Governor-elect Bob McDonnell appeals to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar to make Virginia the first state to move forward with new offshore drilling as part of an "all of the above" approach to energy solutions (as McDonnell calls it, "traditional and renewable").
McDonnell's letter is posted at The Shad Plank.
Showing posts with label energy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label energy. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Why NOW???
First, the Sunday before the election, we get Obama stating he will bankrupt the coal industry and raise electricity prices, and today we finally get Sarah Palin cleared of any ethics violations or wrongdoing in the "Troopergate" non-scandal.
Of course, this could not have been released (or made public by the MSM) say, oh, a week ago?
Ok, I get that the clearing of Palin's name was only made official today...but can anyone tell me (beyond their own bias) why the San Francisco Chronicle would keep those Obama tapes from being released?
Of course, this could not have been released (or made public by the MSM) say, oh, a week ago?
Ok, I get that the clearing of Palin's name was only made official today...but can anyone tell me (beyond their own bias) why the San Francisco Chronicle would keep those Obama tapes from being released?
Labels:
2008 election,
Barack Obama,
energy,
ethics,
Media,
Sarah Palin,
scandals
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
The Vicious Cycle of Environmentalist Policy
I swear to God, the enviro-activist left has really got us playing "Spin The Wheel, Make the Deal". I'll bullet point this to make it really simple.
- Environmentalist lobby pushes for increased production and research into Ethanol.
- Demand for corn goes up, pushes prices skyward.
- Farmers see the gold mine in corn crops, many switch to corn from wheat. This causes the United States to import wheat to meet it's own needs for the first time since the late 18th Century. Thus, the price of anything wheat-based (everything from bread to beer) goes up.
- Increase in corn price increases price of Ethanol itself, along with feed for cows.
- Ethanol-infused gasoline goes up in price due to increase in Ethanol price...price of beef goes up because farmers must pay more to feed their cows.
- Increased gasoline prices force increased shipping costs, which increase the price of ALL shipped goods.
- Shortage of American wheat production causes us to lose favor with all of the 3rd World Nations we would normally export wheat to.
- Democrats state that we are not a good member of the world community because we're not helping to feed the 3rd World...even though the shortage of American food exports is their fault.
Now, let's say this continues, and either Clinton or Obama is elected President. Here's what happens next...
- Media reports about starving children in Africa, state that it is the fault of "greedy rich people".
- Liberal Americans feel guilty, want the Government to "do something".
- Democrats state they will fix this (and everything else) by raising taxes on the "rich"...even though "rich" to them (according to the circulating Dem tax plan post-Bush Administration) is now any single person making over $33,000/year, or any married couple making a combined $45,000/year.
- More Americans in need of financial assistance for various reasons due to increased prices in goods and increased taxes....so the Democrats spend more money to relieve these troubled Americans. To cover costs, they raise taxes even more.
- Increased costs of production, shipping, and taxation force many companies to take jobs elsewhere, forcing millions of Americans into unemployment...thus repeating the previous bullet point.
- Rinse and repeat.
Scary, isn't it?
- Environmentalist lobby pushes for increased production and research into Ethanol.
- Demand for corn goes up, pushes prices skyward.
- Farmers see the gold mine in corn crops, many switch to corn from wheat. This causes the United States to import wheat to meet it's own needs for the first time since the late 18th Century. Thus, the price of anything wheat-based (everything from bread to beer) goes up.
- Increase in corn price increases price of Ethanol itself, along with feed for cows.
- Ethanol-infused gasoline goes up in price due to increase in Ethanol price...price of beef goes up because farmers must pay more to feed their cows.
- Increased gasoline prices force increased shipping costs, which increase the price of ALL shipped goods.
- Shortage of American wheat production causes us to lose favor with all of the 3rd World Nations we would normally export wheat to.
- Democrats state that we are not a good member of the world community because we're not helping to feed the 3rd World...even though the shortage of American food exports is their fault.
Now, let's say this continues, and either Clinton or Obama is elected President. Here's what happens next...
- Media reports about starving children in Africa, state that it is the fault of "greedy rich people".
- Liberal Americans feel guilty, want the Government to "do something".
- Democrats state they will fix this (and everything else) by raising taxes on the "rich"...even though "rich" to them (according to the circulating Dem tax plan post-Bush Administration) is now any single person making over $33,000/year, or any married couple making a combined $45,000/year.
- More Americans in need of financial assistance for various reasons due to increased prices in goods and increased taxes....so the Democrats spend more money to relieve these troubled Americans. To cover costs, they raise taxes even more.
- Increased costs of production, shipping, and taxation force many companies to take jobs elsewhere, forcing millions of Americans into unemployment...thus repeating the previous bullet point.
- Rinse and repeat.
Scary, isn't it?
Labels:
2008 election,
budget,
Democratic Party,
economy,
energy,
environment,
foreign policy,
gas prices,
politics
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Support the Wise County Power Plant
Kilo has a good post up about the support for the proposed Wise County Power Plant. This would be a "clean-burning coal" power plant. Although I do not live near the coalfields of Virginia, I do support this power plant. It will provide jobs, energy, and boost the economy of an area that really needs a project like this to revitalize the county.
Wise County, if you're unfamiliar with it, is located in southwest Virginia, on the border with Kentucky. It is nestled in the mountains and deep in the heart of the Virginia's coal-mining region.
I understand that many people are against using coal for pollution reasons. However, we have technology to make coal usage much more enviro-friendly. Why not give it a chance? It will provide an economic and technological benefit to the coalfields, and a source of energy for the state of Virginia.
Wise County, if you're unfamiliar with it, is located in southwest Virginia, on the border with Kentucky. It is nestled in the mountains and deep in the heart of the Virginia's coal-mining region.
I understand that many people are against using coal for pollution reasons. However, we have technology to make coal usage much more enviro-friendly. Why not give it a chance? It will provide an economic and technological benefit to the coalfields, and a source of energy for the state of Virginia.
Labels:
economy,
energy,
environment,
Virginia politics
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Podium Positions: Energy and Environment
Energy and environmental concerns have been a position of the left for a while. However, that does not mean that conservatives don't know or don't care about energy conservation and environmental concerns. We just don't buy into the liberal hype as much on issues such as global warming. Despite claims about the "consensus" about global warming, there is no consensus. However, that doesn't mean that things don't need to change along the energy and environmental fronts.
Global Warming
Given the outcry of innumerable scientists that there is not a consensus on global warming, and that similar warming trends are taking place on other planets, I am inclined to disagree that global warming on Earth is solely the fault of evil pollutants and corporations. While pollution does not help keep our planet in pristine shape, I fail to see where science has proven this without a doubt.
We should continue to monitor climate trends and the effects that human efforts and solar activity have on our climate. I believe we have not arrived at the true answers about global warming, at least not the most important ones.
Nonetheless, we all want cleaner air and water, it's simply healthier for us. So pursuing smart, sensible conservation efforts is a good thing.
Alternative Energy
Of course, pursuing cleaner and more efficient sources of energy is something worth looking into. Solar power, wind power, hydroelectric power, biofuels, hydrogen-powered vehicles, ethanol...these are all worthy projects and should be further researched.
Federally-funded scientific research in the field of energy has already been pointed in the direction of the above-mentioned sources of energy. Continued research should be looked at in the future.
However, until we can make these alternative sources financially prudent for both the producer and consumer, we've got to provide power and electricity to keep ourselves going.
Until Alternatives Become Cost-Effective...
We are still quite a distance from the day that alternative energy sources can become reliable and/or cost-efficient. Until then, we have to focus on what we, as a nation, have at our disposal.
Clean-burning coal is an alternative that we should look at more seriously. In fact, the state of Virginia already has many large deposits of coal that can be used in the "clean-burning" process. Not only does this help on a national level, but also brings relevance and importance to the mining industry in our state.
Let's face it, we deal too much with nations that are hostile towards us when it comes to oil. What we need to do is focus on opening up further drilling in Alaska and other areas of the United States where we are legislatively limited to drill...despite the bounty of oil beneath these restricted grounds which would make us more self-reliant when it comes to oil. Also, with Brazil having recently discovered a new, rather large deposit of oil that they plan on opening up for drilling, it would be sensible to move our trade away from nations like Venezuela to one like Brazil, whose stance towards America is rather favorable.
Another way to reduce our oil dependency is to look towards nuclear energy. Several nations that have been lauded for "being green", like Japan and France, have a much higher percentage of nuclear-generated electricity than America does. 3 Mile Island was almost 29 years ago, and that incident was not only an example of what can go wrong with nuclear power...but also an example of how many safeguards are in place to prevent a nuclear meltdown. It's time to move on and move towards greater use of this efficient and effective form of power.
In fact, by going to clean-burning coal and nuclear power, our oil dependency lessens dramatically...basically for use in automobiles and a minority of households for heating purposes.
Conservative Conservation
For those who doubt the connection of conservatives and conservation, see this exchange between an unnamed southern governor and President Reagan as noted in Edmund Morris' Dutch.
Governor: Mister President, I want to know why a bear needs more fresh air than a human being?
Reagan: Well, Governor, have you ever smelled a bear?
Admittedly, that quote is a bit light and humorous, but Reagan was a fan of sensible conservation of forests and open land. Conservatives, especially the ones who like to claim the mantle of Reagan, would be wise to keep this in mind. As much as we Americans like our clusters of new development making life convenient for us, we also like wide open spaces and lush green forests. While growth in inevitable in a nation such as ours, we could help conserve our wildlands a great deal with smart, conservative conservationism.
I expressed in the Podium Positions regarding the economy, I believe we should begin a new focus on agriculture. Not only would this provide positive economic results, but would also help with creating results from conserving farmland.
Overview
While alternative sources of energy and fuel are undoubtedly the future, they have not been cost-effective for the consumer. Until we can make these products cheap and widely available for public consumption, we still need to power our nation. Clean-burning coal, domestic oil, and especially nuclear power would not only reduce our need for foreign oil, but the clean-burning coal and nuclear power would lessen our need for oil in general.
We must be smart about the protection of wildlands, but neither overly careful nor overly careless. Our nation has always reserved a general love for the wilderness. It's part of our heritage as a country. Agricultural growth will provide dividends both economically and environmentally, as well.
Global Warming
Given the outcry of innumerable scientists that there is not a consensus on global warming, and that similar warming trends are taking place on other planets, I am inclined to disagree that global warming on Earth is solely the fault of evil pollutants and corporations. While pollution does not help keep our planet in pristine shape, I fail to see where science has proven this without a doubt.
We should continue to monitor climate trends and the effects that human efforts and solar activity have on our climate. I believe we have not arrived at the true answers about global warming, at least not the most important ones.
Nonetheless, we all want cleaner air and water, it's simply healthier for us. So pursuing smart, sensible conservation efforts is a good thing.
Alternative Energy
Of course, pursuing cleaner and more efficient sources of energy is something worth looking into. Solar power, wind power, hydroelectric power, biofuels, hydrogen-powered vehicles, ethanol...these are all worthy projects and should be further researched.
Federally-funded scientific research in the field of energy has already been pointed in the direction of the above-mentioned sources of energy. Continued research should be looked at in the future.
However, until we can make these alternative sources financially prudent for both the producer and consumer, we've got to provide power and electricity to keep ourselves going.
Until Alternatives Become Cost-Effective...
We are still quite a distance from the day that alternative energy sources can become reliable and/or cost-efficient. Until then, we have to focus on what we, as a nation, have at our disposal.
Clean-burning coal is an alternative that we should look at more seriously. In fact, the state of Virginia already has many large deposits of coal that can be used in the "clean-burning" process. Not only does this help on a national level, but also brings relevance and importance to the mining industry in our state.
Let's face it, we deal too much with nations that are hostile towards us when it comes to oil. What we need to do is focus on opening up further drilling in Alaska and other areas of the United States where we are legislatively limited to drill...despite the bounty of oil beneath these restricted grounds which would make us more self-reliant when it comes to oil. Also, with Brazil having recently discovered a new, rather large deposit of oil that they plan on opening up for drilling, it would be sensible to move our trade away from nations like Venezuela to one like Brazil, whose stance towards America is rather favorable.
Another way to reduce our oil dependency is to look towards nuclear energy. Several nations that have been lauded for "being green", like Japan and France, have a much higher percentage of nuclear-generated electricity than America does. 3 Mile Island was almost 29 years ago, and that incident was not only an example of what can go wrong with nuclear power...but also an example of how many safeguards are in place to prevent a nuclear meltdown. It's time to move on and move towards greater use of this efficient and effective form of power.
In fact, by going to clean-burning coal and nuclear power, our oil dependency lessens dramatically...basically for use in automobiles and a minority of households for heating purposes.
Conservative Conservation
For those who doubt the connection of conservatives and conservation, see this exchange between an unnamed southern governor and President Reagan as noted in Edmund Morris' Dutch.
Governor: Mister President, I want to know why a bear needs more fresh air than a human being?
Reagan: Well, Governor, have you ever smelled a bear?
Admittedly, that quote is a bit light and humorous, but Reagan was a fan of sensible conservation of forests and open land. Conservatives, especially the ones who like to claim the mantle of Reagan, would be wise to keep this in mind. As much as we Americans like our clusters of new development making life convenient for us, we also like wide open spaces and lush green forests. While growth in inevitable in a nation such as ours, we could help conserve our wildlands a great deal with smart, conservative conservationism.
I expressed in the Podium Positions regarding the economy, I believe we should begin a new focus on agriculture. Not only would this provide positive economic results, but would also help with creating results from conserving farmland.
Overview
While alternative sources of energy and fuel are undoubtedly the future, they have not been cost-effective for the consumer. Until we can make these products cheap and widely available for public consumption, we still need to power our nation. Clean-burning coal, domestic oil, and especially nuclear power would not only reduce our need for foreign oil, but the clean-burning coal and nuclear power would lessen our need for oil in general.
We must be smart about the protection of wildlands, but neither overly careful nor overly careless. Our nation has always reserved a general love for the wilderness. It's part of our heritage as a country. Agricultural growth will provide dividends both economically and environmentally, as well.
Friday, December 7, 2007
Taxes, Budgets, Transportation...
Craig Vitter and I were bantering back and forth a bit over the proposed gas tax increase. Craig thinks it is a good idea because we need to improve roads and finish transporation projects. I, on the other hand, think that maybe some budget cuts would help, or at least some reallocation of funds.
So I'm looking at the 2006-2008 biennial budget for Virginia, and let's see where our money is going. My goal is to see if we can find $500 million that can be trimmed off of the over $70 billion that is budgeted for the current biennium. Here's a few spots I've found and that I would question in future, or cut down, the figures I use are combined from the General Fund and NonGeneral fund for Fiscal Year 2007 and 2008 unless otherwise stated....
I will also preface this with saying that this is just number flipping, I'd have to actually see a better breakdown of the budgets to make really specific cuts. I'm just throwing some numbers around and looking at where they're going in a slightly general sense.
- We should be able to cut the $15 million spent on Jamestown 2007...that's over and done with now.
- $55 million in grants to nonstate entities or agencies...I'd like to see this one explained a little more. Are the recipients of these grants doing anything to bring commerce and/or industry to Virginia? Are they doing anything to increase state income? I'll go on the assumption that they are, so I'll leave them alone...but I'd be interested in seeing how much we could cut from that.
- Department of Taxation has a budget of over $194 million. I imagine that we could shrink that down a bit. Maybe down to an even $180 million. I mean, honestly...the only reason to increase the budget for the Dept of Taxation is if we're going to increase taxes, which is what I'm trying to avoid here.
- Can we shave a couple million from the budgets for each of the major public colleges and universities? The combined budget for the main campus of William & Mary/VT/UVA/JMU/GMU/VCU/ODU/Norfolk State/Virginia State/Radford/Longwood/CNU = $9,615,094,801 for '07 and '08. That's about 13 percent of the budget by itself.
If you averaged cuts that equaled $2 million per school (bigger budget = bigger cut, obviously, but let's just average it out for simplicity's sake), that right there could save the state $24 million, a $3 mil average would save the state $36 million. If you averaged cuts of $5 million, you would save the state $60 million. This is a large portion of the budget that is worth taking a peek into. Let's see if we shave $60 million over two years on this, what it would do.
Note: I didn't even count the $1.9 billion for the UVA Medical Center, VMI, or any special research or experimental divisions, or special colleges (like the Virginia Institute of Marine Biology). I also didn't factor in Community Colleges, general public education, museums, arts projects, or anything of the sort. We can leave those alone for now.
- Secretary of Education = over $1.4 million...for what? Anyway we can shave this down to an even $1 million, or $500,000 per year?
- Judicial Agencies combined = over $769 million. Take it down to $760 million even, if not further.
- The Virginia ABC = over $950 million. Somehow, I think we can cut $25 million from this without any problem.
- General Assembly - Senate = $21,229,665...HOD = $38,115,455. I say we get the Senate down to $20 mil, HOD down to $36 million. Total cut = over $3.3 million.
Just using round numbers, and making relatively modest cuts on only a few programs...I'm saving the state $126.7 million over two years. That right there is pretty much equal to the revenue that would be generated by the proposed gas tax increase.
And really, I've only scratched the surface.
So I'm looking at the 2006-2008 biennial budget for Virginia, and let's see where our money is going. My goal is to see if we can find $500 million that can be trimmed off of the over $70 billion that is budgeted for the current biennium. Here's a few spots I've found and that I would question in future, or cut down, the figures I use are combined from the General Fund and NonGeneral fund for Fiscal Year 2007 and 2008 unless otherwise stated....
I will also preface this with saying that this is just number flipping, I'd have to actually see a better breakdown of the budgets to make really specific cuts. I'm just throwing some numbers around and looking at where they're going in a slightly general sense.
- We should be able to cut the $15 million spent on Jamestown 2007...that's over and done with now.
- $55 million in grants to nonstate entities or agencies...I'd like to see this one explained a little more. Are the recipients of these grants doing anything to bring commerce and/or industry to Virginia? Are they doing anything to increase state income? I'll go on the assumption that they are, so I'll leave them alone...but I'd be interested in seeing how much we could cut from that.
- Department of Taxation has a budget of over $194 million. I imagine that we could shrink that down a bit. Maybe down to an even $180 million. I mean, honestly...the only reason to increase the budget for the Dept of Taxation is if we're going to increase taxes, which is what I'm trying to avoid here.
- Can we shave a couple million from the budgets for each of the major public colleges and universities? The combined budget for the main campus of William & Mary/VT/UVA/JMU/GMU/VCU/ODU/Norfolk State/Virginia State/Radford/Longwood/CNU = $9,615,094,801 for '07 and '08. That's about 13 percent of the budget by itself.
If you averaged cuts that equaled $2 million per school (bigger budget = bigger cut, obviously, but let's just average it out for simplicity's sake), that right there could save the state $24 million, a $3 mil average would save the state $36 million. If you averaged cuts of $5 million, you would save the state $60 million. This is a large portion of the budget that is worth taking a peek into. Let's see if we shave $60 million over two years on this, what it would do.
Note: I didn't even count the $1.9 billion for the UVA Medical Center, VMI, or any special research or experimental divisions, or special colleges (like the Virginia Institute of Marine Biology). I also didn't factor in Community Colleges, general public education, museums, arts projects, or anything of the sort. We can leave those alone for now.
- Secretary of Education = over $1.4 million...for what? Anyway we can shave this down to an even $1 million, or $500,000 per year?
- Judicial Agencies combined = over $769 million. Take it down to $760 million even, if not further.
- The Virginia ABC = over $950 million. Somehow, I think we can cut $25 million from this without any problem.
- General Assembly - Senate = $21,229,665...HOD = $38,115,455. I say we get the Senate down to $20 mil, HOD down to $36 million. Total cut = over $3.3 million.
Just using round numbers, and making relatively modest cuts on only a few programs...I'm saving the state $126.7 million over two years. That right there is pretty much equal to the revenue that would be generated by the proposed gas tax increase.
And really, I've only scratched the surface.
Labels:
economy,
energy,
environment,
taxes,
transportation,
Virginia politics
Monday, November 19, 2007
Brazil Moving Forward With Nuclear Sub Program to Protect Offshore Oil Reserve
Brazil is looking to build a nuclear submarine (or two) to protect the recently-discovered Tupi offshore oil reserve that has been described as "a massive find".
President Lula da Silva authorized $540 million in funding for the nuclear submarine program, which has been talked about for years, but never pushed as hard as it is now. Silva has also been trying to push forward with restarting the building of nuclear power plants as a cleaner, more efficient way of producing energy.
Nonetheless, this oil find is big news for South America's largest and strongest economy, especially considering that they are a key U.S. ally in the Western Hemisphere.
President Lula da Silva authorized $540 million in funding for the nuclear submarine program, which has been talked about for years, but never pushed as hard as it is now. Silva has also been trying to push forward with restarting the building of nuclear power plants as a cleaner, more efficient way of producing energy.
Nonetheless, this oil find is big news for South America's largest and strongest economy, especially considering that they are a key U.S. ally in the Western Hemisphere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)