Energy
The United States is the top producer of natural gas in the world, and we should have the opportunity to responsibly sell our abundant resources to energy-hungry friendly nations and allies. According to a recently released study by the National Economic Research Associates (NERA), American natural gas production from 2012 to 2040 is predicted to increase overall by 39%. The NERA report concluded that the U.S. increase in GDP for exporting LNG could range from $1.5 billion in 2018 to $36 billion in 2038.
While the United States imports more than 42 percent of our oil, 98 percent of the natural gas consumed here is produced in North America. Fossil fuels are our main source of energy, and we must take advantage of them. To combat underutilization we must see through unfounded environmental concerns and overcome the excessive regulatory hurdles to help us achieve North American and eventually American energy independence.
Permanently opening up new areas of energy development offshore in the outer continental shelf, arctic coastal plains, as well as onshore production of oil and gas resources in the United States will increase domestic production of oil in our country.
Liquefied Natural Gas
The United States is the top producer of natural gas in the world, and we should have the opportunity to responsibly sell our abundant resources to energy-hungry friendly nations and allies. According to a recently released study by the National Economic Research Associates (NERA), American natural gas production from 2012 to 2040 is predicted to increase overall by 39%. The NERA report concluded that the U.S. increase in GDP for exporting LNG could range from $1.5 billion in 2018 to $36 billion in 2038.
Action on major energy projects can’t wait until the world is desperate for our abundant resources. As with the Keystone XL pipeline, we must anticipate what’s in the best interest of our country before it’s too late. Americans know all too well what it’s like to rely on unfriendly nations for energy needs. We can reverse that trend by leveraging the growth in North American natural gas production as part of a broad energy portfolio.
We must continue to expedite the current permitting process for American export terminals. I also urge the Administration to look down the road, so future foreign policy crises can be addressed with energy solutions before they start.
War on Fossil Fuels
Coal, a plentiful and low-cost resource, is historically the largest energy source produced domestically and responsible for about half of U.S. energy consumption. Natural gas is an ample resource in Oklahoma, and through hydraulic fracturing we are able to fully utilize our state resources to drive local energy prices down. To wholly capitalize these traditional energy resources, the market needs to be void of cumbersome regulations imposed by federal agencies.
EPA Regional Haze Rule
Apparently when EPA told states like Oklahoma they could craft their own compliance procedures to implement the Regional Haze rule, they meant states could design their own rules as long as they are identical to EPA’s federal compliance methods. The recent Supreme Court decision not to hear the case between OG&E and EPA will mean higher utility bills for Oklahomans in the days ahead with no corresponding benefit to health.
Under EPA’s Regional Haze rule and the Clean Air statute, states have the opportunity to create their own compliance procedures. The State of Oklahoma created a plan to comply with the rule, which EPA rejected. Oklahoma ratepayers will ultimately be on the hook for EPA’s refusal to defer these decisions to the states.
According to reports of analysis by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), retail power prices will rise four percent on average over the next year, which constitutes the largest increase since 2008. By 2020 retail energy prices are expected to increase an additional 13 percent, not including the cost of new energy rules like the regional haze compliance issue now facing Oklahoma energy customers with the recent Supreme Court decision not to hear the case.
In the 112th Congress, the House passed and I supported the Stop the War on Coal Act in a vote of 232 to 175. The bill included a Regional Haze Regulatory Relief Amendment by Rep. Gosar (R-Ariz), which would have allowed states affected by EPA’s regional haze rule, including Oklahoma, to reject the overreaching federal regulations and replace them with compliant state solutions within two years.
The vast majority of House-passed legislative efforts to reduce excessive federal regulations and allow American families to keep lower utility costs continue to sit on Majority Leader Reid’s desk. Senate Democrats clearly prefer Washington regulations over state solutions, and the people hurt the most are the poor and those on a fixed income.
Coal is the backbone of electricity in the United States. As we work to diversify our energy portfolio, we cannot ask Americans to pay more simply because this Administration wants more control over American energy. Oklahoma utility companies continue to fight the good fight for their customers to ensure they will receive the greatest value on their electricity. The Supreme Corut’s actions mean hard-working Oklahoma families will pay more each month for their electricity in the coming years, despite their state officials and utility companies proactively working to prevent cost increases. This type of environmental policy is federal overreach at its worst.
“30% by 2020 Plan’
Recently the Obama Administration announced its plans for excessive new federal regulations on American energy producers the Administration claims will cut emissions from power plants, especially coal-fired plants, by 30 percent by the year 2020.
The Administration’s announcement of new regulations on American energy providers will hurt those in poverty, arbitrarily driving up electricity costs for all American families. The increased cost to low- and fixed-income American families will hit their budgets hard for food and electricity. Oklahoma utility companies have already predicted that existing EPA regulations will drive up electricity costs, and this only compounds that problem.
Right now, the President says we need to be a world leader in climate change mitigation. But will these changes actually improve our climate, or will they just cost struggling American families more money? In the days ahead, Congress will deliberate the President’s proposed changes, but the Administration has not provided compelling proof the benefits to the environment outweigh the high cost to American families.
Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS)
In June 2014 I introduced H.R. 4849, the Phantom Fuels Elimination Act. The legislation would repeal the corn ethanol mandate and require the remaining mandates within the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) of the Clean Air Act to be fulfilled with domestic production.
It is increasingly clear the RFS is not meeting its original purpose of achieving American energy independence, and its impossible mandates are needlessly overburdening American consumers, energy refiners and producers. I introduced the Phantom Fuels Elimination Act to provide a common-sense solution to the unworkable RFS. American families pay more at the pump than they should because of a foolish federal ethanol mandate. The Phantom Fuels Elimination Act would allow the sale of corn ethanol, but it would eliminate the mandate. It is irrational to require Americans to purchase ethanol when the final price is higher for the consumer and domestic supplies of energy continue to rise.
Created in 2005, the RFS established the first renewable fuel volume mandate in the United States. Currently, the RFS requires American energy producers to refine 36 billion gallons of biofuels. My RFS elimination bill repeals the current corn ethanol mandate in the RFS and limits the biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel, and cellulosic biofuel mandates to domestic production only. In the event American companies do not produce alternative fuels in an amount sufficient to meet the mandate in any year, which has been the case in years past, the EPA would be required to issue a waiver and reduce the overall mandate for that year.
The ethanol mandate’s “blend wall,” caused by lower-than-expected American energy demand despite ever-increasing ethanol additive mandates, was debated in my Oversight Subcommittee hearing last year. We found that fuel blenders scrambled to comply with the RFS regulation. Since the regulation required the sale of product that Americans did not want or that did not exist, it was literally a phantom fuel. After hearing from numerous American energy producers, refiners, automobile manufacturers and even turkey growers concerned with the corn market, it became clear that the EPA would delay appropriate action unless legislation required them to do so.
The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 required energy refiners to increase the amount of ethanol already required to blend into gasoline. The EISA outlined gradual increases in the additive mandate in the near future, which was based on the assumption Americans would consume more gasoline in the future but they have not.
My bill will hopefully solve yet another problem caused by this Administration’s blind insistence that “Washington knows best.” If the demand for ethanol-based gasoline is there, the American consumer will demand it. However, our government can best help us reach North American energy independence by allowing the American energy industry to continue to do its job without unworkable regulations like the RFS.