Capito prepares to offer coal-to-liquids legislation next week
From Staff ReportsThe Register-Herald
Mandatory production of 6 billion gallons of coal-to-liquids fuel by 2022 is the thrust of the proposed Clean Coal-Derived Fuels for Energy Security Act that Rep. Shelley Moore Capito intends to offer next week.Coal can be converted into clean, zero-sulfur, synthetic fuel and oil products for nearly $35 to $45 a barrel, Capito, R-W.Va., said Tuesday.This means that with the use of modern technology, a cheaper alternative to traditional crude oil, now going for nearly $135 a barrel, is possible, she said.“West Virginians are feeling it at the gas station and they’re feeling high gas prices in the spike in food costs,” the 2nd District representative said.“It’s time for an all-hands-on-deck policy and coal must play a part in our energy solutions. Our nation’s coal reserves are larger than the combined oil reserves of the rest of the world. We’ve seen enough excuses and it’s time to get serious about coal-to-liquids.”Capito said her plan can lead to production of clean fuel on the home front that leads to more American jobs, “and it’s the right thing to do for West Virginia.”An energy policy that expands domestic oil and natural gas exploration and embraces conservation efforts and investment is renewable energy technology is needed, she said.“There is no single or easy solution to our nation’s energy needs,” Capito said.“But without increased domestic production of energy, we will continue to subject ourselves to the massive fluctuations in global energy prices that have led prices to their record highs.”
Showing posts with label Oil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Oil. Show all posts
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Saturn Vue Green Hybrid
Summary:
Provides 100-percent fuel economy improvement over Vue 2 Mode
Based on modified 2-mode hybrid system and plug-in technology
Hybrid lithium-ion battery recharges from household outlet in under five hours
Battery replenishment via electric motors and regenerative brake systems
At least 10 miles of all-electric range at slow to moderate speeds
Potential to be world’s most fuel-efficient production vehicle (in many driving situations)
Production may begin in 2010
Introduction: When the Saturn Vue Green Line Plug-in Hybrid goes into production in the 2010 timeframe, it could be the world’s most fuel-efficient production vehicle. According to current timing plans, it will be the first regular-production plug-in hybrid vehicle from an automotive original equipment manufacturer. Offering a 100-percent fuel economy improvement over the 2009 Saturn Vue Green Line 2 Mode Hybrid, the Vue Green Line Plug-in Hybrid demonstrates Saturn’s commitment to diversify from petroleum fuels and reduce emissions. Hoping to be first to offer the world’s first production plug-in hybrid, Saturn vows to tackle all of the many technological hurdles they may encounter in the process.
Whether the Vue Green Line Plug-in Hybrid is a stand-alone model, or joins the Vue Green Line 2 Mode Hybrid (debuting as a 2009 model late this year) in the Saturn Vue lineup, is as yet unclear.
Whether the Vue Green Line Plug-in Hybrid is a stand-alone model, or joins the Vue Green Line 2 Mode Hybrid (debuting as a 2009 model late this year) in the Saturn Vue lineup, is as yet unclear.
Hardware: The powertrain in the Green Line Plug-in Hybrid features two interior permanent magnet motors within the 2-mode transmission, and the GM 3.6-liter V-6 engine with variable valve timing (VVT) gasoline engine with direct injection.
Although not yet announced, the Vue Green Line Plug-in Hybrid, like the Vue Green Line 2 Mode, is likely to include electronic stability control, tire-pressure-monitoring system, and 4-wheel anti-lock brakes (ABS).
Technology: The Vue Green Line Plug-in Hybrid will use a modified version of the GM 2-mode hybrid system used on the 2009 Saturn Vue Green Line 2 Mode, along with plug-in technology, lithium-ion battery pack, higher-efficiency electronics and powerful electric motors. This combination is expected to achieve significant fuel economy increases—potentially doubling any current SUV’s fuel efficiency when the batteries are fully charged. Battery replenishment occurs after the electric-only propulsion has depleted the lithium-ion energy storage system by using the hybrid system’s electric motors and regenerative brake systems. Early testing reveals the Vue Green Line Plug-in Hybrid to be capable of more than 10 miles of electric-only propulsion at low speeds. During brisk acceleration, higher speeds, or when conditions warrant, the vehicle’s driving power comes from a combination of engine and electric power, or engine power only.
The plug-in aspect refers to the vehicle’s lithium-ion batteries, which can be fully recharged in four to five hours by connecting the vehicle to any standard household electrical outlet of 110 volts. The connection port is integrated into the front fender for easy access. Recharging—and not refueling—contributes to reduced consumption of petroleum. A key difference between a plug-in hybrid-electric vehicle and a non-plug-in hybrid-electric model is that the plug-in version provides extended electric-only propulsion, as well as greater battery capacity and recharging from an external electrical outlet.
The vehicle has two driving modes: city and highway. In addition, four fixed mechanical gears maximize efficiency while maintaining performance. Special controls will enable higher speeds during electric-only driving while simultaneously maintaining a longer period of electric-only propulsion. Other technology features are expected to include a navigation system, AM/FM stereo with CD/MP3 player and auxiliary input jack, and a power sunroof.—Suzanne Kane
Monday, May 19, 2008
Barnett Shale Gas - Expanding Our Supplies
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Barnett Shale is a geological formation of economic significance. It consists of sedimentary rocks of Mississippian age (354-323 million years ago) in the U.S. State of Texas. The formation is estimated to stretch from the city of Dallas to west of the city of Fort Worth and south, covering 5,000 square miles (13,000 km²) and at least 17 counties.
Some experts have suggested the Barnett Shale may be the largest onshore natural gas field in the United States. [1] The field is proven to have 2.5 trillion cubic feet (59 km³) of natural gas, and is widely estimated to contain as much as 30 trillion cubic feet (850,000,000,000 m³) of natural gas resources.[2] Oil also has been found in lesser quantities, but sufficient enough (with recent high oil prices) to be commercially viable.
The Barnett Shale is known as a "tight" gas reservoir, indicating that the gas is not easily extracted. The shale is very hard, and it was virtually impossible to produce gas in commercial quantities from this formation until recent improvements were made in hydraulic fracturing technology and horizontal drilling, and there was an upturn in the natural gas price.
Future development of the field will be hampered in part by the fact that major portions of the field are in urban areas, including the rapidly growing Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex.[3] Some local governments are researching means by which they can drill on existing public land (e.g., parks) without disrupting other activities so they may obtain royalties on any minerals found, whereas others are seeking compensation from drilling companies for damage to roads caused by overweight vehicles (many of the roads are rural and not designed for use by heavy equipment).
The Barnette Shale field may increase our known reserves by as much as 15%. (Tim)
The Barnett Shale is a geological formation of economic significance. It consists of sedimentary rocks of Mississippian age (354-323 million years ago) in the U.S. State of Texas. The formation is estimated to stretch from the city of Dallas to west of the city of Fort Worth and south, covering 5,000 square miles (13,000 km²) and at least 17 counties.
Some experts have suggested the Barnett Shale may be the largest onshore natural gas field in the United States. [1] The field is proven to have 2.5 trillion cubic feet (59 km³) of natural gas, and is widely estimated to contain as much as 30 trillion cubic feet (850,000,000,000 m³) of natural gas resources.[2] Oil also has been found in lesser quantities, but sufficient enough (with recent high oil prices) to be commercially viable.
The Barnett Shale is known as a "tight" gas reservoir, indicating that the gas is not easily extracted. The shale is very hard, and it was virtually impossible to produce gas in commercial quantities from this formation until recent improvements were made in hydraulic fracturing technology and horizontal drilling, and there was an upturn in the natural gas price.
Future development of the field will be hampered in part by the fact that major portions of the field are in urban areas, including the rapidly growing Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex.[3] Some local governments are researching means by which they can drill on existing public land (e.g., parks) without disrupting other activities so they may obtain royalties on any minerals found, whereas others are seeking compensation from drilling companies for damage to roads caused by overweight vehicles (many of the roads are rural and not designed for use by heavy equipment).
The Barnette Shale field may increase our known reserves by as much as 15%. (Tim)
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Make Your Own Ethanol
Are Backyard Ethanol Brewers an Answer to High-Priced Gas?
Company debuts ethanol home refinery system to offer consumers an alternative to gasoline
By Larry Greenemeier
A company banking on drivers' weariness of skyrocketing gasoline prices unveiled a home refinery device on Thursday offering another option: ethanol. E-Fuel Corporation says its EFuel100 MicroFueler can produce up to 35 gallons (132 liters) of ethanol a week that consumers can pump directly into their cars and trucks. There is no combustion inside the device, which runs on a standard household 110- to 220-volt AC power supply (consuming about 150 watts*) and uses a membrane system to distill the sugar, yeast and water solution required to make ethanol rather than combustion heating elements, as commercial ethanol producers do. Interested drivers in the U.S. can put in their orders now for their own EFuel100 MicroFueler at the company's Web site with a $3,000 down payment toward the total $10,000 tab; the first units are expected to ship some time this fall. The company, which has plants in Los Gatos and Paso Robles, Calif., as well as Hong Kong, also plans to sell MicroFuelers in Brazil, China and the U.K.The prototype rolled out at a press conference in New York City yesterday is 72 inches (1.8 meters) high, 42 inches (1.1 meters) wide and 72 inches long, but the company says the consumer units are likely to be a bit smaller.
Ethanol fuel is made from a combination of water, yeast and sugar, Tom Quinn, E-Fuel founder and CEO, said at the press conference, adding that the process was no more complicated than what is taught in "third-grade science." The adoption of ethanol has been held back because drivers do not have access to the fuel, he said, pointing out that there are only 1,200 ethanol stations in the U.S., compared with about 176,000 gas stations.To make ethanol in the EFuel100, feedstock (consisting of sugar and yeast) or discarded liquor is loaded into the device's 200-gallon (757-liter) tank. Using the LCD screen located on the front of the device (next to the pump), the operator places the EFuel100 either in ferment (for feedstock) or distillation (for liquor) mode to begin the process. The EFuel100 is hooked up to a water source—much like one's washing machine or dishwasher is—and regulates the amount of water flowing into its tank to begin the ethanol-conversion process.
Once the feedstock is fermented, the device transfers the solution to its distillation system, where it is vaporized in a vertical column tube and sent through a membrane that separates the alcohol from the water. The distilled vapor is then cooled back into liquid form and sent to the 35-gallon storage tank, from which it can be pumped into an automobile using a 50-foot (15-meter) retractable hose. The process of turning sugar into ethanol fuel takes nearly a week (although alcohol distillation can be done in a matter of hours).
The cost of operating and maintaining the EFuel100 vary, depending on rebates (a $1,000 federal tax credit is available) and the cost of the sugar feedstock—it takes 14 pounds (6.4 kilograms) of feedstock to produce a gallon of ethanol. E-Fuel also offers its Carbon Credit Coupon Program, which will allow its customers to buy discounted E-Fuel–certified sugar feedstock for an estimated 15 to 30 cents per pound, the company said Thursday. One of the company's main objectives with the program is to keep the cost of ethanol less than $1 per gallon.The company says that families would save a barrel of cash in the long run. It estimates, for instance, that a family will save about $4,200 per year on fuel (assuming gas costs $3.60 per gallon and ethanol costs $1 per gallon) if it has two cars that get 22 miles per gallon (9.3 kilometers per liter) and are driven a total of 34,500 miles (55,500 kilometers) annually. Automobiles do not require their fuel to be 100 percent ethanol, so greater savings are possible if drivers dilute the finished product with water (as long at that mixture contains at least 65 percent ethanol).E-Fuel chose sugar as its raw material (instead of corn feedstock or cellulose) because of its ease and abundance: corn feedstock or cellulose have to be broken down into sugar before they can be turned into ethanol.
But E-Fuel said it plans to eventually build corn and cellulose versions of its microfuelers, although no time frame has been set. A version that uses corn is lower priority, Quinn said, because corn, unlike sugar, is an essential part of the world's food supply. As Bruce Padula, the company's vice president of sales and marketing puts it, "Doctors aren't telling you to eat more sugar." Still, much of the ethanol-producing infrastructure in place is designed to use corn feedstock—corn-based ethanol accounts for most of the total ethanol produced in the U.S. at this time, according to Louisiana State University's Agriculture Center.However, the company's claims about the environmental friendliness of ethanol are in dispute. E-Fuel touts ethanol as cheaper and more environmentally sound than gasoline, claiming that it produces 85 percent fewer climate change–causing carbon emissions than gasoline. But Mark Jacobson, a Stanford University professor of civil and environmental engineering, says ethanol is no better for air quality. Jacobson last year published a report in Environmental Science & Technology noting that ethanol produces less benzene and butadiene than gasoline, but it releases more formaldehyde and acetaldehyde into the atmosphere.Although ethanol is made from seemingly innocuous materials (like sugar or corn), it becomes dangerous when broken down in the atmosphere into acetaldehyde and acetic acid (the latter of which is corrosive and irritates the eyes), Jacobson says. "[Ethanol] kills people," he says. "Just like cigarette smoke, you're breathing in particles that are harmful."Criticism by Jacobson and others against this fuel that many hope will become an alternative to high-priced, foreign-sourced petroleum is an issue E-Fuel and other ethanol backers will have to address, no matter how much cheaper their product is.
Company debuts ethanol home refinery system to offer consumers an alternative to gasoline
By Larry Greenemeier
A company banking on drivers' weariness of skyrocketing gasoline prices unveiled a home refinery device on Thursday offering another option: ethanol. E-Fuel Corporation says its EFuel100 MicroFueler can produce up to 35 gallons (132 liters) of ethanol a week that consumers can pump directly into their cars and trucks. There is no combustion inside the device, which runs on a standard household 110- to 220-volt AC power supply (consuming about 150 watts*) and uses a membrane system to distill the sugar, yeast and water solution required to make ethanol rather than combustion heating elements, as commercial ethanol producers do. Interested drivers in the U.S. can put in their orders now for their own EFuel100 MicroFueler at the company's Web site with a $3,000 down payment toward the total $10,000 tab; the first units are expected to ship some time this fall. The company, which has plants in Los Gatos and Paso Robles, Calif., as well as Hong Kong, also plans to sell MicroFuelers in Brazil, China and the U.K.The prototype rolled out at a press conference in New York City yesterday is 72 inches (1.8 meters) high, 42 inches (1.1 meters) wide and 72 inches long, but the company says the consumer units are likely to be a bit smaller.
Ethanol fuel is made from a combination of water, yeast and sugar, Tom Quinn, E-Fuel founder and CEO, said at the press conference, adding that the process was no more complicated than what is taught in "third-grade science." The adoption of ethanol has been held back because drivers do not have access to the fuel, he said, pointing out that there are only 1,200 ethanol stations in the U.S., compared with about 176,000 gas stations.To make ethanol in the EFuel100, feedstock (consisting of sugar and yeast) or discarded liquor is loaded into the device's 200-gallon (757-liter) tank. Using the LCD screen located on the front of the device (next to the pump), the operator places the EFuel100 either in ferment (for feedstock) or distillation (for liquor) mode to begin the process. The EFuel100 is hooked up to a water source—much like one's washing machine or dishwasher is—and regulates the amount of water flowing into its tank to begin the ethanol-conversion process.
Once the feedstock is fermented, the device transfers the solution to its distillation system, where it is vaporized in a vertical column tube and sent through a membrane that separates the alcohol from the water. The distilled vapor is then cooled back into liquid form and sent to the 35-gallon storage tank, from which it can be pumped into an automobile using a 50-foot (15-meter) retractable hose. The process of turning sugar into ethanol fuel takes nearly a week (although alcohol distillation can be done in a matter of hours).
The cost of operating and maintaining the EFuel100 vary, depending on rebates (a $1,000 federal tax credit is available) and the cost of the sugar feedstock—it takes 14 pounds (6.4 kilograms) of feedstock to produce a gallon of ethanol. E-Fuel also offers its Carbon Credit Coupon Program, which will allow its customers to buy discounted E-Fuel–certified sugar feedstock for an estimated 15 to 30 cents per pound, the company said Thursday. One of the company's main objectives with the program is to keep the cost of ethanol less than $1 per gallon.The company says that families would save a barrel of cash in the long run. It estimates, for instance, that a family will save about $4,200 per year on fuel (assuming gas costs $3.60 per gallon and ethanol costs $1 per gallon) if it has two cars that get 22 miles per gallon (9.3 kilometers per liter) and are driven a total of 34,500 miles (55,500 kilometers) annually. Automobiles do not require their fuel to be 100 percent ethanol, so greater savings are possible if drivers dilute the finished product with water (as long at that mixture contains at least 65 percent ethanol).E-Fuel chose sugar as its raw material (instead of corn feedstock or cellulose) because of its ease and abundance: corn feedstock or cellulose have to be broken down into sugar before they can be turned into ethanol.
But E-Fuel said it plans to eventually build corn and cellulose versions of its microfuelers, although no time frame has been set. A version that uses corn is lower priority, Quinn said, because corn, unlike sugar, is an essential part of the world's food supply. As Bruce Padula, the company's vice president of sales and marketing puts it, "Doctors aren't telling you to eat more sugar." Still, much of the ethanol-producing infrastructure in place is designed to use corn feedstock—corn-based ethanol accounts for most of the total ethanol produced in the U.S. at this time, according to Louisiana State University's Agriculture Center.However, the company's claims about the environmental friendliness of ethanol are in dispute. E-Fuel touts ethanol as cheaper and more environmentally sound than gasoline, claiming that it produces 85 percent fewer climate change–causing carbon emissions than gasoline. But Mark Jacobson, a Stanford University professor of civil and environmental engineering, says ethanol is no better for air quality. Jacobson last year published a report in Environmental Science & Technology noting that ethanol produces less benzene and butadiene than gasoline, but it releases more formaldehyde and acetaldehyde into the atmosphere.Although ethanol is made from seemingly innocuous materials (like sugar or corn), it becomes dangerous when broken down in the atmosphere into acetaldehyde and acetic acid (the latter of which is corrosive and irritates the eyes), Jacobson says. "[Ethanol] kills people," he says. "Just like cigarette smoke, you're breathing in particles that are harmful."Criticism by Jacobson and others against this fuel that many hope will become an alternative to high-priced, foreign-sourced petroleum is an issue E-Fuel and other ethanol backers will have to address, no matter how much cheaper their product is.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
An Alternative To Oil - Compressed Natural Gas
New CNG station gives another option to rising gasoline pricesBy TIFFANY AUMANN Advocate Reporter
NEWARK -- In the world of alternative fuel vehicles, those that use compressed natural gas often are muscled out of a conversation dominated by gasoline-electric hybrids, biodiesel and hydrogen fuel cells.
Advocates, however, say compressed natural gas can play a big part in reducing dependence on foreign oil.
At less than $2 for the equivalent of a gallon of gasoline, CNG is appealing to drivers pained by escalating gasoline prices. In addition, CNG is one of the cleanest-burning fuels -- with near-zero emissions -- and it is in plentiful supply domestically. More than 80 percent of the natural gas consumed in the United States comes from North America. Last week, Royalty Enterprises CNG Auto Station opened at 600 W. Church St., offering sales, service and refueling for vehicles that run on compressed natural gas. Owner Clayton King said he thinks it is the only station in Ohio to combine all these services in one location.
It also is one of only four public natural gas fueling stations in Ohio, said Sam Spofforth, executive director of Clean Fuels Ohio, a nonprofit organization. A member of Clean Fuels Ohio, King also owns the other three public fueling stations -- in Columbus and Coshocton.
"I believe (Newark) will be a much bigger market (than Coshocton)," King said. "It's centrally located."
The grand opening of CNG station Thursday included a seminar highlighting the benefits of natural gas vehicles. Among attendees were industry representatives, farmers, businessmen and county officials.
'YOU HAVE TO THINK AHEAD'
Sheriff Randy Thorp and two men from his office were present to accept the loan of a CNG cruiser. While there, they also found a used cargo van that could work for the county SWAT team, the sheriff said.
"We're interested in this type of fuel, if for no other reason than the fuel savings," Thorp said. "It's something we're excited about, but it's in its infancy right now."
The sheriff's office racked up more than one million road miles in 2007, and for 2008, the office has budgeted almost $300,000 for gasoline. The sheriff said he was eager to analyze the performance and fuel efficiency of the CNG cruiser, but he had some reservations about using such a vehicle for officers who spend long hours on the road and need to refuel more frequently.
King said CNG vehicles are best suited for commuters, fleets and business owners, such as contractors who drive some distance but come back at night.
"You have to think ahead," King said. "You don't run on the bottom eighth (of the gas gauge) as some people do."
On Thursday, a natural-gas-powered Honda Civic GX sat outside the CNG station for attendees to inspect. A dedicated CNG vehicle, which runs strictly on compressed natural gas, the Civic GX had an 8-gallon tank capable of fueling a 200- to 250-mile trip.
Andrew Chiarelli, alternative fuel vehicle manager for Motorcars Honda, drove the Civic down from his Cleveland dealership, where he said he has sold 30 CNG vehicles in the past nine years. The suggested price of the Civic GX is about $25,000, although it qualifies for a $4,000 tax credit.
'I'M HERE FOR THE ECONOMICS'
According to the Natural Gas Vehicles for America advocacy group, more than 150,000 natural gas vehicles are on the road in the United States and more than 1,500 fueling stations are available, about half of which are open to the public.
John Hinderer Honda in Heath, an authorized dealer of the Civic GX, recently sold its first model to a Wisconsin buyer, sales consultant Alan Feasel said. CNG cars are especially popular in the West, he said, because compressed natural gas prices there are less than 70 cents for a gallon equivalent.
Now that Newark has a fueling station, he expects local Civic GX sales to increase.
Chiarelli said, "If I had a fill station like down here, I bet you I'd sell 5 to 10 a month."
In northeast Ohio, Chiarelli's customers have their own sources of CNG. Products are available, such as the Phill, which can be installed in a garage, tap a gas line and fill a CNG car's tank overnight.
Several farmers attended the CNG station opening with the hope of using natural gas on their properties to run automobiles and farm equipment. Natural gas must be dried and compressed before being used as fuel.
"I'm here for the economics," said Tori Todd, who owns a farm south of Granville and is considering converting to CNG. "I think, long-term, my break-even isn't that far down the line."
As more people discover the benefits of natural gas, demand likely will push up costs. Historically, however, the prices have been less volatile than gasoline, King said.
"When petroleum goes up, (natural gas) goes with it, but not as bad," said King, who buys his natural gas from the Energy Cooperative.
Honda is the only manufacturer selling new light-duty CNG cars in America. Shortly after the Bush administration announced funding incentives for hydrogen fuel cells, Ford, Chevy and Dodge dropped their CNG models, King said. Therefore, he is buying used, factory-built models to sell at his station and also is doing conversions.
Large trucks and vans are the best candidates for conversion, he said, because the return on investment is quicker. The cost of converting a vehicle to CNG can cost about $8,000.
The U.S. Department of Energy estimated in 2000 that Ohio had 1.179 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves with an additional 1.1 tcf discovered recently under Lake Erie. Ohio is the 17th largest producer of natural gas in the country.
In addition, CNG can be obtained from renewable sources. For example, in Grove City the Solid Waste Authority of Central Ohio has broken ground on a green energy center that will capture methane, the main component of natural gas, from landfills.
Not only is natural gas safer for the environment than gasoline, it could be safer for passengers, said Bill McGlinchey, a Lancaster-based consultant.
"Safety always comes up -- 'Isn't that like carrying a bomb in your trunk?,'" he said. "(Natural gas) is the safest transportation fuel we've got. It's only because we've grown up with gasoline that we're still using it today."
Natural gas leaks will dissipate, rather than pool like gasoline, therefore reducing a fire hazard.
Spofforth said it is difficult to make direct comparisons between CNG cars and other Earth-friendly options. Overall, people should keep in mind how they use their vehicle.
"There really is no magic bullet," Spofforth said. "We really need to look at a variety of solutions."
NEWARK -- In the world of alternative fuel vehicles, those that use compressed natural gas often are muscled out of a conversation dominated by gasoline-electric hybrids, biodiesel and hydrogen fuel cells.
Advocates, however, say compressed natural gas can play a big part in reducing dependence on foreign oil.
At less than $2 for the equivalent of a gallon of gasoline, CNG is appealing to drivers pained by escalating gasoline prices. In addition, CNG is one of the cleanest-burning fuels -- with near-zero emissions -- and it is in plentiful supply domestically. More than 80 percent of the natural gas consumed in the United States comes from North America. Last week, Royalty Enterprises CNG Auto Station opened at 600 W. Church St., offering sales, service and refueling for vehicles that run on compressed natural gas. Owner Clayton King said he thinks it is the only station in Ohio to combine all these services in one location.
It also is one of only four public natural gas fueling stations in Ohio, said Sam Spofforth, executive director of Clean Fuels Ohio, a nonprofit organization. A member of Clean Fuels Ohio, King also owns the other three public fueling stations -- in Columbus and Coshocton.
"I believe (Newark) will be a much bigger market (than Coshocton)," King said. "It's centrally located."
The grand opening of CNG station Thursday included a seminar highlighting the benefits of natural gas vehicles. Among attendees were industry representatives, farmers, businessmen and county officials.
'YOU HAVE TO THINK AHEAD'
Sheriff Randy Thorp and two men from his office were present to accept the loan of a CNG cruiser. While there, they also found a used cargo van that could work for the county SWAT team, the sheriff said.
"We're interested in this type of fuel, if for no other reason than the fuel savings," Thorp said. "It's something we're excited about, but it's in its infancy right now."
The sheriff's office racked up more than one million road miles in 2007, and for 2008, the office has budgeted almost $300,000 for gasoline. The sheriff said he was eager to analyze the performance and fuel efficiency of the CNG cruiser, but he had some reservations about using such a vehicle for officers who spend long hours on the road and need to refuel more frequently.
King said CNG vehicles are best suited for commuters, fleets and business owners, such as contractors who drive some distance but come back at night.
"You have to think ahead," King said. "You don't run on the bottom eighth (of the gas gauge) as some people do."
On Thursday, a natural-gas-powered Honda Civic GX sat outside the CNG station for attendees to inspect. A dedicated CNG vehicle, which runs strictly on compressed natural gas, the Civic GX had an 8-gallon tank capable of fueling a 200- to 250-mile trip.
Andrew Chiarelli, alternative fuel vehicle manager for Motorcars Honda, drove the Civic down from his Cleveland dealership, where he said he has sold 30 CNG vehicles in the past nine years. The suggested price of the Civic GX is about $25,000, although it qualifies for a $4,000 tax credit.
'I'M HERE FOR THE ECONOMICS'
According to the Natural Gas Vehicles for America advocacy group, more than 150,000 natural gas vehicles are on the road in the United States and more than 1,500 fueling stations are available, about half of which are open to the public.
John Hinderer Honda in Heath, an authorized dealer of the Civic GX, recently sold its first model to a Wisconsin buyer, sales consultant Alan Feasel said. CNG cars are especially popular in the West, he said, because compressed natural gas prices there are less than 70 cents for a gallon equivalent.
Now that Newark has a fueling station, he expects local Civic GX sales to increase.
Chiarelli said, "If I had a fill station like down here, I bet you I'd sell 5 to 10 a month."
In northeast Ohio, Chiarelli's customers have their own sources of CNG. Products are available, such as the Phill, which can be installed in a garage, tap a gas line and fill a CNG car's tank overnight.
Several farmers attended the CNG station opening with the hope of using natural gas on their properties to run automobiles and farm equipment. Natural gas must be dried and compressed before being used as fuel.
"I'm here for the economics," said Tori Todd, who owns a farm south of Granville and is considering converting to CNG. "I think, long-term, my break-even isn't that far down the line."
As more people discover the benefits of natural gas, demand likely will push up costs. Historically, however, the prices have been less volatile than gasoline, King said.
"When petroleum goes up, (natural gas) goes with it, but not as bad," said King, who buys his natural gas from the Energy Cooperative.
Honda is the only manufacturer selling new light-duty CNG cars in America. Shortly after the Bush administration announced funding incentives for hydrogen fuel cells, Ford, Chevy and Dodge dropped their CNG models, King said. Therefore, he is buying used, factory-built models to sell at his station and also is doing conversions.
Large trucks and vans are the best candidates for conversion, he said, because the return on investment is quicker. The cost of converting a vehicle to CNG can cost about $8,000.
The U.S. Department of Energy estimated in 2000 that Ohio had 1.179 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves with an additional 1.1 tcf discovered recently under Lake Erie. Ohio is the 17th largest producer of natural gas in the country.
In addition, CNG can be obtained from renewable sources. For example, in Grove City the Solid Waste Authority of Central Ohio has broken ground on a green energy center that will capture methane, the main component of natural gas, from landfills.
Not only is natural gas safer for the environment than gasoline, it could be safer for passengers, said Bill McGlinchey, a Lancaster-based consultant.
"Safety always comes up -- 'Isn't that like carrying a bomb in your trunk?,'" he said. "(Natural gas) is the safest transportation fuel we've got. It's only because we've grown up with gasoline that we're still using it today."
Natural gas leaks will dissipate, rather than pool like gasoline, therefore reducing a fire hazard.
Spofforth said it is difficult to make direct comparisons between CNG cars and other Earth-friendly options. Overall, people should keep in mind how they use their vehicle.
"There really is no magic bullet," Spofforth said. "We really need to look at a variety of solutions."
Friday, May 2, 2008
Renewable Fuels
Renewable Fuels Standard
On December 19, 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (H.R. 6) was signed into law. This comprehensive energy legislation amends the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) signed into law in 2005, growing to 36 billion gallons in 2022. By doing so, the bill seizes on the potential that renewable fuels offer to reduce foreign oil dependence and greenhouse gas emissions and provide meaningful economic opportunity across this country, putting America firmly on a path toward greater energy stability and sustainability.
According to a January 2008 study, the economic impact of a 36 billion gallon RFS is as follows:
will add more than $1.7 trillion to the Gross Domestic Product between 2008 and 2022;
generate an additional $436 billion of household income for all Americans during the same time period;
support the creation of as many as 1.1 million new jobs in all sectors of the economy; and,
generate $209 billion in new Federal tax receipts.
Summary of the Biofuels Provisions - Title II
DEFINITIONS (Sec. 201)
Establishes definitions for the renewable fuels program, including conventional biofuel, advanced biofuels, cellulosic biofuels and biomass-based diesel.
Conventional biofuel is ethanol derived from corn starch. Conventional ethanol facilities that commence construction after the date of enactment must achieve a 20 percent greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction compared to baseline lifecycle GHG emissions. The 20 percent GHG emissions reduction requirement may be adjusted to a lower percentage (but not less than 10 percent) by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator if it is determined the requirement is not feasible for conventional biofuels.
Advanced biofuels is renewable fuel other than ethanol derived from corn starch, that is derived from renewable biomass, and achieves a 50 percent GHG emissions reduction requirement. The definition – and the schedule -- of advanced biofuels include cellulosic biofuels and biomass-based diesel. The 50 percent GHG emissions reduction requirement may be adjusted to a lower percentage (but not less than 40 percent) by the Administrator if it is determined the requirement is not feasible for advanced biofuels. (Cellulosic biofuels that do not meet the 60 percent threshold, but do meet the 50 percent threshold, may qualify as an advanced biofuel.)
Cellulosic biofuels is renewable fuel derived from any cellulose, hemicellulose, or lignin, that is derived from renewable biomass, and achieves a 60 percent GHG emission reduction requirement. The 60 percent GHG emissions reduction requirement may be adjusted to a lower percentage (but not less than 50 percent) by the Administrator if it is determined the requirement is not feasible for cellulosic biofuels.
On December 19, 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (H.R. 6) was signed into law. This comprehensive energy legislation amends the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) signed into law in 2005, growing to 36 billion gallons in 2022. By doing so, the bill seizes on the potential that renewable fuels offer to reduce foreign oil dependence and greenhouse gas emissions and provide meaningful economic opportunity across this country, putting America firmly on a path toward greater energy stability and sustainability.
According to a January 2008 study, the economic impact of a 36 billion gallon RFS is as follows:
will add more than $1.7 trillion to the Gross Domestic Product between 2008 and 2022;
generate an additional $436 billion of household income for all Americans during the same time period;
support the creation of as many as 1.1 million new jobs in all sectors of the economy; and,
generate $209 billion in new Federal tax receipts.
Summary of the Biofuels Provisions - Title II
DEFINITIONS (Sec. 201)
Establishes definitions for the renewable fuels program, including conventional biofuel, advanced biofuels, cellulosic biofuels and biomass-based diesel.
Conventional biofuel is ethanol derived from corn starch. Conventional ethanol facilities that commence construction after the date of enactment must achieve a 20 percent greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction compared to baseline lifecycle GHG emissions. The 20 percent GHG emissions reduction requirement may be adjusted to a lower percentage (but not less than 10 percent) by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator if it is determined the requirement is not feasible for conventional biofuels.
Advanced biofuels is renewable fuel other than ethanol derived from corn starch, that is derived from renewable biomass, and achieves a 50 percent GHG emissions reduction requirement. The definition – and the schedule -- of advanced biofuels include cellulosic biofuels and biomass-based diesel. The 50 percent GHG emissions reduction requirement may be adjusted to a lower percentage (but not less than 40 percent) by the Administrator if it is determined the requirement is not feasible for advanced biofuels. (Cellulosic biofuels that do not meet the 60 percent threshold, but do meet the 50 percent threshold, may qualify as an advanced biofuel.)
Cellulosic biofuels is renewable fuel derived from any cellulose, hemicellulose, or lignin, that is derived from renewable biomass, and achieves a 60 percent GHG emission reduction requirement. The 60 percent GHG emissions reduction requirement may be adjusted to a lower percentage (but not less than 50 percent) by the Administrator if it is determined the requirement is not feasible for cellulosic biofuels.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Oil - ANWR And The Democrats
Democrat Fiction: ANWR isn’t worth it.
According to House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, drilling in ANWR “will produce no oil for a decade and do nothing to end our addiction to oil.”
Fact: Yes, it may take a decade for ANWR oil production to get going. But keep in mind that President Clinton’s veto of ANWR in 1995 was upheld thanks to Hoyer and his colleagues. Had that veto been overridden, we could now be seeing an additional one million barrels of oil a day flow into a world market with virtually no excess capacity. Those million barrels would help ease prices.
Steny Hoyer has the audacity to say ANWR oil is not worth it. In 2008 if we were pumping one million barrels per day at $120.00 per barrel that would equal $120m per day. Over the course of one year that would equal $3.6b per month and $43.2 billion per year. That's $43.2 billion that wouldn't be going to Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Canada, etc.
Consider this, in February 2008 we imported 9.6m barrels per day. The 1.0m barrels per day from ANWR could replace 10% of the total imports. Put another way we imported 945,000 barrels per day from Venezuela in February 2008. If we had ANWR oil today we could tell Venezuela to kiss off.
The only thing Democrats want to do is conserve which is a great idea but we also need more internal sources of energy including nuclear, cleaner coal, alternative fuels, and more oil. (Tim)
According to House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, drilling in ANWR “will produce no oil for a decade and do nothing to end our addiction to oil.”
Fact: Yes, it may take a decade for ANWR oil production to get going. But keep in mind that President Clinton’s veto of ANWR in 1995 was upheld thanks to Hoyer and his colleagues. Had that veto been overridden, we could now be seeing an additional one million barrels of oil a day flow into a world market with virtually no excess capacity. Those million barrels would help ease prices.
Steny Hoyer has the audacity to say ANWR oil is not worth it. In 2008 if we were pumping one million barrels per day at $120.00 per barrel that would equal $120m per day. Over the course of one year that would equal $3.6b per month and $43.2 billion per year. That's $43.2 billion that wouldn't be going to Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Canada, etc.
Consider this, in February 2008 we imported 9.6m barrels per day. The 1.0m barrels per day from ANWR could replace 10% of the total imports. Put another way we imported 945,000 barrels per day from Venezuela in February 2008. If we had ANWR oil today we could tell Venezuela to kiss off.
The only thing Democrats want to do is conserve which is a great idea but we also need more internal sources of energy including nuclear, cleaner coal, alternative fuels, and more oil. (Tim)
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Jobs and Energy For America - ANWR
Top ten reasons to support ANWR development
1. Only 8% of ANWR Would Be Considered for Exploration Only the 1.5 million acre or 8% on the northern coast of ANWR is being considered for development. The remaining 17.5 million acres or 92% of ANWR will remain permanently closed to any kind of development. If oil is discovered, less than 2000 acres of the over 1.5 million acres of the Coastal Plain would be affected. That¹s less than half of one percent of ANWR that would be affected by production activity.
2. Revenues to the State and Federal Treasury Federal revenues would be enhanced by billions of dollars from bonus bids, lease rentals, royalties and taxes. Estimates on bonus bids for ANWR by the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Interior for the first 5 years after Congressional approval are $4.2 billion. Royalty and tax estimates for the life of the 10-02 fields were estimated by the Office of Management and Budget from $152-237 billion.
3. Jobs To Be Created Between 250,000 and 735,000 ANWR jobs are estimated to be created by development of the Coastal Plain.
4. Economic Impact Between 1977 and 2004, North Slope oil field development and production activity contributed over $50 billion to the nations economy, directly impacting each state in the union.
5. America's Best Chance for a Major Discovery The Coastal Plain of ANWR is America's best possibility for the discovery of another giant "Prudhoe Bay-sized" oil and gas discovery in North America. U.S. Department of Interior estimates range from 9 to 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil.
6. North Slope Production in Decline The North Slope oil fields currently provide the U.S. with nearly 16% of it's domestic production and since 1988 this production has been on the decline. Peak production was reached in 1980 of two million barrels a day, but has been declining to a current level of 731,000 barrels a day.
7. Imported Oil Too Costly In 2007, the US imported an average of 60% of its oil and during certain months up to 64%. That equates to over $330 billion in oil imports. That’s $37.75 million per hour gone out of our economy! Factor in the cost to defend our imported oil, and the costs in jobs and industry sent abroad, the total would be nearly a trillion dollars.
8. No Negative Impact on Animals Oil and gas development and wildlife are successfully coexisting in Alaska 's arctic. For example, the Central Arctic Caribou Herd (CACH) which migrates through Prudhoe Bay has grown from 3000 animals to its current level of 32,000 animals. The arctic oil fields have very healthy brown bear, fox and bird populations equal to their surrounding areas.
9. Arctic Technology Advanced technology has greatly reduced the 'footprint" of arctic oil development. If Prudhoe Bay were built today, the footprint would be 1,526 acres, 64% smaller.
10. Alaskans Support More than 75% of Alaskans favor exploration and production in ANWR. The democratically elected Alaska State Legislatures, congressional delegations, and Governors elected over the past 25 years have unanimously supported opening the Coastal Plain of ANWR.
1. Only 8% of ANWR Would Be Considered for Exploration Only the 1.5 million acre or 8% on the northern coast of ANWR is being considered for development. The remaining 17.5 million acres or 92% of ANWR will remain permanently closed to any kind of development. If oil is discovered, less than 2000 acres of the over 1.5 million acres of the Coastal Plain would be affected. That¹s less than half of one percent of ANWR that would be affected by production activity.
2. Revenues to the State and Federal Treasury Federal revenues would be enhanced by billions of dollars from bonus bids, lease rentals, royalties and taxes. Estimates on bonus bids for ANWR by the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Interior for the first 5 years after Congressional approval are $4.2 billion. Royalty and tax estimates for the life of the 10-02 fields were estimated by the Office of Management and Budget from $152-237 billion.
3. Jobs To Be Created Between 250,000 and 735,000 ANWR jobs are estimated to be created by development of the Coastal Plain.
4. Economic Impact Between 1977 and 2004, North Slope oil field development and production activity contributed over $50 billion to the nations economy, directly impacting each state in the union.
5. America's Best Chance for a Major Discovery The Coastal Plain of ANWR is America's best possibility for the discovery of another giant "Prudhoe Bay-sized" oil and gas discovery in North America. U.S. Department of Interior estimates range from 9 to 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil.
6. North Slope Production in Decline The North Slope oil fields currently provide the U.S. with nearly 16% of it's domestic production and since 1988 this production has been on the decline. Peak production was reached in 1980 of two million barrels a day, but has been declining to a current level of 731,000 barrels a day.
7. Imported Oil Too Costly In 2007, the US imported an average of 60% of its oil and during certain months up to 64%. That equates to over $330 billion in oil imports. That’s $37.75 million per hour gone out of our economy! Factor in the cost to defend our imported oil, and the costs in jobs and industry sent abroad, the total would be nearly a trillion dollars.
8. No Negative Impact on Animals Oil and gas development and wildlife are successfully coexisting in Alaska 's arctic. For example, the Central Arctic Caribou Herd (CACH) which migrates through Prudhoe Bay has grown from 3000 animals to its current level of 32,000 animals. The arctic oil fields have very healthy brown bear, fox and bird populations equal to their surrounding areas.
9. Arctic Technology Advanced technology has greatly reduced the 'footprint" of arctic oil development. If Prudhoe Bay were built today, the footprint would be 1,526 acres, 64% smaller.
10. Alaskans Support More than 75% of Alaskans favor exploration and production in ANWR. The democratically elected Alaska State Legislatures, congressional delegations, and Governors elected over the past 25 years have unanimously supported opening the Coastal Plain of ANWR.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Oil and Fuel Standards
Plan would hasten better fuel efficiency
Bush administration pushes for vehicle average of 31.6 mpg by '15
Wednesday, April 23, 2008 2:57 AM
By Ken Thomas
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON -- The next generation of cars and trucks would need to meet a fleet average of 31.6 miles per gallon by 2015, according to a proposal the Bush administration announced yesterday. The measure seeks more-fuel-efficient vehicles in the face of high gasoline prices and concerns over global warming.
Transportation Secretary Mary Peters outlined the plan on Earth Day, setting a schedule that is more aggressive than the auto industry expected. The plan responds to a new energy law that requires new cars and trucks, taken as a collective average, to meet 35 mpg by 2020.
"This proposal is going to help us all breathe a little easier by reducing carbon-dioxide emissions from tailpipes, cutting fuel consumption and making driving a little more affordable," Peters said.
New cars and trucks would have to meet a fleetwide average of 31.6 mpg by 2015, or about a 4.5 percent annual increase from 2011 to 2015. By 2015, passenger cars would need to achieve 35.7 mpg; trucks, 28.6 mpg.
The rules were designed to push companies to boost fuel efficiency across their entire lineup. Manufacturers would have different requirements for cars and trucks of different sizes, based on vehicle sales. Collectively, the fleet of new vehicles would need to meet the rules.
Among individual manufacturers, passenger cars built in 2015 by General Motors would need to average 34.7 mpg; Ford's cars, 35.5 mpg; and Toyota's cars, 34.6 mpg.
For light trucks, GM would need to reach 27.4 mpg by 2015; Ford, 28.8 mpg; and Toyota, 28 mpg.
The plan is expected to save nearly 55 billion gallons of oil and reduce carbon-dioxide emissions by 521 million metric tons over the life of the new vehicles built between 2011 and 2015. It would add an average cost of $650 per passenger car and $979 per truck by 2015.
Environmental groups and their allies in Congress, who have criticized the Bush administration's handling of the requirements, said they were mostly encouraged by the proposal.
"After years of fighting a fuel-economy increase, the Bush administration is showing faith in the American auto industry's ability to reform," said Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., who sought the higher standards.
Automakers opposed increases to the regulations in previous years but supported a compromise version of the legislation in Congress. The changes would require the industry to implement more than half of the fuel-efficiency requirements by 2015 and push them to build more gas-electric hybrid cars and diesel-powered trucks and sport-utility vehicles.
"Congress has set an aggressive, single, nationwide standard and automakers are prepared to meet that challenge," said Dave McCurdy, president of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which represents General Motors Corp., Toyota Motor Corp., Ford Motor Co. and others.
In keeping with the new law, however, automakers will continue to receive a 1.2 mpg credit for producing flexible-fuel vehicles that that run on ethanol blends, but the credit will begin phasing out in 2014.
Congress sought the tougher standards last year, arguing that an increase in fuel efficiency would help reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and the nation's dependence upon imported oil. The law, which ushers in the first major changes in three decades, requires the nation's fleet of new vehicles to increase its efficiency by 10 mpg from its current average of 25 mpg, or a 40 percent increase.
The fleet of new passenger cars is currently required to meet a 27.5 mpg average; SUVs, pickup trucks and vans must hit a target of 22.5 mpg. Among the current fleet, passenger cars average about 31.3 mpg while light trucks get about 23.1 mpg.
Bush administration pushes for vehicle average of 31.6 mpg by '15
Wednesday, April 23, 2008 2:57 AM
By Ken Thomas
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON -- The next generation of cars and trucks would need to meet a fleet average of 31.6 miles per gallon by 2015, according to a proposal the Bush administration announced yesterday. The measure seeks more-fuel-efficient vehicles in the face of high gasoline prices and concerns over global warming.
Transportation Secretary Mary Peters outlined the plan on Earth Day, setting a schedule that is more aggressive than the auto industry expected. The plan responds to a new energy law that requires new cars and trucks, taken as a collective average, to meet 35 mpg by 2020.
"This proposal is going to help us all breathe a little easier by reducing carbon-dioxide emissions from tailpipes, cutting fuel consumption and making driving a little more affordable," Peters said.
New cars and trucks would have to meet a fleetwide average of 31.6 mpg by 2015, or about a 4.5 percent annual increase from 2011 to 2015. By 2015, passenger cars would need to achieve 35.7 mpg; trucks, 28.6 mpg.
The rules were designed to push companies to boost fuel efficiency across their entire lineup. Manufacturers would have different requirements for cars and trucks of different sizes, based on vehicle sales. Collectively, the fleet of new vehicles would need to meet the rules.
Among individual manufacturers, passenger cars built in 2015 by General Motors would need to average 34.7 mpg; Ford's cars, 35.5 mpg; and Toyota's cars, 34.6 mpg.
For light trucks, GM would need to reach 27.4 mpg by 2015; Ford, 28.8 mpg; and Toyota, 28 mpg.
The plan is expected to save nearly 55 billion gallons of oil and reduce carbon-dioxide emissions by 521 million metric tons over the life of the new vehicles built between 2011 and 2015. It would add an average cost of $650 per passenger car and $979 per truck by 2015.
Environmental groups and their allies in Congress, who have criticized the Bush administration's handling of the requirements, said they were mostly encouraged by the proposal.
"After years of fighting a fuel-economy increase, the Bush administration is showing faith in the American auto industry's ability to reform," said Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., who sought the higher standards.
Automakers opposed increases to the regulations in previous years but supported a compromise version of the legislation in Congress. The changes would require the industry to implement more than half of the fuel-efficiency requirements by 2015 and push them to build more gas-electric hybrid cars and diesel-powered trucks and sport-utility vehicles.
"Congress has set an aggressive, single, nationwide standard and automakers are prepared to meet that challenge," said Dave McCurdy, president of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which represents General Motors Corp., Toyota Motor Corp., Ford Motor Co. and others.
In keeping with the new law, however, automakers will continue to receive a 1.2 mpg credit for producing flexible-fuel vehicles that that run on ethanol blends, but the credit will begin phasing out in 2014.
Congress sought the tougher standards last year, arguing that an increase in fuel efficiency would help reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and the nation's dependence upon imported oil. The law, which ushers in the first major changes in three decades, requires the nation's fleet of new vehicles to increase its efficiency by 10 mpg from its current average of 25 mpg, or a 40 percent increase.
The fleet of new passenger cars is currently required to meet a 27.5 mpg average; SUVs, pickup trucks and vans must hit a target of 22.5 mpg. Among the current fleet, passenger cars average about 31.3 mpg while light trucks get about 23.1 mpg.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Conoco Supplying Gas To The US
ConocoPhillips willing to build gas pipeline from Alaska
By John Porretto, AP Business Writer
HOUSTON — Oil exploration and production company ConocoPhillips (COP) said Friday that it has proposed to develop a multibillion-dollar pipeline that would transport natural gas from Alaska's North Slope to the lower 48 states and Canada.
The company said it's "prepared to make significant investments, without state matching funds, to advance this project."
ConocoPhillips spokesman Charlie Rowton said the company's best estimate for the entire project, including the pipeline from Alaska's North Slope to Chicago, is between $25 billion and $42 billion.
The pipeline would provide an important avenue for bringing Alaska's massive stores of natural gas to U.S. markets that rely on it for fueling home heaters and other uses. It would move about 4 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day.
The North Slope has 35 trillion cubic feet of known natural gas, and is believed to hold many more times that in undiscovered reserves. But there is no method for shipping natural gas and the staggering cost of such a project has left the resource stranded thousands of miles from markets.
Now with natural gas prices high, a national market eager for cleaner-burning energy, Alaska seeking new participants in its energy industry and mature North Slope oil fields ripe for conversion to gas production, the time may be finally right for the long-desired project, said Marty Rutherford, deputy commissioner of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources.
The state's Alaska Gasline Inducement Act calls for competitive proposals from energy companies for the right to launch what residents hope will be the next Alaska pipeline boom.
In a statement, ConocoPhillips Chairman and Chief Executive Jim Mulva said the company hopes to work directly with the state to advance the project as quickly as possible.
"We also expect to approach other parties to explore ways through which their participation could add value to this effort," Mulva said.
Specifically, Rowton said ExxonMobil and BP would be logical participants as the project moves forward. "We think it makes sense for their to be other owners," he said.
ConocoPhillips said it is already gathering data to support the pipeline permit application.
During the initial phase of the project, Bechtel Oil, Gas and Chemicals will provide construction and design support, the company said.
Do you see the numbers? $25-42B to build the pipeline. Yet the Democrat party wants to tax excess profits, whatever that means. Those profits go toward projects like this one. They're expensive and risky but will enable us, along with other efforts, to become energy independent. Now what would the democrats do with the excess profits? More social engineering, more redistribution of wealth and more interference with market forces? (Tim)
By John Porretto, AP Business Writer
HOUSTON — Oil exploration and production company ConocoPhillips (COP) said Friday that it has proposed to develop a multibillion-dollar pipeline that would transport natural gas from Alaska's North Slope to the lower 48 states and Canada.
The company said it's "prepared to make significant investments, without state matching funds, to advance this project."
ConocoPhillips spokesman Charlie Rowton said the company's best estimate for the entire project, including the pipeline from Alaska's North Slope to Chicago, is between $25 billion and $42 billion.
The pipeline would provide an important avenue for bringing Alaska's massive stores of natural gas to U.S. markets that rely on it for fueling home heaters and other uses. It would move about 4 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day.
The North Slope has 35 trillion cubic feet of known natural gas, and is believed to hold many more times that in undiscovered reserves. But there is no method for shipping natural gas and the staggering cost of such a project has left the resource stranded thousands of miles from markets.
Now with natural gas prices high, a national market eager for cleaner-burning energy, Alaska seeking new participants in its energy industry and mature North Slope oil fields ripe for conversion to gas production, the time may be finally right for the long-desired project, said Marty Rutherford, deputy commissioner of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources.
The state's Alaska Gasline Inducement Act calls for competitive proposals from energy companies for the right to launch what residents hope will be the next Alaska pipeline boom.
In a statement, ConocoPhillips Chairman and Chief Executive Jim Mulva said the company hopes to work directly with the state to advance the project as quickly as possible.
"We also expect to approach other parties to explore ways through which their participation could add value to this effort," Mulva said.
Specifically, Rowton said ExxonMobil and BP would be logical participants as the project moves forward. "We think it makes sense for their to be other owners," he said.
ConocoPhillips said it is already gathering data to support the pipeline permit application.
During the initial phase of the project, Bechtel Oil, Gas and Chemicals will provide construction and design support, the company said.
Do you see the numbers? $25-42B to build the pipeline. Yet the Democrat party wants to tax excess profits, whatever that means. Those profits go toward projects like this one. They're expensive and risky but will enable us, along with other efforts, to become energy independent. Now what would the democrats do with the excess profits? More social engineering, more redistribution of wealth and more interference with market forces? (Tim)
Conoco - What A Gas
BP and ConocoPhillips Join on the Alaska Gas Pipeline
Work to Begin Immediately on New Joint Pipeline Effort to Bring Alaska Gas to Market
ANCHORAGE, April 8, 2008 - BP [NYSE: BP] and ConocoPhillips [NYSE: COP] today announced they have combined resources to start Denali – The Alaska Gas Pipeline. The pipeline will move approximately four billion cubic feet of natural gas per day to markets, and will be the largest private sector construction project ever built in North America. The project combines the financial strength, arctic experience and technical resources of two of the most capable and experienced companies in the world. BP and ConocoPhillips plan to spend $600 million to reach the first major project milestone, an open season, commencing before yearend 2010. Following a successful open season, a process during which the pipeline company seeks customers to make long-term firm transportation commitments to the project, the companies intend to obtain Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and National Energy Board (NEB) certification and move forward with project construction. The FERC and NEB certificates are the critical permits that provide government authorization to construct a pipeline. “This project is vital for North American energy consumers and for the future of the Alaska oil and gas industry. It will allow us to keep our North Slope fields in production for another 50 years,” said Tony Hayward, BP Group Chief Executive. “The Alaska gas pipeline will be an historic project and we are pleased to be working with ConocoPhillips to move it forward.” “Our goal of bringing Alaska’s North Slope gas to market is becoming a reality. Denali – The Alaska Gas Pipeline project will deliver natural gas to meet North America’s growing energy needs,” said Jim Mulva, ConocoPhillips chairman and chief executive officer. “ConocoPhillips is pleased to be working with BP on this project; our companies have a long history of successfully developing projects on Alaska’s North Slope, in Canada, and around the world. The time is right to start moving this project forward.” The project consists of a gas treatment plant on Alaska’s North Slope and a large-diameter pipeline that travels over 700 miles through Alaska, and then into Canada through the Yukon Territory and British Columbia to Alberta. Should it be required to transport gas from Alberta, the project will also include a large diameter pipeline from Alberta to the Lower 48 states. BP and ConocoPhillips will seek other equity partners, including pipeline companies, who can add value to the project and help manage the risks involved. The companies already have assigned staff to the joint project team which will be ramping up over the coming months. A new project headquarters in Anchorage will be identified and a new company formed to manage the project. The project will provide jobs and business opportunities. ConocoPhillips’ previously announced intent to conduct summer field work in Alaska will be rolled into the joint effort.
Work to Begin Immediately on New Joint Pipeline Effort to Bring Alaska Gas to Market
ANCHORAGE, April 8, 2008 - BP [NYSE: BP] and ConocoPhillips [NYSE: COP] today announced they have combined resources to start Denali – The Alaska Gas Pipeline. The pipeline will move approximately four billion cubic feet of natural gas per day to markets, and will be the largest private sector construction project ever built in North America. The project combines the financial strength, arctic experience and technical resources of two of the most capable and experienced companies in the world. BP and ConocoPhillips plan to spend $600 million to reach the first major project milestone, an open season, commencing before yearend 2010. Following a successful open season, a process during which the pipeline company seeks customers to make long-term firm transportation commitments to the project, the companies intend to obtain Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and National Energy Board (NEB) certification and move forward with project construction. The FERC and NEB certificates are the critical permits that provide government authorization to construct a pipeline. “This project is vital for North American energy consumers and for the future of the Alaska oil and gas industry. It will allow us to keep our North Slope fields in production for another 50 years,” said Tony Hayward, BP Group Chief Executive. “The Alaska gas pipeline will be an historic project and we are pleased to be working with ConocoPhillips to move it forward.” “Our goal of bringing Alaska’s North Slope gas to market is becoming a reality. Denali – The Alaska Gas Pipeline project will deliver natural gas to meet North America’s growing energy needs,” said Jim Mulva, ConocoPhillips chairman and chief executive officer. “ConocoPhillips is pleased to be working with BP on this project; our companies have a long history of successfully developing projects on Alaska’s North Slope, in Canada, and around the world. The time is right to start moving this project forward.” The project consists of a gas treatment plant on Alaska’s North Slope and a large-diameter pipeline that travels over 700 miles through Alaska, and then into Canada through the Yukon Territory and British Columbia to Alberta. Should it be required to transport gas from Alberta, the project will also include a large diameter pipeline from Alberta to the Lower 48 states. BP and ConocoPhillips will seek other equity partners, including pipeline companies, who can add value to the project and help manage the risks involved. The companies already have assigned staff to the joint project team which will be ramping up over the coming months. A new project headquarters in Anchorage will be identified and a new company formed to manage the project. The project will provide jobs and business opportunities. ConocoPhillips’ previously announced intent to conduct summer field work in Alaska will be rolled into the joint effort.
Brazil's Gusher Of Oil
In Brazil, Another Gusher (by Joshua Schneyer)
If its size is confirmed, a vast new oil find would catapult Brazil into the world's oil-producing elite. But extraction will be difficult.
If its size is confirmed, a vast new oil find would catapult Brazil into the world's oil-producing elite. But extraction will be difficult.
Among energy investors, they are becoming known as Brazilian bombshells: a barrage of announcements about oil and gas discoveries—some confirmed, others speculative, and each more spectacular than the one before. Together, they suggest that Brazil could be on the cusp of transformation, from a once energy-poor developing nation into a major oil exporter.
The latest of the announcements came Monday, when the head of ANP, Brazil's government oil regulator, revealed "unofficial" figures from a new reservoir, known as Carioca, which may hold 33 billion barrels of oil and gas. If confirmed, it would be the world's largest discovery in at least 32 years. Carioca, which is located in the Santos Basin, 170 miles from shore underneath 2,000 meters of water, would follow on the November mega-discovery by state oil company Petrobras (PBR) of the offshore Tupi field, with its already confirmed reserves of 5 billion to 8 billion barrels, and a later discovery known as Jupiter, a natural gas area that Petrobras says is as big as Tupi and perhaps even more important for gas-hungry Brazil.
The latest of the announcements came Monday, when the head of ANP, Brazil's government oil regulator, revealed "unofficial" figures from a new reservoir, known as Carioca, which may hold 33 billion barrels of oil and gas. If confirmed, it would be the world's largest discovery in at least 32 years. Carioca, which is located in the Santos Basin, 170 miles from shore underneath 2,000 meters of water, would follow on the November mega-discovery by state oil company Petrobras (PBR) of the offshore Tupi field, with its already confirmed reserves of 5 billion to 8 billion barrels, and a later discovery known as Jupiter, a natural gas area that Petrobras says is as big as Tupi and perhaps even more important for gas-hungry Brazil.
Unconfirmed Estimates
If confirmed, a 33-billion-barrels find would trail just two larger oil reservoirs, in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Those fields were each discovered more than 60 years ago, but together still account for nearly 8% of global oil output. With a single field, Brazil could potentially top all the proved reserves in the United States, estimated at 29.9 billion barrels, according to BP's 2007 Statistical Review of World Energy. Mexico's 35-billion-barrel Cantarell field, discovered in 1976, was largely responsible for that country becoming the world's fifth-largest oil producer.
"Carioca would be the third-largest oil field in the world," said Haroldo Lima, director of ANP, at an energy seminar Monday.
But, unsurprisingly for the oil business, which is fueled by industry rumor, the facts about the Carioca discovery are, at best, hard to pin down.
Start with the report itself. Lima claimed he got the 33-billion-barrel estimate for Carioca "in a nonofficial way, through back channels, but from people at the company (Petrobras)." On Tuesday, Brazil's securities regulator, CVM, chided Lima for a potential leak of insider information. Lima claimed the Carioca figures had also appeared elsewhere, including in magazines, making them public domain.
If confirmed, a 33-billion-barrels find would trail just two larger oil reservoirs, in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Those fields were each discovered more than 60 years ago, but together still account for nearly 8% of global oil output. With a single field, Brazil could potentially top all the proved reserves in the United States, estimated at 29.9 billion barrels, according to BP's 2007 Statistical Review of World Energy. Mexico's 35-billion-barrel Cantarell field, discovered in 1976, was largely responsible for that country becoming the world's fifth-largest oil producer.
"Carioca would be the third-largest oil field in the world," said Haroldo Lima, director of ANP, at an energy seminar Monday.
But, unsurprisingly for the oil business, which is fueled by industry rumor, the facts about the Carioca discovery are, at best, hard to pin down.
Start with the report itself. Lima claimed he got the 33-billion-barrel estimate for Carioca "in a nonofficial way, through back channels, but from people at the company (Petrobras)." On Tuesday, Brazil's securities regulator, CVM, chided Lima for a potential leak of insider information. Lima claimed the Carioca figures had also appeared elsewhere, including in magazines, making them public domain.
More Recoverable?
Typical for Petrobras, which often initially downplays discoveries but has sometimes leaked discovery data, the company said that Lima's estimate was premature and further drilling was needed to quantify Carioca reserves. "We've got a discovery, but more work is needed before we have a full account of reserves," said Jorge Zelada, Petrobras international director, at a breakfast Tuesday. Just two months ago, Spain's Repsol YPF (REP), a 25% partner in the Carioca discovery, released a far more tempered assessment, saying it expected Carioca contained "at least 500 million barrels."
Lima hinted Monday that Carioca's alleged 33 billion barrels were all recoverable reserves, saying Carioca appeared five times larger than Tupi (which itself holds between 5 billion and 8 billion recoverable barrels). The distinction would be vital, since in most offshore reservoirs only around a third of oil is recoverable.
But analyst reports, including from Citibank (C), largely dismissed the idea, saying Brazil's Carioca field would then top even the largest Saudi reservoir in terms of total oil. Experts said even a figure of 10 billion recoverable barrels at Carioca would be remarkable. Combined with the other recent discoveries, it could vault Brazil, which currently has proved reserves of 12 billion barrels, into the world's oil elite, perhaps between Nigeria (36 billion) and Venezuela (80 billion).
Typical for Petrobras, which often initially downplays discoveries but has sometimes leaked discovery data, the company said that Lima's estimate was premature and further drilling was needed to quantify Carioca reserves. "We've got a discovery, but more work is needed before we have a full account of reserves," said Jorge Zelada, Petrobras international director, at a breakfast Tuesday. Just two months ago, Spain's Repsol YPF (REP), a 25% partner in the Carioca discovery, released a far more tempered assessment, saying it expected Carioca contained "at least 500 million barrels."
Lima hinted Monday that Carioca's alleged 33 billion barrels were all recoverable reserves, saying Carioca appeared five times larger than Tupi (which itself holds between 5 billion and 8 billion recoverable barrels). The distinction would be vital, since in most offshore reservoirs only around a third of oil is recoverable.
But analyst reports, including from Citibank (C), largely dismissed the idea, saying Brazil's Carioca field would then top even the largest Saudi reservoir in terms of total oil. Experts said even a figure of 10 billion recoverable barrels at Carioca would be remarkable. Combined with the other recent discoveries, it could vault Brazil, which currently has proved reserves of 12 billion barrels, into the world's oil elite, perhaps between Nigeria (36 billion) and Venezuela (80 billion).
Brazil's Golden Oil
We are likely to see an ever increasing supply of ethanol from Brazil to meet the US requirements for clean fuel. This could bring the price of US corn down in 2009 and on. (Tim)
HOUSTON (ICIS news)--Brazil will likely ship up to 700m gal (2.6bn litres) of ethanol to the US through Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI) countries in 2009, as the US will need it to meet domestic demand, a US producer said on Friday.
The projection is based on US ethanol production reaching 10bn gal in 2008, the source said.
Under US law, the equivalent of up to 7% of US annual production can imported tax-free in 2009 via the 19 CBI countries, which include Jamaica, El Salvador, Costa Rica and Trinidad & Tobago.
Although the CBI is a US initiative to foster development in the Caribbean, it allows Brazil to bypass a 54-cents/gal tax imposed on its ethanol exports when the product is shipped directly to US shores.
The import restriction kept the arbitrage closed for Brazil during most of 2007, as the weaker US dollar and a drop in US ethanol prices made the Brazilian product too expensive.
In 2006, half of Brazil’s exports of 3.4bn litres were shipped to the US, but exports fell significantly last year, as Brazilian ethanol became less competitive and US demand for the imports of the biofuel dropped.
US ethanol prices fell below $1.70 (€1.16)/gal in the third quarter of 2007, but spot values have rebounded since then, trading this week at $2.40/gal FOB (free on board) New York Harbour, according to global chemical market intelligence service ICIS pricing.
US spot prices have steadily climbed since December, bolstered by an expected surge in US demand for the biofuel due to the new Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS).
The new RFS will require the US to use 36bn gal of renewable fuels annually by 2022, but the perception that demand will surge already in the short term was pushing up prices, two producers said.
The RFS will generate a market for 9bn gal/year of ethanol in 2008, and 11bn gal/year in 2009, one source said. US producers would have to scramble to meet demand in the next two years, the source said.
US ethanol demand in January-October 2007 was at 5.5bn gal, while output was 5.2bn gal, based on the latest data from the Renewable Fuels Association (RFA).
According to one source, Brazilian ethanol would likely flow to markets on the US East Coast, particularly to southeastern states, such as Florida, which is considering a proposal to further encourage the use of biofuels in its gasoline market, one of the largest in the country.
Florida Governor Charlie Crist was quoted as saying during a recent trip to Brazil that he was determined to fight the US tariff on ethanol, while making Florida a gateway for US imports of the Brazilian biofuel.
HOUSTON (ICIS news)--Brazil will likely ship up to 700m gal (2.6bn litres) of ethanol to the US through Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI) countries in 2009, as the US will need it to meet domestic demand, a US producer said on Friday.
The projection is based on US ethanol production reaching 10bn gal in 2008, the source said.
Under US law, the equivalent of up to 7% of US annual production can imported tax-free in 2009 via the 19 CBI countries, which include Jamaica, El Salvador, Costa Rica and Trinidad & Tobago.
Although the CBI is a US initiative to foster development in the Caribbean, it allows Brazil to bypass a 54-cents/gal tax imposed on its ethanol exports when the product is shipped directly to US shores.
The import restriction kept the arbitrage closed for Brazil during most of 2007, as the weaker US dollar and a drop in US ethanol prices made the Brazilian product too expensive.
In 2006, half of Brazil’s exports of 3.4bn litres were shipped to the US, but exports fell significantly last year, as Brazilian ethanol became less competitive and US demand for the imports of the biofuel dropped.
US ethanol prices fell below $1.70 (€1.16)/gal in the third quarter of 2007, but spot values have rebounded since then, trading this week at $2.40/gal FOB (free on board) New York Harbour, according to global chemical market intelligence service ICIS pricing.
US spot prices have steadily climbed since December, bolstered by an expected surge in US demand for the biofuel due to the new Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS).
The new RFS will require the US to use 36bn gal of renewable fuels annually by 2022, but the perception that demand will surge already in the short term was pushing up prices, two producers said.
The RFS will generate a market for 9bn gal/year of ethanol in 2008, and 11bn gal/year in 2009, one source said. US producers would have to scramble to meet demand in the next two years, the source said.
US ethanol demand in January-October 2007 was at 5.5bn gal, while output was 5.2bn gal, based on the latest data from the Renewable Fuels Association (RFA).
According to one source, Brazilian ethanol would likely flow to markets on the US East Coast, particularly to southeastern states, such as Florida, which is considering a proposal to further encourage the use of biofuels in its gasoline market, one of the largest in the country.
Florida Governor Charlie Crist was quoted as saying during a recent trip to Brazil that he was determined to fight the US tariff on ethanol, while making Florida a gateway for US imports of the Brazilian biofuel.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
How To Combat High Oil Prices
Wind Energy + and -
+
Wind farms will generate more than 1 percent of U.S. electricity this year. The only reason projections aren't higher? The industry grew 45 percent last year and now it's running out of turbines. The American Wind Energy Association speculates that this barely tapped resource could provide 20 percent of U.S. power by 2020.
-
That will only happen if the money is right: Congress approved a 2-cent-per-kilowatt-hour federal tax credit for wind installations in 2005, but the credit is set to expire at the end of this year. In 2004, the last time the subsidy lapsed, construction of new installations fell 77 percent.
Solar Energy + and -
+
The U.S. solar industry grew nearly 60 percent last year—but still ranks below the wind sector. Google and Wal-Mart made headlines with workplace installations, and residential use continues to grow. The industry hopes solar can supply 200 gigawatt-hours per year by 2030—enough to power 20,000 households.
-
Money remains the issue here, too. It can cost $25,000 to retrofit a home with a basic 3-kilowatt solar system, and while prices for panels have dropped in the past 30 years, they'll have to keep coming down to meet those industry goals.
Ethanol Production + and -
+
This biofuel may become a crucial bridge to electric cars, and engineers at Coskata, a startup company in Warrenville, Ill., say they can create ethanol for less than $1 per gallon. The company hopes its first commercial plant will produce 100 million gal. of ethanol per year by 2011.
-
Coskata engineers claim that each unit of energy input generates 7.7 times as much in output, so they may have solved ethanol's sluggish energy balance issue. Still, one major hurdle remains: Fewer than 1 percent of the nation's gas stations are equipped to dispense ethanol.
The Case For Conservation +++
Better Mileage 1 Billion Barrels Saved Per Year
From 1975 to 2000, American cars cut their fuel use by the equivalent of 2.8 million barrels of oil per day, spurred largely by Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) laws. Then progress stalled. December's energy law will raise CAFE standards to 35 mpg by 2020, but pushing them to 40 mpg would cut oil demand by 1 billion barrels per year, roughly our current imports from Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Venezuela combined.
Improved Mass Transit 45 Million Barrels Saved Per Year
Public transportation ridership has risen 25 percent since 1995. The savings if one-third more people rode mass transit: 45 million barrels per year. (This won't happen - Tim)
More Energy-Efficient Homes 30 Million Barrels Saved Per Year
One recent study found that weatherizing oil-heated houses produced average savings of nearly 18 percent. If all oil-heated homes achieved this level by 2013, the National Resource Defense Council estimates it would save nearly 30 million barrels per year.
Streamlined Air Traffic 18 Million Barrels Saved Per Year
The Federal Aviation Administration's NextGen GPS-based air traffic control system is expected to reduce delays and speed takeoffs and landings. A Department of Energy study estimates those measures could save the equivalent of 18 million barrels per year by 2013.
+
Wind farms will generate more than 1 percent of U.S. electricity this year. The only reason projections aren't higher? The industry grew 45 percent last year and now it's running out of turbines. The American Wind Energy Association speculates that this barely tapped resource could provide 20 percent of U.S. power by 2020.
-
That will only happen if the money is right: Congress approved a 2-cent-per-kilowatt-hour federal tax credit for wind installations in 2005, but the credit is set to expire at the end of this year. In 2004, the last time the subsidy lapsed, construction of new installations fell 77 percent.
Solar Energy + and -
+
The U.S. solar industry grew nearly 60 percent last year—but still ranks below the wind sector. Google and Wal-Mart made headlines with workplace installations, and residential use continues to grow. The industry hopes solar can supply 200 gigawatt-hours per year by 2030—enough to power 20,000 households.
-
Money remains the issue here, too. It can cost $25,000 to retrofit a home with a basic 3-kilowatt solar system, and while prices for panels have dropped in the past 30 years, they'll have to keep coming down to meet those industry goals.
Ethanol Production + and -
+
This biofuel may become a crucial bridge to electric cars, and engineers at Coskata, a startup company in Warrenville, Ill., say they can create ethanol for less than $1 per gallon. The company hopes its first commercial plant will produce 100 million gal. of ethanol per year by 2011.
-
Coskata engineers claim that each unit of energy input generates 7.7 times as much in output, so they may have solved ethanol's sluggish energy balance issue. Still, one major hurdle remains: Fewer than 1 percent of the nation's gas stations are equipped to dispense ethanol.
The Case For Conservation +++
Better Mileage 1 Billion Barrels Saved Per Year
From 1975 to 2000, American cars cut their fuel use by the equivalent of 2.8 million barrels of oil per day, spurred largely by Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) laws. Then progress stalled. December's energy law will raise CAFE standards to 35 mpg by 2020, but pushing them to 40 mpg would cut oil demand by 1 billion barrels per year, roughly our current imports from Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Venezuela combined.
Improved Mass Transit 45 Million Barrels Saved Per Year
Public transportation ridership has risen 25 percent since 1995. The savings if one-third more people rode mass transit: 45 million barrels per year. (This won't happen - Tim)
More Energy-Efficient Homes 30 Million Barrels Saved Per Year
One recent study found that weatherizing oil-heated houses produced average savings of nearly 18 percent. If all oil-heated homes achieved this level by 2013, the National Resource Defense Council estimates it would save nearly 30 million barrels per year.
Streamlined Air Traffic 18 Million Barrels Saved Per Year
The Federal Aviation Administration's NextGen GPS-based air traffic control system is expected to reduce delays and speed takeoffs and landings. A Department of Energy study estimates those measures could save the equivalent of 18 million barrels per year by 2013.
Congressional Concern About Gushing Oil Prices
Once again, Big Oil executives were forced to sit for another round of abuse from Congress.
This latest public pillorying of Big Oil appropriately occurred on April Fool’s Day.
Congress can be counted on to replicate this charade whenever gasoline prices spike.
Normally, Congress will angrily order a thorough investigation into price gouging and other skulduggery by Big Oil following one of these Capitol Hill floggings.
This latest televised excoriation of Big Oil occurred before the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.
If the rich history of these events can be a guide, Congress will order another congressional investigation. The public should expect the same result — nothing.
Inevitably, the much-ballyhooed investigations into Big Oil come back with the same findings — market forces, not price gouging, are the reason for the rise, and fall, in the cost of gasoline.
That same finding was reported last year by the Federal Trade Commission after Congress members accused oil companies of conspiring to restrict supplies when gasoline hit $3.02.
Now that gasoline prices are approaching $4 in the midst of a housing crisis, an economic slowdown and a falling dollar, oil executives knew it was time to be ordered back to Washington so Congress members could grandstand for their constituents who want low gasoline prices, no new refineries, low diesel prices, no new drilling, low heating oil prices, no oil company incentives, no new nuclear power plants and a bountiful supply of alternative energy.
That would be nice. Unfortunately, that is not the world we live in.
This time, Congress had the additional ammunition of record oil company profits.
Profits of the five largest oil companies — Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Shell, BP and Conoco Phillips — topped $123 billion last year, up from $30 billion in 2002.
“Your approval ratings are lower than ours — you are down low,” Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II, D-Mo., told the oil company executives.
That’s saying something since Congress’ approval ratings have been consistently lower than those of President Bush, who has racked up some impressively low approval ratings.
Once again it was left to the oil company executives to explain to Congress that they do not control the price of oil, as umpteen congressional investigations have reported.
Oil prices are controlled on the world market by oil supplies that vary widely based on access, disruptions and the hit-and-often-miss search for new supplies.
In addition, the price of oil varies as the demand for the commodity goes up and down.
The well-known forces of supply and demand govern the price of oil, and subsequently the price of gasoline and millions of other products that come from oil.
Congress members have been told this repeatedly from their own investigations. Hope springs eternal, however, that some day America’s most investigated and scapegoated industry will someday be caught cheating and finally justify the periodic drive-by shooting of Big Oil.
This time Congress is threatening to strip the U.S. oil companies of their $18 billion in “subsidies” and require that the money be spent on renewable and alternative energy.
Investing in research and development of renewable and alternative energy is good idea. But trying to fund something based on the volatile commodities market would be unreliable.
Besides, according to the Wall Street Journal, the $18 billion in question actually came from tax deductions authorized by Congress to all manufacturers, not just Big Oil.
Other nations aggressively pursue the development of new oil supplies to fuel their expanding economies. Congress prefers to blame America’s oil companies for the nation’s problems.
Congress can tax and investigate Big Oil until the cows come home. At the end of the day it will have no impact on the price of gasoline.
Rowland Nethaway
This latest public pillorying of Big Oil appropriately occurred on April Fool’s Day.
Congress can be counted on to replicate this charade whenever gasoline prices spike.
Normally, Congress will angrily order a thorough investigation into price gouging and other skulduggery by Big Oil following one of these Capitol Hill floggings.
This latest televised excoriation of Big Oil occurred before the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.
If the rich history of these events can be a guide, Congress will order another congressional investigation. The public should expect the same result — nothing.
Inevitably, the much-ballyhooed investigations into Big Oil come back with the same findings — market forces, not price gouging, are the reason for the rise, and fall, in the cost of gasoline.
That same finding was reported last year by the Federal Trade Commission after Congress members accused oil companies of conspiring to restrict supplies when gasoline hit $3.02.
Now that gasoline prices are approaching $4 in the midst of a housing crisis, an economic slowdown and a falling dollar, oil executives knew it was time to be ordered back to Washington so Congress members could grandstand for their constituents who want low gasoline prices, no new refineries, low diesel prices, no new drilling, low heating oil prices, no oil company incentives, no new nuclear power plants and a bountiful supply of alternative energy.
That would be nice. Unfortunately, that is not the world we live in.
This time, Congress had the additional ammunition of record oil company profits.
Profits of the five largest oil companies — Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Shell, BP and Conoco Phillips — topped $123 billion last year, up from $30 billion in 2002.
“Your approval ratings are lower than ours — you are down low,” Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II, D-Mo., told the oil company executives.
That’s saying something since Congress’ approval ratings have been consistently lower than those of President Bush, who has racked up some impressively low approval ratings.
Once again it was left to the oil company executives to explain to Congress that they do not control the price of oil, as umpteen congressional investigations have reported.
Oil prices are controlled on the world market by oil supplies that vary widely based on access, disruptions and the hit-and-often-miss search for new supplies.
In addition, the price of oil varies as the demand for the commodity goes up and down.
The well-known forces of supply and demand govern the price of oil, and subsequently the price of gasoline and millions of other products that come from oil.
Congress members have been told this repeatedly from their own investigations. Hope springs eternal, however, that some day America’s most investigated and scapegoated industry will someday be caught cheating and finally justify the periodic drive-by shooting of Big Oil.
This time Congress is threatening to strip the U.S. oil companies of their $18 billion in “subsidies” and require that the money be spent on renewable and alternative energy.
Investing in research and development of renewable and alternative energy is good idea. But trying to fund something based on the volatile commodities market would be unreliable.
Besides, according to the Wall Street Journal, the $18 billion in question actually came from tax deductions authorized by Congress to all manufacturers, not just Big Oil.
Other nations aggressively pursue the development of new oil supplies to fuel their expanding economies. Congress prefers to blame America’s oil companies for the nation’s problems.
Congress can tax and investigate Big Oil until the cows come home. At the end of the day it will have no impact on the price of gasoline.
Rowland Nethaway
Monday, April 7, 2008
Obama's Pandering
Is this more pandering by Obama and the Democrats or does he really believe the stuff he says? (Tim)
Obama tries to pump up Pennsylvania
Fortune writer-reporter Jia Lynn Yang writes:
Barack Obama may not pump gas for his own motorcade. But he wants Pennsylvania to know that he too has noticed the rising prices.
“We are paying record prices,” Obama told a capacity crowd at the Dunmore Community Center Gymansium in Scranton last week. “I don’t have to tell you: $3.50 a gallon?” The crowd starts shouting back numbers: “$3.25! $3.55!” until the whole gym sounds like a cattle auction.
Obama stands in the middle listening, allowing the crowd to vent. He pauses. “A lot,” he says, to laughs. “Meanwhile, Exxon Mobil (XOM) made $11 billion last quarter.” Cue loud booing.
Throughout Pennsylvania, especially in economically depressed former mining towns such as Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, Obama has been sounding some John Edwards-like notes about the contrast between Americans who work hard and struggle to pay for gas, and the corporate titans who make millions in bonuses.
It’s a traditional message for Democrats - Hillary Clinton’s been using it for months - but Obama’s ratcheted up the volume lately, in part because of his audience. He has to connect withworking-class voters in order to beat Clinton, not just in the April 22 primary in Pennsylvania but in Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky, Montana, Oregon, and South Dakota, all states that are coming up between now and June 3. (Maybe not so much in Guam.)
So Obama has begun to weave lines like, “A CEO makes more money in 10 minutes than a worker makes in a whole year” into his stump speech. And Countrywide Financial Corp. (CFC) usually gets a mention too for awarding its CEO and president $19 million in bonuses after the mortgage lender’s sale to Bank of America.
Is the extra populist juice working? The latest polls in Pennsylvania, where Obama spent much of last week, show some gains. Quinnipiac shows Obama getting closer but still 9 points behind Clinton. Public Policy Polling has Obama creeping ahead of Clinton, though only by 2 points. Other polls have yet to come out corroborating his new lead.
As for what Obama will do exactly about gas prices, he does go out of his way to say that as president he won’t wave a magic wand that will instantly lower the cost. At a press conference staged at a gas station in Manheim, Pa., last week, he promised a three-pronged approach.
In the long term, Obama favors investing in fuel-efficient car technology and developing more alternative energy sources like cellulosic ethanol. In the short term, he wants to cut to the payroll tax for the working class, which he says will translate into $1,000 back per family.
And Exxon? You’ve been warned. Says Obama: “I think we can look at going after windfall profits in a serious way.”
Obama tries to pump up Pennsylvania
Fortune writer-reporter Jia Lynn Yang writes:
Barack Obama may not pump gas for his own motorcade. But he wants Pennsylvania to know that he too has noticed the rising prices.
“We are paying record prices,” Obama told a capacity crowd at the Dunmore Community Center Gymansium in Scranton last week. “I don’t have to tell you: $3.50 a gallon?” The crowd starts shouting back numbers: “$3.25! $3.55!” until the whole gym sounds like a cattle auction.
Obama stands in the middle listening, allowing the crowd to vent. He pauses. “A lot,” he says, to laughs. “Meanwhile, Exxon Mobil (XOM) made $11 billion last quarter.” Cue loud booing.
Throughout Pennsylvania, especially in economically depressed former mining towns such as Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, Obama has been sounding some John Edwards-like notes about the contrast between Americans who work hard and struggle to pay for gas, and the corporate titans who make millions in bonuses.
It’s a traditional message for Democrats - Hillary Clinton’s been using it for months - but Obama’s ratcheted up the volume lately, in part because of his audience. He has to connect withworking-class voters in order to beat Clinton, not just in the April 22 primary in Pennsylvania but in Indiana, North Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky, Montana, Oregon, and South Dakota, all states that are coming up between now and June 3. (Maybe not so much in Guam.)
So Obama has begun to weave lines like, “A CEO makes more money in 10 minutes than a worker makes in a whole year” into his stump speech. And Countrywide Financial Corp. (CFC) usually gets a mention too for awarding its CEO and president $19 million in bonuses after the mortgage lender’s sale to Bank of America.
Is the extra populist juice working? The latest polls in Pennsylvania, where Obama spent much of last week, show some gains. Quinnipiac shows Obama getting closer but still 9 points behind Clinton. Public Policy Polling has Obama creeping ahead of Clinton, though only by 2 points. Other polls have yet to come out corroborating his new lead.
As for what Obama will do exactly about gas prices, he does go out of his way to say that as president he won’t wave a magic wand that will instantly lower the cost. At a press conference staged at a gas station in Manheim, Pa., last week, he promised a three-pronged approach.
In the long term, Obama favors investing in fuel-efficient car technology and developing more alternative energy sources like cellulosic ethanol. In the short term, he wants to cut to the payroll tax for the working class, which he says will translate into $1,000 back per family.
And Exxon? You’ve been warned. Says Obama: “I think we can look at going after windfall profits in a serious way.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
