Fracking: An existential threat to green dogma

Misleading claims about shale gas development serve dogma but not the public interest

The Sierra Club and other environmental pressure groups are redoubling their efforts to “stop fracking in its tracks.” No wonder. The technology is an existential threat to fundamental “green” dogmas.

Horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing is a true “game changer.” In less than two years, this proven but still rapidly advancing technology has obliterated longstanding claims that we are running out of petroleum. Instead, the USA now finds itself blessed with centuries of oil and gas.

Thankfully, much of it is on state and private lands, which cannot easily be locked up by federal diktat.

Poland and Estonia are using it, China has invited companies to the Middle Kingdom, Britain, Israel and Jordan are evaluating their shale deposits, and other nations are following suit – coaxing oil and natural gas from shale and other rock formations that previously had refused to yield their hydrocarbon riches.

By making more natural gas available, fracking has reduced the US price for this clean-burning fuel to under $3 per thousand cubic feet (or million Btu), compared to a peak of $8 a few years ago.

Natural gas is also supplanting coal for electricity generation. Due to excessive, mostly unnecessary new Environmental Protection Agency regulations, many US coal-fired power plants are shutting down. Replacement plants are far more likely to be gas-powered than nuclear, especially in the near term.

Natural gas makes heating and electricity more affordable for families, hospitals, government buildings and businesses; feed stocks less expensive for makers of plastics, paints, fabrics and other petrochemical products; and the prospect of natural gas-power vehicles more enticing, without mandates or subsidies. That translates into thousands of jobs created or saved.

Companies are keeping chemical plants open that were slated to close, due to soaring prices for oil that they now can readily replace with cheap natural gas. Shell plans to build a $2-biillion ethane “cracking” plant near Pittsburgh – creating 10,000 construction jobs and 10,000 permanent jobs – thanks to abundant gas from Marcellus Shale. Louisiana, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Texas and other states are reporting subsidy-free employment and revenue gains from shale gas development. More are likely to follow, as companies seek new ways to capitalize on access to abundant, inexpensive, reliable gas.

Natural gas also provides essential backup power for wind turbines. Without such backup, electricity generation from these projects would plummet to zero 70-80% of the time, affecting assembly lines, computers, televisions, air conditioners and other electrical equipment dozens of times every day.

Even harder for environmentalists to accept, cheap natural gas also makes it harder to justify building redundant wind turbines that require large subsidies to generate far more expensive electricity only 5-8 hours a day, on average, while killing large numbers of raptors, migratory birds and bats. It makes more sense to simply build the gas turbines, and forget about the mostly useless wind turbines.

Fracking is also unlocking oil in the vast Bakken Shale formations beneath Montana, North Dakota and Saskatchewan. Oil production there has shot from 3,000 barrels a day in 2006 to nearly 500,000 today – creating thousands of jobs … and a growing need for the Keystone XL pipeline to Texas.

In response, eco-activists are spreading unfounded fears about this proven technology. Using words like “reckless,” “dangerous” and “poisonous,” they say unregulated fracking companies are operating with little concern for ecological values and causing cancer, earthquakes and groundwater contamination.

The claims have fanned borderline hysteria in some quarters and prompted Maryland, New York and other states to launch drawn-out studies or impose moratoria that will postpone drilling and the benefits it would bring. Facts are sorely needed.

Drilling and fracking have been carefully and effectively regulated by states for decades. As studies by the University of Texas and various state agencies have documented, there has never been a confirmed case of groundwater contamination due to fracking. Even EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson acknowledged that to a congressional panel.

These analysts, drilling companies and even an Environmental Defense expert now say fracking has not played a role in any of the rare cases where methane has gotten into drinking water.

Instead, the cause has generally been a failure of “well integrity” – the result of improper cementing between the well borehole and the steel “casing” and pipes that go down through aquifers and thousands of feet deeper into gas-laden shale formations. Similar failures occur in water wells drilled through rock formations containing methane (natural gas).

The solution is straightforward: better standards and procedures for cementing vertical pipes in place, and testing them initially and periodically to ensure there are no leaks.

Similarly, fracking fluids fail to match the “toxic” and “cancerous” opprobrium alleged by anti-drilling campaigns. Over 99.5% of the fluids is water and sand. The other 0.5% is chemicals to keep sand particles suspended in the liquid, fight bacterial growth and improve gas production.

Although industrial chemicals were once used, almost all of today’s are vegetable oil and chemicals used in cheese, beer, canned fish, dairy desserts, shampoo, and other food and cosmetic products.

As to “earthquakes,” barely detectable “tremors” have occasionally been measured near fracking operations and wastewater disposal injection wells. However, calling these snap, crackle and pop noises and movements “earthquakes” is akin to screaming “Earthquake!” when a cement truck goes by.

Despite these facts, EPA is nevertheless trying to invent problems and inject itself into already vigilant and responsive state regulatory efforts. The agency has conducted a roundly criticized study in Wyoming and is conducting water tests in Pennsylvania, where state officials view its activities as unnecessary meddling.

Additional over-reach and over-regulation would be hugely detrimental to US and global well-being. Fracking could help create numerous jobs and provide a far more secure, affordable, dependable and lower-pollution future than would ever be possible with wind or solar power.

By expanding oil and gas development, it could make North America the world’s new energy hub. Middle East sheiks, mullahs and OPEC ministers would lose economic, political and strategic power. Threats of Russian pipeline closures would no longer intimidate Eastern European countries. Politicians everywhere would waste less money on “renewable” energy T-Boonedoggles.

Unfortunately, though, fear campaigns are preventing some of America’s poorest counties and families from enjoying the economic benefits of Marcellus Shale development.

Baltimore’s Sage Policy Group calculated that fracking in western Maryland could reduce energy costs, create thousands of jobs, and generate millions of dollars annually in revenue for the state and Allegany and Garrett Counties. Similar studies in New York and elsewhere have reached similar conclusions.

Hydraulic fracturing technologies are proven. Regulations to protect drinking water are in place and improving steadily, as cementing and other legitimate concerns are recognized and addressed.

North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Texas, Poland and Israel are showing the way forward.

Communities that have not yet opened their doors to responsible drilling, fracking and production need to replace anti-hydrocarbon agendas and fears with facts, optimism and science-based regulations.

Paul Driessen

We Have It, They Admit It, However, We Can't Use IT.

This is a GREAT Article.

Hey folks,

Happy Tuesday to ya. This is a GREAT Article. It really is. Just one problem, which it even admits. It's by News Chief - What U.S. energy crisis? Published: Monday, March 26, 2012 at 6:28 a.m.

Every election year, the politicians take malicious delight in panicking Americans with lurid predictions of an imminent energy crisis: We're running out of oil. We're running out of natural gas. The oil sheikhs will be dictating how we run the country.

The solution, of course, is always to elect the politicians making the charges. It's all nonsense.

OK remember this. To say we need to Elect a Politician to CHANGE Obama's Energy Policies is nonsense? We will look at this again in a few seconds.

A March 20 Wall Street Journal commentary by Citi's top commodities researcher, Ed Morse, contends that "in energy, North America is becoming the new Middle East."

That might have been an overstatement, but not by much.

The U.S. and Canada's proven reserves of oil and natural gas are increasing at rates that would have been considered fantasy only a few years ago.

The conservative calculations of the Energy Information Administration said oil reserves increased 8.6 percent from December 2008 to December 2009 and natural gas reserves rose 11.3 percent — and those were economically down years when exploration would presumably slow down.

Natural gas reserves reached their highest level since 1971.

Proven reserves are those that the EIA deems reasonably recoverable given existing technology and economic conditions.

Of course, the technology is constantly improving and high demand makes the recovery profitable.

And then there are new discoveries, like the Bakken Field underlying almost all of North Dakota and parts of South Dakota and Montana. It is estimated to hold 481 billion barrels of oil.

Indeed, because of our refining capacity, the United States became a net petroleum exporter last year for the first time since 1949.

In The Wall Street Journal, Morse writes, "The United States has become the fastest-growing oil and gas producer in the world, and it is likely to remain so for the rest of this decade and into the 2020s."

Now this is true. However, a bit misleading. This is IN SPITE of Obama's War on Energy. His outright hostility to anything Oil, Natural Gas, and Coal. IN SPITE of Obama standing in the way, we have been able to do this. Imagine what we could do if he would get OUT of the way.

Canada is enjoying a similar boom in production and explorations. And one can hope that the overregulation and underinvestment restricting production in Mexico and Venezuela won't last forever.

We would profit greatly from and WITH them if Obama would allow the Keystone Pipeline to be fully built. He is NOT. HE is standing in the way of this also.

In the United States, it would help if the federal government wouldn't get distracted by uneconomic and wasteful incentives for ethanol, electric cars, wind mills that chop up great numbers of birds for tiny contributions to the electricity grid and schemes for extracting fuel from random plants.

OBAMA!

The government's efforts should be directed to research, investment and regulation to insure that this energy, which our economy must have, is extracted cleanly and safely.

The "new Middle East" sounds pretty good energy-wise, but we'd just as soon skip the political turmoil. With the coming election, we have a surplus of our own.

OK, so? "The solution, of course, is always to elect the politicians making the charges. It's all nonsense?" THAT is nonsense. It is OBAMA that said the Coal Industry would go Bankrupt, and he was proud about that. It is Obama that said he likes $4.00 plus a gallon Gas. It is HIS Administration that said we need to find a way to INCREASE our Gas Prices to those of Europe. They have of course backed off that. It is OBAMA that put into place Moratoriums both actual and de facto, that have cost America hundreds of thousands of Jobs. It IS Obama standing in the way of the Keystone Pipeline. Oh, he attempted to take credit for that of which he could not stop if he wanted to, and what he has no say on, but he IS blocking the Majority of it for no other reason than Politics.

It IS OBAMA who keeps throwing hundreds of Billions of Dollars into Companies that do nothing but line the Pockets of their CEO's, fire Employees, produce NOTHING, and go out of business. No folks, it's NOT nonsense. It's FACT! We need someone in Office that understands REALITY, and is committed to doing what we need to do. Forget the Gas Prices, that we KNOW from History WILL go down. Forget the new Jobs it WILL create, that we know from History. We are talking nearly if not more than a TRILLION dollars in NEW REVENUE that it WILL generate. We have a President that just says no. While saying NO, continues to spend more money. Think about that.
Peter

Real Life Proof We CAN Drill Our Way Out

Complete and utter Election Time BS.

Hey folks,

Happy Tuesday to ya. Since it's Tuesday, time to check in at the Energy Front. Someone just asked me why I call it "The Energy Front." I call it the "Energy Front" because this Administration is at WAR with every form of Energy that makes the World work. From the Moratorium, to the De-Facto Moratorium, to the Oppressive Taxation and Regulations, to the OUTRIGHT Denial of anything that WILL actually work to: Create Jobs, Reduce Dependency, Increase Revenue and bring Costs Down.

They are in trouble folks. It really is that simple. We learned before that $4.00 Gas is a tipping point. Once the price hits $4.00 a gallon, people get angry. People start calling for action by Government. People start changing their Lifestyles. It gets loud out there. When it hit $4.00 a gallon, Obama attacked Bush saying he should do something. The Liberals attacked Bush saying he should do something. He did. He said we will use our own. He said we would Drill more and use more of our own resources. The Price of a Barrel of Oil dropped, overnight, like a rock.

So now, Oil is $108 a Barrel. Gas is near and in some places over, $4.00 a gallon again. This President is NOW saying there is nothing he can do. This President is NOW talking about it and completely LYING about it. He is coming out and attempting to get you to believe we are Drilling more and it's not working. {Sigh} Complete and utter Election Time BS.

It was Barack Obama who said he likes $4.00 a gallon Gas. It was HIS Administration that said they want to find a way to get American Gas Prices up to that of Europe. It is Barack Obama who said he would bankrupt the Coal industry, and your Energy Costs would "Necessarily Skyrocket."It is Barack Obama who imposed a Drilling Moratorium. Rigs all over packed up and took Tens of Thousands of American Jobs with them. It is Barack Obama who put into place a De-Facto Moratorium. Slowing and blocking the Permitting Process. It is Barack Obama who is attacking Natural Gas, it's too cheap. It is Barack Obama who is attacking Hydrofracking.

All this at the same time he is out there saying we are Drilling more and it's not working. Saying we can't Drill our way out of all this. Again folks. Complete and utter Election Time BS. What we CAN'T do Mr. President, is continue to throw hundreds of Billions of Dollars into Companies that line the pockets of Executives, while firing Employees, producing NOTHING, and going out of business.

What we can't do is get off Oil and flick a switch and go Green. There is NOTHING Green to switch to. NOTHING. I love this piece by Erick Erickson of Red State.

On Friday, the President of the United States accused his Republican opponents of being members of the Flat Earth Society because of their demands that the nation increase drilling.

In no small bit of irony, the President who bitterly lamented the rise of ATM’s and Internet travel options accused the GOP of wanting to bitterly cling to the past.

But what of Barack Obama’s energy policy? He likes to tout wind and solar technologies and batteries, but it seems while he accuses the GOP of being flat earthers, the reality is that the President is himself anti-science when it comes to the reality of domestic energy needs.

His solution to fueling our cars amounts to using unicorn farts as gas — which has just as much a chance of happening as the mythic battery powered cross country run.

{Laughing} "Unicorn Farts." Very funny. However, Farts are CO2 and that's a pollutant. Can't use that. {laughing}

So we can't Drill Our Way out? Look at North Dakota. Here is the entire Article. According to Personal Liberty Digest - The North Dakota Oil Boom March 16, 2012 by Chip Wood Yup. That's his name. Chip Wood.

The average prices of a gallon of gas and a barrel of oil are near 150-year highs. Most pundits expect them to go higher. Are you ready for $5-per-gallon gasoline?

In a recent speech, President Barack Obama said: “We’re not going to be able to just drill our way out of the problem of high gas prices.” Actually, to a large extent, we can. For proof, let’s compare what’s been happening in California to the extraordinary accomplishments in North Dakota.

According to the Fraser Institute’s 2011 Global Petroleum Survey, California is the worst State in the Nation for its hostility to drilling. In fact, measured against the rest of the world, California ranks 91st.

Thanks to years of placating environmental extremists, California’s anti-drilling regulations make it almost impossible to drill for new oil anywhere in the State, onshore or off. As a result, its production of oil has fallen by nearly one-third in the past 20 years. As oil production has declined, so has tax revenue. Even with several gigantic tax increases during that period, oil revenues in the State are down.

That’s too bad, because California needs every penny of income it can get. It has one of the highest State sales taxes and personal income taxes in the country. Still, it’s not enough. The budget deficit for the coming fiscal year will top $9 billion — the fifth year in a row of billion-dollar deficits. Governor Jerry Brown’s proposed solution? Raise taxes even higher.

So you won’t be surprised to learn that wealthy Californians are fleeing the State as fast as they can. According to census data, almost one-third of its wealthiest residents — those earning $500,000 a year or more — fled the State between 2007 and 2009. On our Left Coast, they won’t drill for oil. And pretty soon, they won’t be able to drill many millionaires, either.

Let’s contrast the near-bankruptcy of the People’s Republic of California with what’s been happening in one of the most independent and entrepreneurial States in the union: North Dakota.

In 1995, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated that there were 150 million “technically recoverable barrels of oil” in an area of North Dakota known as the Bakken Shale. In 2008, the number had climbed to 4 billion barrels. Two years later, it had doubled to 8 billion barrels.

Today, thanks to vast improvements in recovery technology as well as the discovery of vast new oceans of underground oil, estimates of “recoverable” oil in the Bakken Shale have tripled to 24 billion barrels. That is more oil than is being produced anywhere else in the United States, including Alaska’s famed Prudhoe Bay. But it’s a small fraction of what is possible.

Experts say that current technology can extract only about 6 percent of the oil they know is underground in North Dakota. Total estimated oil reserves are thus around 500 billion barrels. And new discoveries are happening all of the time.

Let me include an interesting footnote on the subject of “reserves.” In 1980, the oil reserves in the United States were estimated at 30 billion barrels. Yet in the intervening 32 years, this country actually produced 77 billion barrels of oil. In other words, we produced more than 2.5 times more oil than the leading experts said there was 32 years earlier.

Today, the numbers are even more staggering. The amount of “technically recoverable” oil in the United States is estimated at 1.4 trillion barrels. (Please note that is “trillion,” with a “T.”) Unfortunately for us, most of that oil is located in areas Obama says we can’t search for it: in portions of Alaska and in waters off our shores.

Combined with known resources in Canada and Mexico, total recoverable oil in North America exceeds 1.7 trillion barrels. How much is that? Let me put it in perspective: It is more than all the oil the world has used since the first oil well was drilled in Titusville, Penn., 150 years ago.

So far, all I’ve discussed is oil. When natural gas and coal are added to the total, the numbers are clear: We have enough energy reserves in the United States to fuel all of our needs for 100 years, even if we never made another discovery.

Back to North Dakota for a moment. The effect of the bonanza there has been extraordinary. Stephen Moore, my favorite Wall Street Journal writer, says that what is happening in Williston, N.D., “is what the Gold Rush might have looked like had it happened in the time of McDonald’s, Wal-Mart and Home Depot.”

The State has the lowest unemployment rate in the Nation, at just 3.3 percent. California’s, by contrast, is 11.1 percent. That doesn’t even count the unemployed people who have simply stopped looking for work. The true unemployment number is probably closer to 20 percent.

According to the Census Bureau, North Dakota led the Nation in job and income growth in 2011. While California is losing millionaires every day, North Dakota is creating them faster than anyplace else in the country. But even entry-level positions are benefiting. For example, a job flipping burgers at McDonald’s pays $18 an hour plus a “signing bonus” for new employees.

And while the State of California can’t begin to pay all of its bills — it even issued IOUs last year in place of tax refunds — the biggest argument in North Dakota’s State Capitol is how to spend all of the money that’s pouring in. Legislators in Bismarck have approved hundreds of “shovel ready” infrastructure projects, including roads, bridges, railroads and pipelines. But even while spending more on worthwhile projects, legislators also agreed to cut the State income tax.

What’s happening in North Dakota is a classic example of the one thing that would solve our energy problems everywhere — and most other problems in the economy, too. Unfortunately, it’s the one thing Obama and his team won’t even consider.

The solution is simple: Let the market work.

In his State of the Union address in January, Obama declared that “This country needs an all-out, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy.”

Like so much that comes out of our President’s mouth, the sentence was as misleading as his skilled staff of speechwriters could make it. What he meant was that his Administration would continue pouring billions of dollars into every wasteful alternative energy pipe dream they could think up, while continuing to slap higher taxes and more regulatory handcuffs on the businesses that can actually solve our energy needs and make money (and pay taxes) doing it.

Rather than foster energy independence, Obama wants to make us all dependent. Dependent on government, that is.

Want to reduce unemployment? Increase tax revenues? Get the economy humming again? Truly foster energy independence?

The answer to all of them is the same: Get government off our backs. Let the market work. The results will be amazing. Maybe next year we’ll have a government that’s willing to give it a try.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

–ChipWood

It really is not hard to understand. To fix a problem cause by the attack on Oil, is to FREE Oil and let those that do, do what they do, and we will all benefit from it. Decreased dependency. Increase Revenue. Increase National Security. Increased Jobs. Lower Costs on EVERYTHING. Drill our way out of this Mr. President? Yes we can.
Peter

Sources:
Red State - Barack Obama’s Energy Policy: Unicorn Farts as the Fuel of Tomorrow Posted by Erick Erickson (Diary) Monday, March 19th at 4:46AM EDT
Personal Liberty Digest - The North Dakota Oil Boom

Obama Administration Continues to Lie About Gas Prices

This is plain Pathetic.

Hey folks,

This really is just plain pathetic. It really is. Obama comes out and outright LIES about his Energy Policy. I mean completely LIES about it. According to Obama on WHO-TV, Eyeball 13 news, Monday night, said this...

Our oil production right now is higher than at any time in the last eight years. We've seen more new rigs go up. We're opening up millions of acres to oil exploration, and so the issue here is not that we're not drilling enough.

NONE of this is TRUE. You Mr. President, are the one the imposed a ridiculous and pointless Moratorium in the Gulf. Rigs packed up and went home. Well, elsewhere. Causing hundreds of thousands of lost Jobs. YOU Mr. President, are the one that continues to STALL the Permitting Process, and STILL refuse new Drilling where we KNOW Oil is. YOU Mr. President, are the one that has been attacking Oil, Coal, Natural Gas, and YOU are the one Mr. President, that just said no to the Keystone Pipeline that would have created Tens of, if not Hundreds of Thousands of NEW JOBS. YOU blocked the Decrease of Dependency, and INCREASED Revenue. Not to mention bringing Energy Costs DOWN. YOU did all these things.

The problem is we only have 2% of the world's oil reserves and we use 20% of the world's oil.

Patently Absurd and an outright Lie.

Obviously what we want to do is to get gas prices as low as we can, as quickly as we can, but the most important thing in order to do that is to reduce our demand on oil.

This one is just convoluted to say the least. We are doing all we can to increase Oil Production but this is BAD and we need to get AWAY from Oil? Does that make any sense to you whatsoever? He continued..

I think the American people understand that, you know, we don't have a silver bullet when it comes to gas prices, but they're hurting right now.

No Mr. President. The American people KNOW we CAN do something about it. YOU are the one standing in the way.

You know, it's like a tax on your paycheck every time you fill up. And so what I've instructed my team to do, we're looking at every single thing we can do from relieving bottlenecks to try to see if we can impact internationally how the oil markets are operating. Ultimately, though, the single most important thing we can do is reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and the fact that we've reduced our dependence by about a million barrels a day, that over time is gonna have a big impact.

Alright, I'm done with the Liar and Chief on this issue. They are NOT looking for ways to reduce our Dependency on FOREIGN Oil. The way you do that is produce more DOMESTIC Oil. There is NOTHING to switch to. All your so called GREEN Energy Jobs are going away, because there is NOTHING to switch to. From Wind Companies, to Solar, to now even Battery Companies, once the Federal Money dries up and goes away, so do they. After the Executives line their pocket and contribute some back to Obama and Crew.

Then you have Chu. Remember him? He said we need to find a way to RAISE Gas Prices to EUROPEAN Prices. He is the US Energy Secretary. Remember, back in 08, Obama said he LIKES $4.00 a gallon gas. Just wished it got there slower. Then his Energy Sec. said we need to find a way, even if through Taxation, to raise Gas Prices. Well, now he changes his tune. According to

CNS News - Energy Secretary Renounces Call For Higher Gas Prices By Craig Bannister March 13, 2012

Under questioning by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) today, Energy Sec. Steven Chu renounced his previous call for higher gas prices.

“Since I walked in the door, as secretary of energy, I’ve been doing everything in our powers to do what we can to reduce these gas prices,” Sec. Chu told the Senate hearing.

As we know is a COMPLETE Lie.

Sen. Lee then asked Chu: “Are you saying that you no longer share the view that we need to figure out how to boost gasoline prices in America?”

“I no longer share that view,” Sec. Chu said.

Because Obama slapped me upside my head and said you better not tell the truth about this. It's an election year. Now go lie. We're dying here.

Sen. Lee then followed up: “But, you did then, but you don’t now?”

“When I became secretary of energy, I represented the U.S. government, and I think now in this economic very slow return, these prices could well affect the comeback of our economy and we’re very worried about that,” Chu replied.

NO they are not. What they are very worried about is your VOTE!

“So, of course we don’t want the price of gasoline to go up; we want it to go down,” Chu concluded.

Earlier, Sen. Lee questioned Chu’s ability to empathize with the average American’s plight at the pump:

“I don’t know how much driving you, personally do, yourself. So. You may not personally be feeling the gouge at the pump. But, I assure you that hundreds of millions of hard-working Americans do feel this.”

Chu, of course, is chauffeured to and from work on the taxpayers’ dime.

It's an election year. Obama is hurting. 41 percent approval rating is the lowest of his Presidency. The majority of Americans, no mater what Political affiliation, Race, Status, or Sex, all say it's the Economy Stupid. One of the BIGGEST Chucks bringing the Economy down is Energy Costs. This is just FACT. So of course the Administration is going to come out and try to convince you that "They feel your Pain." and that they "Are working hard to find a way to help you." When we KNOW this couldn't be farther from the Truth. This is all BS. There is no other way to say it. It's not distortion. It's not exaggeration. It's not false assumptions. It is complete BS. Outright lies. It really is just this simple.

Listen to me folks. Hear what I am telling you here. I wish I had time to find it, but remember that report a while back that told us, no matter what, I think it was about Solar, even if completely successful, we would still get something like 60 percent of our Energy from Oil in the next 50 years? There will never come a day, here me, there will never come a day, EVER, that we will flip a switch and never use another drop of Oil. NEVER.

Problem is, Solar is not successful. Wind, NOT successful. Batteries, NOT a suitable switch. There is NOTHING. So we need to, and the only way to, reduce our dependency on foreign Oil is to produce more of our own. In doing so, we will create a SAFER America, boost the Economy, create hundreds of thousands of Jobs, and bring down the Price of Gas. There is NO other solution. Period.
Peter

Who's to Blame for Gas Prices?

A compilation of FACTS heard here over the years.

Hey folks,

Happy Tuesday to ya. I got two for ya. First up? BG sent this in. It was from Yesterday on the Rush Limbaugh Radio Show. None of this is new. But he put it all together like no one else could. It was a great Segment. A compilation of FACTS heard here over the years. Here he is. Ladies and Gentalmen, Rush Limbaugh.

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Michael Janovsky at the New York Times, April 24th, 2006, about six years ago: "Democrats Eager to Exploit Anger Over Gas Prices." This is back in 2006. The Democrats were running for office in the midterm elections trying to talk us into a recession. This is after they had failed at trying to talk us into failure in Iraq. "Democrats running for Congress are moving quickly to use the most recent surge in oil and gasoline prices to bash Republicans over energy policy, and more broadly, the direction of the country. With oil prices hitting a high this week and prices at the pump topping $3 a gallon in many places..." We're now over $5 in California. In 2006, with "prices at the pump topping $3 a gallon in many places Amy Klobuchar, a Democratic Senate candidate in Minnesota, is making the issue the centerpiece of her campaign. Ms. Klobuchar says it 'is one of the first things people bring up' at her campaign stops. To varying degrees, Democrats around the country are following a similar script that touches on economic anxiety and populist resentment against oil companies."

Yep!

"'It's a metaphor for an economy that keeps biting people despite overall good numbers,' said Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York..." What else do we have, Chuck-U? Oh, Chuck-U is in the news today, folks. Chuck-U tells Clinton to pressure Saudi Arabia to pump more oil. Senator Chuck-U Schumer "wants Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to press..." She's got her own section in the program today for her own rampant hypocrisy. (We'll get to that in due course.) Chuck-U Schumer "wants Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to press Saudi Arabia to boost output as rising prices are hitting consumer at the gasoline pump." Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa!

Wait a minute. More oil? Chuck-U wants more oil? Is that what asking the Saudis to do, pump more oil? Is that right? Is that what that means? Senator Schumer tells Clinton to pressure Saudis to pump more oil? He wants more oil? Then how come this regime vetoes the Keystone pipeline and has a drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico and makes fun of/mocks the concept of producing more oil in the United States? So Senator Chuck-U Schumer is asking Senator Clinton to make us more dependent on foreign oil! That's what he's doing when he's asking her to pressure the Saudis, pump more oil. He wants us to be more dependent. He doesn't want to use our own oil. Obama doesn't want to use our own oil.

How come Chuck-U is not out there saying, "Everybody go buy a Volt?" How come Chuck-U's not saying, "Hey, everybody go buy a Prius, go buy a hybrid"? How come Chuck-U's not out there saying, "Get your tire gauge out and make sure the pressure is right and get a tune-up"? That's what Obama do. So the Democrats want more oil. They want the price to come down with more supply. Funny how that never works domestically. So 2006, New York Times: "Democrats Eager to Exploit Anger Over Gas Prices" -- at $3 a gallon. From BigGovernment.com Wynton Hall with the story: "Seven Gas Facts Obama Cannot Escape -- 1.

"In September 2008, Barack Obama’s 'Nobel-prize winning physicist' of an Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, told the Wall Street Journal: 'Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe,'" which is much higher than what we pay. Obama has said he wants high prices. Why don't these guys come out and say, "This exactly what we want"? Steven Chu, the energy secretary, Nobel-prize winning physicist has advocated for higher prices. So has Obama. Now they're getting higher prices. You know why? They want higher prices so you'll have to go out and buy a Volt or a hybrid or get on a bus or get on a subway or take mass transit and become like a number.

A robot. An interchangeable part of the system, like a Chinese citizen taking orders and dictates from the state and their command-and-control economy. The truth is, they want higher prices. The problem is it's an election year. Can't advocate for higher gas prices in an election year. "2. In 2008, then-candidate Barack Obama admitted that, like his future Energy Secretary Mr. Chu, he believed that high gas prices would be a good thing because they would force Americans to ween [sic] themselves off of oil, but that he would have 'prefered [sic] a gradual adjustment.'" We had the sound bite last week. We reminded you of it when gasoline hit four bucks and Obama said: It's okay; it's okay. I'm just a little upset how fast it got there. 3. On January 19, 2009, the day before Barack Obama [immaculated] gas prices were $1.84 a gallon. As of February 20, 2012 a gallon of gas cost $3.59," and now it's close to $5 a gallon. And don't forget, in 2006 it was $3 a gallon, and the Democrats are out exploiting it and trying to turn it into a big political issue. "4. As Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson points out, 'Offshore drilling permits are being issued at less than half the rate of the previous administration. The average number of leases issued on public lands is less than half than during President Clinton’s term.' 5. In 2008, Barack Obama seemed perfectly comfortable with soaring energy prices if they meant curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

"As Mr. Obama confessed: 'Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.'" In their hearts and minds, Obama and the left are LOVING gas prices go up. They just can't say so. But they love it. And that's why there's not a huge effort to bring them down. There's a huge effort to make you think they want to, but how many stories have you seen where Obama says, "Ah, there's really not a whole lot the president can do"? And Jay Carney says, "Well, there's not a whole lot the president can do." In 2006, don't forget, Chuck Schumer and John F. Kerry (who, by the way, served in Vietnam) were mocking Bush for asking the Saudis to pump more oil! Arabs producing more oil makes prices go down, but somehow the US pumping more oil won't make any difference.

That's what they tell us. "Nah-nah-nah. That's the stupidest thing we ever heard of! That's a tired, worn-out cliché. 'Drill, drill, drill,' and for 30 years they've been saying that. That's what the Republicans always say. Just drill, drill. That's gonna take us two to three years!" Well, where would we be if 30 years ago we had just started drilling, drilling, drilling? Chuck-U Schumer in 2008: "Schumer to Bush: Stop 'Coddling' Big Oil, Saudis," and get on 'em and make 'em pump more. And Chuck-U wants Hillary to do the same thing now. Obama, he can lower the sea level but he can't lower the price of oil. "7. Try as he might, President Obama’s campaign will try to distance themselves from the fact that a central pillar of Mr. Obama's 2008 campaign was a pledge to reduce the 'pain at the pump' caused by high gas prices."

We can go back and we can get all of that audio that was a centerpiece of his campaign, a pillar, to reduce pain at the pump. But missing no opportunity to invoke class warfare, Obama said, "For the well-off in this country, high gas prices are mostly an annoyance, but to most Americans they're a huge problem, bordering on a crisis. Here in Indiana gas costs $3.60 a gallon," he said in 2008. Now it's 2012, we're over $5 a gallon, and there's not much we can do about it.

And from MSNBC: "8 Reasons Why Gas Will Hit $5 a Gallon This Year." I'll just read through them. Not gonna give you details. Number one, Strait of Hormuz. Number two, Iran. Number three, refiners raising prices. Number four, other geopolitical risks. Number five, the European Union may save itself. Number six, the US economic recovery means higher oil prices. Number seven, summertime. Number eight, supply risk. In all eight of these reasons, not one of them mention Obama or his energy policies. So we have every effort in the world being made to shield Obama from any relationship to high gasoline prices, despite what the Democrats did all during '05, '06, '07, and '08. We even have some Republicans now saying, "We really don't want to try to tie the president to this, market forces no president can control."

We said back in 2006 there's nothing Bush can do about it. The president does not have a magic wand. Releasing from the strategic reserves doesn't make a significant long-term difference in the price of oil. And people who said that back then want us to say something consistent now. "Well, come on, let's not jump on Obama for this. We all know honestly that presidents can't do anything about it." Bush was not choking the supply, however. Obama is. Obama is a factor in the price of gasoline. See, that's the difference, Obama is a factor in the price of oil. Obama wants higher oil prices, his energy secretary and he have both said so. They want higher oil price. This is not making it up. They want higher oil prices. It's less freedom. It's less mobility. It forces you into alternative buying decisions when it's time to get a new car. So Obama does have something to do with high oil prices.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

Eric in Glenn Arbor, Michigan, you're next on the Rush Limbaugh program. Hello, sir.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. Long-time listener from the early Clinton years.

RUSH: Thank you, sir.

CALLER: The reason why I'm calling is about the oil prices and what we're paying at the pump. Lots of news about it, and if we go to five, six-dollar-a-gallon oil, that's gonna sink the economy, and I think it's time to fight back, and I think we can fight back by several perspectives. One, we as a consumer can cut back slightly on our fuel usage. And, two, instead of just releasing 30 million barrels of oil from the strategic energy reserves, we need to do it in a strategic manner. For example, release seven million barrels of oil at, say, $89 a barrel. It's about 109 bucks a barrel today. Release it at below the market price and then make several subsequent releases without telling anybody --

RUSH: There's not enough oil there to make any difference. The real question is what is the rice of algae by the gallon because Obama has suggested pond scum as the next alternative fuel for oil. We cannot, by the way, and I appreciate the big-heartedness here in wanting to conserve, but there's gonna be forced conservation at five dollars a gallon. There was a four. People will drive less because they can't afford it. By the way, the economy's already sinking. But you get to five or six dollars a gallon, the choice to conserve will not be something you have to force on people, it'll be happening naturally. But even at that, conserving is not growth, and growth is what our economy needs. Growth and supply, growth in expansion, demand, all these things, that's what this country and this economy needs. We can't conserve our way to growth of anything.

END TRANSCRIPT

That was from the Rush Limbaugh Show yesterday. Be right back with Obama's NEW answer for Energy.
Peter

Sources:
Rush Limbaugh Radio - The Democrat Gas Hypocrisy
New York Times: Democrats Eager to Exploit Anger Over Gas Prices - Michael Janovsky - 04.24.2006
The Hill: Sen. Schumer Tells Clinton to Pressure Saudi Arabia to Pump More Oil
BigGovernment: 7 Gas Facts Obama Cannot Escape

Reg, High Tech, Super, Pond Scum?

Pelosi was ahead of her time.

Hey folks,

OK, I have to issue an apology. Wait, did you catch this? Yup. Another "Green Energy Company," propped up by YOUR money, lays off 150 people, is failing, yet? That's right, they are paying themselves, the Executives, BIG bonuses and pay raises. Not kidding folks, According to Free Public - After Layoffs, Execs Get Big Raises at Taxpayer-Funded A123 (Makes batteries for Fisker) National Legal & Policy Center ^ | February 16, 2012 | Paul Chesser

A taxpayer-funded electric vehicle battery company, that is considered in great danger due to its dependency on troubled EV company Fisker Automotive, has awarded its top executives big salary increases despite a steep downward trajectory in its stock price.

Massachusetts-based A123 Systems -- which received $279.1 million in stimulus money from the Department of Energy, and up to $135 million in incentives from the State of Michigan -- boosted the base salaries of two vice presidents and its chief financial officer on February 8.

Chief Financial Officer David Prystash was bumped 27 percent to $380,000; VP of Energy Solutions Robert Johnson’s base salary increased 51 percent from his 2010 level to $400,000; and VP of Automotive Systems Jason Forcier saw his pay rise 32 percent from 2010, to $350,000. The news was first reported by the Boston Web site of Citybizlist.com, which obtained the information from an A123 SEC filing.

Now this report says 125 employees, but I saw another that said 150. Regardless, they took YOUR money and they are paying themselves HUGE salaries, and the company is failing. They are laying people off. When the money, YOUR money, is gone, they will go the way of Wind and Solar Companies. Bankrupt.

So lets have a conversation with the President. "Mr. Obama. Wind, Solar, now Battery Companies, that YOU gave Hundreds of Billions of Tax Payer Money to, are failing all over the place. There is NO MARKET. They are producing NOTHING. Can we pretty please, Drill, get more Natural Gas, allow the Pipeline? Can we now do what we should have been doing all along?"

President Obama "Uh, no. There is a new hope. Yes. A new answer. We will not Drill, get more Natural Gas, and I'll allow a little part of the Pipeline, it is an election year, to be built. But that is not the answer. No. we have a new hope. You should get excited about it."

"Yeah? OK. What is it?"

President Obama "Well, it's Pond Scum."

"Excuse me?"

President Obama. "Yeah, yeah. Pond Scum. You know Algae."

Here is an actual quote. This is a REAL quote from the President of the United States.

We're making new investments in the development of gasoline and diesel and jet fuel that's actually made from a plant-like substance, algae. You got a bunch of algae out here, right? If we can figure out how to make energy out of that, well, we'll be doing all right.

Uh? "If we can figure out how to" FLY, "well, we'll be doing all right." as well. We could just fly, like Superman, to Work, School, whatever. Not sure about the Store. How to carry all that stuff. But hey, if we learned to Fly, uh, no Farting though, that would be like driving, greenhouse gas as such, so fart free flying, and "we'll be doing all right." I know, I know. But he really said this. According to CSN News - Obama's Energy Plan -- Algae By Susan Jones February 24, 2012

(CNSNews.com) - "The American people aren't stupid," President Obama said on Thursday -- as he insisted that drilling for more oil on U.S. territory is "not a strategy to solve our energy challenge."

The president's solution? Algae, for one.

There are no quick fixes to the nation's energy problem, the president said, dismissing Republican calls for more drilling as a "bumper sticker."

"We’re making new investments in the development of gasoline and diesel and jet fuel that’s actually made from a plant-like substance -- algae," the president said at a campaign stop in Florida. "You've got a bunch of algae out here, right? If we can figure out how to make energy out of that, we’ll be doing all right."

Obama said the nation could replace up to 17 percent of the oil it imports for transportation with "this fuel that we can grow right here in the United States. And that means greater energy security. That means lower costs. It means more jobs. It means a stronger economy."

{Sigh} More OIL means greater NATIONAL Security. It means lower costs. It means more jobs. It means a stronger Economy. Just saying YES to the Keystone Pipeline means greater NATIONAL Security. It means lower costs. It means more jobs. It means a stronger Economy. Talking about Pond Scum? Means NOTHING. It will simply continue the DECREASE of National Security, HIGHER Costs, LESS Jobs, and damaging the Economy even further.

Even some of his supporters are out there saying, what the? This is completely ridiculous. It really is. Do NOTHING to actually FIX the Problem that Liberal Policies over the Years have CREATED, just issue Speeches and ask people to Dream. $5.00 to even $6.00 a gallon gas is coming folks. But fret not, while you are paying that, just think how wonderful it will be when we learn how to turn Pond Scum into Energy,,,,,OH WAIT!!!! I forgot about my apology. No I have to apologize.

Look folks, I was wrong. Yup. For years I thought Nancy Pelosi was loosing it. That she was getting a bit kooky. That perhaps it was time for her to retire. But I was wrong. One example I used of this was what she said back in 2006. Yup. She was not being kooky. She was not even talking about Politics. No sir. I was just too ignorant to understand she was WAY ahead of her time. When she said, she wanted to "drain the swamp," she was talking about GREEN ENERGY... Now I get it. Sorry MS Pelosi. {Smile}
Peter

Sources:
Free Public - After Layoffs, Execs Get Big Raises at Taxpayer-Funded A123
CSN News - Obama's Energy Plan -- Algae

Why We NEED To Increase Our Own

If we had started, non of this would matter.

Hey folks,

It get frustrating when discussing this. It really does. It WILL effect every Man, Woman, and Child in this Country and it WILL effect the price on everything. I really do not understand how some just do not seem to get it.

If we had, start to do what then President Bush said, finding ways to increase OUR Energy Production, and using more of our own, we would not care right now, from and Energy Standpoint, about any of the current events going on in the World. We would have increased our Supply, in which, we would have decreased Demand, bringing DOWN Energy Prices. This would have decreased Prices on EVERYTHING. It would have boosted the Economy, Created Hundreds of Thousands of new Jobs. It would have INCREASED Revenue to every form of Government from Local to Federal. It would have INCREASED our National Security.

However, we did the exact opposite. Which of course means, we GET the exact opposite reaction. The Price of Energy has Skyrocketed. We have LOST Hundreds of Thousands of Jobs. We have decrease Revenue to Government, we have DECREASED our National Security. We MUST care what is going on in the World today. It will effect EVERY American.

We now have an Administration that is playing Politics with the lives of EVERY American. Those the most effected are those with fixed incomes, and those who make less. No matter what you make, the Price on EVERYTHING is going up. If you do not have the means to increase you financial out put, you WILL have to make tough choices on what to cut out, just to fill your tank, heat you home, and buy FOOD.

A simple solution, even after the Moratorium, de facto Moratorium, attacks by this Administration on Coal, Oil, Natural Gas, a Pipeline was offered. A Pipeline that could supply 92 percent of all our liquid fuel needs from right here and our friends in the North Canada was denied by this Administration. They just said No.

Now take a look at the World. According to Reuters - Iran stops oil sales to British and French firms

(Reuters) - Iran has stopped selling crude to British and French companies, the oil ministry said on Sunday, in a retaliatory measure against fresh EU sanctions on the Islamic state's lifeblood, oil.

"Exporting crude to British and French companies has been stopped ... we will sell our oil to new customers," spokesman Alireza Nikzad was quoted as saying by the Ministry of Petroleum website.

The European Union in January decided to stop importing crude from Iran from July 1 over its disputed nuclear program, which the West says is aimed at building bombs. Iran denies this.

Iran's oil minister said on February 4 that the Islamic state would cut its oil exports to "some" European countries.

The European Commission said last week that the bloc would not be short of oil if Iran stopped crude exports, as they have enough in stock to meet their needs for around 120 days.

And what happens AFTER the 120 days? Then you have THIS. According to CNBC News - Saudi Arabia Cuts Oil Output, Export: Industry Report Published: Sunday, 19 Feb 2012 | 7:32 AM ET By: Yousef Gamal El-Din CNBC Anchor

The world’s top oil exporter, Saudi Arabia, appears to have cut both its oil production and export in December, according to the latest update by the Joint Organizations Data Initiative (JODI), an official source of oil production, consumption and export data.

The OPEC heavyweight saw production decline by 237,000 barrels per day (bpd) from three-decade highs of 10.047 million bpd in November, the JODI data showed on Sunday.

The draw-down was sharper for the actual amount exported, declining by 440,000 bpd, or 5.6 percent, to come in at 7.364 million bpd, the data also showed. The level would still be similar to exports after a steep ramp-up last June.

In its monthly report on February 10, the IEA put Saudi Arabia’s production number for December slightly lower at 9.55 million bpd, a disparity of 260,000 bpd versus the JODI data.

Iran appeared not to have filed data in time for the latest release, providing no additional clues about how many export barrels were already lost in December, as some reports have suggested.

JODI, an initiative coordinated by the International Energy Forum (IEF), depends on participating member states for data collection. The IEA estimated Iran’s oil supply in December to have been 3.45 million bpd, marking a drop of 100,000 bpd.

For the third month in a row, no details were available for the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Libya, the immediate reasons for which are unclear.

Together with other Gulf oil exporters, the UAE has been in focus as a possible source of alternative supply for at least some of Iran’s crude. Widening sanctions have seen several Asian clients of Iran’s oil, including top importer China, send high-level delegations to the region in the last few weeks.

Iraq, another frequently-cited supplier to make up for part of the Iranian oil shortfall following European Union sanctions, reported no major changes to its supply and export regime. Authorities there are pursuing an ambitious production expansion plan with the aim of reaching 12 million bpd by 2016.

So Iran playing games, and the Saudis are cutting their Oil Production. What does this all mean? $5.00 a gallon gas. If not more. It means decrease, ON PURPOSE, of Supply, which means, and INCREASE in Demand, which of course means and INCREASE on Price. Once again, an INCREASE in the Price of Oil, MEANS and INCREASE in the Price of EVERYTHING.

This is not difficult to understand folks. It really isn't. WE NEED TO START USING OUR OWN!!!! We need to stop playing Politics with the very LIVES of every American. We need to STOP relying on Foreign Governments that HATE us for our very Basic Needs. We need the Keystone Pipeline. We need to Drill more. We need to Refine more. We need more Natural Gas. We have the answer right here. It's not too late. YET. We need new leadership in this, and all areas. It IS just that simple.
Peter

Sources:
Reuters - Iran stops oil sales to British and French firms
CNBC News - Saudi Arabia Cuts Oil Output, Export: Industry Report

That jobs thing sure didn’t last long

That jobs thing sure didn’t last long

Obama rejects Keystone XL jobs, promotes more wind and solar subsidies. What to do now?

President Obama “is focused like a laser on putting people back to work,” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) assured us last fall – echoing repeated statements by President Obama and Administration officials who “can’t wait” for Congress or others to take action and create jobs.

The jobs thing didn’t last long, however. The President soon vetoed TransCanada’s application for permits to build the Keystone XL pipeline. Approving them “would not be in the national interest,” he declared.

It is hard for most Americans to understand how it is contrary to the national interest to create 20,000 construction and manufacturing jobs, increase US gross domestic product by an estimated $350 billion, and bring 830,000 barrels of oil per day via pipeline from friend and neighbor Canada to Texas refineries. It’s hard for us to grasp how pipelining Canadian oil is worse than importing oil in much riskier tankers from unstable, unfriendly places like Venezuela and the Middle East – or how it’s better for the global environment to transport Canadian oil by tanker to China, where it will be burned under far less rigorous pollution laws and controls.

It’s equally hard for average citizens to comprehend how more than three years of careful environmental studies are insufficient, especially after the State Department had issued several reports concluding that the pipeline would have only “limited adverse environmental impacts” in areas that are already dotted with oil wells and crisscrossed with oil and gas pipelines.

To suppose, as the President insisted, that Keystone would generate “a lot fewer jobs than would be created by extending the payroll tax cut and extending unemployment insurance” is simply baffling.

In view of White House intransigence, what should Congress and TransCanada do now?

The 1,660-mile-long Keystone XL pipeline would begin in southeastern Alberta, Canada and end in Port Arthur, Texas. Although it would incorporate the existing Keystone Cushing pipeline through Kansas and part of Oklahoma, most of the US portion (from Canada through Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska, and from Cushing, Oklahoma to Port Arthur) would be new. Keystone XL would create 20,000 jobs manufacturing and installing 36-inch pipe, valves and other components to build that addition.

Environmentalists predictably went ballistic. Surface mining Alberta’s oil sands damages lands and habitats, they railed. Never mind that this technique is being replaced by in situ “steam-assisted gravity drain” processes, that mined lands are being restored to forest and grass habitats, or that blocking Keystone XL will neither end oil extraction nor prevent crude or refined product shipments to China.

Mining, processing and using this oil will increase greenhouse gas levels and global warming, activists vented. Never mind that total “greenhouse gas” emissions would amount to an almost undetectable portion of annual global GHG emissions. That “dangerous manmade global warming” is an exaggerated scare that has little basis in truly peer-reviewed science. Or that there has been no warming for a decade, UN IPCC “science” is crumbling at its foundation, and increasing numbers of climate experts are publicly dissenting from IPCC orthodoxy.

Mr. Obama needs environmentalists in his camp, if he expects to be reelected. Radical greens have made Keystone XL the latest symbol of their intense hatred of anything hydrocarbon – and a centerpiece for fundraising. Like the President, they are intent on ending our “addiction to oil” and “fundamentally transforming” the energy, economic and social fabric of America.

Jobs, GDP, tax revenues and national security will therefore have to take a backseat.

As he suggested in his State of the Union speech, President Obama seems willing to generate expensive electricity for three million homes by blanketing a million acres of public lands with taxpayer-subsidized, bird-killing wind turbines, habitat-smothering solar panels, high-voltage transmission lines, and gas-fired backup units. Anti-Keystone “environmentalists” seem to have few objections to such “eco-friendly” energy. But for them a pipeline is intolerable.

Faced with these facts, TransCanada could do as Mr. Obama suggested – and reapply for permits, after the fall elections and after changing its intended pipeline route to avoid allegedly sensitive areas. In the meantime, it could continue trying to win friends and influence people.

Yes, it could. But doing so has significant pitfalls.

It would drag the process out, leave the company in the “kill zone” of media and environmentalist attacks, in a political no man’s land, amid deadly crossfire from savvy and well-funded activists, journalists and bureaucrats. It would also set the stage for anti-pipeline lawsuits in courts of their choosing – perhaps in “friendly” lawsuits between “green” plaintiffs and EPA or State – when and if permits finally are granted.

A further drawback is that focusing on the State Department and White House ignores the Interior Department, Fish & Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency and many other federal and state regulatory and judicial agencies and processes that will still stand in the way of final project approval, and will likely take years to navigate.

There is a better way.

TransCanada could and should work closely and cooperatively with farmers and farm bureaus, state governors, agencies and legislators, mayors and other affected parties, to address concerns and compensate landowners for the use of their property, unavoidable impacts and damages in the unlikely event of an accident. The company should emphasize that Keystone XL will create thousands of jobs; generate billions of dollars in private, local, state and national revenue; use the best and safest pipeline technology; and bring oil from a friendly country to American refineries, motorists, farmers and manufacturers.

TransCanada should also take legal action, in state and/or federal courts of its choosing, over causes of action of its choosing. The company’s permit application has been rejected – for specious environmental and overtly political reasons. The Administration’s decision is clearly “ripe” for litigation.

The company may be reluctant to sue. Litigation over such matters is not as common in Canada as in the lawsuit-happy USA; the judicial territory may be unfamiliar; and the outcome is not certain.

However, in the United States environmentalists often win in the courts of media and public opinion, especially in an election year, especially with hundred-million-dollar anti-oil campaigns, laden with emotional rhetoric.

On the other hand, companies frequently win in US courts of law, where they are able to compile complete judicial records with solid scientific facts supporting their projects – something that is virtually impossible to do in a sound-bite-driven (and often biased) news media. The factually bankrupt rhetoric of environmentalist campaigns is no match for sound science, when claims and arguments are scrutinized at the trial and appellate level. Faced with defeat, the green wolf packs often go off in search of easier prey.

The anti-pipeline, anti-oil sands groups will not disappear. They will most assuredly sue TransCanada and multiple government agencies if permits are ultimately issued. They will also do all they can to shut down any Pacific Gateway pipeline, any exports to Asia, and ultimately all oil sands operations.

This better way forward has strong probabilities for success. It is clearly in the national interest of both Canada and the United States that it be taken, and that it succeed.
Paul Driessen
____________

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow and Congress of Racial Equality, and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death.

Projected Cost of $4.60 A Gallon

Are you ready for the Show?

Hey folks,

Have you seen the Projected Forecasts? It's coming. The Politics, the phony Outrage, the SHOW. Do you remember a few years back when gas hit $4.00 a gallon? We learned that this was pretty much the tipping point. EVERYTHING went up. Food, Merchandise, the cost to Power your Home. The Cost to HEAT and COOL your Home. EVERYTHING went up.

We learned during this time that THIS is pretty much the Price where people change their Lifestyles. Where people start traveling LESS. Buying LESS. Working harder at saving, just to pay their Home Bills.

Who was the hardest hit? Those on fixed Incomes. The Poor and the Elderly. Single Moms had to get second Jobs, just to pay for the Gas to go to their main Jobs. Pay more for Childcare. EVERYONE had to pay more for EVERYTHING.

Then came the Show. Liberals in Congress showed their Phony Outrage. They blamed "Big Oil" and said they were going to steel their Profits and give the money to you. They held Phony Hearings and attempting to get you all upset with those supplying the Energy.

Then something happened. An American President stood up and said enough is enough. We will open up new areas here in this Country. We will Drill more HERE. We will start using our own. So what happened? OVER NIGHT, literally, it's a fact, look it up, over night the price of a Barrel of Oil Plummeted. Fell like a rock. The Prices at the pumps started to fall precipitously.

Why? Because everyone knew, without a doubt, this American President was serious. We WERE going to do it. Then comes along another American President. This one says, NO. We will not Drill at all. The Rigs left. The Energy Companies took their Ball and went elsewhere. Then he says OK, you can continue but only if you jump through the hoops I tell you to. Putting into place a de-facto Moratorium. Then he started an outright ASSAULT on anything Energy. He SAID he will bankrupt the Coal Industry. He will NOT allow Drilling. He SAID he LIKES high Gas Prices. He just said NO to the Keystone Pipeline that would provide us with 92 Percent of all our Liquid Fuel Needs. What happened? You got it. The Prices starting on their way back up. They are going to KEEP going.

Why? Because just like the first President, people KNOW he is serious, and they know he will not reverse course no matter how much REAL Outrage is out there. They KNOW he doesn't care. So? Have you seen the Projections? $4.60 a gallon by May. THIS YEAR!

It's coming folks. Get ready. The Politics, the phony Outrage, the SHOW. Obama and the Liberals in Congress will be calling for investigations. They will be blaming "Big Oil." They will be telling you how "Big Oil" doesn't care about you. They will call for more "Regulations" and such. Oh it's coming. But remember who is REALLY to blame here. It's NOT the Energy Companies. It IS totally Obama and Crew. TOTALLY.

Who will be hardest hit? Will Obama? Nope. He's a Millionaire. Will Mikey Moore? Nope, he's a Millionaire. However, who knows, maybe he'll make another Movie calling Oil Companies evil and make even MORE money. Will Congress? Nope, Most in Congress are Millionaires. Will people like Rush? Nope. HE is a Millionaire. No folks, make no mistake about this either, those hardest hit over $4.60 a Gallon, will be those on Fixed Incomes. Those Living Paycheck to Paycheck. But it WILL effect ALL of us together.

And what are you going to do about it? NOTHING! What are you going to switch to? NOTHING. There is NOTHING to switch too. You are going to Pay it. You do not have a choice. It is, and has been, the Environmentalists that have brought us the Environment where this is possible. No new Refineries, Nuke Plants, for like 40 plus years. No new Drilling where we KNOW the Oil is. No Keystone Pipeline. No NOTHING. Just continue to rely on foreign Governments that hate us, to meet our very basic, and fundamental needs.

All I can say to you, get ready for the Show. Get ready for the Elections. Get ready to Vote for REAL Hope and REAL Change. Imagine another 4 years of all this? Imagine another 4 years with NO recourse? He will not be worried about being re-elected. Look around. Do you WANT another 4 years of THIS?
Peter

Relative Costs

It is all calculated and connected.

Hey folks,

It amazes me that some still do not understand what I mean when I say "The cost of Energy goes up, so does the cost of EVERYTHING else." It does truly amaze me that some can not get this concept. So I want to spend some time today talking about Relative Costs.

Factory A Produces Product B, Ships it to Store C, where you go and buy it. Lets start with Factory A. Factory A has to buy the Material to make Product B. They have to buy the Boxes to pack it in to ship it out. All this, most of the time, have to be Shipped IN. So Factory A has to pay the Fuel Costs to have that all shipped in BEFORE they even start Production.

Now that they have the Materials in route, they have to pay for the Energy to run the Factory. They need Electric to operate the Machines, keep the lights on, Heat, AC, ETC. So now the Materials arrive, and they Produce Product B. Lets say it cost them $1.00 to produce it.

After Production, they now pack it up and Ship it out. They now pay a Shipping or Delivery Company, say $1.00 to take it to Store C. Now Store C buys it for $2.25. That is to cover Costs and a little bit for a Profit. Now Product B is on the shelve waiting for you to come in and buy it. But wait...

Store C has to light the Sign, keep the Lights on, Heat, AC, ETC. as well. They now have to cover the Cost of buying the Product B. Plus a little bit to make a Profit. So Product B NOW costs you $3.25.

Now if the Price of Oil goes up? It will now cost MORE for this whole process. From buying the Material, Boxes, Power to produce, then Ship, ALL goes up. Now Product B costs $1.25 to Produce. $1.25 to Ship. Store C now has to buy it for $2.75. Store C's Electric Bill just went up also. So just to make about the same Profit, and cover the costs, Product B now cost you $3.75.

Do not forget, while all this is happening, YOUR Electric Bill just went up. It now cost you MORE to keep the lights on. More to heat your Home. More to run the AC. Go to the Gas Station to get fuel to go to Store C, or anywhere, it now cost YOU more there as well.

The decision to NOT run a Pipeline, Drill Here, or use our OWN resources in anyway, WILL effect ALL of us. It doesn't matter what side of the Political Isle you are on. It doesn't matter if you are Black or White. It doesn't matter what Religion you believe in. It WILL effect every Man, Woman, and Child in this Country. When I think about this, I think about those on Fixed Incomes. Retired People. Unemployed People. Disabled People. Even Single Family Homes. People that do NOT have unlimited resources. You know, like those in Congress and Government making these decisions for the rest of us.

All this is also leaving aside another absolute fact. That increasing our dependency on Foreign Governments, that do not like us to begin with, DECREASES our National Security and general well being. When you realize that all this can be avoided by simply saying YES, we will use our own resources. We WILL allow a Pipeline to go through our Great Country. We WILL create Tens to Hundreds of Thousands of new Jobs. We WILL decrease our dependency on Foreign Governments. We WILL reduce the Cost of EVERYTHING. Yet we do NOT do it. One would have to wonder, WHY?
Peter

The People to The Government, PLEASE Control Our Temperature!

A couple of years ago, people said, "It will never happen here." It already is.

Hey folks,

Happy Tuesday to ya. How are you today? Here is sunny South Florida, it is a cool 65 Degrees this morning. I got up and noticed a bit of chill in the air. I turned on the Heat, for about 10 minutes, just to take the chill off, and then I turned it off. How are you? What's your temperature outside? I see in my old Stopping Grounds of Salisbury Mills NY it's 33.1. Glad I'm here. {Smile}

So what is your comfort level? Do you like to walk around your house as if it were Summer? You like 75? What about when it is high 80s or 90s. Do you prefer to wear a sweater in your home? You like 75 year round? Do you like 65? Seriously, what is your comfort level? I've visited some friends and family over the years where I could not stand the heat in their homes. Then I had to wear a COAT in others homes in the Winter time. But that's good for them and I never complain, it's THEIR home.

However, it may not be like this too much longer. Let me explain how "Smart Meters" really work. Energy Company XWZ in your State, in your County, send a bunch of Pencil Pushing, Statisticians, and Numbers Guys, into a back room somewhere in their Company. They look at their, say 30 Million Customers. They say "OK. The Average Temperature in the Winter is THIS. The Average Temperature in the Summer is THIS. If we set the Temperature in the Home at say 75 {Just for example} the AC will kick on this many times, the heat this many. This will generate a Revenue of THIS. They haggle. They debate. They try it out the first year, then they tweak it the next. They figure out the BEST optimal Temperature for the best Revenue Stream. They do not CARE what you think or what your optimal Temperature is for Comfort. They come up with a number and it becomes a Hard Number. Set. It is what it is. Live with it.

I can hear some of you now. Screw that. That opens the door for the Big Bad Energy Companies to ABUSE it's Customers. We can not allow that. We can not let them get away with this. So? How do we prevent this? GOVERNMENT!!! We need Government to step in and Control these "Smart Meters." We need GOVERNMENT to protect us from the Evils of the Big Energy Companies. {Sigh}

As with MANY things, this is how people have been conditioned. There are Evils in the World and we need Government to come in and protect us. The first thought that ran through my head when I read this Article was "Get the Government the Hell OUT of our Homes and lives, and we no longer have a problem." But when this has been enacted, the PEOPLE that have been so conditioned, their first thought was to call out to Government for help. FREEDOM never even entered their mind. Sad is it not?

Just like the Economy, Healthcare, and many other things in a Socialistic Society, all you have to do is LOOK at where it is to see what IS coming. Look at Greece. Look at Italy. Look at Europe. Just like all other things, look at "Smart Meters." A couple of years ago, people said, "It will never happen here." It already is. They have them in California. I remember when I first brought this up people told me I was crazy. "It's MY Home. I will control MY Temperature in MY HOME!!" Uh, no you will not. That is called FREEDOM. This is not what we are talking about. Here is the FIRST Paragraph, and REALLY all you need to know about the WHOLE Article in The Guardian - Smart meters could lead to huge rise in energy bills By Rajeev Syal, The Guardian, Monday 16 January 2012

Plans to roll out new and more sophisticated meters to every home in Britain are open to abuse by energy companies and should be regulated with more vigour by the government, a powerful committee of MPs has concluded.

Like I said, People have been conditioned to see Energy Companies as these Big Bad Entities that are Greedy and Evil and the People NEED Protection by Government against them. So simply put the thought into People's heads that they {The Big Bad Energy Companies} may be allowed to abuse the People, the People CALL OUT FOR GOVERNMENT to come to the rescue. Look at the way this is worded. Margaret Hodge, the Chair of some Consumer Group in Britain, said this..

"Consumers will have to pay suppliers for the costs of installing and operating smart meters through their energy bills and no transparent mechanism presently exists for ensuring that savings to the supplier are passed on. The track record of energy companies to date does not inspire confidence that this will happen."

Again, Energy Companies are EVIL and Abusive. We need Government to step in and control them. See how this works. She went on..

"The government is relying on competition in the market to drive down prices. But, as has been previously reported by Ofgem, the energy market does not currently operate as an effective competitive market.

"The department [of energy and climate change] should clearly set out what energy suppliers' responsibilities will be for engaging with consumers to deliver the benefits of smart meters; and how they will be held accountable to both the department and consumers,"

So you see folks. It's for your own good. You see. The Government will make sure that these Companies answer to YOU. Yes. The Government is on your side. They are looking out for YOU. Just don't worry about it. The Government KNOWS what is best for you. {Sigh} The sad thing is, PEOPLE will BUY this garbage. So why are they dealing with all this nonsense ANYWAY?

Under European directives, all member states are required to install "intelligent metering systems" to at least 80% of domestic electricity consumers by 2020.

{Laughing} You got it. The GOVERNMENT Commanded it. Now the Government will take it over,,uh,, because the PEOPLE are asking for HELP!!

Folks, make no mistake about it. It's coming HERE. All this Socialistic Nonsense that would never have even been thought of as a possibility of being enacted HERE is COMING. This Administration as taken HUGE leaps forward toward that end result. This is WHY it is so important to Vote for REAL Hope and REAL Change this next Election. We need Adults, SANE Adults, in charge. And we need FREEDOM to reign supreme once again. Or, you know, go buy a sweater, you may need it to watch the next American Idol.
Peter

Sources:
The Guardian - Smart meters could lead to huge rise in energy bills

Oil Prices Rising,,,

NH RESULTS: Mitt 39% Ron 23% Huntsman 17% Newt 10% Rick 9%.

Hey folks,

I want to talk about Gas Prices, since I could not be here yesterday. However, there was a little Primary in New Hampshire last night. And I'm sorry. I'm not sure I'm buying it. Seriously. NH RESULTS: Mitt 39% Ron 23% Huntsman 17% Newt 10% Rick 9%. Now EVERYONE knows that Romney was meant to win this thing. That's NOT the problem I have. No, not even Ron Paul. My biggest problem with this is Huntsman in THIRD? Well, Money can but you a lot of things. I don't know. There is this little twinge in my gut that something is not on the up and up here. Just doesn't make sense to me.

Anyway, many more to go. Happy Wednesday to ya. Notice the Price of Gas? Going up again? We all know why. The tension in the Straight of Hormuz, and the BIGGEST Factor? Well, lets see if this is one of the 8 Factors. According to Triple Pundit - Our Perspective on the 8 Strategic Factors Shaping Oil Price in 2012 By Raz Godelnik January 10th, 2012

The price of oil is still one of the most important factors shaping the economy. It can determine not just how much you’ll pay for a gallon of gasoline but also how fast the American and the eurozone economies will recover. It even has a say in who will be the next American president. This is why many people and companies try to predict the price of oil and better understand the events that influence its volatility.

Two people that tried to give it a shot are Gregory Copley and Yossef Bodansky, who are editors at GIS/Defense & Foreign Affairs. They published a list of 8 strategic factors that will likely to influence the price of oil in 2012. This is a very interesting list, although it comes from a business-as-usual perspective, which doesn’t look much beyond the price volatility implications of geo-political events. Adding the green energy market point of view might provide an even more comprehensive picture of the upcoming year, so here’s our take on 2012:

{Sigh} "Green Energy."

1. Growing global instability might be good news for clean energy – unrest in Nigeria and the Iranian threat to blockade the Strait of Hormuz drove oil prices up this week. We are more likely to see this kind of event in 2012 and if tensions, especially where Iran is involved, transform into crisis, the price of oil can skyrocket. “Energy analysts say even a partial blockage of the Strait of Hormuz could raise the world price of oil within days by $50 a barrel or more,” according to the New York Times. Such a trend can make the business case for clean energy much stronger, making solar and wind energy look much more attractive.

We could very well be looking at another World War in the NEAR Future. A lot of thing are already in place. But we need not worry about Oil going up $50 dollars a barrel if we just did ONE thing.

2. But not necessarily… – 2012 will also be the year where we’ll see a divide between renewable and secure energy supply. It’s true that the sun and the wind can’t be subject to a blockade threat from Iranian, but natural gas deposits in the Marcellus Shale or Canadian oil sands, are secure without being eco-friendly. Proponents of these non-clean alternatives will probably use the rise in the risk of oil shipment in 2012 as an argument to convince the public and Washington of the need to extract more oil and natural gas in North America. If you want to understand what it means for clean energy just take 3 minutes and 39 seconds of your time and listen to this story on NPR about solar panels that need to compete with cheap natural gas.

Don't waste your time. We already talked about this. If the Government is Propping you up, then there is NO MARKET for you.

3. The Arab Spring can reshape the old oil regime – the Arab uprisings have ousted or weakened some American allies, making the oil reality of the Middle East even more volatile and unpredictable. It doesn’t necessarily mean the Arab Spring is good news for clean energy (see point 2), but it means that there’s a good chance Middle Eastern oil would stop being a default option for many countries and will make them rethink about their energy supply. Hopefully, climate and environmental considerations will be incorporated in the process, leading to further use of clean energy resources.

{Laughing} Could TERRORIST Uprising and taking over the ENTIRE Middle East be good for a nonsensical, Liberal, FAILED, Agenda? Again, there is NOTHING to switch to.

4. The year of storage – the authors write that in 2012 we’ll see “a growth in the development to strategic scale (a significant change) of viable storage devices”. It’s also true for renewable energies, such as solar thermal, where we are expected to see companies like SolarReserve and BrightSource moving ahead with new storage technologies that are supposed to make renewable energy more competitive on a larger scale.

Well, DO that and then get back to the rest of us that LIVE in REALITY. If it works GREAT. But BUILD it FIRST and make sure it works.

5. The unrest in Nigeria will not move big oil companies to clean energy activity – One of the factors the authors write about is the return of the chaos in Nigeria, where there is a threat of a civil war. Only this week Bloomberg reported that Nigerian workers began a national strike after fuel costs more than doubled, threatening to shut ports and disrupt output from Shell and Chevron. Even if the situation in Nigeria escalates, it’s unlikely that Shell and the other big oil companies operating in Nigeria will see it as a reason to shift their focus to renewable. There’s too much money for them in Nigerian oil to give it up, and in the worst case scenario, where they are kicked off the country, they’ll just be looking for a new Nigeria to make money from.

Folks, this is one of the MANY things wrong with these IDIOTS. People DIEING in Nigeria. People being Raped, Tortured, and MURDERED. Peoples Homes destroyed. All this, and what is their first thought? I don't think this is ENOUGH to persuade the Oil Companies to stop production. DAMN IT!!

6. 2013 might be even more important – The authors write that “based on present evidence, the US energy dependence pattern will remain slow to change in 2012, and significant change is only likely to occur with a change in US political leadership, which could occur at the beginning of 2013.” They’re probably right – the results of the upcoming elections can make a big difference for the clean energy sector, making 2012 a not so important year after all.

They are right about this. We keep this Moron in Office and we are,, well, the Country as we know it is DONE. Get another in there that believe the SCAM that is Global Warming,,eh,,Climate Change,,and YES, the will be slow to DO THE RIGHT THING.

7. Political changes in China – the authors remind us that the Chinese President Hu Jintao is going to step down from the presidency in 2012, and this will trigger a new era in Chinese politics. His successor Xi Jinping seems to be a supporter of clean energy and can play an important role in promoting a conservation culture in China and leading the country to meet its 12th Five-Year Plan clean energy targets.

Or they won't because they really DON'T care what YOU think about their Energy Policies.

8. Take predictions cautiously – no matter how smart analysts are, it’s difficult if not impossible to predict the future. Who could foresee, for example, the Fukushima nuclear accident and its implications on the Japanese and Germany nuclear policies? I also bet few if any analysts at all predicted the bankruptcy of Solyndra and the damage it caused to the solar market in 2011. In other words, take all predictions cautiously and don’t forget to check them on January 1st, 2013.

So who wrote this? Raz Godelnik. He is the one of the Founders of Eco-Libris, a Green Company. Could ya tell? {Smile}

So OF COURSE he would NOT talk about the most important thing that we could do, and SHOULD have done a long time ago now. DRILL MORE OIL. Get the Government out of the way of our Energy Needs. Allow the Keystone Pipeline to go through. STOP PLAYING GAMES at the cost of ALL Americans. National Security is compromised because this Administration is pandering for Votes of people like this Idiot. Some of the points they make here is VERY True, however they seem to be hoping for them to come to past. I'm hoping that we get an ADULT in the White House and in Leadership of the Senate and House and DO what we NEED to do. Use our own resources that we got RIGHT here, and our friends in the North.
Peter

Sources:
Triple Pundit - Our Perspective on the 8 Strategic Factors Shaping Oil Price in 2012