Energy

A recent study — Powering California: The Monterey Shale & California’s Economic Future — found that development of oil from the Monterey Shale using hydraulic fracturing and other recovery technologies could result in (a) the creation of 512,000 to 2.8 million new jobs; (b) personal income growth of $40.6 billion to $222.3 billion; (c) additional local and state government revenues from $4.5 billion to $24.6 billion, and (d) an increase in state GDP by 2.6% to 14.3% on a per-person basis.

The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity presents an even gloomier future for coal than the EIA projects. They predict that more than 280 coal-fired generating units are set to be shut down, partly due to stricter EPA regulations. And according to a report released by the National Economic Research Associates, seven new EPA regulations are expected to cost the electrical sector $16.7 billion per year, cause 887,000 job losses annually, and eliminate 69 gigawatts of coal-fired electricity.

The “century-old” Antiquities Act gives President Obama the authority to designate national monument status even if there’s no actual monument erected. A national monument designation makes the locale off limits to development. President Obama has used this “emergency” designation nine times—six times in the past year. The Sierra Club wants it used more.

[Monica's] electric bills run as high as $700 to $800 a month in the summer for a 1600 square foot home. “I work for the electric company,” she said. “Everything I have goes to pay my bill.” With her bills so high, Monica got behind. She’s been on a payment plan for three years and doesn’t see any hope of ever getting caught up.

The collapse of Solyndra solar a while ago focused much attention on the cost of so-called renewable energy. But according to James Rust of the Heartland Institute, subsidies for solar are just the tip of the expensive renewables iceberg . . .

Producing electricity from the burning of wood, or biomass, has long been viewed as an environmentally friendly way of generating power. But now this once favored source of green energy is losing its luster . . .

Finding affordable and abundant sources of domestic energy has become a big priority in recent years. And while many options are being looked at, one that has taken the nation by storm is the development of shale gas.

If he truly cares about American jobs, it is time for President Obama to expedite approval of Keystone. Any further delay would send a clear signal to the nation, and to Canada, that he will never approve the project and has no real interest in creating jobs and getting our economy back on track. The charade would be over. The President who promised to bankrupt coal companies would go on record as trying to bankrupt oil companies and keep Americans in unemployment lines.

The American economy has some basic problems. We need more well-paid jobs, increased revenue, and our trade balance is out of whack. Each of these issues could be easily addressed, but environmentalists are doing everything they can to kill potential solutions.

For years, many have warned of the energy havoc that could be wrought by global warming hysteria. Great Britain barely avoided such chaos this past winter when one million homes narrowly escaped a blackout during Britain’s 5th harsh winter in a row.

As the economy limps along, many are wondering what is stymieing economic growth. Dr. Tom Borelli from the National Center for Public Policy Research credits the EPA as one of the chief problems, and here explains why…

As everyone knows, emissions from the burning of coal are contributing to a warming of the planet, right? Well, that’s been the message of global warming proponents for some time, but it appears this message is starting to change now that there’s been little observable temperature increase in nearly 10 years.

Do fossil fuels like coal and oil harm your health? Well many environmentalists would have you believe so, but Marlo Lewis, Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, offers a different perspective…

In news that could please oil companies and Green activists alike, the U.S. Department of Energy released a report claiming that using carbon dioxide to enhance oil recovery could be beneficial for the economy and the environment.

EPA claims that fine particulate matter at levels above 12 micrograms per cubic meter kills people within hours and causes a quarter of all U.S. deaths, but during a recent episode in China when fine PM levels were 89 times higher than the EPA standard, the only deaths attributed to the episode were from traffic accidents due to poor visibility. EPA is using this fraud to shut down coal power plants, creating higher energy costs that really do cause premature deaths among America’s poor.

If coal is good for the Navajo Nation, the Crow Tribe, and other Native Americans, then it should be okay for the rest of us. Coal warms our homes and provides good jobs and does not need billion-dollar subsidies just to try to break even.

Finding affordable and abundant sources of domestic energy has become a big priority in recent years. And while many options are being looked at, one that has taken the nation by storm is the development of shale gas.

Does hydraulic fracturing produce more wastewater than conventional natural gas production? Surprisingly, Dr. Brian Lutz, professor of biogeochemistry, says ‘no,’ and is here to explain why. . . .

Opponents of hydraulic fracturing for natural gas, also known as “fracking,” have long claimed that it contaminants drinking water. Unfortunately for them, they have been unable to find such contamination . . .

Gina McCarthy, President Obama’s choice to replace Lisa Jackson at the Environmental Protection Agency, has been chastised for having lied to Congress, in claiming that EPA did not use “dangerous manmade climate change” to justify new 54.5 mpg standards for cars and light trucks. She’s also been implicated in the agency’s practice of using fake emails to hide questionable dealings and activities.

Renowned energy expert Robert Bryce: “Over the past six decades, the fracturing process has been used more than 1 million times on American oil and gas wells. If it were as dangerous as the anti-drilling/anti-hydraulic fracturing crowd claims, then hundreds, perhaps thousands, of water wells would have been contaminated by now.”

WATCH NOW. Fun new promo spot for FrackNation. Catch the premiere January 22 at 9PM on AXS.tv.

The new robber barons are not content with only taxes and debt. They are using other people’s hard-earned money to finance wind, solar, biofuel and other schemes that reward crony capitalist campaign contributors.while locking up centuries of vital energy resources.

I was delighted to actually see a herd of nearly extinct bison – right in the middle of the oil sands mining project in northern Alberta, which I visited a few weeks ago. Much of this oil is destined for the USA, to reduce imports from dictatorships, and more will come in the Keystone XL Pipeline, if President Obama ever approves it.

Finding affordable and abundant sources of domestic energy has become a big priority in recent years. And while many options are being looked at, one that has taken the nation by storm is the development of shale gas.

Does hydraulic fracturing produce more wastewater than conventional natural gas production? Surprisingly, Dr. Brian Lutz, professor of biogeochemistry, says ‘no,’ and is here to explain why. . . .

Drilling opponents claim to be protecting the environment. In reality, they simply detest hydrocarbons, modern living standards, free enterprise and personal liberty. Commonsense policies will rejuvenate our economy, put Americans back to work….

Opponents of hydraulic fracturing for natural gas, also known as “fracking,” have long claimed that it contaminants drinking water. Unfortunately for them, they have been unable to find such contamination . . .

New advances in extracting oil and natural gas from shale formations hold great promise for America’s energy future. Indeed, recent analysis indicates the West alone could generate 1.3 million barrels of production per day by 2020, exceeding our current daily imports from Russia, Iraq, and Kuwait combined.

It’s very apparent that the real intent is to make oil and gas more expensive in order to make the heavily subsidized, unreliable and costly ”renewable” energy programs they are pushing more cost-competitive. This is the Tonya Harding approach to energy… break your opponent’s kneecap if you can’t win fair and square.

My favorite parts of the movie were the extensive sections featuring the landowners who lease their land for frac’ing -– who are portrayed in Gasland and Promised Land as unwitting dupes of evil industrialists. But these landowners knew far, far more about both frac’ing and water than the pseudo-documentarians who infantalize them.

It appears evident that our nation’s abundant
supply of natural gas in combination with practical advantages afforded most
particularly for LNG long-haul trucking applications will continue to become
more and more attractive over time, expanding the infrastructure and driving
down vehicle production costs through economies of scale.

A few years ago, Germany was “fully committed” to the EU’s goal of ending fossil fuel use. It was building lots of wind turbines, and even some solar farms despite its often-cloudy skies. After the tsunami, Prime Minister Angela Merckel announced Germany would phase out its nuclear plants quickly, implying more power from renewables.

Dr. Kelvin Kemm, a South African nuclear physicist and CFACT advisor, explains on Kenyan TV that Africans need to greatly increase the availability of affordable electricity and do not need Europeans telling them “No.”

The headlines this week deal with the North Anna nuclear plant in Virginia and the earthquake that struck nearby. Earlier in the summer, it was the Fort Calhoun and Cooper nuclear plants in Nebraska and the encroaching Missouri River floodwaters. Before that it was Japan’s earthquake and tsunami and the Fukushima nuclear complex.

Here in the “upside down” Southern Hemisphere, we have now passed mid-winter and are heading toward summer. However, the nights will remain rather cold for another month, before we start to really feel the returning warmth of summer.

In light of the nuclear crisis in Japan, should the world abandon nuclear power for safety reasons? Dr. Kelvin Kemm, a nuclear physicist, says no, and here explains why: “The Fukushima nuclear plants are forty years old and use an outdated boiling water reactor design. . .”

The ground hadn’t stopped shaking. Tsunami waters had not receded. And yet coverage of this awful natural disaster – a scene of almost unfathomable devastation and death – was already giving way to single-minded focus on radiation exposure and meltdowns.

Holland has long been known for its tulips, wooden clogs and, of course, windmills. So it’s probably not surprising when the European Union moved to increase its use of renewable energy, Holland was among the first to jump on board the windmill bandwagon.

The earthquake and tsunami in Japan delivered a devastating one-two punch to that island nation and to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. So what does much of the world do? You guessed it. They blamed the designers, builders and operators of the nuclear plant for not doing a good enough job.

The collapse of Solyndra solar a while ago focused much attention on the cost of so-called renewable energy. But according to James Rust of the Heartland Institute, subsidies for solar are just the tip of the expensive renewables iceberg . . .

Everyone knows that environmental groups oppose the construction of coal and nuclear plants – but do they also oppose wind and solar projects as well? The surprising answer is “yes.”

Americans must no longer ignore false realities and double standards that threaten our health and prosperity…. The examples are legion. It’s fortunate that ruling elites have double standards, or they wouldn’t have any standards at all. Legislators and regulators would never tolerate such behavior in the private sector. Citizens should no longer tolerate it in our government.

By purchasing solar panels for their homes, a growing number of folks are opting for what they think is the Green-friendly option. But according to the Associated Press, there is a dirty side to solar…

A 2011 U.S. Chamber of Commerce report titled “Project/No Project” found 140 renewable projects that had stalled, stopped, or been outright killed due to “Not in My Back Yard” (NIMBY) environmental activism and a system that allows limitless challenges by opponents.

Ready for the world’s first Green trade war? Well that may soon be coming, as China is now considering new tariffs on U.S. chemicals used to make solar panels.

A select group, described as “sophisticated investors” by one solar panel installer, was concerned with return-on-investment issues and maximizing their multiple, tax-advantaged solar panel installations. They requested that the 15 cent/kWh buy-rate be increased by Dominion to offset the anticipated Federal and State income tax burden. Otherwise, the net after-tax-return would be about the same as for the current net energy metering plan, thus there would be no monetary incentive to participate in the solar plan.

If America starts using more renewable energy, what will that do to our electricity prices? While some claim that getting electricity from the sun and wind is cheap and affordable, the real world experience of European countries that have taken this route has proven otherwise.

[Monica's] electric bills run as high as $700 to $800 a month in the summer for a 1600 square foot home. “I work for the electric company,” she said. “Everything I have goes to pay my bill.” With her bills so high, Monica got behind. She’s been on a payment plan for three years and doesn’t see any hope of ever getting caught up.

Bob Johns, spokesman for the American Bird Conservancy … confirmed …[that] the Altamont operation alone has killed more than 2,000 golden eagles. But that’s not all. “Nationwide, the wind industry kills thousands of golden eagles without prosecution,” Johns said, “while any other American citizen even possessing eagle parts such as feathers would face huge fines and prison time.”

Everyone knows that environmental groups oppose the construction of coal and nuclear plants – but do they also oppose wind and solar projects as well? The surprising answer is “yes.”

Americans must no longer ignore false realities and double standards that threaten our health and prosperity…. The examples are legion. It’s fortunate that ruling elites have double standards, or they wouldn’t have any standards at all. Legislators and regulators would never tolerate such behavior in the private sector. Citizens should no longer tolerate it in our government.

Without subsidies, renewables cannot compete — and so BP is bailing. Addressing wind energy’s future, Amy Grace, a New York-based analyst at New Energy Finance, said: “There’s limited visibility beyond 2014 about what the assets will be worth as a tax credit supporting turbines is set to expire at the end of this year.”

Bats are struck by blades traveling 100 to 200 mph at their tips or felled by “barotrauma,” sudden air pressure changes that explode their lungs, as explained in a 2008 Scientific American article “On a wing and low air: The surprising way wind turbines kill bats.”

Not only has the wind industry never solved its environmental problem, it has been hiding at least 90% of this slaughter for decades. In fact, the universal problem of hiding bird (and bat) mortality goes from bad to intolerable beyond the Altamont Pass boundaries, because studies in other areas across North America are far less rigorous, or even nonexistent, and many new turbines are sited in prime bird and bat habitats.

A 2011 U.S. Chamber of Commerce report titled “Project/No Project” found 140 renewable projects that had stalled, stopped, or been outright killed due to “Not in My Back Yard” (NIMBY) environmental activism and a system that allows limitless challenges by opponents.