystone XL. We hope that the President will allow the State Department to complete its review and grant the permit to build this project.”

On May 14, 2014, President Obama addressed federal permitting for infrastructure projects: “We’re cutting bureaucratic red tape that stalls good projects from breaking ground.  We’re launching a new national permitting center to implement these reforms.  We are aiming to put every major infrastructure project on a public dashboard so everybody can go online; track our progress; hold us accountable; make sure things are coming in on time, on budget; make sure your taxpayer money is being used well, but also make sure that we’re putting folks back to work rebuilding America.  That’s our goal.”

CEA and its consumer advocates have long supported the Keystone XL pipeline, sending more than 1.5 million letters to the State Department, the White House and Congress since 2010. In 2014, CEA polling concluded that majorities of voters in nine states also strongly supported the project. For more information on the Keystone XL project and CEA’s support for this critical infrastructure, please visit BuildKXLNow.org.

Legal Precedent Against Local Oil and Gas Bans Builds

Ohio farm with springtime corn crop

For the second time in as many months, a judge has overturned a local ban on oil and gas production. Judges in Mora County, New Mexico and now Columbus, Ohio, have ruled that municipalities may not pass regulations which preempt state authority over oil and gas production.

In Ohio, the state Supreme Court ruled yesterday that efforts by Munroe Falls, Ohio to limit drilling in their community were preempted by state statutes which allow for statewide planning and permitting of oil and gas operations, despite Ohio’s status as a “home rule” state.

A similar case was heard by a federal judge in New Mexico last month where a blanket ban on oil and gas drilling by Mora County was overturned on the grounds that it clashed with state and federal law.

“The decision by the Ohio Supreme Court only solidifies what we at Consumer Energy Alliance have been saying for years: Simply saying NO to energy production is an improper path for local communities to take,” said David Holt, President of Consumer Energy Alliance. “We have to balance environmental protection and energy production, as well as fully and scientifically answer all questions from state citizens. There is now precedent at both the state and federal level that shows these kinds of local initiatives conflict with existing law, reaffirming that state government is the best equipped and most knowledgeable to regulate natural resource development, and provide business and regulatory consistency.

“Anti-energy groups that are increasingly focusing on supplying local officials with mis-information as a way to restrict energy development are doing a disservice to the community and the state.  Groups that peddle this kind of restrictive public policy under the guise of protecting local residents do so at risk to the economies and jobs in those communities. We think there are better ways for public funds to be spent than defending rules which only serve to protect one party at the expense of another.

“CEA – an association comprised of more than 400,000 consumers — supports a process that balances the needs and rights of residents, landowners, mineral owners, the environment and all the local & state jobs that result from robust economic activity, like energy development.  For too long, some have tried to pit the environment against energy development, as if the two are mutually exclusive.  American ingenuity can do better.  We can have both environmental protection AND energy development. The courts in New Mexico and Ohio appear to agree,” added Holt.

CEA President Discusses Energy on Houston Radio

Texas drilling rig

On Feb 10th, CEA President David Holt sat down with Michael Berry on Houston’s KTRH to discuss energy policy for a full hour. The discussion covered everything from oil prices, to hydraulic fracturing and offshore energy production.

Listen below-

 

 

Fracking bans in cities hurt everyone

Onshore fracking well pad

When groups take the irresponsible and uneducated position of saying no to energy development, everyone – especially those in oil-rich Texas communities – lose, CEA President David Holt says in an op-ed published in The Bryan-College Station Eagle.

On Nov. 4, the voters of Denton made history. They approved a fracking ban within the city limits, the first ban of its kind in the energy-giant state of Texas.

It was, however, the kind of history that other leading energy regions, such as the Bryan-College Station metropolitan area, should strive to avoid.

The ban effectively ends natural gas production in the city — and the thousands of jobs and millions in tax receipts that it generates annually.

Natural gas production in the gas-rich Barnett Shale accounts for nearly 40 percent of economic growth in the region. It also produces about $30 million in taxes to Denton.

The Perryman Group estimated in a report earlier this year that the ban, if approved, could cost Denton $251.4 million in economic activity and 2,000 jobs over the next 10 years.

The legislation also would slash tax income by $5.1 million and cut $4.6 million in revenue to the Denton school district. Expect consumers and residents to make up the difference, especially if a long, expensive legal battle ensures.

Hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling are nothing new, especially in Texas. What is new are the recent calls for drilling restrictions by activists who also are trying to kill the Keystone Pipeline, offshore energy development, transmission lines for wind and solar electricity and almost every other energy development plan in America.

Denton always has been an example of what safe and efficient energy production brings to the table: revenue, jobs and economic growth. It is now also an example of what happens when politics wins out.

Rather than work on a solution to solve the issues surrounding drilling in a suburban area — and set an example for other cities in Texas to work from — many students at the University of North Texas were swayed by the startling rhetoric from anti-energy activists and their overly reactionary solution to the problem. Denton residents now will be left holding the proverbial bag, once students complete their course of study and move away.

This should not have happened.

After all, banning energy not only undermines Texas’s longtime stance as the American leader in energy production, it simply is not good for Lone Star state consumers. We need to continue holding the industry to a high standard on health, safety and the environment, but we can maintain this standard while still reaping the economic benefits of drilling for oil and natural gas.

And those benefits are hard to ignore. A new report from ICF International finds that a gallon of gasoline would cost an estimated 29 cents to 94 cents more if not for technologies such as hydraulic fracturing and the energy it unlocks.

In College Station, employers such as Sanderson Farms rely on affordable and reliable energy to meet payrolls, hire new employees and grow the local economy.

As a result, countless polls and surveys show that there is tremendous bipartisan support for energy production of all kinds, even hydraulic fracturing, which is not a new technology.

And since hydraulic fracturing has enabled the U.S. to reduce dramatically its carbon emissions, and thus improve its overall environmental record and put it on a path to achieve record air quality levels, it is far more environmentally friendly than many think. But these facts were left out by the Denton Drilling Awareness Group and other anti-energy activists. Moreover, many communities in Texas have successfully regulated oil and gas development within city limits to better mitigate the impacts to local residents and still reap the economic benefits of drilling.

Members of the College Station City Council understand energy’s significance. In fact, the council recently added to the city’s list of oil and gas wells by approving two more that would utilize hydraulic fracturing. Cities such as College Station can do much to help relieve the friction between drilling activities and local residents. Ordinances that help reduce noise, light, traffic and other impacts can allow cities to reap the economic benefits of hydraulic fracturing while satisfying the concerns of residents. But it takes the cooperative spirit of all involved.

When groups take the irresponsible position of simply saying no to energy development, everyone loses. College Station is doing its part to continue Texas’s long history of energy dominance. Other Texas communities need to follow in their direction.

David Holt is president of Consumer Energy Alliance

Ideas for Making the Most of Gas Savings

Putting gas in car

Bloomberg reports that a steady decline in gas prices has left consumers with extra cash in their pockets after filling up their tanks. For one heavy-commuting family in Pennsylvania featured by Bloomberg, this translates into $500 a month in savings. What could your family get for an extra $500 a month? Here are some possibilities:

Keystone Tiptoes Closer to Final Congressional Approval

Pipeline construction

Today, the Senate voted to approve pro-Keystone legislation, setting the stage for what is likely to become one of the first Republican legislative victories in the new congressional session. After lengthy debate that included votes on more than 40 amendments, the bill passed with bipartisan support in a vote of 62-36.

The Senate’s consideration of the bill included votes on various amendments, most notably an amendment from Senate Energy Committee Chair Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) to block President Obama’s announcement to designate part of the Arctic Wildlife Refuge as wilderness and Senator Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) amendment to expedite LNG exports, both of which failed to pass.

Hearing the news, CEA’s Executive Vice President Michael Whatley said, “After two weeks of Senate debate where all Senators were able to offer and vote on amendments, the result is an overwhelming bipartisan win for American energy consumers. President Obama should feel confident that the voices of concern related to the project have been heard, and that the measure reflects the will of the American people.”

Meanwhile, Republican leaders in the House of Representatives will decide whether to vote on the Senate’s bill or attempt to find a compromise in a conference committee. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is touting the bill’s eminent approval as proof that Congressional gridlock is starting to abate:

“We want to get Washington functioning again,” said McConnell on the floor. “And we want to pass common-sense ideas. The Keystone debate is showing how we can do both.”

However, even if Congress approves the measure, the GOP may not have the required 67 Senate votes to stop President Obama from making good on threats to veto the bill.

CEA President: Arctic is “Key” to Energy Revolution

Arctic shipping and recreational boats

As a part of its Energy Insiders series, National Journal asked energy experts about the future of oil and gas development in the Arctic Refuge following President Obama’s announcement that he would ask Congress to designate it as a protected wilderness area.

In response, Consumer Energy Alliance President David Holt emphasized the critical role of Arctic development in keeping energy prices low for consumers and spurring on America’s energy revolution:

The “great Alaska shut-out” may be how future generations describe Sunday’s announcement on ANWR – the most recent salvo in a series of unilateral federal actions to close Alaskan energy development. Closing large areas of federal land and waters in Alaska to oil and natural gas development limits the energy potential of Alaska, deprives the state of much-needed resources to fuel their economy and fund their budget, and jeopardizes the long-term security of the Trans-Alaskan Pipeline System (TAPS) – a critical infrastructure that remains an important part of U.S. energy security for the Lower 48.

Worse still, the president’s decision to manage ANWR as wilderness and boldly ask the pro-energy Congress to permanently prohibit commercial activity in the region goes against the clear and repeatedly stated wishes of the citizens of Alaska – the people who matter most. Senator Murkowski and the rest of the Alaska delegation are not exaggerating when they claim the administration has declared “war” on Alaska. The typically unpretentious Senator Murkowski was right to be incensed: the administration has failed time and again to listen to the will of Alaskans and Alaska Natives on issues of energy development and other commercial activity. Responding to the president’s announcement, the North Slope Borough – the municipal government that encompasses 94,000 square miles on Alaska’s North Slope, the frontlines of energy development – denounced the administration’s move noting that the “people of the North Slope have been unequivocal in their opposition to further Wilderness designations in ANWR.” Furthermore, the Borough stated, “We would like to invite President Obama and Secretary Jewell to travel to ANWR and meet with the people who actually live there before proposing these types of sweeping land designations.”

From ANWR and NPR-A to offshore areas off the north and south of Alaska, the Obama Administration has utilized nearly every tool it has to restrict access to Alaskan energy development without congressional oversight or sufficient input from Alaskans. For a Congress that is looking to swiftly counter these actions, legislators must understand what’s truly at stake here.

While ANWR has been a political football since the 1990s, this should in no way undermine its importance – nor the importance of offshore Alaskan resources. Alaskan energy has fueled consumers in the lower-48 for decades, helping to dramatically lower oil imports in the 1980s and provide Americans a stable source of energy in an increasingly unstable world. For the state of Alaska, oil revenues provide more than 90 percent of the state’s budget and the industry supports one-third of Alaskan workers. The recent decline in oil production from state and private lands already has the State of Alaska facing significant budget deficits and an unemployment rate of 6.3 percent, which is higher than the U.S. average of 5.6 percent and much higher than energy powerhouses like North Dakota and Oklahoma that have unemployment rates of 2.8 and 4.2 percent, respectively. For American energy consumers, particularly those on the West Coast, the decline in Alaskan North Slope crude has required refineries to import oil to replace these declining Alaskan supplies.

We are in the midst of an energy revolution, and Alaska is key to its continuation. The Obama Administration continues to publicly taut the importance of energy development and take credit. Yet, its actions tell a different story, with these new restrictions on Alaska being the last example. The fact is that shutting-out Alaska has the potential to jeopardize the long-term viability of our energy revolution. Opening up areas of federal land and waters and permitting offshore development in the Chukchi Sea ensures a strong pipeline of energy projects will come online to fuel America for generations and to keep Alaska growing. Moreover, Alaskan energy development anchors U.S. leadership in the Arctic, an area of increasingly geopolitical importance.

Consumer Advocate Group Offers Qualified Support for Federal Offshore Leasing Program

Offshore energy production in the Gulf of Mexico

Consumer Advocate Group Offers Qualified Support for Federal Offshore Leasing Program

Houston, TX – Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA) President David Holt issued the following response to the Interior Department’s release today of a Draft Proposed Program (DPP) for the 2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas Leasing Program:

“We’re pleased to see the Interior Department take steps to advance offshore exploration in the Atlantic and to continue responsible development in the Gulf of Mexico. With the overwhelmingly positive impact U.S. energy production has on the entire U.S. economy, consumers everywhere have long advocated for offshore energy production and the benefits it brings to U.S. energy affordability and security. However, by excluding areas of the Arctic and Eastern Gulf of Mexico, this initial plan falls short of the great potential our nation’s natural resources possess.”

“As of this morning, the United States is $0.03 away from $2.00 gasoline. Oligarchs in Russia and Venezuela are stumbling under low oil prices. And, the United States economy is growing – all thanks to burgeoning U.S. energy development. For the first time in decades, the U.S. is leading the world’s energy supply discussion, and fundamentally re-shaping global politics. We should utilize this momentum to take action now to ensure we have access to long-term American energy resources to continue this revolution into the next generation. Continuing to restrict areas off Alaska and limit the full potential of the Atlantic and Eastern Gulf of Mexico stunts our ambitions and limits our energy future. Thanks to continuing improvements in technology, practices and oversight, the United States has demonstrated that offshore energy production and environmental stewardship can and do coexist.”

On Monday, Consumer Energy Alliance launched a campaign, Arctic for All, to promote public awareness of Arctic issues, including offshore energy development, and the importance of the Arctic region to the United States. Today’s announcement that future development off Alaska remains questionable could hinder U.S. engagement and leadership in this increasingly important region.

1...235236237...338Page 236 of 338

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT

© Consumer Energy Alliance