No Runny Eggs

The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think.

Day by Day cartoon

Archive for the 'Energy' Category

August 28, 2009

Can’t Have Your Cake and Eat It Too!

by Shoebox @ 5:18. Filed under Energy, Global "Warming", Politics - National.

Do your remember all of those great arguments for support of the Waxman-Markey “let’s rush back to the 1500’s bill?”  We were going to save mother earth, we were going to increase jobs, we were going to be less dependent on foreign oil.

Not so much!

A new study done by Ensys Energy finds that rather than import less oil, if Waxman-Markey is passed, we will actually import MORE oil.  In fact, the study shows that by 2030 we would likely need to DOUBLE the amount of imported oil!

How can that be?  Simple.

If we start taxing production and processing of fossil fuels, less investment will be made into production and processing of fossil fuels.  If less investment is made, less outcome will result.  All of this is pretty much in line with the designs of the Waxman-Markey bill.  The problems comes in that there is no magical product available that can replace fossil fuels in the vast majority of it’s uses.  Thus, we dramatically reduce supply but have little reduction in demand.  Unless we actually do chose to go back to the 1500’s, we’ll need to replace the production that is no longer happening in the US.  According to the study, the shift in production looks like this:

U.S. refining throughput, a measure of productivity, could plummet by as much as 25% (4.4 million barrels per day) and investment in U.S. refining could fall by as much as $90 billion, a decline of 88 percent, by 2030, the EnSys study forecast.

Well, I guess that shoots one of the reasons for the Waxman-Markey bill.  Would you like a quick second?

According to the same study, because no magical new power source will be available, the effect of the Waxman-Markey bill will not reduce carbon emissions.  All Waxman-Markey will do is shift the carbon emissions from the US to other countries around the world.  In other words, only the NIMBY people will get anything out of Waxman-Markey.  Yeah, they’ll get something right up to the point that the US economy is hammered because we have a dramatically increasing negative trade balance because we have to import twice as much energy as we used to!  Oh, and we’ll lose a bunch of jobs too!

 

August 18, 2009

Drill Here, Drill Now Tuesday (8/18/2009) part 2 – shale edition

by steveegg @ 7:39. Tags:
Filed under Energy.

(H/T – JiangxiDad)

I usually don’t do two of these in a week, but it’s not every day that we hear of East Coast shale. Investor’s Business Daily reports that New York Governor David Patterson (yes, he is a Dem) wants to go get the natural gas contained in the Marcellus Shale formation. This formation, which covers the souther portion of New York, the western part of Pennsylvania, almost the entirety of West Virginia, the eastern portion of Ohio, and portions of neighboring states, is estimated to hold as much as 1,300 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, or 65 years’ worth of domestic natural gas production.

Naturally, the envirowhackos that want to prevent this exploitation are whining that the method that would be used to get the natural gas, fracking, uses a lot of water, and could damage the aquifers that supply New York City with drinking water. IBD explodes both halves of that, pointing out that fracking has already been done in the area with no aquifer damage, and that fracking requires less water than ethanol production.

I echo IBD’s call to Gov. Patterson – “Drill, Patterson, drill.”

Drill Here, Drill Now Tuesday (8/18/2009) – offshore edition – UPDATE – With a Soros connection?

by steveegg @ 6:00. Tags:
Filed under Energy.

(H/T for the concept – Jessi Olson – H/T for the article – Carol Platt Liebau)

Long-term reader of this blog may remember a weekly series that I borrowed from Jessi Olson called “Drill Here, Drill Now Tuesday” in response to the ludicrously-high gas prices of last summer. We both called for increased domestic oil drilling.

The prices may not be quite as bad this summer, but it’s not for a lack of trying by the Obama administration. At every turn, from refusing to explore the possibility of offshore drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to a rescinding of existing permits to tap the oil shale out west, they have tried to squeeze the life out of the domestic oil industry. In fact, the Department of the Interior attempted to take a court-ordered ban of new drilling in Alaska and have that apply nationwide, only to be told by the court that it only applied to Alaska.

Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal reports that the U.S. Export-Import Bank has issued a $2 billion “preliminary committment” letter to Brazilian state-owned Petrobras so it can exploit the Tupi oil field. I have to wonder whether that is merely because it isn’t in American waters, it involves a state-owned enterprise, or both.

Revisions/extensions (4:36 pm 8/18/2009) - Ed Morrissey dug up a Bloomberg piece from Friday on The Left’s Moneybag George Soros changing to a higher-dividend position in Petrobras. Do remember that The Chicago Way involves rewarding one’s benefactors.

July 28, 2009

Expiration date – nuclear edition

by steveegg @ 16:36. Filed under Energy, Politics - National.

(H/T – RadicalRon)

The Knoxville News Sentinel reports that the Department of Energy rejected USEC’s $2 billion loan-guarantee application for The American Centrifuge project, a uranium gas-centrifuge enrichment facility, despite a campaign-era pledge from Barack Obama to support said guarantee. USEC CEO John K. Welch claims that the program met the original intent of the DOE loan-guarantee program; of course, that was before Obama actually became President.

I would have simply wrote it off to the Obama administration’s hatred of American nuclear power and the expiration of yet another campaign promise, but in the course of confirming that gas-centrifuge technology is how the Iranians are working at getting nuclear weapons, I discovered that not only is it considered the enrichment method of the future, with Russia, Japan, Germany, the UK and the Netherlands adopting it, there is a second gas-centrifuge project from Louisiana Energy Services, the National Enrichment Facility.

So, what are the differences between LES and USEC? I haven’t been able to determine whether LES also applied for loan guarantees, but there are two differences between the two companies. First, LES is a wholly-owned subsidiary of European URENCO, while USEC is a Maryland company. Second, there is a donation difference between the officers of LES and the officers of USEC. The USEC donation list is rather Republican-heavy, and features donations from Welch to John McCain. Meanwhile, the LES donation list is rather Democrat-heavy, and features a max-amount donation from PR head Brenda Brooks to Obama.

Revisions/extensions (11:10 pm 7/28/2009) - Fixed the link back to JammieWearingFool.

July 1, 2009

100% energy-independent Wisconsin (on “green” energy, no less)?

by steveegg @ 21:26. Filed under Energy, Politics - Wisconsin.

I hate to dump all over Mark Neumann’s idea that Wisconsin could, with “green, renewable” energy, be 100% energy independent in a generation, but I’m afraid I must. First, I must state that I admire what he did with the “green” home his company built.

There are two primary sources of energy, electricity and fuel. I could not find specifically how much electricity Wisconsin uses, but American Transmission Company, which serves the eastern 2/3rds of the state, most of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, and the Rockford, Illinois area, delivered a total of 68,162,000 megawatt-hours of electricity in 2008, with a peak 1-hour load of 11,794 megawatts. Meanwhile, in 2007 (the last year figures were available), the consumption of “green power” in Wisconsin, including power produced outside the state, was 197,145 megawatt-hours, with a peak 1-hour capacity of just under 106 megawatts. Granted, that doesn’t include hydroelectric (which is 100% tapped), and it doesn’t include projects built since 2007, but somehow I doubt there’s anywhere close to either 50,000,000 megawatt-hours/year or a reliable peak capacity of anywhere near 9,000 megawatts in “green” power. Those requirements just go up exponentially if plug-in electric cars ever hit Wisconsin.

Second, there’s fuel. I will necessarily be overly simplistic because of a similar lack of reliable information, but that’s balanced by the fact that, unless synthetic fuels somehow can be made with the resources in Wisconsin, we will never be 100% fuel-independent. In 2007, Wisconsin drivers used about 2,950,000,000 gallons of fuel. I don’t know what the splits between gasoline and diesel were, so I will assume that it was all gasoline. Further, I’ll assume that 7% of that fuel was ethanol. That leaves 2,743,500 gallons of gasoline used. In a generation, I would expect, between fuel efficiency increases and population increases, that to be reduced by about 25%, or about 2,000,000 gallons of gasoline.

If that is replaced by ethanol, given the inefficiencies of it versus gasoline, we’re looking at 2,500,000 gallons of ethanol that would need to be produced to make every part of E85 that can be produced in Wisconsin actually produced in Wisconsin. Assuming all of that is produced from corn (which the outstate farmers would love), about 7,620,000 acres would need to be given over to ethanol production. Given there were just over 15,000,000 acres of farmland in 2007, divided between crops and livestock, where exactly is all that corn going to be grown?

I do note that using switchgrass to make ethanol uses half the land. Still, that’s over a quarter of the farmland. What farm products do we give up exporting? Wheat? Corn? Milk?

There is another alternative; hydrogen-powered fuel cells. Provided there is sufficient electricity to split water into its component hydrogen and oxygen, it would seem that Wisconsin, with Lake Michigan on the east, Lake Superior on the northwest, the Mississippi River on the southwest, and innumerable lakes and rivers, would be a prime source for hydrogen. However, there’s two bits of bad news. First, it takes a lot of energy to split water, and Wisconsin doesn’t exactly have a surplus of that, especially “green” energy. Second, does anybody believe for a second that the enviromentalists will let that water be used for energy on anything approaching a mass scale?

Revisions/extensions (9:32 pm 7/1/2009) - I originally forgot to take into account that E85 still is 15% gasoline. The affected numbers have been corrected.

June 29, 2009

But Isn’t That My Ox Being Gored?

by Shoebox @ 5:09. Filed under Energy, Politics - Minnesota, Politics - National.

The Republican Party claims to stand for principles.  Amongst the principles they claim to stand for are limited government, personal liberty and free markets.  However, too many in the Republican Party believe that principles are not absolute.  They believe that principles can, shall we say, be flexible.  The rationale of these Republicans is that limited government is good, if I’m not in power, personal liberty is good unless my party says otherwise and free markets are good unless our party says there’s a problem.  Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota is a perfect example of one of these flexibly principled Republicans.

As a result of Governor Sanford’s confusing personal life, there have been several articles this weekend promoting Pawlenty as a rising spokesperson, perhaps even now, a strong contender for the 2012 Presidential bid…yeah, whatever.  I don’t know if it’s some of that thinking or just because he’s a lame duck Governor and is working on his next meal ticket but, Pawlenty is quickly becoming to Governor’s what Michele Bachmann is for the House of Representatives; in the media all the time talking about things that they shouldn’t be talking about. 

A perfect example showing Pawlenty in the media saying things he shouldn’t and showing his flexible principles, was his appearance on Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.”  On the show, Pawlenty argued that the recently passed cap and trade bill was bad policy.  OK, I’m with him so far.  It’s when he tells us why it’s bad policy that I give him my patented “Ron Paul talking about the gold standard” look.  According to American Pravda’s version of the interview, here’s why Pawlenty believes Cap and Trade is bad policy:

In an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday morning, the Republican governor said he shares the goal of reducing pollution and emissions. But he says the best way to do that is through conservation, more fuel-efficient vehicles and improving base-load power with nuclear energy.

They add:

Pawlenty says the cap and trade emissions regime in the bill would send U.S. jobs to other countries.

Funny, in 2007 the Minnesota Legislature passed a renewable energy bill.  That bill requires that energy producers in the state generate specific and increasing percentages of their energy through things like wind, solar or hydrogen.  The mandates are high enough that it will make Minnesota the state with the most renewable generated energy in the nation.  An amendment to remove Minnesota’s restriction on nuclear plants, the only State one of a few, with Wisconsin being another, to have such a restriction, failed.  Likewise, an amendment to waive the renewable requirements if they cost more than 10% more than existing methods also failed.  Finally, the bill contained a provision that allows utilities that exceed their required amounts of renewable energy to sell credits to other utilities.  Sounds a bit like the sale of carbon credits doesn’t it? 

Governor Pawlenty signed this bill and in many corners, was seen as a cheer leader for the bill.  Today, he decries a national version of what he gladly burdened Minnesotans with just two years ago. 

To too many Republicans like Pawlenty, principles only matter when it’s not their ox being gored.

Revisions/extensions (8:37 am 6/29/2009, steveegg) - Made a correction, as Wisconsin also has a complete moratorium on new nuclear power plants.

June 24, 2009

Must-watch Wednesday – Mary Katharine Ham tries to read Waxman-Markey

by steveegg @ 17:38. Filed under Energy, Envirowhackos, Politics - National.

It may no longer be called HamNation, and she doesn’t do videos nearly as often as she used to, but Mary Katharine Ham is back with a vengeance on the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade-Tax bill about to be rammed down our throats…

YouTube Preview Image

The 1,201-page version that just got marked up (as H.R. 2998) isn’t even the final version that will be rammed through on Friday, but it will be at least a not-at-all-reasonable facsimile.

Revisions/extensions (7:22 pm 6/24/2009) - I hope MKH doesn’t get laryngitis reading the bill. So far, she made it through the table of contents. Instead of posting videos, I’ll direct you to her YouTube page.

May 29, 2009

Pre-vacation Hot Read – Lance Burri’s smackdown of Time on economics

by steveegg @ 21:24. Filed under Economy, Energy.

Lance Burri smacks down a Time story that claims oil is not subject to the laws of economics. The closing smash:

In order: expectation of increased demand; increased demand for futures; restriction of supply; more restriction of supply.

Okay, all of you who took basic economics in high school: what do the laws of economics say about those factors?

They say whoever wrote that article doesn’t understand basic economics.

The brilliance is how he uses Time’s article against its idiotic lede.

May 12, 2009

Drill here, drill now Tuesdays – 5/12/2009 (and a new NRE poll)

by steveegg @ 13:17. Tags:
Filed under Energy, NRE Polls, Politics - National.

The original concept started with Jessi Olson back when oil was at $140/barrel and gasoline was over $4/gallon

Even though the economy shows very few signs of restarting, the price of oil is back up over $60/barrel after hitting a low of nearly $35/barrel, and gasoline in Milwaukee is already tickling $2.60/gallon after a couple months of being well below $2/gallon. Somehow, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that in that time frame, the Democrats in Congress and the Obama administration have restored every last roadblock to oil exploration and exploitation that resulted in the record prices last summer.

With that in mind, I’ve started up a new poll. It’s rather simple – when will gas prices in Milwaukee lead with a “1″ again?

When will the number 1 once again lead the price of regular unleaded gasoline in Milwaukee?

Up to 1 answer(s) was/were allowed

  • When it climbs above $9.99/gallon. (75%, 66 Vote(s))
  • When it dips below $2.00/gallon. (25%, 22 Vote(s))

Total Voters: 88

Loading ... Loading ...

May 8, 2009

Here comes the annual Algore/Whitman Memorial RFG Price Hike

by steveegg @ 7:28. Filed under Energy, Envirowhackos.

In case you haven’t noticed gas prices in the Milwaukee area lately, they’ve begun their annual winter-blend-to-summer-blend price spike. According to our friends at GasBuddy.com (which runs both MilwaukeeGasPrices.com and MadisonGasPrices.com), Milwaukee-area gas prices went up from an average of $2.088/gallon this time last month to $2.367/gallon as of this morning. Meanwhile, Madison-area gas prices from an average of $2.088/gallon this time last month to $2.196/gallon as of this morning.

One can’t even blame corn-a-hole this time, as to meet the federal mandates for minimum corn-a-hole content, most stations have chosen to put 10% ethanol in regular unleaded outstate. That leaves the RFG as the sole remaining difference, and I could’ve swore that, back when it was crammed down our fuel injectors, it wasn’t supposed to be more than a couple cents per gallon more expensive.

April 3, 2009

But, But, But…

by Shoebox @ 9:04. Filed under Economy, Energy, Politics - National.

From CNNmoney:

America’s oil bust

BRADFORD, Pa. (CNNMoney.com) — Six months ago this oil town in Western Pennsylvania was booming. You couldn’t find a worker to paint a house, let alone man a drill rig. The nearby oil fields buzzed with activity as high prices drove a production frenzy.

Now this boomtown’s bustle is as quiet as the surrounding late-winter forest.

but, but, but I thought we were supposed to be getting all kinds of “Green Jobs!”  I thought we were going to grow jobs!  Is it possible that Obama’s plan to “grow green jobs” might actually cause massive unemployment in industries that are not in favor?  Is it possible that some areas of the country may actually have significantly worse unemployment because of Obama’s plan to “grow jobs?”

Elkhart Indiana, Saaaalute!

February 10, 2009

Odd Man Out

by Shoebox @ 5:23. Filed under Energy, Global "Warming".

An article out in Germany talks about growing interest in developing nuclear power in Europe.   According to the article, Germany and even Sweden are talking about restarting nuclear power development.   Apparently previous agreements to cease and desist are now considered old fashioned:

Sweden announced last week that it was revoking a 1980 referendum decision to phase out nuclear power. Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt and the leaders of the three other parties in the coalition described the deal as “historic.”

The European Union gets nearly 30% of its electricity from nuclear plants.   It has 147 active nuclear power plants.   They have 2 under construction with 20 proposed plants.

Isn’t nuclear so, what’s the phrase, 1970’s?   I thought nuclear was anti green, anti new world order.   Why the sudden interest in nuclear?

With gas and oil prices rocketing and fears about global warming growing, however, nuclear power seems to be experiencing a global renaissance.

Funny thing, we’ve got all the same issues and concerns.   The one advantage we do have is that we have more coal than anywhere else in the world, but that’s bad too.

I’ve looked through the entire stimulus bill and can find no reference to nuclear energy in it.   That’s kind of odd considering that President Obama continues to tout all of the green jobs that will be created.  

Europe’s decided that being anti nuclear is “historic.”   Looks like contrary to all of Obama’s talk about leading we’re just going to be plain old history.

How Green Is Your Ethanol?

by Shoebox @ 5:12. Filed under Corn-a-hole, Energy.

With apologies to the New Christy Minstrels:

Green Green it’s green they say
on the far side of the hill
Green green I’m goin’ away
to where the gas is greener still

a Well I told those Greenies when they said "use the corn!"
Dontcha know it’s a fool’s game you play?
You’ll up food prices, need a huge subsidy
And not supplant one barrel of oil
a-singin"¦.

Remember all those ethanol commercials?   They used to tell us about how efficient it was because we grow it and how much greener it was than using fossil fuels.

We saw the folly of the first “benefit” a year plus ago as ethanol use contributed to a doubling of corn prices which resulted in dramatic increases in all food that contained corn or corn products.   Now we have the University of Minnesota throwing cold water on the latter.

In a study to be fully released later this week, The U of M concludes:

The researchers found that depending on the materials and technology used in production, cellulosic ethanol’s environmental and health costs (19 to 32 cents per gallon) are less than half the costs of gasoline (71 cents per gallon), while corn-based ethanol’s costs (72 to about $1.45 per gallon) range from roughly equal to about double that of gasoline.

Gosh, that’s odd.   I thought gas was the evil, anti green fuel.   Who would have thought that ethanol was a horribly ungreen fuel?   The answer is anyone who would do a little research past seeing the word “green!”   The problem with corn based ethanol has always been in what it takes to grow the corn and turn it into fuel.   Unfortunately, few people want to educate themselves and look only at the core product and what they believe comes out of a tailpipe.   Even the authors of the research see the myopia:

“To understand the environmental and health consequences of biofuels, we must look well beyond the tailpipe to how and    where biofuels are produced. Clearly, upstream emissions matter,” Hill says.

“Green” has become a pixie dust that changes anything it touches into something no longer questionable as to its economic quality or its usefulness.   Putting doggie doodoo into a bag and calling it “green” may make some folks feel good but it has no value to me as a pillow.

H/T Glenn Beck

January 11, 2009

Drill Here, Drill Now Tues…er, Sunday – 1/11/2009

by steveegg @ 17:52. Tags:
Filed under Energy, Envirowhackos, Politics - National.

(H/T for the new news – Amanda Carpenter, H/T for the DHDNT concept – Jessi Olson)

My gas price – $1.879 just outside the bunker

Why do I have a special Sunday edition of Drill Here, Drill Now? It’s because Senate Majority Leader Dingy Harry Reid (D-OPEC) and 65 of his fellow members of the bipartisan Party-In-Government used their first floor vote of the session to lock up the not-yet-developed energy-rich land to the tune of $10 billion. Even though that’s supposedly short of a veto (which I hope would happen if this shows up before noon Eastern 1/20), the fact that there were several ‘Rats missing in action means that my prediction in the Weekend Scramble that the pork would net a veto-proof majority came through.

There is one place left to stop this, and thanks to San Fran Nan’s (D-CA) machinations, it is likely that the House will join the Senate in not allowing any minority-written amendments.

January 6, 2009

Drill Here, Drill Now Tuesdays – 1/6/2009

by steveegg @ 12:15. Tags:
Filed under Energy.

This was started by Jessi Olson back when gas was over $4/gallon. Despite the fact that gas is currently under $2/gallon, I’ll continue to do this on a more-or-less regular basis until the underlying message sinks into the collective cement blocks that pass for heads amongst the members of the bipartisan Party-In-Government.

My price for gas – $1.899/gallon outside the bunker

Today, I will focus on a different aspect of oil – heating oil. As I type, heating oil is rocketing off the floor of about $1.20/gallon established last month, up to a current level of $1.64/gallon. Yes, that is below where it was this time last year (somewhere around $2.60/gallon), and well below the mid-summer spike of about $4.15/gallon, but that drop was a result of the temporary opening of places like the outer continental shelf to oil exploration. The Democrats are already sharpening their knives to slay that opening, and the current surge in oil and gas prices is proof we are still at the ragged-high edge of the demand/supply-price curve.

Worse, Ed Morrissey passes along a report that friend-to-the-Left Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez will no longer be sending his suitable-only-for-heavy-oils-like-heating-oil crude over here for “free”. The cynical side of me says that won’t return because he got what he wanted out of that “investment”; kindred spirits in charge of everything. Even if I weren’t cynical, the fact remains that CITGO isn’t in the charity business anymore at a time when costs are going up.

Do you really want to be dependent on the whims of a tyrant who can’t even keep his own country powered? If not, then I have three words for you – “Drill baby, drill!”

November 19, 2008

Drill Here, Drill Now Tuesdays – Special Wednesday edition – 11/19/2008

by steveegg @ 14:26. Tags:
Filed under Energy.

This was started by Jessi Olson of Wake Up America back when most of the country was off-limits to oil exploration. I’ve sort of fallen off the wagon once the off-shore ban expired, and really fell off after the election.

Price of regular unleaded in south-suburban Milwaukee – $1.899

There is actually some hopeful news today, which is why I brought this thing in from the dustbin. The Salt Lake Tribune reports that the Interior Department has finalized the rules for opening up the Mountain West’s oil shale reserves. Royalties will start at 5%, then increase by 1 point a year after the 5th year of commercial exploitation to the standard 12.5%. Also, 49% of those royalties will be shared with the state in which a particular mine is.

Naturally, the no-drill crowd is all up in arms, but at least they have to actively reverse course now to get oil back up their dream of $140+/bbl and gas to their $4-$10/gallon dream.

October 30, 2008

Reminiscing

by Shoebox @ 5:25. Filed under Energy, Global "Warming".

Remember back to the good ol’ days when we were debating whether we were or weren’t in a recession, we were concerned that McCain might have to face Hillary and gas was $4.00?   Well, all three of those things are now ancient history.   Or are they?

NewsMax.com published an article Wednesday that claims that the International Energy Agency will publish a report saying that existing oil field production is declining at a rate far faster than previously thought.   While they recognize that it’s natural for   fields to decline and that increased investment can flatten or reverse that decline, they don’t believe it will be enough.

It seems that there are two ways to look at the IEA’s report.

One would be to continue the “drill here drill now” mantra.   Funny how the decreasing price of gas has seen an equal reduction in the discussion of gas prices.   I know the election has people’s attention but regardless of that outcome, we need to keep our foot on the pedal, so to speak.   This economic slow down isn’t going to last forever.   The minute that the markets sense that things will improve, oil prices will start to move up and so will gas prices.   If you like gas at a level that is about to go south of $2.00 in the Twin Cities, we need to keep production up.

The second thought is, “Gee, is it just coincidence that the IEA is raising a red flag on production now or is there something else going on?”   Likely not.

The IEA was originally organized during the oil crisis of the 70’s.   Its purpose was to coordinate activities amongst its member countries (now numbering 28 that are mostly Western and Asian countries) to reduce or eliminate oil supply disruptions, a laudable goal.   However, within the last year or so the IEA has hopped on the global warming bandwagon and now also focus on “alternative energy” and “mitigating climate change.”   In fact, the IEA has been a leading advisor to the UN on topics like emission trading and member country efforts to reduce greenhouse gases.   In a phrase, I’d say the IEA has mixed loyalties!

The IEAs final report is due to come out November 12th.   If the final report is as dire in its oil production forecast as what Newsmax is reporting, you can expect the Dems to cranking the sirens on the needs for a new stimulus to generate “green jobs for renewable energy!”   Just remember, if you hear those sirens, the report that generated them was created by an agency who no longer has oil production and mitigation of supply disruption as their sole, or some would argue, even their primary purpose.

October 14, 2008

Drill Here, Drill Now Tuesdays – 10/14/2008

by steveegg @ 16:00. Filed under Energy.

Yes, I forgot to put one up last week in the rush to get to DC (I HATE flights that leave at 7 am), but I’m back this week.

My gas price (south-suburban Milwaukee, WI) – $2.979/gallon

Well, we’ve had the ban on offshore drilling expired for two weeks, and even though I haven’t been paying very close attention, I don’t seem to recall any news on new leases. Then again, we do have an election coming up in 3 weeks, and the party that seems poised to win has promised to shut off the spigot.

If that happens, we’ll look back at $4/gallon gas and $140/barrel oil, and whatever you were paying in your locale for electricity, natural gas, and heating oil at their peaks to date with nostalgia. Do recall their non-drill “drill” bill that would have put most of the OCS off-limits. Do also recall they snuck a tax increase on domestic oil production into the bailout bill.

September 30, 2008

Drill Here, Drill Now Tuesdays – 9/30/2008

by steveegg @ 19:35. Filed under Energy.

This idea was started by Jessi at Wake Up America. It will appear here every Tuesday (whether I’m here or not; the only difference is I won’t be able to update the current gas price while on vacation) until Congress wakes up and allows a lot more domestic drilling (I’m not talking about just ANWR, or just off the Florida coast where Cuba, Red China and Brazil are preparing to drink our milkshake, or just the shale fields in the Rockies).

My Gas Price (south suburban Milwaukee County, Wisconsin): $3.539/gallon

This one is going up a bit late today, but we are within a few hours of seeing the Congressional ban on offshore drilling expire. I’ll be blunt; I want next week’s update to include news that offshore drilling leases are being negotiated and signed.

Offshore drilling is now in the hands of the oil companies and the Bush administration. I don’t want excuses; I want action, especially since this window of opportunity may be very short.

This, however, is only the beginning. There’s the matter of ANWR and oil shale out West that’s been locked up. While it’s not specifically oil-related, there’s also a lot of clean coal that’s been locked up. That needs to be opened up as well. The clock is ticking, and this has to happen.

September 24, 2008

BBBBBBBBULLSHIT!

by Shoebox @ 15:22. Filed under Energy.

I’m pretty sure that’s how Jim Cramer would respond to this!

 

This headline from “The News Agency Who Shall Not Be Named:”
House votes to end offshore drilling ban

The article claims that because the Dems didn’t force the provision to extend the moratorium into a continuing resolution, they “voted to end” the ban!

What the hell?!?!?!?!

How can something that is not voted on be a vote not to do it?

“Nancy and the Dimmocrats” for all intents and purposes, voted to extend the ban with the ridiculous bill that they claimed was a “drilling bill.” Only when she did the math and found that she was going to lose House members if she tried to play chicken with the moratorium extension, did she cave on the issue.

Never forget; Nancy, Harry and the Democrat caucus’ in both the House and Senate have done absolutely nothing to increase even the possibility of energy supplies in this country.   What have they done?   They have ignored, obstructed, impeded, neglected and disregarded the will of 74% of the American People.

Are the Poll Trends for Dems Worse Than Thought?

by Shoebox @ 5:46. Filed under Energy, Politics - National.

According to this article  by “The News Agency Who Shall Not Be Named,” Nancy and the Democrats have backtracked from their earlier commitment to shove a renewal of the offshore drilling ban into a continuing resolution bill.  

A continuing resolution bill is necessary because the “Do nothing Congress,” headed by Pelosi and Reid have, well, done nothing all session.   Included in their “nothing” is not passing spending bills that will allow the government to function next year.   So, like  college students who wait until the last day to do their assignments for the quarter, the Democrats are negotiating for a way to finish their work after the session is done.

You may remember that the House passed a bill last week that was touted as a “drilling bill.” In fact, the bill would have done next to nothing for drilling while putting onerous additional taxes on oil companies and redirecting billions of dollars to thus far, unproven and terribly inadequate “alternative energy” sources.

While the Senate hadn’t taken up the “drilling bill,” the House had promised that they were “going to the mats” and planned to insert a resurrection of the drilling ban into the continuing resolution. The thinking was that Bush wouldn’t have the political capital to veto a bill that keeps the government running. If he did, the thinking went, the Republicans wouldn’t dare sustain a veto when, in just a few weeks, they would have to face voters and explain why they had “shut down the government.”

As an aside, I for one am generally for a shut down of the government. Congress has been pretty much shut down for two years. As far as I can tell, many things, including the lapse of the oil drilling moratorium have improved, while issues like the current economic situation, surely wouldn’t have been changed.

So why did Pelosi change her mind? She seemed to have a good political position to at least give the Republicans a black eye. She obviously was against expanding drilling. She’s never done anything but what she found politically expedient so it couldn’t be that she is bowing to the will of the American people  who support drilling by overwhelming numbers!

I’ve thought about this all day and can only come up with one answer: The sudden and dramatic closing of gaps and, in some cases taking the lead, by McCain/Palin in numerous “swing” states, may well portend greater momentum towards McCain than current polls can capture.

Additionally, a dramatic surge in preference for Republicans shown in a recent Gallup poll, has the Republicans down only 3 points in the generic Democrat/Republican ballot. Just 30 days ago, the Republicans were down 11 in the same generic ballot.   This could portend fewer House losses and, dare I hope, maybe some surprise Republican pickups?

I think Nancy’s afraid for her job!

I don’t mean afraid in the sense that the Republicans retake the house, although that would be great!   I mean afraid in the political sense where she gets a significant mandate against her positions thus making her politically meaninglesser (can you be meaninglesser?   Can Nancy be any more meaningless? Let us count the ways that she has been meainingless just this year:   FISA, War funding, Surge, S-CHIP and, lest I forget, the drilling moratorium!)

I think Nancy did a calculation. Nancy added McCain’s gains in swing states with the point gain in the generic ballot.   She took that number and divided by 74% which is the ratio of Americans who want offshore drilling expanded.   She took that result and raised it to the 59th power which is the percentage of folks who support drilling in ANWR.   Nancy calculated that a certain way to galvanize support for Republicans was to “play chicken” with the drilling ban.

It turns out that Nancy did what Nancy always does, she made her decision not based on what is best for the American people.   She made her decision based on what is best for Nancy!

September 23, 2008

Drill Here, Drill Now Tuesdays – 9/23/2008

by steveegg @ 18:23. Filed under Energy.

This idea was started by Jessi at Wake Up America. It will appear here every Tuesday (whether I’m here or not; the only difference is I won’t be able to update the current gas price while on vacation) until Congress wakes up and allows a lot more domestic drilling (I’m not talking about just ANWR, or just off the Florida coast where Cuba, Red China and Brazil are preparing to drink our milkshake, or just the shale fields in the Rockies).

My Gas Price (south suburban Milwaukee County, Wisconsin): $3.759/gallon

America needs to drill here drill now. America is having a energy crisis, and we need to do something now!

The United States has vast oil and gas resources onshore and offshore that are currently illegal to develop and therefore inaccessible.

U.S. law prohibits the development of approximately 38 billion barrels of undeveloped oil resources (19 billion barrels onshore and 18.92 billion offshore).

U.S. law prohibits the development of approximately 180 trillion cubic feet of undeveloped natural gas resources (94.5 trillion cubic feet onshore and 85.7 trillion cubic feet offshore).

Also…

CONGRESS RECENTLY VOTED TO MAKE IT ILLEGAL TO DEVELOP U.S. OIL SHALE RESOURCES

With oil prices at an all-time high, Americans are facing escalating gas, diesel, and aircraft fuel increases. Oil prices are projected to increase further.

Congress, however, has made it illegal to develop vast domestic oil resources in large parts of the United States.

The most startling Congressional prohibition on domestic oil production concerns the recently enacted ban on the development of oil shale resources in parts of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming in the Green River Formation. According to a Rand Study estimate, this reserve contains over one trillion barrels of oil, with 800 billion barrels fully recoverable, or three times the current oil reserves as Saudi Arabia.

There, however, is some good news. There is very-late word that the House Democrats will not attempt to attach their no-drill bill making the easiest-to-exploit portions of America’s energy resources permanently inaccessible to the continuing resolution. Thus, the ban on the offshore drilling portion of the various roadblocks toward energy independence will be lifted next week Wednesday. While I have no doubt the Democrats will try again next year to ensure a perpetual energy crunch if they are left in power, and while this doesn’t directly address the lock-ups on on-shore oil and natural gas, clean coal, and oil shale, I’ll take this victory.

September 19, 2008

Maybe, The Wizard Does Have Brains!

by Shoebox @ 9:45. Filed under Energy.

For the reference point, read my post here.

This morning, TheHill.Com is reporting that the Senate “Gang of Invertebrates” will not offer their energy bill until after the elections!

A bipartisan group of senators who sought a compromise in the rancorous energy debate won’t introduce their bill before lawmakers adjourn for the elections, several Senate aides said Thursday.

Well, maybe not everyone got a brain:

No legislative language was drafted in early August. But the group agreed to a broad set of goals, including transitioning 85 percent of the country’s automobiles to non-petroleum-based fuels within 20 years, providing incentives to boost nuclear energy, repealing billions in subsidies for oil companies, opening the Eastern Gulf of Mexico off of Florida for oil exploration, and allowing Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia to decide whether to allow drilling off their shores.

Yet there is still hope, even for the slow ones:

But many Republicans criticized the plan, raising concerns that by offering a compromise to Democrats and their presidential candidate Barack Obama, it would blunt a potent election-year attack that has gained traction at the polls. GOP presidential candidate John McCain opposed the plan, and Democrats were preparing to attack the Arizona senator for standing in the way of a bipartisan compromise. And many Republicans, like Sen. McCain, said repealing subsidies from oil companies would amount to a tax hike.

I’m glad to see that the Republicans now understandthe political angle of their “Suicide Compact.” Had the Senate R’s pushed forward with their plan, they would have either forced McCain to move with them or spend a lot of time explaining how his “friends” were “well meaning” but “dumb as a box of rocks on this topic.”

The drilling moratorium ends on October 1st. Unless the Dems try to force a reup for the moratorium into one of the budget bills (unlikely at this point), the world changes on October 2nd. I’m not suggesting that there is an armada of drilling rigs sitting in docks, building steam, ready to break loose the moorings on October 2nd. I am saying that I don’t know how the toothpaste gets back in the tube after the election. The one possibility is if the Dems sweep the Presidency, the House and a filibuster proof Senate…that would be bad not just for oil but for the entire economy. Let’s make sure that doesn’t happen!

In the meantime, there are 20 Senators who still don’t get the bigger picture. I’ve got 2 in my state. You can bet they’ll be hearing from me (only one will even listen) while they’re home on the recess. A candidate is most pliable on their positions when they think their job is at risk.

September 18, 2008

We’re Off to See the Senate….I Wonder If They Have Any Brains?

by Shoebox @ 5:07. Filed under Energy.

As if In some kind of a wierd  cult version of “The Wizard of Oz,” SanFranNan, Nick Rahall as the Scarecrow, Steny Hoyer as the cowardly lion and John Dingle, Gene Green and George Miller alternately playing the Tin Man, dropped a house on Biiiiiiig Oiiiiiiiil which they see as the evil witch, and are now headed off to the  Wizard to collect their rewards.

The “broom” that they carry is clearly meant to be a symbol of their hatred for Biiiiiig Oiiiiiiiil.   Besides playing shell game with “increasing” drilling, they have dramatically increased the taxes on oil companies at a time when we should be providing incentives to do more not less.   To make matters worse, the “broom” removes existing tax incentives from Biiiiig Oiiiiiiil.   The final straw (pun intended) is that the additional taxes the “broom” imposes on Biiiiiig Oiiiiiiil will be used to fund a blackhole of alternative energy “solutions.”

I heard the Sarah Palin interview on Hannity and Colmes tonight.   If the Dems approach to energy isn’t an example of them being hooked on OPiuM (Other People’s Money) and the redistribution of it, I don’t know what is.

When SanFranNan and company arrive at the Senate, they are hoping that the Wizard will grant them their rewards.   Just like in the real version, while the Wizard may appear to be a doddering fool, I’m beginning to think that there may be more wisdom there than meets the eye.

I never liked John McCain’s gang of 14.   I don’t like the current Senate’s Gang of Invertebrates any better.   That said, whether it was McCain’s design or not, it is a fair assessment that his gang got us a couple of good Supreme Court justices without having to call in the nuke strike.   I’m beginning to think that if the current gang handles things properly, they too can accomplish the greater good of increased drilling,  in spite of  having a bill that does no more good than the “broom” that the House is bringing.

If the Gang of Invertebrates can hold together, it is almost certain that no bill will come out of the Senate before the expiration of the drilling ban.   If that happens and the American people are provided hope for improved oil production three things will happen.   1.   There will be immense  scrutiny on the oil companies  drilling  activities, they will be in a use it or lose it situationa by virtue of the expectations created with the public.   2.   The “Greens” will be fully exposed as the obstructionists they really are and we can deal with them, maybe in a significant way, as they will be throwing lawsuit after lawsuit in an attempt to create their own drilling ban and 3.   It will be nearly impossible for the Dems to put the genie back in the bottle.

With my apologies to E.Y. Harburg:

“If drilling on the  big blue  sea,  lets cars run longer, why oh why can’t we?”

September 17, 2008

Liar Liar Pants on Fire!

by Shoebox @ 5:01. Filed under Energy.

Just last week Denny Hoyer, sent out by Nancy Pelosi because she’s incapable of saying “I’m wrong,” was quoted by TheHill.com as saying:

"[Republicans] will have the opportunity to offer their alternative, yes," Hoyer said in response to a question about how the energy bill will be introduced. "We understand that their motion to recommit will be their Republican alternative."

Representative Marsha Blackburn (R) Tennessee calls “Bullshit” on Denny and Nancy with her statement:

"After a five-week vacation and a cross country book tour; during which time Democrats turned off the lights, turned off the cameras, and refused to address the energy issue; we have this 290 page sham energy bill dropped in the middle of the night. There hasn’t been a single hearing on this bill and not a single amendment will be allowed. This is no way to address the most pressing issue for America. On the process alone, this is unacceptable."

The bill the Dems dropped on the House today was just another example of Nancy Pelosi marking time and accomplishing nothing for the American people. Amongst other things, the ridiculous bill included:

  • The ability to drill offshore only outside of 50 Miles
  • The ability for states to opt out of the drilling forcing drilling out to 100 miles
  • Didn’t include some of the most productive drilling areas
  • Increasing taxes on oil companies, regardless of what they recovered, but up to $30B…most of which was going to be used to “invest” in unproven and going nowhere “alternative” energy solutions.

Besides the fact that in reality, this only opens drilling outside of 100 miles and really doesn’t add any substantial amounts of additional energy to the mix, the areas on the West coast that are at the 100 mile + distance are very difficult, if at all possible to drill because of the depths of the ocean.

Pelosi is trying to give her Democrat House members cover in the upcoming elections.   She’s trying to be able to say the the Republicans wouldn’t agree to a bipartisan bill.   You and I know the truth…pass it along.   I’m hoping the American people see through her ploys and shows her the door in November!

« Older Entries

[No Runny Eggs is proudly powered by WordPress.]