The incredible and ugly truth about THE GAME.
It would seem since 1990 the industry has been heeding environmenalists calls to stop carbon dioxide emissions. With rising fuel prices The Republican Party and their supporting media have been 'GAMING' the issue rather than 'TAKING IT ON' along with an industry who obviously and minimally in Juneau, Alaska is looking to move to 'Hydrogen Production' in response to better transporation authority with alternatives. The leadership based in Juneau has seen the handwriting on the wall with it's local icefields disappearing and have for years been looking into hydrogen production rather than drilling further for oil and gas. They actually perfer to leave the environment alone and support the tourist and salmon industry.
CLUELESS in DC. The Republican Party and it's media exploits consumer complaints for votes rather than DOING THE RIGHT THING !!
ALL SHADES OF GRAY
"Good Morning, Americans"
The link to the title of this entry is a report by Dr. Mark N. Cooper. He compiled a report stating the oil industry was artificially inflating prices by reducing production at the refinery level. That in and of itself is not of concern to me except to realize the 'damage' to the Gulf refineries might not be as tragic to the industry as Bush would like to make it.
In actuality it is a form of activism as far as I am concerned. It was a way for the industry to be responsible to the environment in a way that would bring consumer pressure to purchase autos with higher fuel efficiency. No at least demade it, realizing the future for oil was finite. For all their efforts dating back to 1990, it was working to some extent in the early years but was undermined in later years by a Republican Congress who would neglect CAFE standards and allow the growth of the use of SUVs.
Their efforts, which they have a right to do, would further be undermined by a Republican president who would glut the American economy with tax cuts, artificially increasing consumer income allowing still more consumption of gas in low mileage vehicles.
I find this very interesting.
Now.
Bush would seek to be a glutonous oil barron, whom is obviously out of touch with an industry trying to modify consumer behavior; by pandering in obnoxious environmental abuse legislature that the industry might not even desire. It is somewhat reassuring that oil has acted with a conscious to some extent that has fallen short in government political pandering to consumers whom have little to no options to find high mileage vehicles as the auto industry has not tooled up in good conscience as oil evidently has by aggressively marketing SUVs without any alternative vechicles.
I think I owe Oil an apology realizing they were trying to put pressure the only way they could from 1990.
At any rate, I don't approve of the attack on the environment by this administration, nor do I approve of using government funds to 'reestablish' an oil industry with very limited supply when compared to the future of the children of this country.
I encourage the oil industry to continue to put pressure where they can to change the auto industry both gasoline engines and alternatives to increase the reluctance of consumers to continue CO2 emissions without conscience.
There is a social attitude in this country among some consumers that disregard environmental safety that pander to the oil barrons of the White House. That 'attitude' is encouraged by media services such as FOX that 'can't make it otherwise.' It would seem the oil industry does not 'HATE' environmentalists as much as Bush does. It would seem the deadly politicians of Dick Cheney use environmental abuse to reconcile financial liabilty to stockholders as well as securing war contracts to Halliburton and Carlyle.
The American Voter has not been of good conscience regarding the people they are putting in office to assist industry to resolve the 25 percent of global carbon dioxide they are responsible. To a large extent this proves that lack of government regulation as well as low tax rates work against the best interest of the country.
Storms kick off climate change debate
Washington flouts new studies that find global warming may cause their growing violent nature.
By Bill Straub / Scripps Howard News Service
WASHINGTON -- Katrina and Rita have kicked off a debate among scientists over the effect of global climate change on hurricane intensity, but it doesn't appear the environmental issue has grabbed the attention of Washington.
Scientists have been reluctant to cite climate change as the cause for the recent spate of Atlantic hurricanes in light of inconclusive data. But recent studies indicate that the increasingly violent nature of the storms over the past 35 years could be attributed to global warming.
Washington has, to this point, all but ignored the debate on global climate change, although some provisions in the recently passed energy bill promoting alternative energy sources could be seen as a nod in that direction. That same bill, however, includes $13.1 billion in tax breaks for industries that emit greenhouse gases, including $4 billion for the oil industry.
Katrina Relief Leads to Some Bending of Rules
By Cindy SkrzyckiTuesday, September 20, 2005; Page D01
The wake of Katrina has convinced some regulators that the time has come to break, or at least bend, some rules to help speed assistance to the victims of the storm.
When a Home Depot store in Hammond, La., wanted to set up a temporary gas station to provide fuel for suppliers and employees, the company approached the Environmental Protection Agency and asked regulators not to enforce all the usual pollution standards that cover pumping gas.
EPA Wants to Ease Toxic Spill Reporting
By JOHN HEILPRINThe Associated PressWednesday, September 21, 2005; 3:41 PM
WASHINGTON -- The government wants to quit forcing companies to report small releases of toxic pollutants and allow them to submit reports on their pollution less frequently.
Saying it wants to ease its regulatory burden on companies, the Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed adopting a "short form" that would excuse companies from disclosing spills and other releases of toxic substances if:
WASHINGTON -- The government wants to quit forcing companies to report small releases of toxic pollutants and allow them to submit reports on their pollution less frequently.
_They claim to release fewer than 5,000 pounds of a specific chemical. The current limit is 500 pounds.
_They store onsite but claim to release "zero" amounts of the worst pollutants, such as mercury, DDT and PCBs, that persist in the environment and work up the food chain. However, they must report if they have stored dioxin or dioxin-like compounds, even if none is released.
EPA said it also plans to ask Congress for permission to require the accounting every other year instead of annually. The EPA's annual Toxics Release Inventory began under a 1986 community right-to-know law. The first year the change could be possible, if Congress agreed, would be 2008.
"Waive EPA Rules for Katrina"
WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Senate’s environment committee is drafting legislation that would allow the Environmental Protection Agency to suspend any anti-pollution regulations for 120 days to help in the recovery from Hurricane Katrina.
The EPA’s chief briefed Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., and his colleagues on Wednesday. Stephen Johnson told senators he was not aware of anything he needed at this point, committee spokesman Bill Holbrook said Thursday.
But the EPA administration also said “there are still a number of unknowns and couldn’t project what he would need considering those unknowns,” Holbrook said.
Short-Term Energy Outlook
The possibility of energy market disruption amid this very active hurricane season turned to reality with the arrival of Katrina. In this issue, EIA examines some plausible paths to recovery.
The Gulf of Mexico coast region is a major oil and natural gas supply center for the United States with significant offshore oil and natural gas production, refining capacity, and petrochemical facilities, and serves as a major import hub and nexus for pipeline infrastructure. In the Gulf coast region, Federal offshore crude oil production accounts for 1.5 million barrels per day (29 percent of total U.S. production); crude oil refining capacity accounts for about 8.0 million barrels per day (47 percent of total U.S. production); and offshore natural gas production accounts for about 10 billion cubic feet per day (19 percent of total U.S. production). A significant portion of the Gulf coast’s petroleum products—gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel—is shipped to Eastern U.S. markets through the Colonial and Plantation pipelines or transported to Midwest markets by pipeline or the Mississippi River.
Committee to Examine Hurricane Katrina’s Impact on U.S. Energy Supply, Price of Gasoline
Barton Announces September 7th Hearing
WASHINGTON -- The following are excerpts from a press conference House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton, R-Texas, held today at the Arlington (Texas) Chamber of Commerce to discuss the impact of Hurricane Katrina on the U.S. energy supply:“We have between 1-2 million barrels of day of oil production in the Gulf of Mexico that’s been shut down because of the hurricane. That’s about 25% of our production capacity in the United States. We also have more than 25% of our nation’s refining capacity in various stages of shut down.“Next Wednesday afternoon the Energy and Commerce Committee is going to have a hearing on the consequences of Hurricane Katrina and the general impact on the energy market both at wholesale and at retail.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Press contact: Elliott Negin, NRDC, 202-289-2405If you are not a member of the press, please write to us at nrdcinfo@nrdc.org or see our contact page.NEW HOUSE BILL WOULD CRIPPLE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACTStatement by Andrew Wetzler, NRDC Senior Attorney
WASHINGTON (September 29, 2005 ) -- The House of Representatives passed a sweeping overhaul of the Endangered Species Act today, cutting key protections for endangered wildlife and giving taxpayer money to land developers and the oil and mining industry. By a 229 to 193 vote, the House approved the bill (H.R. 3824) sponsored by Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Resources Committee, eliminating critical habitat designations, exempting the pesticide industry from wildlife safety regulations, and authorizing millions in payouts to landowners for obeying rules that protect federally protected species.
The following is a statement by Andrew Wetzler, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council:
"It would be scandalous to pass this bill into law. This legislation would do nothing to protect wildlife and, in fact, would lead to more extinctions. "Of the many damaging provisions in this bill, one of the worst would repeal rules that protect endangered species from pesticides like DDT, which nearly killed off the bald eagle years ago.
"The bill also would fleece U.S. taxpayers by paying wealthy developers to comply with endangered species protections. Under a loose compensation scheme, land developers would be able to name their price for lost profits. In America we don't pay people not to pollute.
"Most damaging to species recovery, however, is the bill's complete elimination of essential habitat protections. It defies common sense to expect an endangered species to recover if the place it calls home is converted to condos or paved for a parking lot."
