Rep Huelskamp Floor Speech on Energy

Rep Huelskamp took to the House floor on Tuesday, July 12, 2011, to discuss how the Obama administration is holding up the energy permitting process across the country as well as in the First Congressional District. He talked specifically about Sunflower Electric Power Plant and how a "death-by-litigation" strategy is being executed against the plant in order to keep it from going online. This plant would provide nearly thousands of jobs during its construction and would provide considerable economic benefits to the entire state. He also discussed other types of energy production that are being stifled, including that of gas and oil.

At Last A Campaign Promise Kept

Remember back before the catastrophic 2008 election, when Obama made this promise?

"Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."

Remember this one?

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That's not leadership. That's not going to happen."

He's coming through on his promises to put an end to affordable energy,

Gutfeld" Cap and Trade

Deader than a hooker with herpes...

Electricity Prices Will Skyrocket

In another clip from the same January 2008 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle in which Barack Obama promised to bankrupt anyone foolish enough to build coal-burning power plants, he also made an interesting admission about his entire energy plan. Obama told the editors that his policies would make energy prices “skyrocket” as the energy industry passed along the exorbitant costs of his cap-and-trade policy:





Transcript:

The problem is not technical, uh, and the problem is not mastery of the legislative intricacies of Washington. The problem is, uh, can you get the American people to say, “This is really important,” and force their representatives to do the right thing? That requires mobilizing a citizenry. That requires them understanding what is at stake. Uh, and climate change is a great example.

You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.

They — you — you can already see what the arguments will be during the general election. People will say, “Ah, Obama and Al Gore, these folks, they’re going to destroy the economy, this is going to cost us eight trillion dollars,” or whatever their number is. Um, if you can’t persuade the American people that yes, there is going to be some increase in electricity rates on the front end, but that over the long term, because of combinations of more efficient energy usage, changing lightbulbs and more efficient appliance, but also technology improving how we can produce clean energy, the economy would benefit.

If we can’t make that argument persuasively enough, you — you, uh, can be Lyndon Johnson, you can be the master of Washington. You’re not going to get that done.

Skyrocketing energy prices will destroy the USA's economy.

All Of The Above

American Energy Act (H.R. 6566), the House GOP’s “all of the above” energy plan to lower gas prices.

To increase the supply American-made energy in environmentally sound ways, the legislation will:

* Open our deep water ocean resources, which will provide an additional three million barrels of oil per day, as well as 76 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, as proposed in H.R. 6108 by Rep. Sue Myrick (R-NC). Rep. John Peterson (R-PA) has also worked tirelessly on this issue.

* Open the Arctic coastal plain, which will provide an additional one million barrels of oil per day, as proposed in H.R. 6107 by Rep. Don Young (R-AK);

* Allow development of our nation’s shale oil resources, which could provide an additional 2.5 million barrels of oil per day, as proposed in H.R. 6138 by Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI); and

* Increase the supply of gas at the pump by cutting bureaucratic red tape that essentially blocks construction of new refineries, as proposed in H.R. 6139 by Reps. Heather Wilson (R-NM) and Joe Pitts (R-PA).

To improve energy conservation and efficiency, the legislation will:

* Provide tax incentives for businesses and families that purchase more fuel efficient vehicles, as proposed in H.R. 1618 and H.R. 765 by Reps. Dave Camp (R-MI) and Jerry Weller (R-IL);

* Provide a monetary prize for developing the first economically feasible, super-fuel-efficient vehicle reaching 100 miles-per-gallon, as proposed in H.R. 6384 by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT); and

* Provide tax incentives for businesses and homeowners who improve their energy efficiency, as proposed in H.R. 5984 by Reps. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), Phil English (R-PA), and Zach Wamp (R-TN), and in H.R. 778 by Rep. Jerry Weller (R-IL).

To promote renewable and alternative energy technologies, the legislation will:

* Spur the development of alternative fuels through government contracting by repealing the “Section 526” prohibition on government purchasing of alternative energy and promoting coal-to-liquids technology, as proposed in H.R. 5656 by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), in H.R. 6384 by Rob Bishop (R-UT), and in H.R. 2208 by Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL);

* Establish a renewable energy trust fund using revenues generated by exploration in the deep ocean and on the Arctic coastal plain, as proposed by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA);

* Permanently extend the tax credit for alternative energy production, including wind, solar and hydrogen, as proposed in H.R. 2652 by Rep. Phil English (R-PA) and in H.R. 5984 by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD); and

* Eliminate barriers to the expansion of emission-free nuclear power production, as proposed in H.R. 6384 by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT).

Virginia Is Sitting on the Energy Mother Lode

Another example of extreme environmentalism blocking America's energy supply. Why would the lefties do this? Except for the fact that there is ample energy supplies on America soil, why aren't we utilizing those supplies instead of paying enormous amounts to others?

Amid the rolling hills and verdant pastures of south central Virginia an unlikely new front in the battle over nuclear energy is opening up. How it is decided will tell us a lot about whether this country is willing to get serious about addressing its energy needs.

In Pittsylvania County, just north of the North Carolina border, the largest undeveloped uranium deposit in the United States -- and the seventh largest in the world, according to industry monitor UX Consulting -- sits on land owned by neighbors Henry Bowen and Walter Coles. Large uranium deposits close to the surface are virtually unknown in the U.S. east of the Mississippi River. And that may be the problem.

Virginia is one of just four states that ban uranium mining. The ban was put in place in 1984, to calm fears that had been sparked by the partial meltdown of a nuclear reactor on Three Mile Island outside of Harrisburg, Pa. in 1979.

Who do you think stoked those unfounded fears? And how exactly does banning uranium mining, uranium which is sold worldwide, calm anything. Except for the leftists environmental Marxist who plan America's demise, I see no gain in banning uranium mining. Just a whole lot of stupidity.

But then there is this ...

Messrs. Bowen and Coles, who last year formed a company called Virginia Uranium, are asking the state to determine whether mining uranium really is a hazard and, if not, to lift the ban. But they've run into a brick wall of environmental activists who raise the specter of nuclear contamination and who are determined to prevent scientific studies of the issue.

Let me see if I have this right -- America can't drill for oil, can't build refineries, can't build nuclear power plants, can't build coal fired power plants -- OK so what can we do? Add to the list we can't mine uranium. But we can pay $700 billion a year to terror states for energy. We can burn food and build useless windmills, and electric cars, which will never deliver what they promise.

Ever heard of things this stupid?

One more thing, warmism == Communism, and Obama is a Communist, the chosen one to enslave the people of America.

Numbers are Rising, Even In California

Polls nationwide say people are coming to their sense regarding the stupid bans on drilling, building refineries and new nuclear power plants. The latest from California Field Poll

A strong majority, 63 percent, want shipping terminals to import liquefied natural gas, a condensed and super-cooled fuel that critics say can turn into a fireball if it leaks.

Fifty-one percent still oppose offshore drilling. But that opposition appears to be softening. The last time the Field Poll asked about offshore drilling, in 2005, 56 percent of Californians opposed it.

California law prohibits new nuclear plants within the state until the country has a long-term solution for handling radioactive waste. But Orange County Assemblyman Chuck DeVore said Californians are starting to see the technology as a way to cut greenhouse gas emissions. For the past two years, he has pushed legislation to lift the moratorium and says he will do so again.

Those changes in sentiment could have big political ramifications. Energy costs are becoming a crucial issue in the presidential campaign.

It's becoming clear how the Democrat Marxists and the environmental Marxist work hand in hand to build a phoney façade of scaremongering and panic to prevent new energy from coming to the market.

FPL, And Money For Green Energy

Look, from the outset, the whole of the "green push" has been marketing with no substance. Most of the crap being shovelled has been shovelled before, think Jimmy Carter and his disastrous Presidency, and the needed breakthroughs in terms of science and engineering have not happened. I bought my first miracle solar system in 1979, it didn't work, because the energy supplied never recovered the cost to build it. If I hadn't had a government grant for the whole cost, I would have never bought. Given that it was "free" to me at least, it did what it said it would, heated my hot tube and hot water heater. We lived in a "bright sunshine" cold area at the time, great for solar. But it sure wasn't the way to energy independence that Pres Carter said it would be. The program was terminated shortly after I bought in.

So now we are into the heavy marketing of "green" as big a scam as the global warming hoax itself. Business es see it as a 'selling point' to be green. Grocery stores 'going green' -- Does anyone stop and think what does that actually mean? Nothing, simply nothing. It's just marketing phrase-ology. Yes I actually asked at the local super, what does 'going green' mean? Paper or plastic was the best answer, and they were trying to cut energy costs, because they cut into the bottom line so badly under Democrat rule.

So who is surprised that FPL, my electric supplier, is using the 'green money' to tell people they are going green. Sort of like a loop if you ask me, you talk into one end and the answer, what you want to hear, comes out the other end. All smoke, no substance. You really didn't think a few bucks was actually going to do anything when power stations now cost billions?

Report: FPL green energy program misleading - Forbes.com

Nearly 39,000 Florida Power & Light customers gave the company $11.4 million over four years to develop green energy, but a report shows most of the money went toward administrative and marketing costs.

According to a 19-page report written by the staff of Florida's Public Service Commission, FPL's Sunshine Energy Program suffers from several problems and "does not currently serve the interest of the program's participants."

The voluntary program charges FPL customers $9.75 per month - on top of the regular energy bill - to help develop alternative power sources. Nearly 39,000 FPL customers participate in it.

According to FPL's web site, for every 10,000 subscribers, the company will develop 150 kilowatts of solar energy in Florida and buy 1,000 kilowatt hours of renewable energy credits.

Public Service Commission staff said only 24 percent of the $11.4 million collected from customers went toward developing renewable energy. The rest went to marketing and administrative costs.

Get your energy credits right here, I have a book of renewable energy coupons that I sell for a few dollars a piece, no guarantee I will do anything, except spend the money telling you I spent your money.

Sheesh, how dumb are people.

The Simgle Biggest Failure Of The Hoax

While worrying about CO2 emissions, the Senate's upcoming Marxist top down "control your economy and pretend to control the weather" climate bill’s most notable failure is it does not suggest the CO2-free energy option, nuclear energy, to solve the problem. This simply indicates a lack of seriousness in solving the CO2 problem, just the desire to collect more in taxes.

Like with the illegal alien problem, that didn't control the border or enforce existing laws, the lack of nuclear power in the climate bill is all the clarity you need.

France now generates almost 80% of its electricity using nuclear energy, and it also enjoys some of the cleanest air in the industrialized world. The US has 103 nuclear power plants which supply about 20% of our base electrical load. There is no reason that nuclear power shouldn't be supplying 90% of the US base load, except for the very same Democrat Marxists in Congress. They are blocking all energy sources, including nuclear in order to constrain supplies on the market.

And now you know.

Democrats in Congress, raise taxes fund socialism and gun control. It's your job to provide the links between the first two and the last.

Blame Congress for High Oil Prices

What would Reagan do? In 1981 Reagan was faced with a similar problem, sky-rocketing energy prices caused by the dumbest President in US history, that dunderhead Carter -- Reagan deregulated oil prices and the oil companies freed up exploration, and triggered the biggest peacetime expansion of the US economy in history. What the Democrat Socialists are now trying to destroy. History is your friend, just not WikiPedia history, which is infested with liberal lies and liars.

...

I think the WSJ article needs a slight refinement, it's not Congress, it's the Democrat Socialists in Congress that think they have found their nirvana with the global warming hoax. After restricting supplies of energy for 30 years, they finally have arrived at what they see as the 'fix'. Convince enough people to pay sky high taxes so government can pretend to control the weather. They don't even plan on spending the tax money collected on energy related items, but for things like the peace core and other liberal wet dreams like free universal health care, that infinite demand sump.

Gasoline prices are through the roof and Americans are angry. Someone must be to blame and the obvious villain is "Big Oil" with its alleged ability to gouge consumers and achieve unconscionable, "windfall" profits. Congress is in a vile mood, and has dragged oil industry executives before its committees for show trials, issuing predictable threats of punishment, e.g. a "windfall profits tax."

But if there is a villain in all of this, it is Congress itself. That venerable body has made it impossible for U.S. producers of crude oil to tap significant domestic reserves of oil and gas, and it has foreclosed economically viable alternative sources of energy in favor of unfeasible alternatives such as wind and solar. In addition, Congress has slapped substantial taxes on gasoline. Indeed, as oil industry executives reiterated in their appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 21, 15% of the cost of gasoline at the pump goes for taxes, while only 4% represents oil company profits.

To understand the depth of congressional complicity in the high price of gasoline, one must understand that crude oil prices explain 97% of the variation in the pretax price of gasoline. That price, which has risen to record levels, is set by the intersection of supply and demand. On the one hand, world-wide demand has accelerated mainly due to the rapid growth of China and India.

...

It has done so by preventing the exploitation by IOCs of reserves available in nonpark federal lands in the West, Alaska and under the waters off our coasts. These areas hold an estimated 635 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas – enough to meet the needs of the 60 million American homes fueled by natural gas for over a century. They also hold an estimated 112 billion barrels of recoverable oil – enough to produce gasoline for 60 million cars and fuel oil for 25 million homes for 60 years.

This doesn't even include substantial oil shale resources economically recoverable at oil prices substantially lower than those prevailing today. In an exchange between Sen. Orin Hatch (R., Utah) and John Hofmeister, president of Shell Oil Company during the May 21 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, the point was made that anywhere from 800 million to two trillion barrels of oil are available from oil shale in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming.

Oil shale becomes economically viable when crude oil exceeds about $40 a barrel, unlike ethanol which seems to never become viable, because of land and water use issues. Shale oil is called 'synfuel'.

Then there is the punchline ...

If Congress really cared about the economic well-being of American citizens, it would stop fulminating against IOCs and reverse current policies that discourage, indeed prohibit, the production of domestic oil and natural gas. Even the announcement that Congress was opening the way for domestic production would lead to downward pressure on oil prices.

Which is the key issue, the Democrat Socialist in Congress care about one thing and one thing only -- POWER. Get used to tyranny, it creeps up on you, especially when you are upset about what the tyrants want you to focus on, instead of what the real problem is.

Think About It

Think about what reducing energy consumption 20, 30, 50 percent will really mean. Because that is what the lunatics mean when they talk about reducing CO2.

And why not nuclear power? Why that's too scary for the enviro-lunatics.

Like all Liberal proposals, they don't think through the results of adopting them before it's too late. Yes, I mean you Hussein and Hildabeast, and you too McCain. The un-scientific DDT ban has killed tens of millions of African children, don't let this stupid CO2 tax do the same to modern society.

Does nyone remmeber chicken little? The modern environemtal groups are made of them, with Al Gore leading the band.

Meanwhile, More New Energy Finds

British Columbia gas find

The company said its Dilly Creek lands in the Horn River Basin in northeastern British Columbia could contain as much as six trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

"We estimate our Dilly Creek lands contain between 3 and 6 trillion cubic feet of recoverable contingent resources," Nexen said in a release. "Further appraisal activity is required before these estimates can be finalized and commerciality established."

Other players in the region have also reported big gas finds on their properties. Indeed, EOG Resources Inc said earlier this year its Horn River holdings could yield as much as 6 trillion cubic feet of gas, while EnCana Corp and Apache Corp have also reported good results.

Far from running out of fuels, we are running out of food because of our own doing, there seems to be plenty of new fuel finds to go around. We could always convert coal to liquid fuel like Nazi Germany did in the 1920s. BTW - Nazi means National Socialism, key word socialism, and oh yeah, Hitler was elected.

If we could only drill off the coasts of the US, never know what we might find. For starters, there is trillions of cubic feet of clean burning gas locked up in the Destin Dome a hundred miles off of Destin Florida, just for the taking -- But, there is always a but, the environmental whacka-doodles won't allow it. Maybe the whacka-doodles prefer Red China drilling 45 miles off Florida with all their advanced Communist technology would be safer for our beaches. Frankly, and I live on the beaches they talk about, I wish they would allow drilling every where, say 20 miles from shore. It would be good for the environment and help with the food supply of the planet. Good for fishing as well.