Environmentalists and energy

Who often blocks alternative energy projects? Radical greens

Las Vegas Review-Journal editorial 

August 22, 2008

Link to Article

The sunny predictions that came from this week's National Clean Energy Summit at UNLV largely ignored the dark clouds hovering above the Cox Pavilion. (No, they didn't come from a coal-fired power plant.)

They represented the handful of environmental extremist groups that are all for a renewable revolution, as long as it doesn't involve the construction of wind turbines (they might kill birds), solar power arrays (they take up too much land and displace threatened bugs and rodents) or transmissions lines (they ruin scenic views), and as long as it doesn't allow this country's metropolitan areas to grow larger.

This loyal faction of the Democratic Party's base is using laws and regulations championed by the left to obstruct liberals' single biggest policy goal: decreasing the country's use of fossil fuels and increasing its reliance on alternative energy. Organizations such as the Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity have sued to block various "clean" energy projects for all the reasons listed above, and had, prior to this week, showed no interest in playing nice with their ambitious, progressive pals.

Renewable energy is already significantly more expensive to generate and deliver than coal- and gas-fired electricity -- litigation makes it even more costly.

But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who helped organize the conference, brought some good news to a Wednesday luncheon with Review-Journal journalists. He said the Sierra Club was "on board" with his plan to spur the development of wind, solar and geothermal power generation across unpopulated areas and transmit the electricity to population centers.

"They're being reined in," Sen. Reid said of the environmental extremists, adding that he would publicly condemn environmental groups that try to stop renewable energy projects with frivolous litigation "if I thought it would help."

We wish we could share the senator's confidence. The Tucson, Ariz.-based Center for Biological Diversity, in particular, views no minnow or insect as less important than the human race.

It's ironic that this organization and other groups claim human-caused global warming will bring about the extinction of thousands of species over the next century, but they still work to kill renewable energy projects -- that could, in theory, abate the damage -- if they threaten a single weed.

Of course, the global-warming scare is simply a means to consolidate government power and impose more top-down control over the everyday lives of citizens. And replacing coal-fired power plants with renewable technologies would triple or quadruple the average household's electricity bill.

But Sen. Reid's promise is a start. We'll hold him to it.

Posted By Marc Morano – 4:26 PM ET – Marc_Morano@EPW.Senate.Gov

News Round Up

August 18, 2008

New Webpage: Get the Facts on Energy & Gas Prices – LINK   

Sampling of articles in past week:

The Wall Street Journal- Republicans Are Skeptical Of Pelosi's Offshore Drilling Proposal - August 18, 2008
Excerpt: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's proposal Saturday to make expanded offshore drilling part of a new Democratic energy bill got a skeptical reaction from Republicans, who said they suspect it will contain other provisions unacceptable to the minority. The result may be that Congress remains deadlocked on the potent election issue. Ms. Pelosi's proposal is the clearest sign yet that Democratic Congressional leaders are tacking away from earlier strong opposition to expanded offshore oil production, in the face of opinion polls that indicate many voters favor the "drill more" stand adopted by Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain and others in his party.

Excerpt: Dropping her opposition to a vote on coastal oil exploration, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Saturday that the House would consider expanded offshore drilling as part of broad energy legislation when Congress returns next month. In the weekly Democratic radio address, Ms. Pelosi criticized Republicans as focusing too narrowly on offshore drilling as a solution to high gasoline prices, but said she would bow to demands that the House revisit a drilling ban that has been imposed annually since the 1980s.She said legislation being assembled by Democrats "will consider opening portions of the Outer Continental Shelf for drilling, with appropriate safeguards, and without taxpayer subsidies to big oil." "We hope our Republican colleagues will join in a bipartisan effort, not only to increase domestic supply, but also to help consumers and to protect the environment," Ms. Pelosi said in the broadcast. The decision came after growing anxiety among Democrats that Republicans were scoring politically with their call for a vote on offshore drilling. Though Congress is on its August break, a rotating group of House Republicans has rallied daily on the House floor, demanding that Ms. Pelosi call lawmakers back for a vote to allow oil companies to pursue offshore resources.

Excerpt: On Aug. 1, the same day the call for a vote on drilling began on the House floor, the Alaska state Senate approved a package of measures to license a new natural gas pipeline. House Bill 3001 lets Palin award the Alaska Gasoline Inducement Act license to TransCanada Alaska, a pipeline builder that cast a winning bid of five. The legislature had been trying for 30 years to authorize something like this and, up until now, had blown it. Palin got it through. Getting it off the ground, the state says, will be the biggest construction project in U.S. history. Palin considers the $26 billion project her biggest accomplishment as governor. "It was not easy," she told IBD. "Alaska has been hoping and dreaming for a natural gas pipeline for decades. What it took was getting off the dime and creating a competitive market in Alaska."

Excerpt: The Senate Republicans who are trying to force Congress to lift restrictions on offshore drilling say they have 38 senators backing their efforts to force a showdown over the critical campaign issue of energy prices — one that could shut down the government. Democratic leaders in Congress want to extend the moratorium on new offshore oil and gas drilling, which is due to expire Oct. 1, and the most likely route would be to attach the proposal to a catchall spending bill needed to keep the federal government running. But at least 38 Republicans have signed a letter pledging to "actively oppose" that extension. Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican, began circulating the letter to his colleagues after the Senate adjourned for its summer recess Aug. 2 and said he expects more of them to endorse his proposal before Congress returns in early September. "There's been a great response already [to the letter], but frankly, every senator should sign on because it's irrational to say 'no' to proven American energy during this [energy] crisis," Mr. DeMint said.

Excerpt: Battered on the energy issue for weeks, Democratic Senate candidate Rep. Mark Udall moved Wednesday to close the distance with his Republican opponent on the issue, calling for more domestic drilling and reversing his long-standing opposition to drilling off America's shores. Both were sharp turnarounds for a man who has made the expansion of renewable energy a cornerstone of his career and who has consistently dinged the aggressive drilling policies of the Bush administration during this campaign. But both Udall and his staff emphasized that the nation's energy crisis called for a sweeping rethinking of possible solutions — and that the country could no longer afford to keep much of anything off the table.

 Excerpt: "The United States has 2 trillion barrels of oil shale," according to the Institute for Energy Research. "This is more than seven times the amount of crude oil reserves found in Saudi Arabia and is enough to meet current U.S. demand for over 250 years."Consider that the entire world has used around 1 trillion barrels since oil was discovered in Titusville, Pa., in 1859."If full-scale production begins within five years," reckons Nick Loris of the Heritage Foundation, "the U.S. could completely end its dependence on OPEC by 2020." There's enough North American petroleum trapped in oil sands and shale rock to form our own OPEC.A report from the Energy Department's Argonne National Laboratory states that "even a moderate estimate of 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil from oil shale in the Green River Formation is three times greater than the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia.""Present U.S. demand for petroleum products is about 20 million barrels per day," the Argonne report notes. "If oil shale could be used to meet a quarter of that demand, the estimated 800 billion barrels of (currently) recoverable oil from the Green River Formation could last for more than 400 years."

Excerpt: Anti-drilling interests recently have cited EIA contentions that lifting the ban on drilling for oil in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) would produce a mere 200,000 barrels a day. But as Washington's Institute for Energy Research points out, that "is roughly equal to the daily production rate of just one new offshore platform in the Gulf of Mexico" — obviously a fraction of what is actually available from the entire OCS.According to the EIA, "access to the Pacific, Atlantic and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030."

But the EIA assumes no leasing until 2012 and no oil production until 2017 when, in fact, some leasing already has been done in California, where according to analysis by the Wall Street research firm of Sanford C. Bernstein, new oil could be extracted within a year of lifting the ban.

Excerpt: Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina), chairman of the Senate Steering Committee, announced that 36 Senators have signed the letter to protect October 1 as American Energy Freedom Day, and to "actively oppose" any attempt to extend bans on offshore drilling and oil shale beyond their expiration at the end of September. U.S. Congressman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) is gathering signatures to a similar letter in the House of Representatives."The overwhelming majority of Republican Senators have pledged to protect October 1 as American Energy Freedom Day so we can reduce dependence on foreign oil and lower the cost of gas at the pump," said Senator DeMint. "Many people aren’t aware that the bans on drilling must be renewed every year, and all we have to do is allow these prohibitions to expire on October 1. In just 50 days, Americans will have the freedom to pursue their own energy resources here at home. Our letter is very straightforward: we will actively oppose any effort to extend the bans on offshore drilling and oil shale." 

Excerpt: Pickens believes, like I do, that as Americans continue to suffer from high gas prices, we need to take advantage of our abundant, domestic supply of natural gas for use as a transportation fuel. The promise of natural gas as a mainstream transportation fuel is achievable today -- not 15 or 20 years from now. From Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) powered cars, to semi-trucks running on liquefied natural gas (LNG), no other commercially viable fuel burns cleaner.

Excerpt: But in this era of global warming hysteria, the standard arguments apparently aren’t working. Maryland’s Gov. Martin O’Malley -- who is well-regarded by environmentalists for consuming and metabolizing the Green Kool-Aid on global warming -- supports the Calvert Cliffs expansion.O’Malley apparently realizes that Maryland needs the electricity given the fact that the state is facing rolling blackouts on summer days starting as early as 2011. Moreover, nuclear power is emission-free, another plus for Maryland’s warmer-in-chief. His support is even more remarkable since he recently barred the installation of wind turbines on public lands. The governor’s picking nukes over wind must have sent the Greens’ into meltdown. So in response, the desperate Greens came up with a bizarre new argument: nuclear power causes global warming.That’s right, nuclear is the latest form of "dirty" energy. How can that be, you ask? Nuclear power doesn’t produce greenhouse gases, does it? Well, not directly, the Greens argue.

Excerpt: Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is considering legislation that would permit new offshore drilling as part of a broad energy bill, a response to growing anxiety within her party that Republicans are gaining traction with election-year attacks that Democrats aren't doing enough to address high gasoline prices.One proposal under consideration would let states decide whether to permit new energy exploration off their coasts while possibly maintaining the drilling ban off the Pacific Coast, according to a House leadership aide who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of ongoing negotiations.Pelosi has long opposed lifting the drilling ban but has come under pressure from members of her own party -- including freshmen in tough reelection campaigns -- to allow a vote on offshore drilling. Adding to that, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama recently said that he would be open to limited offshore drilling if it was part of a broader energy compromise.A vote is likely to be held next month, after the House returns from its summer recess.What exactly would be voted on was still being discussed Wednesday. Democrats are expected to insist that any bill include some of their priorities, such as the repeal of oil industry tax breaks and a requirement that utilities generate more electricity from cleaner energy sources.

The Foundry- Reductio Ad Absurdum and the Left- August 18, 2008

Excerpt: No one is advocating that we tear down the Washington Monument to mine for coal beneath it. Those that suggest otherwise just expose their own desperation. Conservatives do believe that advances in technology make oil and natural gas production much less intrusive and much more safe than they were in 1969 when an oil platform operating in violation of federal code, spilled oil off the coast of Santa Barbara. The real issue here, is that while the rest of the world is developing their resources, the U.S. is not.

The Foundry- Common Sense on Energy Invades Washington- August 14, 2008

Excerpt: But gasoline prices continued upward and a funny thing happened. The public saw through the anti-drilling rhetoric and recognized that increased domestic production is a good idea. Polling showed large majorities in favor, sometimes more than 2 -1. The Congressional leadership is struggling mightily to avoid a vote on opening these areas, but won’t be able to do so for much longer. Unless current gas price declines accelerate enough to take gas prices off the front burner, expect a big showdown in September over an issue most thought would have been long dead.

# # #

Waning Warming Debate

Americans Aim To Reduce Carbon Footprints, Despite Drop In Concern For Climate Change

Monday, Aug. 11, 2008
by Amy Harder

Link to Article 

For all the recent coverage of the pollution surrounding Beijing's Olympic Games, global warming has gotten relatively little attention, whether on the nightly news or on the campaign trail. While the majority of Americans still say they consider climate change a serious issue, a new poll suggests public concern over the issue has ebbed since last year.

According to a survey [PDF] from ABC News, Planet Green and Stanford University, fewer than half -- 47 percent -- of Americans consider global warming an important issue to them personally, down from 52 percent in April 2007. Although a vast majority still think the planet is warming -- 8 in 10 respondents -- that figure is also down from last year, having dropped 4 percentage points. Furthermore, in an open-ended question, the number of respondents who called global warming the biggest environmental challenge facing the world fell 8 points from 2007 and currently hovers at 25 percent.

According to an analysis by ABC News' Gary Langer, the drop in these numbers coincides with decreased media attention to climate change, in favor of the election and economy. "A database search finds 50 percent fewer news stories on global warming in the month before this poll was conducted, compared with the month before last year's survey," Langer wrote.

That dimmer media spotlight could explain respondents' lack of knowledge about how John McCain and Barack Obama measure up on global warming. About 8 in 10 respondents said they knew little or nothing about the candidates' positions on the issue. Nevertheless, the Democratic contender has a clear advantage: Fifty-five percent of respondents said Obama would do a better job of reducing global warming, while only 23 percent said so of the GOP nominee.

Respondents split evenly when pollsters asked whether government-led or market-based solutions would do a better job of reducing global warming, but they did favor government measures such as a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions.

Americans appear to be holding themselves responsible as well for the energy crisis. About 7 in 10 respondents said they're attempting to reduce their carbon footprint, by driving less, using less electricity and recycling.

But despite the overwhelming consensus that global warming is indeed occurring, doubt over the science behind the issue is still lingers strongly in people's minds. Only 30 percent of ABC News respondents said they trust what scientists have to say about the environment "completely" or "a lot," with 39 percent saying they trust them "a moderate amount" and 30 percent saying they do not trust them. On top of that, nearly 60 percent of respondents said there is "a lot of disagreement" within the scientific community as to how dangerous climate change is.