By The Associated Press, Oct. 22, 2008
WASHINGTON — Rushing to ease endangered species rules before President Bush leaves office, Interior Department officials are attempting to review 200,000 comments from the public in just 32 hours, according to an e-mail obtained by The Associated Press.
The Fish and Wildlife Service has called a team of 15 people to Washington this week to pore through letters and online comments about a proposal to exclude greenhouse gases and the advice of federal biologists from decisions about whether dams, power plants and other federal projects could harm species. That would be the biggest change in endangered species rules since 1986.
In an e-mail last week to Fish and Wildlife managers across the country, Bryan Arroyo, head of the agency’s endangered species program, said the team would work eight hours a day starting Tuesday to the close of business Friday to sort through the comments.
House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., whose own letter opposing the changes is among the thousands that will be processed, called the 32-hour deadline a "last-ditch attempt to undermine the long-standing integrity of the endangered species program."
At that rate, according to a committee aide’s calculation, 6,250 comments would have to be reviewed every hour. That means that each member of the team would be reviewing at least seven comments each minute.
It usually takes months to review public comments on a proposed rule, and by law the government must respond before a rule becomes final. How fast the rule is finished could determine how hard it is to undo.
A new administration could freeze pending rules. But if the regulation is final before the next president takes office, reversing it would require another review and public comment period — a process that could take months and sometimes years.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
North Texas agencies near deal to pump in water from Oklahoma
By MAX B. BAKER - Fort Worth Star Telegram - Oct. 22, 2008
FORT WORTH — In a sweeping cooperative agreement to provide water to North Texas’ growing population, the Tarrant Regional Water District, the city of Dallas and the North Texas Municipal Water District say they will work together to pipe water out of Oklahoma, a massive project that could cost several billion dollars.
Under the agreement, the Tarrant district will be the lead agency in negotiating with Oklahoma officials and in fighting any legal challenges.
The district approved the agreement Tuesday, and the Dallas City Council is scheduled to consider it today. The North Texas district approved it last month.
"I think it is a very positive step toward coordinating a regional water supply approach in North Texas," said Hal Sparks, vice president of the Tarrant district board.
By working together, the three agencies would also be able to share water stored in their own reservoirs to prevent shortages in the area, said Jim Oliver, general manager of the Tarrant district.
It is the first step to a regional water supply that would make the Metroplex "almost drought-proof," Oliver said.
So far, the estimated cost of the pipeline is about $3 billion, he said.
Details of how the cost may be shared by the agencies have yet to be determined, officials said.
Cost sharing
Last year, the Tarrant district, searching for water for its exploding population, developed a plan to pump hundreds of millions of gallons from Oklahoma creeks and streams into its reservoirs.
Called a "robust project," it would provide enough water to serve the 4.3 million people who are expected to live in the district’s service area by 2060.The district now provides water to about 1.6 million people.
The Tarrant district wants to capture water from the Kiamichi River, Cache Creek and Beaver Creek basins before it enters the Red River and takes on too much salt. The first pipeline would pump water about 60 miles, from near Lawton, Okla., to Lake Bridgeport.
About the same time it filed permits for the water, the Tarrant district filed a lawsuit contending that a 2001 Oklahoma moratorium on out-of-state water sales violates federal law concerning interstate commerce.
Oklahoma contends that it can enforce the moratorium until a study of its water supply is completed. The lawsuit is pending before a federal appeals court in Denver.
The Tarrant district has spent about $2.4 million in developing its Oklahoma water plans, about half of it going for the legal challenge, said Wayne Owen, the district’s planning director.
He said Dallas and the North Texas Municipal Water District have agreed to retroactively share in those costs.
How much each agency would contribute could depend on the amount of water used, Qualls said.
So far, the agreement only mentions the Kiamichi River basin near McAlester.
Irving deal
The agreement could prove problematic for Irving, which reached a deal in August with the southeast Oklahoma town of Hugo to buy millions of gallons a year.
Under the contract, Irving would pump the water from Hugo Lake into North Texas, initially paying about $1.7 million a year.
Hugo, using money provided by Irving, filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Oklahoma’s ban on out-of-state water sales.
Tarrant district officials have painted Irving as looking out for its own interests to the detriment of everyone else.
Under the three-party agreement, Owen said, the water districts and Dallas may use the available capacity in many local reservoirs, making it harder for Irving to store water.
Irving Mayor Herbert Gears said that the city has spent millions developing its plans for Oklahoma water and that he doesn’t think the new agreement will affect them.
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram
FORT WORTH — In a sweeping cooperative agreement to provide water to North Texas’ growing population, the Tarrant Regional Water District, the city of Dallas and the North Texas Municipal Water District say they will work together to pipe water out of Oklahoma, a massive project that could cost several billion dollars.
Under the agreement, the Tarrant district will be the lead agency in negotiating with Oklahoma officials and in fighting any legal challenges.
The district approved the agreement Tuesday, and the Dallas City Council is scheduled to consider it today. The North Texas district approved it last month.
"I think it is a very positive step toward coordinating a regional water supply approach in North Texas," said Hal Sparks, vice president of the Tarrant district board.
By working together, the three agencies would also be able to share water stored in their own reservoirs to prevent shortages in the area, said Jim Oliver, general manager of the Tarrant district.
It is the first step to a regional water supply that would make the Metroplex "almost drought-proof," Oliver said.
So far, the estimated cost of the pipeline is about $3 billion, he said.
Details of how the cost may be shared by the agencies have yet to be determined, officials said.
Cost sharing
Last year, the Tarrant district, searching for water for its exploding population, developed a plan to pump hundreds of millions of gallons from Oklahoma creeks and streams into its reservoirs.
Called a "robust project," it would provide enough water to serve the 4.3 million people who are expected to live in the district’s service area by 2060.The district now provides water to about 1.6 million people.
The Tarrant district wants to capture water from the Kiamichi River, Cache Creek and Beaver Creek basins before it enters the Red River and takes on too much salt. The first pipeline would pump water about 60 miles, from near Lawton, Okla., to Lake Bridgeport.
About the same time it filed permits for the water, the Tarrant district filed a lawsuit contending that a 2001 Oklahoma moratorium on out-of-state water sales violates federal law concerning interstate commerce.
Oklahoma contends that it can enforce the moratorium until a study of its water supply is completed. The lawsuit is pending before a federal appeals court in Denver.
The Tarrant district has spent about $2.4 million in developing its Oklahoma water plans, about half of it going for the legal challenge, said Wayne Owen, the district’s planning director.
He said Dallas and the North Texas Municipal Water District have agreed to retroactively share in those costs.
"The water we are all going to try and get into the Metroplex is going to be coming from farther and farther away," said Denis Qualls, senior engineer for the Dallas water department. "To partner in that and share the costs is a prudent thing."
How much each agency would contribute could depend on the amount of water used, Qualls said.
So far, the agreement only mentions the Kiamichi River basin near McAlester.
"We will be looking at this as it progresses into how much, when and how," he said.
Irving deal
The agreement could prove problematic for Irving, which reached a deal in August with the southeast Oklahoma town of Hugo to buy millions of gallons a year.
Under the contract, Irving would pump the water from Hugo Lake into North Texas, initially paying about $1.7 million a year.
Hugo, using money provided by Irving, filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Oklahoma’s ban on out-of-state water sales.
Tarrant district officials have painted Irving as looking out for its own interests to the detriment of everyone else.
Under the three-party agreement, Owen said, the water districts and Dallas may use the available capacity in many local reservoirs, making it harder for Irving to store water.
Irving Mayor Herbert Gears said that the city has spent millions developing its plans for Oklahoma water and that he doesn’t think the new agreement will affect them.
"In the end, we will all be partners in bringing water to North Texas," he said. "We’ll need pipelines, water treatment plants and reservoirs. And we’ll all have to win some court cases."
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram
Monday, September 15, 2008
Dems propose energy tax breaks
By H. JOSEF HEBERT - Associated Press Writer - Sept. 15, 2008
WASHINGTON - House Democrats outlined $18 billion in tax incentives over 10 years for alternative energy and efficiency improvements Monday, proposing to pay for them by rescinding tax breaks for the biggest oil companies.
The tax package is expected to be included in an energy bill later in the week that also would lift the sweeping federal bans on offshore oil and gas drilling off the Pacific and Atlantic coasts.
The legislation would open, wherever a state agrees, waters at least 50 miles from shore from New England to Washington State. An exception would be waters off Florida's western coast where energy development would continue to be banned.
The tax provisions are similar to those that passed the House earlier this year, but not the Senate.
The proposal would extend tax credits for wind and solar industries that are scheduled to expire this year and provide a variety of tax incentives to spur development of alternative non-fossil energy resources such as cellulosic ethanol and other biofuels.
It would provide tax incentives to people wanting to put solar panels or mini-wind turbines on their homes, and to companies that encourage bicycle commuting by making available bike storage areas.
To pay for the new tax incentives, House Democrats want to roll back a pair of tax breaks enjoyed by the five largest oil companies. One was enacted to benefit all domestic manufacturers against foreign competition and the other involves tax credits claimed by U.S. oil companies for oil pumped overseas.
Together the two provisions, if continued, will save the largest oil companies $17.7 billion in taxes over the next decade.
Meanwhile, a sharp debate continued Monday over whether the Democrats' energy legislation actually will produce any more oil from offshore waters.
Republicans argued that the Democratic plan leaves out nearly 90 percent of the 18 billion barrels of oil believed to be located in areas of the Outer Continental Shelf now off limits because it would continue the ban in a 50-mile shoreline buffer.
And they argue that states would have little incentive to go along with drilling off their beaches — even 50 miles out to sea — if they would not share in the billions of dollars in federal royalties. The Democrats proposal has no royalty sharing provision.
The legislation would "do very little to increase U.S. oil supplies" and "...denies Americans access to some of our nation's most promising energy resources" that could be brought to market the fastest, Red Cavaney, president of the American Petroleum Institute, wrote in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Pelosi has argued that the drilling proposal is a "reasonable compromise" with those who demand more offshore drilling. She also said oil companies should give up some of their tax subsidies in return for wider access to the government's energy resources.
Read more
WASHINGTON - House Democrats outlined $18 billion in tax incentives over 10 years for alternative energy and efficiency improvements Monday, proposing to pay for them by rescinding tax breaks for the biggest oil companies.
The tax package is expected to be included in an energy bill later in the week that also would lift the sweeping federal bans on offshore oil and gas drilling off the Pacific and Atlantic coasts.
The legislation would open, wherever a state agrees, waters at least 50 miles from shore from New England to Washington State. An exception would be waters off Florida's western coast where energy development would continue to be banned.
The tax provisions are similar to those that passed the House earlier this year, but not the Senate.
The proposal would extend tax credits for wind and solar industries that are scheduled to expire this year and provide a variety of tax incentives to spur development of alternative non-fossil energy resources such as cellulosic ethanol and other biofuels.
It would provide tax incentives to people wanting to put solar panels or mini-wind turbines on their homes, and to companies that encourage bicycle commuting by making available bike storage areas.
To pay for the new tax incentives, House Democrats want to roll back a pair of tax breaks enjoyed by the five largest oil companies. One was enacted to benefit all domestic manufacturers against foreign competition and the other involves tax credits claimed by U.S. oil companies for oil pumped overseas.
Together the two provisions, if continued, will save the largest oil companies $17.7 billion in taxes over the next decade.
Meanwhile, a sharp debate continued Monday over whether the Democrats' energy legislation actually will produce any more oil from offshore waters.
Republicans argued that the Democratic plan leaves out nearly 90 percent of the 18 billion barrels of oil believed to be located in areas of the Outer Continental Shelf now off limits because it would continue the ban in a 50-mile shoreline buffer.
And they argue that states would have little incentive to go along with drilling off their beaches — even 50 miles out to sea — if they would not share in the billions of dollars in federal royalties. The Democrats proposal has no royalty sharing provision.
The legislation would "do very little to increase U.S. oil supplies" and "...denies Americans access to some of our nation's most promising energy resources" that could be brought to market the fastest, Red Cavaney, president of the American Petroleum Institute, wrote in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Pelosi has argued that the drilling proposal is a "reasonable compromise" with those who demand more offshore drilling. She also said oil companies should give up some of their tax subsidies in return for wider access to the government's energy resources.
Read more
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Explosion probe faults gas company
By GARY REAVES - WFAA-TV - Wednesday, August 6, 2008
MCKINNEY — Almost three months after an explosion destroyed three McKinney homes and just nine days after Nancy Foster died from burns she endured in the blast, the Texas Railroad Commission announced they discovered numerous violations made by the gas line company and its contractor.
During their three-month probe, the commission said they discovered six rule violations made by Atmos and two more violations by its contractor, M. J. Sheridan.
The Foster family's lawyer, Frank Branson, said they are outraged.
"They ignored the rules before the explosion," he said. "They ignored the rules that caused the explosion and they ignored the rules on how you investigate and record the data."
The tragedy started when the gas company's approved contractor, M J Sheridan, punctured a three-inch gas line with a boring machine. Rules require that when they get within 12 inches of the line, they shut down the machine and dig by hand.
From there, the report stated the mistakes multiplied.
While the line was cut at 4:30 p.m., no one called 911 until 5:38 p.m., which was after the explosions began. In that crucial hour, the on-scene inspector failed to test sewer lines for gas and failed to order evacuations. Afterwards, Atmos failed to give drug and alcohol tests to the work crew.
The Foster family said they are suing for justice and answers.
"We supports our employees who we believe took appropriate actions at the time of the incident," read a statement released by Atmos. "We also have high standards for our contractors ... We continue to review our practices and protocols."
Read more on WFAA
The report is preliminary and Atmos and the contractor have 30 days to respond.
MCKINNEY — Almost three months after an explosion destroyed three McKinney homes and just nine days after Nancy Foster died from burns she endured in the blast, the Texas Railroad Commission announced they discovered numerous violations made by the gas line company and its contractor.
During their three-month probe, the commission said they discovered six rule violations made by Atmos and two more violations by its contractor, M. J. Sheridan.
The Foster family's lawyer, Frank Branson, said they are outraged.
"They ignored the rules before the explosion," he said. "They ignored the rules that caused the explosion and they ignored the rules on how you investigate and record the data."
The tragedy started when the gas company's approved contractor, M J Sheridan, punctured a three-inch gas line with a boring machine. Rules require that when they get within 12 inches of the line, they shut down the machine and dig by hand.
From there, the report stated the mistakes multiplied.
While the line was cut at 4:30 p.m., no one called 911 until 5:38 p.m., which was after the explosions began. In that crucial hour, the on-scene inspector failed to test sewer lines for gas and failed to order evacuations. Afterwards, Atmos failed to give drug and alcohol tests to the work crew.
The Foster family said they are suing for justice and answers.
"We supports our employees who we believe took appropriate actions at the time of the incident," read a statement released by Atmos. "We also have high standards for our contractors ... We continue to review our practices and protocols."
Read more on WFAA
The report is preliminary and Atmos and the contractor have 30 days to respond.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Fort Worth Residents Rally Support for Moratorium on Barnett Shale
While John McCain is trying to sell his energy policy of “Drill here. Drill now. Drill. Drill. Drill…” those affected by the devastation of the Domestic Drilling Agenda are calling for a moratorium.
Fort Worth woke up just in time to discover the free money promised to them by Chesapeake Energy landmen comes with a high price. Chesapeake Energy wants to run high pressure—100 psi minimum—gas pipelines through Fort Worth Neighborhoods. The highly corrosive, raw, wet gas can eat through a new pipeline in 3 or 4 years and is unodorized, invisible and extremely explosive.
Chesapeake, a private company, is using eminent domain to take yards and sometimes the entire home for their profit. Eminent domain should be used only for public gain with no private stakeholders.
If you are in the Barnett Shale area, you should try to attend this rally and learn from the mistakes made by Fort Worth residents.
Pipelines are dangerous:
In 1937, the New London School Explosion killed 300 – 400 children and teachers.
A Palo Pinto County gas well explosion in 2005 left a crater the size of a football field. The flash was seen 100 miles away.
An explosion in Forest Hill caused 500 homes to be evacuated in 2006.
Other unresolved issues of concern?
Bring a burger and spend your lunch hour with us!
Heed this warning Hanesville Shale and Marcellus Shale residents. Learn from the mistakes of Fort Worth.
This is also on Texas Kaos and Burnt Orange Report.
Fort Worth woke up just in time to discover the free money promised to them by Chesapeake Energy landmen comes with a high price. Chesapeake Energy wants to run high pressure—100 psi minimum—gas pipelines through Fort Worth Neighborhoods. The highly corrosive, raw, wet gas can eat through a new pipeline in 3 or 4 years and is unodorized, invisible and extremely explosive.
Chesapeake, a private company, is using eminent domain to take yards and sometimes the entire home for their profit. Eminent domain should be used only for public gain with no private stakeholders.
If you are in the Barnett Shale area, you should try to attend this rally and learn from the mistakes made by Fort Worth residents.
The Fort Worth Coalition for a Reformed Drilling Ordinance (CREDO) is made up of individuals and groups who are concerned that gas production in Fort Worth is proceeding without adequate consideration of long-term impacts
CREDO believes the City is obligated to assure the safety and well being of its citizens above all other considerations
CREDO calls for a City-imposed moratorium on gas well permitting until:
- Plans are in place to accomodate the total impact of urban gas production over the life of the activity
- Post-depletion planning is in place to protect future residents
- Planning for gas production is integrated with the city's Comprehensive Plan and other appropriate plans
- Regulations are in place to assure safe operation of the total gas production activity
Click Here for Details about the Call for a Moratorium
Pipelines are dangerous:
In 1937, the New London School Explosion killed 300 – 400 children and teachers.
A Palo Pinto County gas well explosion in 2005 left a crater the size of a football field. The flash was seen 100 miles away.
An explosion in Forest Hill caused 500 homes to be evacuated in 2006.
Other unresolved issues of concern?
- Infrastructure and quality of life impacts of drilling and fracking operations over the life of a well
- Pipeline routing and the questionable use of Eminent Domain
- Public safety, from drilling through production and long term degradation of the gas production infrastructure
- Water use, waste transport and disposal
- Effects of gas production on property values, insurance rates, future development, etc.
- Economic parity for those who signed leases early without organized efforts
- Air quality including release of hazardous compounds
- Impacts on public parks and loss of other important green space
Bring a burger and spend your lunch hour with us!
Heed this warning Hanesville Shale and Marcellus Shale residents. Learn from the mistakes of Fort Worth.
This is also on Texas Kaos and Burnt Orange Report.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
This Time, It's Different - Global Pressures Have Converged to Forge a New Oil Reality
By Steven Mufson - Washington Post Staff Writer - Sunday, July 27, 2008
The two events, half a world apart, went largely unheralded.
Early this month, Valero Energy in Texas got the unwelcome news that Mexico would be cutting supplies to one of the company's Gulf Coast refineries by up to 15 percent. Mexico's state-owned oil enterprise is one of Valero's main sources of crude, but oil output from Mexican fields, including the giant Cantarell field, is drying up. Mexican sales of crude oil to the United States have plunged to their lowest level in more than a dozen years.
The same week, India's Tata Motors announced it was expanding its plans to begin producing a new $2,500 "people's car" called the Nano in the fall. The company hopes that by making automobiles affordable for people in India and elsewhere, it could eventually sell 1 million of them a year.
Although neither development made headlines, together they were emblematic of the larger forces of supply and demand that have sent world oil prices bursting through one record level after another. And while the cost of crude has surged before, this oil shock is different. There is little prospect that drivers will ever again see gas prices retreat to the levels they enjoyed for much of the last generation.
Unlike the two short, sharp oil jolts of the 1970s, the latest run-up has been accelerating over several years as ample supplies of crude oil have proven elusive and the thirst for petroleum products has grown. The average price of a barrel of oil produced by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries doubled from 2001 to 2005, doubled again by March this year and jumped as much as 40 percent more after that.
For American motorists, a full tank of gas costs nearly twice what it did at the start of last year, racing past the $4-a-gallon mark, and has begun cutting into other household spending.
"What can you do? You need gas," said Barry Modeste, a construction worker who stopped his van at a Shell station in Takoma Park one recent morning to add $15 worth. It was enough, he said, to get him to a cheaper station in Rockville. "If you don't have gas, you can't get to work. And if you can't get to work, you don't get paid. And if you don't get paid, you can't buy food. We're at their mercy."
Last month, 51 percent of the respondents in a Washington Post poll said rising gas prices were causing a serious financial hardship for them or others in their household. It was the first time a majority had said that since the poll began posing that question eight years ago.
The rising prices are also adding to inflation, aggravating the U.S. trade deficit -- oil now accounts for about half of it -- and taking a toll on businesses already struggling with the economic slowdown caused by the housing and financial crises.
"I'm a very small businessman. If I get any smaller, I'll be out of business," said independent trucker Lee Klass, who was driving through the Texas Panhandle this month with a 33,000-pound load of plastic containers bound for Colorado. Klass had just paid $636 for fuel, enough for the trip but no more. Filling the tank would cost nearly twice that much.
Abroad, riots shook India after the government trimmed fuel subsidies. Truckers in Britain, France, Spain and South Korea have clogged the roads to protest rising fuel prices. In the Philippines, soaring prices for oil and petroleum-based fertilizer have derailed the economy and ignited calls for a cut in the tax on oil imports. With her popularity at a record low, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo is expected to confront the issue in a nationally televised speech scheduled for tomorrow.
Even after oil prices have tumbled more than $24 in the past two weeks, largely as the result of easing tensions in the Middle East and slowing U.S. economic activity, crude is still trading near historic highs.
In a series of articles starting today, The Washington Post examines the economic forces that have unhinged oil prices from their longtime cyclical patterns, propelling fuel costs to once unimaginable levels that are now both fraying the lifestyles of our recent past and speeding the search for an energy source of the future.
Read the entire article and other parts of the series in the Washington Post.
The two events, half a world apart, went largely unheralded.
Early this month, Valero Energy in Texas got the unwelcome news that Mexico would be cutting supplies to one of the company's Gulf Coast refineries by up to 15 percent. Mexico's state-owned oil enterprise is one of Valero's main sources of crude, but oil output from Mexican fields, including the giant Cantarell field, is drying up. Mexican sales of crude oil to the United States have plunged to their lowest level in more than a dozen years.
The same week, India's Tata Motors announced it was expanding its plans to begin producing a new $2,500 "people's car" called the Nano in the fall. The company hopes that by making automobiles affordable for people in India and elsewhere, it could eventually sell 1 million of them a year.
Although neither development made headlines, together they were emblematic of the larger forces of supply and demand that have sent world oil prices bursting through one record level after another. And while the cost of crude has surged before, this oil shock is different. There is little prospect that drivers will ever again see gas prices retreat to the levels they enjoyed for much of the last generation.
Unlike the two short, sharp oil jolts of the 1970s, the latest run-up has been accelerating over several years as ample supplies of crude oil have proven elusive and the thirst for petroleum products has grown. The average price of a barrel of oil produced by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries doubled from 2001 to 2005, doubled again by March this year and jumped as much as 40 percent more after that.
For American motorists, a full tank of gas costs nearly twice what it did at the start of last year, racing past the $4-a-gallon mark, and has begun cutting into other household spending.
"What can you do? You need gas," said Barry Modeste, a construction worker who stopped his van at a Shell station in Takoma Park one recent morning to add $15 worth. It was enough, he said, to get him to a cheaper station in Rockville. "If you don't have gas, you can't get to work. And if you can't get to work, you don't get paid. And if you don't get paid, you can't buy food. We're at their mercy."
Last month, 51 percent of the respondents in a Washington Post poll said rising gas prices were causing a serious financial hardship for them or others in their household. It was the first time a majority had said that since the poll began posing that question eight years ago.
The rising prices are also adding to inflation, aggravating the U.S. trade deficit -- oil now accounts for about half of it -- and taking a toll on businesses already struggling with the economic slowdown caused by the housing and financial crises.
"I'm a very small businessman. If I get any smaller, I'll be out of business," said independent trucker Lee Klass, who was driving through the Texas Panhandle this month with a 33,000-pound load of plastic containers bound for Colorado. Klass had just paid $636 for fuel, enough for the trip but no more. Filling the tank would cost nearly twice that much.
Abroad, riots shook India after the government trimmed fuel subsidies. Truckers in Britain, France, Spain and South Korea have clogged the roads to protest rising fuel prices. In the Philippines, soaring prices for oil and petroleum-based fertilizer have derailed the economy and ignited calls for a cut in the tax on oil imports. With her popularity at a record low, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo is expected to confront the issue in a nationally televised speech scheduled for tomorrow.
Even after oil prices have tumbled more than $24 in the past two weeks, largely as the result of easing tensions in the Middle East and slowing U.S. economic activity, crude is still trading near historic highs.
In a series of articles starting today, The Washington Post examines the economic forces that have unhinged oil prices from their longtime cyclical patterns, propelling fuel costs to once unimaginable levels that are now both fraying the lifestyles of our recent past and speeding the search for an energy source of the future.
Read the entire article and other parts of the series in the Washington Post.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Cheney's Staff Cut Testimony On Warming
Health Threats at Issue, Ex-EPA Official Says
By Juliet Eilperin - Washington Post Staff Writer - Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Members of Vice President Cheney's staff censored congressional testimony by a top federal official about health threats posed by global warming, a former Environmental Protection Agency official said yesterday.
In a letter to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), former EPA deputy associate administrator Jason K. Burnett said an official from Cheney's office ordered last October that six pages be edited out of the testimony of Julie L. Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Gerberding had planned to say that the "CDC considers climate change a serious public health concern."
Boxer, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said the administration sought the changes for fear that Gerberding's testimony could trigger new controls under the Clean Air Act that would regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from burning fossil fuels. The White House has opposed mandatory limits and has insisted that voluntary measures and increased research are the best ways to address the issue.
"The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the Office of the Vice President (OVP) were seeking deletions to the CDC testimony," Burnett, 31, a Stanford-trained economist and a Democrat, wrote in response to an inquiry from Boxer's committee. "CEQ requested that I work with CDC to remove from the testimony any discussion of the human health consequences of climate change."
Several media outlets, including The Washington Post, reported at the time of Gerberding's testimony that the administration had revised her proposed remarks. White House officials justified the changes by citing doubts about the scientific basis of her testimony.
Burnett -- a grandson of high-tech entrepreneur David Packard and a member of the Packard Foundation's board of trustees -- has given more than $129,000 to Democratic campaigns in recent years, including $3,600 to presidential candidate Barack Obama (Ill.). He did not identify who in the vice president's office had called him.
"I'm not interested in pointing fingers at any individual," he said at a news conference with Boxer, adding that he is focused on how the government will address climate change in response to a Supreme Court decision last year requiring the EPA to deal with rising carbon dioxide emissions. "I'm interested in helping inform the next administration to help make those decisions, while recognizing Congress could act to pass a better law."
Boxer demanded that, in light of Burnett's allegations, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson turn over "every document related to the agency's finding that global warming poses a danger to the public" -- a determination the EPA reached late last year in a document that has never been made public. On that basis, the senator said, the agency must issue regulations to limit the emissions.
The White House declined to open the EPA e-mail containing that finding, which Burnett sent on Dec. 5, leaving the recommendation in limbo. Burnett was responsible for climate change issues at EPA.
"I'm calling on Mr. Johnson to act now, and if he doesn't have the courage or the strength or determination to act, he should resign," Boxer said.
EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar said Johnson will not provide the documents, but added that Boxer and others will be able to read about the agency's findings in detail when it releases its proposed regulation of greenhouse gases, expected within days.
"The administrator is glad to see Senator Boxer agrees that we need a robust and complete advance notice of proposed rulemaking that will come out as soon as Friday," Shradar said, adding that "a lot of those documents" Boxer is seeking will be in the proposal. "I don't know if she's just now working on her summer reading list or what."
...
CDC spokesman Tom Skinner said that any changes to Gerberding's planned testimony were made "during the normal editing process" and that she "spoke openly and fully without constraint" while testifying before the Senate.
Frank O'Donnell, who heads the advocacy group Clean Air Watch, said the revelations confirmed that the vice president has been steering environmental policy during President Bush's tenure
"For years, we've suspected that Cheney was the puppeteer for administration policy on global warming," O'Donnell said. "This kiss-and-tell account appears to confirm the worst."
...
Read more in the Washington Post
By Juliet Eilperin - Washington Post Staff Writer - Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Members of Vice President Cheney's staff censored congressional testimony by a top federal official about health threats posed by global warming, a former Environmental Protection Agency official said yesterday.
In a letter to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), former EPA deputy associate administrator Jason K. Burnett said an official from Cheney's office ordered last October that six pages be edited out of the testimony of Julie L. Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Gerberding had planned to say that the "CDC considers climate change a serious public health concern."
Boxer, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said the administration sought the changes for fear that Gerberding's testimony could trigger new controls under the Clean Air Act that would regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from burning fossil fuels. The White House has opposed mandatory limits and has insisted that voluntary measures and increased research are the best ways to address the issue.
"The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the Office of the Vice President (OVP) were seeking deletions to the CDC testimony," Burnett, 31, a Stanford-trained economist and a Democrat, wrote in response to an inquiry from Boxer's committee. "CEQ requested that I work with CDC to remove from the testimony any discussion of the human health consequences of climate change."
Several media outlets, including The Washington Post, reported at the time of Gerberding's testimony that the administration had revised her proposed remarks. White House officials justified the changes by citing doubts about the scientific basis of her testimony.
Burnett -- a grandson of high-tech entrepreneur David Packard and a member of the Packard Foundation's board of trustees -- has given more than $129,000 to Democratic campaigns in recent years, including $3,600 to presidential candidate Barack Obama (Ill.). He did not identify who in the vice president's office had called him.
"I'm not interested in pointing fingers at any individual," he said at a news conference with Boxer, adding that he is focused on how the government will address climate change in response to a Supreme Court decision last year requiring the EPA to deal with rising carbon dioxide emissions. "I'm interested in helping inform the next administration to help make those decisions, while recognizing Congress could act to pass a better law."
Boxer demanded that, in light of Burnett's allegations, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson turn over "every document related to the agency's finding that global warming poses a danger to the public" -- a determination the EPA reached late last year in a document that has never been made public. On that basis, the senator said, the agency must issue regulations to limit the emissions.
The White House declined to open the EPA e-mail containing that finding, which Burnett sent on Dec. 5, leaving the recommendation in limbo. Burnett was responsible for climate change issues at EPA.
"I'm calling on Mr. Johnson to act now, and if he doesn't have the courage or the strength or determination to act, he should resign," Boxer said.
EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar said Johnson will not provide the documents, but added that Boxer and others will be able to read about the agency's findings in detail when it releases its proposed regulation of greenhouse gases, expected within days.
"The administrator is glad to see Senator Boxer agrees that we need a robust and complete advance notice of proposed rulemaking that will come out as soon as Friday," Shradar said, adding that "a lot of those documents" Boxer is seeking will be in the proposal. "I don't know if she's just now working on her summer reading list or what."
...
CDC spokesman Tom Skinner said that any changes to Gerberding's planned testimony were made "during the normal editing process" and that she "spoke openly and fully without constraint" while testifying before the Senate.
Frank O'Donnell, who heads the advocacy group Clean Air Watch, said the revelations confirmed that the vice president has been steering environmental policy during President Bush's tenure
"For years, we've suspected that Cheney was the puppeteer for administration policy on global warming," O'Donnell said. "This kiss-and-tell account appears to confirm the worst."
...
Read more in the Washington Post
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
