Grand Energy Debate Warms Up in Washington 19 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
After all this time, the U.S. Congress is finally getting serious about taking steps they hope will help solve our nation's energy crisis and the skyrocketing cost of gasoline and related fuels. During the next three weeks a series of debates and votes will take place in the House and Senate that could impact the price of gasoline, diesel fuel and heating oil for American families for years to come.
According to pollsters, as many as 80% of Americans want the Congress to approve legislation that would open up the OCS (U.S. outer-continental shelf) and ANWR (the Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve) to additional oil and natural gas exploration. Sounds simple, doesn't it? All we need is for our Representatives and Senators to cast their votes, send this legislation to the president, and go home to campaign for their re-election.
But like most things in Washington, this will not be simple or easy. Preliminary proposals now being developed would repeal tax incentives for offshore energy exploration and dedicate these monies and the royalties the government now receives to expanding the use of renewable fuels. Further, it could reduce the distance of offshore exploration from 200 to 100 or even 50 miles, require public utilities to utilize more renewable power, and expand the use of natural gas transport. It may even include a $50 billion loan program for U.S. automakers to help them produce more fuel efficient vehicles.
What we do have going for us, however, is a DEADLINE. Congress may be able to turn back the clocks (and have!) in their chambers, but the moratorium prohibiting offshore energy exploration and production will expire without fail on September 30th. After that, finding and producing the oil and gas that may lie off the U.S. coastal waters would be the exclusive province of our energy exploration companies.
Of course, for a variety of reasons, our politicians are not about to let that happen. The House is crafting energy legislation as this is written, which will have to win the support of their majority party. Once they reach a consensus, they can pass an energy bill and send it to the Senate by majority vote without input from the minority.
But this is where things are going to get interesting. Although there are 100 Senators, it takes 60 votes to pass this type of legislation in the Senate. That means a coalition of 40 Senators can stop any bill from passage. Right now, it is fair to say there isn't the agreement of 60 Senators on how to proceed, which could render whatever measure the House sends them irrelevant.
At the end of the day, there is also the prospect of a government SHUTDOWN on October 1st if the Congress can't come to an agreement on this hallmark legislation. Each year the extension of the OCS exploration moratorium has been part of the Congress' continuing budget resolution, which keeps the federal goverment operating when individual appropriations bills that fund federal spending haven't been adopted.
The only thing we know for sure is that all eyes will be on Washington the next few weeks as our elected officials struggle to satisfy the demands of energy producers, public utilities, environmental activists, and most important of all, VOTERS, about future U.S. energy policies. However it comes out, the Grand Energy Debate now getting underway in our nation's Capitol will be a sight to behold before it's over!
Disclosure: No positions.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
TraderMark
-
2
Don Dion
-
3
Cliff Wachtel
-
4
Mike Havrilla
-
5
James Quinn
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 19 comments:
have you read "animal farm"?
they simply do not give a sh*t about you and me.
> jack
The voters, who constantly reelect these career politicians, want low prices for petro-fuel.... their immediate gratification requirements and hedonistic and profligate lifestyles demand it. (aside... what is the savings rate in the USA?...What is the average credit card and non mortgage debt per household/)
Clearly, to most knowledgeable economists and thinkers, the price of fuel must rise, either by shortages( natural or contrived) or by government intervention. Europe has adopted a high fuel tax (originally to support massive socialistic programmes) which has the additional effect of reducing consumption by causing the consumer to seek ways to maximize the fuel efficiency of vehicles and moderate petro based lifestyles (jet skis, riding lawnmowers, ATVs, long auto trips, truck frame based SUVs, second or third cars, etc...). Americans from government down to states, counties, cities are downright WASTEFUL of energy resources, particularly gasoline and diesel fuels and even electricity. It is the way we grew up in an era of cheap energy. People want to continue this wasteful lifestyle even knowing the longer term consequences are quite undesirable. American consumers by stubbornly demanding lower prices to support their accustomed lifestyles act like temperamental spoiled pre-teens.
Americans have got to look to more than their current consumption habits and think about what they will be leaving on this planet for their children and more future generation. The current generationS are clearly the "ME" generationS. They are selfishly hedonistic to the detriment of those who will follow. Until Americans have the will to vote for representatives who will look to the future and who will institute the necessary programmes providing realistic sources of new energy and for conservation of existing resources, we will be in a constant crisis mode with respect to energy and maybe even eating.
I cannot believe that most religions in the USA promote "helping your fellow man" (in church that is) and then proceed to squander their "God given" resources to the detriment of their children and future generations.
Get real people. People are selfish. Government must take action to
I. conserve energy resources (by raise the prices via taxation of petro-fuels relative to hydro, solar, wind, and geothermal)
II. Promote heavily the conservation of all energy resources by reducing waste. E.G. Penalize the big rig driver with big $ ticket if he lets his 2 gallon/hour run in the parking lot. Penalize all entities which read neighborhood meters from narrow ranging non-electric vehicles. There are literally thousands of little things that can radically reduce the use of petroleum and all resources.
III. Promote and build an infrastructure nationwide for recycling waste of all sorts. Many progressive cities and counties already have this is place.
Will today's generations vote for the type of individual who works for the future of America and not just for the current registered voter? Probably not. It will take a major war or 1973 style petroleum supply disruptions to even get serious about the programmes needed. Maybe when Americans must have a "victory garden" producing food to survive, the reality of conservation and alternative energies will find a "Mr. Smith goes to Washington" class of "public servant".
I have hope.Rikiki
Well said, although I would take issue with some of your America bashing examples. It is important to LIMIT Socialist answers to economic problems, and Europe is the PRIME example. Every problem we have here caused by government intervention and social engineering, Europe has in SPADES (no pun intended!).
It would be nice to see Europe (and Japan, for that matter) take on the cost of providing their own defense, rather than simply criticize us (and not even help out!) when we do it. You know, to try to keep you all from having to learn to speak German or Russian or whatever, if you get my drift.
If the Dem controlled House insists on severe limitations in new territory then we can no longer hope to have a successful bridge of oil to get us to re-newable fuels. God forbid that mega discoveries occur in these new territories and we can drill our way out.
I heard many CEO's of nano materials companies saying that the new true value of fossil fuels will be carbon feedstock for the DNA patterned , self-assembly of ALL things. So even if an oil elephant is struck , we won't need to burn it.
My favored bridge to satisfy the demands of energy producers, public utilities, environmental activists, and most important of all, VOTERS, about future U.S. energy policies is Carbon to the Soils.
Biochar, the modern version of an ancient Amazonian agricultural practice called Terra Preta (black earth), is gainitainability.Terra Preta Soils a process for Carbon Negative Bio fuels, massive Carbon sequestration, ng widespread credibility as a way to address world hunger, climate change, rural poverty, deforestation, and energy shortages… SIMULTANEOUSLY!
This technology represents the most comprehensive, low cost, and productive approach to long term stewardship and sus10X Lower Methane & N2O soil emissions, and 3X Fertility Too. Every 1 ton of Biomass yields 1/3 ton Charcoal for soil Sequestration.
Indeed, Dr. James Hansen, NASA's top Atmospheric authority, is now placing it in the center stage of pro-active solutions for the climate crisis.
arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/pa...
I hope you will come to share my passion in getting the word out on the wonderful solutions provided by TP soils.
I'm sort of the TP list (and data base at REPP-CREST) cub reporter, most all my list postings, under shengar@aol.com, are news items, collaborative work, lobbying efforts with government, writers and journals.
terrapreta.bioenergyli...
Charles Mann ("1491")in the Sept. National Geographic has a wonderful soils article which places Terra Preta / Biochar soils center stage.
I think Biochar has climbed the pinnacle, NGM gets more than fifty million readers monthly!
We need to encourage more coverage now, to ride Mann's coattails to public critical mass.
ngm.nationalgeographic...
Please put this (soil) bug in your colleague's ears. These issues need to gain traction among all the various disciplines who have an iron in this fire.
It's what Mann hasn't covered that I thought should interest .
The Biochar provisions by Sen.Ken Salazar in the 07 farm bill,
Dr, James Hansen's Global warming solutions paper and letter to the G-8 conference last month, and coming article in Science,
arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/pa...
The new university programs & field studies, in temperate soils
Glomalin's role in soil tilth & Terra Preta,
The International Biochar Initiative Conference Sept 8 in New Castle;
www.biochar-internatio...
Given the current "Crisis" atmosphere concerning energy, soil sustainability, food vs. Biofuels, and Climate Change what other subject addresses them all?
Carbon to the Soils, the only ubiquitous and economic place to put it.
Erich
Erich - I like your passion for what may prove itself a remarkable source of energy someday. Obviously, it has a ways to go before it is commercially viable. So, stay with it! Believing in something and perspiraton is how new worthwhile things get done!
P.S. Of course, if there IS a mega oil or gas (or hydrate) discovery in the OCS, the D's will say there were in favor of exploring there ALL ALONG, just as they are now in favor of limited exploration in the OCS and the "surge" in Iraq. One thing about being a D is you can be consistently incorrect about the way things actually work in the real world (outside the Beltway), but that doesn't mean you were ever wrong!
hey my friend. iv'e missed you too. been hoping to pick up shares in clne but they just won't pull back quite enough.
i have been getting snippets about china getting ready to drill near cuba? heard anything?
my girl speaks spanish. she has been monitering the spanish channels when she can. she told me 3 or so weeks back that chavez invited russia to build a base in venezuala and purchased 200billion in russian arms.
today while i was listening to the radio russian warships moved into the florida straits and off the yucatan and another strategic area that i missed. looks like we have to get past them to protect our offshore oil.
yesterday she told me chavez was calling on cuba to merge as a nation with venezuala.
you called it quite awhile back. this election is getting more interesting by the day.
good article.
did you catch the interview with pelosi where she revealed that she did not know ng was a fossil fuel?
i wonder just how interested our oil companies will be in drilling offshore if making profit is made anymore difficult. i am thinking of their selling off assets.
been building on pbr lately. seemed like a good opportunity. wanting to grab rio but can't right now.
careful now you're makin' a lot of sense.
i haven't gotten my dancing girl yet. i think i'm gettin' cheated here. oh well, my girlfriend would probably kick her out anyway.
your point about production seems possible. so if we don't drill how would it help with the oil or ng supply?
It is nice to know that someone can still read and analyze. Thanks for your comments.
Clarifications:
1-- As you surmised, my point was about raising the price of fuels. Whatever the political systems exist in Europe and for whatever intent they had in taxing fuel, the (perhaps unsought) consequence of reduced consumption and higher efficiency resulted. I have great negative feelings about socialism. I am foremost a Libertarian by philosophy and a Republican by party. I am a native American citizen who grew up in a family where "waste not... want not" and "eat all you put on your plate" were rules of the day.
2--My parents were immigrants from Germany in the 20s. I was born in the Midwest, completed most of my graduate studies in CA and served my country for 6 years in the Navy. I earned the right to b*&^ch about conditions caused by the current "dumbed down" voters and political "leaders". For nearly 40 years since I became a Republican in college years, I have observed my fellow Americans slip into the morass of more government.
3--I concur that we have tried to support a more stable world and tried to keep the inter-country slaughter to a "minimum"... to our loss of precious young men and women in the military and to our financial detriment caused by hijacking a large portion of our GNP. We still have troops in Germany, Korea, and the Middle East. It is expensive to be the last line defenders of the free world. Because of our "Protector of the Free World" syndrome, we do not have the resources to spend on our own population.
4-- Having lived in MN, CA, HI, WA, TN and TX, I can assure you my observation of not only government waste but also of individual's waste is valid. . And, I was speaking about mainly scarce resource waste
----------------------...
>>JHM47
If you could not READ my post try this.
1--I did not condone any sort of European governance. If you were an economist, you would immediately note that Europeans who raised taxes on fuels for whatever reason garnered a welcomed collateral effect of reducing consumption. If you are not familiar with that language, then try this.... Reducing consumption and raising efficiencies was a side effect of whatever their intent was. I simply do not care what European intent was, as one who has had scads of college courses in economics, only the consequence matters.
2-- So Europe is becoming a "third world country. Who cares? I never took a pro-European stance in my position.... merely an economic observer of facts. Emulate?? Read with your mind and don't presume to be able to vet my stands on economic issues or political systems.
3--DA you are probably too young to remember what people burned in furnaces during winter for millennia. Wood, then coal, then heavy petro and now natgas. As a matter of fact many people do buy wood or harvest wood each year for the winter months. In many parts of this country wood pellet stoves are gaining popularity, as are high efficiency wood stoves. When the folks in Boston are paying $1,000 per month for winter fuel oil., those folks in Wisconsin, Maine, Washington, Idaho, Montana and New Hampshire. will be better off.
4-- I have been a proponent of Nuclear powered everything since my first college course in physics that dealt with the matter. I have followed the Nuclear Navy since the USS Nautilus was launched. We Americans have acted like a bunch of sheeple with regards to nuclear energy generation. The US Navy has had well over 100 nuclear reactors in ships since the USS Nautilus. Nuclear Works.
5-- I have a long-standing proclivity for diesel vehicles not electric. Next car,, I think CNG and maybe in a few decades a truly satisfactory hybrid diesel/electric. Electric... maybe like the early 1900s electric trucks... only in cities, I don not foresee an electric traveling from Austin to El Paso on one charge any time in my lifetime.
READ, THINK, THEN REACT.
Rikiki
PS I support certain government projects especially the Interstate highway infrastructure, the TVA, BPA, and certainly government power infrastructure for power transmission lines. T. Boone has it mostly right in my opinion.
It is nice to know that someone can still read and analyze. Thanks for your comments.
Clarifications:
1-- As you surmised, my point was about raising the price of fuels. Whatever the political systems exist in Europe and for whatever intent they had in taxing fuel, the (perhaps unsought) consequence of reduced consumption and higher efficiency resulted. I have great negative feelings about socialism. I am foremost a Libertarian by philosophy and a Republican by party. I am a native American citizen who grew up in a family where "waste not... want not" and "eat all you put on your plate" were rules of the day.
2--My parents were immigrants from Germany in the 20s. I was born in the Midwest, completed most of my graduate studies in CA and served my country for 6 years in the Navy. I earned the right to b*&^ch about conditions caused by the current "dumbed down" voters and political "leaders". For nearly 40 years since I became a Republican in college years, I have observed my fellow Americans slip into the morass of more government.
3--I concur that we have tried to support a more stable world and tried to keep the inter-country slaughter to a "minimum"... to our loss of precious young men and women in the military and to our financial detriment caused by hijacking a large portion of our GNP. We still have troops in Germany, Korea, and the Middle East. It is expensive to be the last line defenders of the free world. Because of our "Protector of the Free World" syndrome, we do not have the resources to spend on our own population.
4-- Having lived in MN, CA, HI, WA, TN and TX, I can assure you my observation of not only government waste but also of individual's waste is valid. . And, I was speaking about mainly scarce resource waste
----------------------...
>>JHM47
If you could not READ my post try this.
1--I did not condone any sort of European governance. If you were an economist, you would immediately note that Europeans who raised taxes on fuels for whatever reason garnered a welcomed collateral effect of reducing consumption. If you are not familiar with that language, then try this.... Reducing consumption and raising efficiencies was a side effect of whatever their intent was. I simply do not care what European intent was, as one who has had scads of college courses in economics, only the consequence matters.
2-- So Europe is becoming a "third world country. Who cares? I never took a pro-European stance in my position.... merely an economic observer of facts. Emulate?? Read with your mind and don't presume to be able to vet my stands on economic issues or political systems.
3--DA you are probably too young to remember what people burned in furnaces during winter for millennia. Wood, then coal, then heavy petro and now natgas. As a matter of fact many people do buy wood or harvest wood each year for the winter months. In many parts of this country wood pellet stoves are gaining popularity, as are high efficiency wood stoves. When the folks in Boston are paying $1,000 per month for winter fuel oil., those folks in Wisconsin, Maine, Washington, Idaho, Montana and New Hampshire. will be better off.
4-- I have been a proponent of Nuclear powered everything since my first college course in physics that dealt with the matter. I have followed the Nuclear Navy since the USS Nautilus was launched. We Americans have acted like a bunch of sheeple with regards to nuclear energy generation. The US Navy has had well over 100 nuclear reactors in ships since the USS Nautilus. Nuclear Works.
5-- I have a long-standing proclivity for diesel vehicles not electric. Next car,, I think CNG and maybe in a few decades a truly satisfactory hybrid diesel/electric. Electric... maybe like the early 1900s electric trucks... only in cities, I don not foresee an electric traveling from Austin to El Paso on one charge any time in my lifetime.
READ, THINK, THEN REACT.
Rikiki
PS I support certain government projects especially the Interstate highway infrastructure, the TVA, BPA, and certainly government power infrastructure for power transmission lines. T. Boone has it mostly right in my opinion.
We haven't build refineries in about 40 years! OK, we've added onto them but the real bottleneck is the refineries. What will it do to have more drilling if we can't refine it which, by the way will take at least another 5 years and more to tap it? How will this help a theoretical lowering of prices?
It's troubling to see the shortsightedness our nation is going through. Myopic visions of the future can only take you so far. As long as you don't address the bottlenecks, such as refining capacity, drilling makes as much sense as ordering more food than you can eat at a restaurant.