API President says Senate leaders took right step to shelve flawed spill bill
August 5, 2010
WASHINGTON, August 3, 2010 — Senate leaders took the right step to shelve a flawed spill bill, and we look forward to working with lawmakers to improve the bill so that American taxpayers, domestic jobs, the economy and our economic security are protected, according to a statement by American Petroleum Institute President and CEO Jack Gerard:
“The decision today by the Senate leadership to shelve flawed spill legislation is a good one. The bill proposed by the Democratic leadership is not an effective or reasoned response to the spill. Instead it will cost American jobs, threaten our fragile economic recovery and jeopardize our energy security.
“Among the legislation’s shortcoming is the elimination of the cap on oil spill liability. Unlimited liability for spill damages would force most oil and natural gas companies out of the Gulf of Mexico because they would be unable to purchase insurance. This would put thousands of American jobs at risk and reduce the energy supplies we get from the Gulf.
“A robust, workable oil spill liability program – possibly including a mutual insurance element – is achievable and would cover the cost of a large spill without shifting huge costs to taxpayers.
“The bill falls short again in seeking to impose a new layer of federal regulation on hydraulic fracturing. This technology is essential to developing America’s vast reserves of shale gas, and states already do a good job regulating its use. Superfluous federal legislation would slow development of these vital domestic supplies of clean-burning energy and hundreds of thousands of new jobs associated its development.
“We strongly believe a bill is possible that could enhance offshore safety and ensure payment of damages from possible future accidents without discouraging job creation or domestic energy development. We stand ready to work with the Senate towards this goal.”
API Sounds Off on the Drilling Moratorium… The Second One!
July 15, 2010
There’s a lot happening today in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon accident — BP is testing the integrity of the Macondo well in hopes of capping it; the House and Senate are marking up energy legislation; and the deepwater drilling moratorium continues to threaten livelihoods in the Gulf.
I’d like to call your attention to a blog post we posted yesterday about the moratorium. Despite the administration’s stated reason for imposed the second moratorium, it will do nothing to improve the engineering and geological knowledge required to solve the Deepwater Horizon problem. It won’t help the industry contain blowouts. It won’t improve spill-response technology. And it won’t encourage safer operations. But it will put tens of thousands of Americans out of work, reduce domestic oil and natural gas production and make the United States increasingly reliant on other countries for energy. API’s CEO Jack Gerard also condemned the decision in a statement released on Monday.
I also wanted to give you a heads up that you are likely to see advertisements and other communications efforts from environmental groups who are seizing upon the oil leak to advocate for punitive measures against the oil and natural gas industry – new taxes in particular. API has developed a briefing paper on this issue that might be helpful to you in sorting out the facts.
And finally, API just issued a short statement on the markup of Rahall’s energy bill (CLEAR). It is attributed to Jack Gerard and says:
“The bill passed by the House Natural Resources Committee today moves well beyond a response to the tragic accident in the Gulf of Mexico, to the point where – if adopted by the Congress – provisions of the legislation will kill jobs, stifle economic recovery and punish an already-reeling Gulf Coast community.
“The numerous provisions that discourage U.S. oil and natural gas development have the potential to drive investment out of the United States, killing U.S. jobs and harming our economy.
“We support efforts to ensure safe and environmentally responsible operations, and we are committed to being part of the solution. But we cannot forget that oil and natural gas demand is growing and that it is critical to every sector of our economy. Any policy changes must bear that in mind. We can protect the environment without jeopardizing our economic security.”
Jane Van Ryan
API
Editor’s Note: With this same type of reasoning we would stop all air travel the next time a plane crashed. Obama and his goons think this is a justification for shutting down an industry they want to eventually put out of business! Pro business? HA! And remember that when government punishes big oil, those taxes are sent along to us in the form of higher energy prices. Environmentalists are also anti business and need to be stopped.
Drilling Moratorium Lifted
June 22, 2010
A federal judge in New Orleans today lifted the ban on deepwater drilling. In a 22-page ruling, Judge Martin Feldman wrote:
“The blanket moratorium, with no parameters, seems to assume that because one rig failed and although no one yet fully knows why, all companies and rigs drilling new wells over 500 feet also universally present an imminent danger.”
The White House announced it would file an immediate appeal.
In a statement, API welcomed Judge Feldman’s decision to lift the moratorium on Gulf of Mexico deepwater operations and listed some of the activities the industry is taking to improve the safety of deepwater operations.
Immediately after the Deepwater Horizon accident, the industry formed two task forces to examine safety and environmental protection, and recently it formed two additional task forces on subsea well control and oil spill response.
With regard to the moratorium, API said:
“The moratorium was an initial reaction to concerns about the safety of offshore oil and natural gas operations. However, an extended moratorium would have a tremendous impact on the nation’s energy security – and cause significant harm to the region of the country that was already suffering from the spill – without raising safety or improving industry procedures. With this ruling, our industry and its people can get back to work to provide Americans with the energy they need, and do it safely and without harming the environment.”
Editor’s note: The President’s knee jerk reaction is as hystercal as would be banning of air travel after a plane crash. There have been relatively few incidents regarding deep water drilling, and this should be kept in perspective. Obama’s hope was to use this as an environmental wedge against Big Oil.
Open Letter to Chevron and BP (British Petroleum)
April 30, 2010
Chevron and BP
Dear Marketing Department,
I have been a supporter of big oil companies and your right to drill off shore, in spite of public opinion being against you. However, for some reason, your commercials (at least here in California) are aimed at people who will NEVER support what you do. In fact, they think you are the scum of the earth.
Right now with this oil spill in the Gulf, you are their number one target. These people want to shut you down so you can never drill again. They say your product kills plant and animal ocean life; you are an affront to God himself (not that they believe in God except when it’s convenient.)
The Chevron plant in Richmond, CA has been under assault by environmental groups who are going so far as blocking retrofits of outdated plant facilities which would actually be good for the “environment” by making oil and gas transport safer and less prone to leakage.
Regardless of how many commercials you produce that talk about alternative energy and other “green” subjects, radicals will never think what you do is okay. They believe the only green you care about is the money you make from peddling what they believe is a dangerous product. So why cater to them and tug at their little environmentalist hearts while insulting people like me?
I, on the other hand, get nauseous every time I am assaulted on television by the “green” agenda pap you are spewing and would prefer you start aiming your commercials at the rest of us who like and appreciate your products.
Finally, I would like to point out that we have become a culture of celebrity. People tend to believe everything they see on television is true, including commercials. For that fact, your insistence in supporting the “green” agenda, even though the movement has been shown to be a political sham based on flawed studies, reinforces people’s erroneous beliefs that global warming is actually happening. The worst part about that? They think it is being caused by you and your product.
Education is the key. Please reconsider your marketing perspective and get back to telling people how much our country needs petroleum products. We would not have become the greatest country on earth without it. Please explain to them all the uses oil and its derivatives have. Tell the television audience how much of the Prius (like plastic parts) is actually made from oil products that does NOT go into the gas tank!
Most respectfully,
- FedUpEditor
A Petroleum Loving, Sports Car Driving Citizen
Lynn Woolsey is NOT for the common folk!
April 25, 2010
Democrat Lynn Woolsey says she is for the working man and woman, but how can that be? When a vote comes up for cap and trade or any other environmental bill that raises our energy costs by not allowing domestic production who pays the price?
As a regular guy, I see my price per gallon on gas creeping up or my energy bills (gas and electric) climbing upward, I know it is becuase of Lynn Woolsey and Democrats like her, all pandering to the far left environmental fringe, that are to blame.
Now they want to introduce a VAT tax. Who do you think will hurt the most? With components taxed at every level of production, big screen televisions will be all but out of reach for most poor and moderate income consumers.
Look at Woolsey’s voting record, and you will see she is beholden to special interests like big union and environmental groups that she is too wrapped up in their concerns to begin to address her constituents. She has to go. There will be other choices out there. Hopefully one of them will take her place.
- FedUpEditor
Global Warming Satire – Hide the Decline
April 24, 2010
Lynn Woolsey on a Spending Spree?
April 24, 2010
Is this woman trying to buy votes or what? After the story abour earmarks, I see this KTVU post about another $1 billion she is spending to “restore” the SF Bay. Where is the money coming from? Is she so confident they will get the VAT tax that they will have the money to pay for all this pork? Remember, this is not because of the commerce clause in the constitution they are doing this, but because of the EPA, another huge bureaucracy funded by us. We are not against cleaning up the bay, but use California’s money to do it… What? They are broke too? Those crazy Democrats! – Editor
======================
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. — Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Hillsborough, was in South San Francisco
Friday to announce the introduction of a bill to the U.S. Congress that would spend $1 billion to restore and clean up the San Francisco Bay.
The bill, the San Francisco Bay Improvement Act of 2010, would give the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency about $100 million annually over a 10-year period to fund projects that would restore the health of the Bay, which has been harmed by pollution, invasive species, and the loss of wetland habitat.
Speier said Congress has spent money on problems with other estuaries, including the Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes and hoped her fellow members of Congress would approve a bill for the Bay Area.
“I never predict whether a bill’s gonna pass, but I don’t introduce a bill without putting every effort to make sure it will end up on the President’s desk,” she said.
The bill was co-sponsored by the Bay Area’s congressional delegation: Anna Eshoo, John Garamendi, Mike Honda, Barbara Lee, Zoe Lofgren, Jerry McNerney, George Miller, Pete Stark, Mike Thompson, and Lynn Woolsey. SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. — Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Hillsborough, was in South San Francisco Friday to announce the introduction of a bill to the U.S. Congress that would spend $1 billion to restore and clean up the San Francisco Bay.
The bill, the San Francisco Bay Improvement Act of 2010, would give the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency about $100 million annually over a 10-year period to fund projects that would restore the health of the Bay, which has been harmed by pollution, invasive species, and the loss of wetland habitat.
Speier said Congress has spent money on problems with other estuaries, including the Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes and hoped her fellow members of Congress would approve a bill for the Bay Area.
“I never predict whether a bill’s gonna pass, but I don’t introduce a bill without putting every effort to make sure it will end up on the President’s desk,” she said.
The bill was co-sponsored by the Bay Area’s congressional delegation: Anna Eshoo, John Garamendi, Mike Honda, Barbara Lee, Zoe Lofgren, Jerry McNerney, George Miller, Pete Stark, Mike Thompson, and Lynn Woolsey…
Read the entire sickening story here.
From a Reader
April 22, 2010
From Peter in California:
This one is really informative. You can see how your RAT IS VOTING.
Shortcut to: http://www.killcarb.org/
Editor’s note: Lynn Woolsey Congress needs to become Jim Judd for Congress! California’s 6th District needs him! Bring back jobs! Bring back the economy! Stop the spending! Stop overtaxation!
Santa Rosa Student at Tea Party!
April 22, 2010
Face to Face with Jim Judd for Congress – 6th District California opposing Lynn Woolsey
April 22, 2010
