Posted February 16, 2017
There’s a lot of good news to be found in EPA’s draft Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2015, which came out this week – all of it underscoring progress, much of it led by industry, in reducing emissions – even as American consumers and the U.S. economy are supplied the energy they need.
Posted January 13, 2017
As the Trump administration comes into office and the new Congress begins work, a sea-change is needed in the way Washington approaches American oil and natural gas abundance. It’s critically important for consumers, the U.S. economy and our country’s security. We need policies that embrace and harness America’s energy renaissance instead of trying to restrain it. We need an approach to regulation that manages safe and responsible energy development instead of smothering it in short-sighted, often unnecessary restrictions and red tape.
Posted December 9, 2016
Posted November 17, 2016
As EPA nears the release of its finalized hydraulic fracturing/water report, the weight of scientific study and analysis backs the agency’s preliminary conclusion that there’s no evidence that fracking has led to “widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States.” Dozens of other recent studies reached similar conclusions – including peer-reviewed case studies and research by academics, government and industry, as well as state and federal regulatory reviews.
Posted September 2, 2016
Abundant, affordable and reliable. Natural gas appears in each of PJM’s compliance scenarios for good, market-based reasons – with ample availability and dependability driving its economic benefits. In the marketplace, this is a winning hand for America.
Posted August 12, 2016
As an agency that fundamentally bases its work on fact and scientific analysis, EPA needs to follow the facts and the science on the safety of hydraulic fracturing.
More than a year ago, after a five-year, multi-million dollar study on the impacts of fracking on drinking water resources, EPA concluded: “We did not find evidence that these mechanisms have led to widespread, systemic impacts on drinking water resources in the United States.” The report affirms volumes of scientific data, including more than 950 sources of information, technical reports, information from stakeholders and peer-reviewed EPA scientific reports.
A move by the agency’s Science Advisory Board (SAB), questioning the draft report’s conclusion, is without basis, because EPA’s work and its findings were and are scientifically sound.
Posted August 3, 2016
Some context for legal challenges to EPA’s final rule for new oil and natural gas sources, filed individually this week by a coalition of states, API and other organizations.
As we’ve noted before, methane emissions from field production of natural gas are falling – mainly because industry wants to capture as much of the primary component of natural gas as possible, to deliver to customers. Industry is on it, deploying technologies and know-how to prevent emissions during production. Bottom line: In a period of soaring production, we’ve had falling methane emissions.
This is happening under the current regulatory regime.
Posted June 27, 2016
Two more results from the new Harris Poll on what Americans are thinking about key energy issues.
First, 77 percent of registered voters say they’re concerned about government requirements that would increase the amount of ethanol in gasoline. Second, 73 percent agree that federal government regulations could contribute to increased costs for gasoline to consumers.
Both results basically point fingers at the federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) – which indeed is Washington pushing for more ethanol in gasoline, which experts and studies warn could impact consumers at the gasoline pump and at the repair shop.
Posted June 15, 2016
Posted June 10, 2016
We often hear proponents of the federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) argue that mandating increasing use of ethanol in the nation’s fuel supply is about consumer choice. This view is reflected in some of the news coverage of this week’s RFS public hearing in Kansas City.
Yet, when you look at the marketplace and the fuels consumers actually want, the RFS represents restricting choice, not expanding it.