Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Four Dollar a Gallon Gasoline Doesn’t Scare Me, but What Does Scare Me Is……

It’s just a matter of time, this month, next month, this year, next year $4.00 a gallon gasoline and higher will be a factor in our lives.


May 15 AOL quoted Phil Flynn, a senior market analyst at Alaron Trading in Chicago as saying, "I think it's going to happen. Unless things change dramatically, I think we're going to see $4 a gallon." Flynn said, “Gasoline stocks have fallen for the past twelve weeks straight and are now at their lowest level for this time of year since 1956.”


In the same article “Peter Beutel, an oil analyst at consulting firm Cameron Hanover, noted in a recent report that refineries have not operated above 95 percent capacity since Hurricanes Rita and Katrina in 2005. Before 2005, the refineries, clustered around the Gulf coast and badly damaged in the storms, routinely operated at over 95 percent capacity.”


However, $4.00 a gallon gasoline doesn’t scare me.


Despite some inflation, a change in life style by some, $4.00 a gallon gasoline can probably be digested by the American economy. It won’t be pleasant, but will probably spur some of us to opt for more flex fuel and/or more efficient fuel consuming vehicles.


What does scare me is the continuing trouble in Nigeria. The United States imports approximately 14% of its oil from that African country.


Today, The NIGERIAN TRIBUNE reported “As at last week, the militants in the Niger Delta put Nigeria oil industry on edge. Eni [Agip] Companies in Nigeria were the worst hit as the attackers paralysed operations at the Brass oil terminal of Agip by sabotaging the pipelines feeding the terminal. Chevron Nigeria Limited also announced that it would begin to withdraw staff from offshore location because of escalating violence in the creeks after six of its workers were kidnapped and it also had to shut in 57,000 barrels of oil.”


What happens if the terrorists continue their endeavors and eventually bring Nigeria’s oil exports to a stop?


All we need to do is look back to the Arab Oil Embargo of 1973. Then the United States was only importing 30% of its oil consumption in more than 60% in 2006.


The Arab oil embargo of 1973 created a 6%-7% percent decline in consumption of oil by the United States, . Yet, the price of oil quadrupled and the NYSE lost $97 billion of value.


Now here is what really scares me.


Imagine if the situation in Nigeria continues to deteriorate to the point where its oil fields are shut down creating a 14% shortfall in oil supplies to the United States. That’s more than double the shortfall that was created in 1973 by the Arab Oil Embargo.


The results of such a shortfall would make the consequences the United States suffered from the Arab Oil Embargo pale in comparison.


It is easy to imagine a nightmare of double digit inflation, a downward spiraling of the standard of living, long lines at gas and even food stations, and possible riots and worse.



That nightmare is what spurs me to urge all who read this to work for U.S. energy independence through:

  • The development of U.S. fuel resources.

  • The continuing development of alternative fuel resources , such as ethanol, wind, solar, and even such esoteric sources such as the fusion of Helium3 .

  • Conservation in vehicle fuel consumption.

  • The development of and the use of more energy efficient housing, manufacturing and transportation.

  • Development of new modes of mass transit..


If the United States can achieve near energy independence than the nightmare of severe energy shortages will never occur. Instead the nightmare is replaced greater prosperity throughout the world through the development of new and alternative energy resources. These developments will raise the standard of living of even those in third world nations, without increasing the environmental footprint that such development created in the past.


That’s why USA Energy Independence dot com exists. To provide you our reader a format of news and views of technology and leadership that can prevent a nightmare and create a dream.









Sunday, May 06, 2007

Stossel Sacrifices Solid Reporting in "Corn God..." report

The rebuttal of Keith Sanderson, President and Co-Founder U.S.A. Energy Independence to John Stossel of ABC's recent piece "Sacrificing our Children to the Corn God."
John,
I am usually quite impressed by your objectivity and in-depth research regarding "Myths and Lies and Downright Stupidity". . However this time you and your team showed about as little in-depth knowledge about ethanol as you accuse many of your colleagues about having about science or economics.
Here are four reasons you are wrong regarding your piece "Sacrificing our Children to the Corn God,"
1. Those who are in the hunt for ethanol such as Andy Karsner, Undersecretary of State, Vinod Khosla cited as one of the most influential venture captiaists by both Forbes and Fortune magazines, Admiral Woolsey, VP Booz & Allen and former head of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Dr. Chu of of the Livermore research center who just received a $500,000,000 research grant from BP will all agree that corn ethanol is only a tranistional fuel source. They would likely agree that the U.S could not depend upon corn or row crop ethanol as the primary source for ethanol. The future of ethanol is in cellulosic ethanol. And had your team done its job they would have known that. You and your team failed to either understand the transitional nature of corn ethanol or chose not to include the whole story about ethanol in your report.
2. Luddite-like you chose to report on ethanol as if all things will remain the same as far as energy. Here are the facts. According to the U.S. department of energy the U.S. imported more than 60% of its petroleum needs in 2007. Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Nigeria each provide us more than 10% of our oil. These nations are either unstable politically or located in unstable parts of the world. Imagine what would happen if something occurred to interrupt their oil to us. To help you imagine just think of the oil crisis in 1973. At that time the United States was importing far less oil as a percentage of its needs than the 60% of its consumption that it imports today. Gasoline rose in price from $.30 a gallon to $1.20. Today, a similar curtailment of oil supply could raise gasoline pump prices from $3.20 a gallon to almost $12.00 a gallon. Without both corn and cellulosic ethanol development a curtailment in oil imports to the U.S. will be crippling to your economy and have a much greater negative impact on our children than your claims of danger from ethanol development will ever have..
3. Transport. Yes corn or cellulosic ethanol are more corrosive than gasoline. However, there is not the need to transport ethanol the great distances one must transport gasoline. Why? Because ethanol refineries are not scalable as are gasoline refineries. The nature of ethanol refineries (corn or celluolsic) scatter them across the country. Yes some modifications will have to be made to transport ethanol, but there will not be a need to secure pipelines in unstable areas such as Nigeria, and the Middle East, or secure ports and shipping lanes from those nations. In addition, Louisiana, Texas,California refine 45% of the nation's gasoline. We luckily escaped severe damage on Louisiana refineries by Hurricane Katrina. Experts such as Admiral Woolsey suggest that having our gasoline refining assets concentrated leaves this country open to supply interruptions due to both natural disasters and terrorism. The very nature of ethanol scatters our refining assets across the country.
4. Technology moves on despite the fact your reporting doesn't recognize it. The automakers tell us they will have hybrid vehicles within the next ten years that will get more than 100 miles per gallon. The average commuter (40 miles per day) will not consume a drop of gasoline with new lithium battery technology. The increased gasoline mileage coupled with the production of corn ethanol and increased production of cellulosic ethanol can and will seriously decrease our dependence on foreign oil.
Mr. Stossel, I invite you to unlike most of your peers, admit that you made an error in reporting and set the record straight by busting the unfair myth you have created about ethanol by concentrating on corn ethanol and not on the total ethanol story.

Keith W. Sanderson
President and Cofounder

Monday, January 08, 2007

Lease or Buy Your Next Car?

USAEnergyIndependence.com » Autoshow » Article
Jan. 8, 2007 16:10
New E85 Flex Fuel Vehicles, Hybrids, Diesel Engines Indicate Lease
By Dr. Energee


Lease or Buy Your Next Car?
Green Technology Signals Lease


The 1990s should have taught us something about laying down hard cash for rapidly changing and evolving technologies.

Like me, you probably bought a new computer for yourself or your business about once every two years starting around 1988. The fast pace of development led to computers with increased clock speeds, greater hard drive storage, evolving operating systems (Windows 95?), and the bulge in software code that pushed the envelope further. These were the impetus behind constant new investments in hardware, software upgrades and storage devices. By the mid 90s, most IT managers figured that it was better to lease than buy.

The evolving technology game it appears confronts us now with automobiles. At the Detroit Auto Show this week, GM introduced the Chevy Volt. The Volt can be fully charged by plugging it into a 110-volt outlet for approximately six hours a day. When the lithium-ion battery is fully charged, the Volt can deliver 40 city miles of pure electric vehicle range. GM's future vision power plant relies on E-Flex technology that translates to (E) electric propulsion generated through battery power maintained from a small engine fueled by [Flex) flexible fuel alternatives such as E85, biodiesel or hydrogen. Although a concept vehicle, earlier blog-meisters talked about a vehicle with these characteristics being available mid 2008. This week they are talking about "?". Point is these new vehicles are coming and coming soon at GM, especially with Toyota at their heels with their own 113 mpg vehicle due out in 2008.

Rapid technology changes in the automotive industry are already in play. GM announced at the Los Angeles Auto show in late November its intention to produce a plug-in hybrid SUV that can achieve 113 mpg through use of lithium ion batteries by 2009, as part of its VUE Green line 2 mode system.

In 2008, the 2-mode hybrid system will expand to the Cadillac Escalade full-size SUV and the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra crew cab pickups.

In 2007, the GM Hybrid system will expand to the Saturn AURA Green Line and Chevrolete Malibu front wheel drive midsize sedans.

In 2007, the 2-mode hybrid system will debut in the Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon full size SUVs.

TOYOTA already has four hybrid models, Camry, Highlander, Prius, and Explore.

That does not take into account the growing availability of Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) available for 2007 including the recently announced FFV-capable H3 Hummer. See bottom of this article or a list of 2007 E85-capable (Ethanol blend of 85% Ethanol and 15% gasoline) models from our USAEnergyIndependence.com and EthanolIsUs.com websites. (Check our websites for the E85 fuel station closest to you.)

Still, we’re not through. A flood of new diesel engines, some capable of burning Biodiesel blends up to B100 (all biodiesel, no petroleum diesel), will be available for 2008.

DaimlerChrysler and Volkswagen said that their Chrysler, Mercedes-Benz, VW and Audi brands were designing nearly a dozen cars and sport utility vehicles with diesel engines using an emission-cleaning technology called Bluetec.

The Bluetec emission-cleaning technology was developed by Mercedes-Benz to meet the new U.S. diesel emission standards. The system uses special filters to trap particulate matter that causes sooty emissions.

To meet California standards, a special catalytic converter or a device to inject ammonia-based liquid into the fuel stream will be added to reduce smog-causing nitrogen oxide emissions.

Mercedes-Benz debuted a trio of Bluetec-equipped cars last November — an E320 sedan, an ML sport utility and an R-Class sport wagon at the Los Angeles auto show, and said it intended to add the system to its GL sport utility next year. Those vehicles are sold in 45 states where emission rules aren't as strict as in California.

Chrysler said its initial Bluetec diesel would be a Jeep Grand Cherokee SUV. Volkswagen intends to use a 4-cylinder diesel in its Jetta sedan and a new small SUV called the Tiguan in 2008, and diesel versions of its Touareg large SUV and Passat midsize sedan by 2009. Audi is expected to launch a diesel vehicle in 2008.

New hybrids. New Flex Fuel capable vehicles. New diesel engines. There’s a lot to choose from in the next few years. Most of these technology-changed vehicles will start hitting showrooms throughout 2008, which we predict will be a pivotal year for Green automotive technology.

So we’re recommending anyone looking to buy this year instead lease (and negotiate for a short term one at that) a fuel-efficient FFV-capable or hybrid vehicle. You may end up paying more this year as a down payment and with greater monthly outlay for the lease, but the technology upgrade will reward you in 2009-2010 and bring us all toward greater energy independence in the near term.


2007 FFV Capable Vehicles
DAIMLER/CHRYSLER
4.7 L H3 Hummer
4.7L Dodge Durango
4.7L Dodge Ram Pickup 1500 Series
4.7L Chrysler Aspen
4.7L Jeep Commander
4.7L Jeep Grand Cherokee
4.7L Dodge Dakota
3.3L Dodge Caravan, Grand Caravan and Caravan Cargo
2.7L Chrysler Sebring Sedan

FORD
4.6L Ford Crown Victoria (2-valve, excluding taxi and police units)
5.4L Ford F-150
4.6L Lincoln Town Car (2-valve)

GM
5.3L V-8 engine Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra half-ton pickups 2WD & 4WD
5.3L Vortec-engine Avalanche, Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon & Yukon XL
3.5L Chevy Impala (LS, 1LT & 2LT)
3.5L Chevy Monte Carlo (LS and LT models only)
5.3L Chevy Express
5.3L GMC Savana
3.9L Chevy Uplander
3.9L Pontiac Montana (Offered only in Canada and Mexico by special order)
3.9L Saturn Relay
3.9L Buick Terraza

MERCEDES
2.5L C230 Sedan automatic AND manual transmission

MERCURY
4.6L Mercury Grand Marquis (2-valve)

NISSAN
TITAN 5.6L Titan V8 engine
5.6L Armada V8 engine

Iran threatens to stop oil flow via Hormuz strait

JPost.com » Iran » Article
Jan. 8, 2007 16:10
Iran threatens to stop oil flow via Hormuz strait
By JPOST.COM STAFF


A senior Iranian officer warned that if the West continues to threaten Iran's economy over its nuclear program, Teheran will discontinue the flow of oil via the Strait of Hormuz, Israel Radio reported Monday.

According to the officer, 40% of the world's oil is transferred through the strait, and the world is dependent on Iran for a source of energy and a stable economy.

Iran's spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, added that Iran cannot allow itself to give up the right to develop its nuclear technology program.

Monday, October 16, 2006

Thank You. Mr. President


October 12, 2006

“I really appreciate that. Thank you.”

With true earnestness and heart-felt sincerity I did not think I’d get or warrant, I had simple phatic communion with the President yesterday. We were in a receiving line at the Advancing Renewable Energy Conference in St. Louis. “We” were about 200 or so conference-goers composed of DOE and USDA PHD economists, agronomists and staffers, renewable energy industry association members, business leaders and others who were fortunate to be close to the podium. There were about 1000 conferees in the Hall whose expertise covered Wind, Solar, Ethanol, E85, Biodiesel, and other abstracts and permutations of bioenergy.

Mike Johanns, Secretary of USDA, Sam Bodman, Secretary of DOE were there too.
(How often do you get the President and 2 Cabinet Level members in the same space at the same time?) I don’t think anyone can quibble about the Administration’s commitment to our Energy Independence, not with these guys passionately pushing the Agenda.

Concern for the future of Renewable Energy from an Oil Man, as the President described himself, was refreshing. But like others in the audience, including Partner Keith Sanderson and I whose careers started in the Mining business 30 years ago, it was important to share the same communion and passion. There were others in the audience there who had been working on the Renewable Energy “experiment” for the last 30 years who never gave up the hope for a brighter, less oil-dependent future. Their time for recognition had come. We are grateful to them.

When I reached out to shake the President’s hand, I said “Thank you for all you’ve done for us sir.” Distracted by the line-of-hands, he first looked forward to the next person in the receiving line, then looked back to me and said, “I really appreciate that. Thank you.” He then looked ahead, looked back at me again with a quick glance, smiled and moved on.

Friday, October 06, 2006

OPEC’S GREED ANOTHER REASON FOR ALTERNATIVE FUEL !


During the recent spike in oil prices the members of the OPEC Cartel saw an interesting phenomenon reinforced. Oil Consuming nations are willing and seemingly able to pay increasingly higher prices for oil.

Now that demand has lessened for oil and oil prices have returned to more moderate levels, it seems OPEC plans to hold a meeting of its members and make a decision to reduce oil production in to prevent oil prices from continuing their current downward trend.

I want to thank the members of OPEC for being greedy and showing the world their true colors. Perhaps your greed will be like a cold dose of reality. Maybe more Americans will wake up to the fact that when one is dependent on a substance, be it oil, or drugs, and a cartel controls the supply, price is a matter of how greedy the cartel wishes to be. The brutal truth is a cartel will gladly hike its prices as the substance it controls becomes in shorter supply or the consumer becomes more and more addicted; OPEC is no different.

The conference for Advancing Renewable Energy is being held in St. Louis on October 10-12. USA Energy Independence is proud to be a sponsor of this event. Members of our staff look forward to listening to the speakers and interviewing some of them. Some leading companies will be exhibiting at the conference and we plan to visit their exhibit booths, as well talk with other attendees.

We will then post what we heard, saw and learned on www.usaenergyindpendence.com in order to provide our visitors with information about what is going on in the quest for Advancing Renewable Energy. We believe it is activity such as advancing renewable energy that will reduce this nation’s dependency on the OPEC Cartel and move us closer to USA Energy Independence.

Keith Sanderson
Cofounder USA Energy Independence
President and Editorial Director

Saturday, September 23, 2006

Motorweek Discusses Biodiesel on PBS in 2005

Biodiesel information as presented by Motorweek in 2005.

Friday, September 22, 2006

The Ethanol Boom

Americans Find A Fuel Source In Corn

Technology Energy Gas Oil Fuel

As oil prices continue to rise, Americans are getting their fuel from an unlikely source â€Â“ corn.

Across the country, plants are opening that convert corn into ethanol - a clean burning, renewable fuel. Ethanol improves car performance since it cleans the engine, fuel lines and increases the octane of a blended fuel. It also helps the environment â€Â“ a 10 percent blend of ethanol in fuel can reduce emissions by up to 30 percent.

Thousands of gas stations across the country offer drivers 10 percent ethanol blend fuel, and more than 600 stations offer 85 percent ethanol. That number is expected to grow with the recently passed energy bill that mandates an increase in ethanol fuel production. As demand grows, producers are using automation technology to produce ethanol more efficiently.

SOT:
- David Vandergriend, ICM
- David Meyer, Siemens
- Ron Fagen, Fagen Inc.
- David Reisz, Farmer
- Al Jentz, Plant Manager, Amaizing Energy
- Kate Brookes, On Scene
- Becky Constant, Amaizing Energy, Board of Directors
- Eugene Gochenour,Farmer

B-roll:
- Corn stalks
- Trucks unloading corn at plant
- Gas stations offering ethanol blend
- Cars on road

Produced for Siemens

Ethanol vs. Gasoline

KEYWORDS: General Motors Automobiles Cars Consumer Fuel Gas

STORY SUMMARY:
As the price of gas hits record highs, alternative fuel sources continue to be debated. One alternative fuel which has been touted for years as a renewable, low-emission resource that could replace oil is gaining momentum.

More than four million vehicles on the road today can run on gasoline as well as ethanol, the clean-burning fuel made from corn and other biomass sources. The number of stations offering ethanol has also jumped 60 percent since the beginning of the year.

Current flexible fuel vehicles can run on as much as 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline. A gallon of ethanol is 20 to 30 cents less than regular gasoline, with little difference in ease-of-use at the pump or car performance. General Motors says as much as 30 percent of our gasoline consumption could be replaced by ethanol if it were to become available across the country.

SOT:
- Tom Stephens, General Motors
– Rick Hittle, Arizona Petroleum

Monday, September 11, 2006

911 Remembrance



On 9-11 2001 my lawyer son was in an elevator on his way up to the 77th floor of the Sears Tower. His mother and I reached him by phone each individually to let him know in no uncertain terms to get the hell out of the building. It was about 9 a.m. A short time later, as I watched a BBC broadcast on my computer, the first tower fell. I called my son again who was now on the street and told him what I saw. No further words were needed. He ran away from the building.

For those other sons and daughters, the ones in the Towers, at the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania, the ones who couldn't run, no further words are needed! We remember them, the sacrifice of the First Responders, this day, and pray that tomorrow all the cowards behind the act will soon be delivered to their Maker.
So, let us join with the President and First Lady, and say a few words, in silence. Let us all remember them today and forever.
We've stopped running.

Monday, August 14, 2006

The Prices, They Are A-Changin!




Bob Dylan said it in his song, “The Times, They Are A-Changin.” And when it comes to energy, the times have changed. We have found that the times have changed from an abundance of available energy reserves to seemingly that of teetering on the brink of shortages.

Now, a new tune might be better titled “Prices, They Are A-Changin.” The hard undeniable fact is that cheap and abundant energy, the very stuff that helped make this nation great are no longer either cheap or seemingly abundant.

The history of this country has been one of having and using vast energy resources. It’s that availability and the development of technologies to develop the resources that has helped make this country great.

When the first Europeans arrived they found vast forests which supplied them a seemingly infinite amount of wood to heat their homes and to stoke their forges.

Through the 1600’s and into the 1700’s the colonies grew and prospered. One reason for their growth and prosperity was the abundance of water to power their grain and saw mills.

Then, what should be awaiting the industrial revolution when it came to this young nation in the 1800’s? Coal. Coal was plentiful. Throughout the nineteenth century coal driven steam engines powered the boats, the trains, and the factories that through the decades drove the engines of commerce.

When the internal combustion engine made its entrance, again, as if by magic the United States was blessed with an abundant resource. This time it was petroleum that could be refined into gasoline and diesel fuel. And again the economy grew and prospered as a direct consequence of the combination of ample petroleum resources and the internal combustion engine’s proliferation across the landscape.

Now, a very serious question confronts us. What happens when a society faces the prospect of continuously increasing energy prices and energy shortages? Answer: Inflation, unemployment, and worse; a spiraling decrease in the standard of living of its citizens.

The irony is the United States really doesn’t have an energy resource shortage. The nation faces a shortage of the will to act in becoming energy independent. Coal, oil shale, hydrogen, biofuels, solar, wind and other alternative sources all hold the promise for both short term solutions and long term solutions.

There is even a possibility of the discovery and development of an energy source that is not even currently perceived as existing. Does that prospect seem far fetched? Think about this. Who knew about gasoline in the 1850’s? Few if any visionaries in the mid 19th century could imagine the impact of gasoline, the internal combustion engine and the network of highways that tied this nation together in the 20th century.

The predictable technological future of those 19th century experts was steam engine driven technology. They could not foresee the amazing changes in energy resources and technology that propelled us through the 20th century. It just may be that there is a great and wonderful and unexpected technological energy surprise awaiting us. Even if there isn’t there are many options near at hand that can provide us USA Energy Independence,

However, unless we act… Unless our leaders forge a Declaration of USA Energy Independence policy that attacks our dependency on offshore oil, you, and I, our children and grandchildren will pay the consequences. Instead of continuing to be a nation built on a combination of abundant energy resources that are utilized to continually raise the standard of living, we will decline to a second rate power, faced with not only food shortages, but shortages of almost everything.


Keith Sanderson is co-founder USA-EI

Monday, August 07, 2006

Without Energy, We Will Be Extinct.


As the most powerful nation in the history of the world, the U.S. faces today its most critical challenge. It’s not from a foreign foe, from Iranian threats of $200/barrel oil, from war between Israel and Hezbollah, but from our own appetite for energy, primarily oil.

We are on tender hooks. An interruption of the Alaskan oil field supply leading to a loss of daily production of nearly 400,000 barrels is what has confronted us just this morning. That loss will take days, weeks, perhaps months to fix according to BP, the oil field owner/operator. The production loss may trigger the draw down of our Strategic Petroleum Reserve for the first time since the Clinton Administration.

That loss alone could send gasoline prices up another $1.00/ gallon over the next several weeks according to my commodity broker friends. But WAIT THAT’S AN EASY PROJECTION. It doesn’t stop there. T. Boone Pickens, the hedge fund oilman and billionaire geologist, said last week that annual worldwide consumption is 86 million barrels/day and production is 80 million barrels/day. You do the math: $4.00/gallon gasoline is an almost surety even before this Alaskan production shortfall.

And it’s not going away this time. No energy cycle from expensive to cheap. I spent the first 10 years of my career in the mining business, riding the energy-induced mining equipment boom (and bust) following the Arab Oil Embargo. By the mid ‘80s cheap oil was again in front of us and it fueled anew our dependence on unstable sources of supply.

Are we in la la land or what? This country lives on oil. We consume most of the world’s energy, our transportation network feeds our lifestyle “oil- habitation” and sprawl… we’ve all seen this coming.

USA Energy Independence needs an emergency, a national call to action. I’ve heard just in the last few weeks (sound bites all) John Kerry, George Bush, Howard Dean, Joe Lieberman and Hillary call for USA Energy Independence. Some of them actually have a plan. But the plans involve Ethanol or Oil Sands Or Coal or BioDiesel or Hydrogen, singularly or in some loose concert. It needs cohesiveness and greater immediacy, a central non-partisan focus, with statesmen not politicians, to pull us together.

We already have a national energy emergency, so we need a 911 energy-independence mentality, a Cabinet level position on Energy National Security, a daily review in the Oval Office of Energy Self Reliance initiatives, a Press Corps asking for daily Energy briefings, and more, for us to finally turn the corner on this Oil-Induced Hard Reality and Pain-at-the-Pump.

Join with us. Send a message to our leadership. Give us your email address and your zipcode (we’ll never share it) at http://www.usaenergyindependence.com. Maybe together we can bring the President from Crawford to the White House now to address this issue. He can even bring Cindy Sheehan and her Press entourage.


Bill Wolski is co-founder USA-EI.

Wednesday, August 02, 2006

To plan or not to plan for USA energy independence



In the late 1990’s a barrel of oil cost $10 on the world market. Today’s cost is over $70 per barrel, and some analysts are predicting it to go to $100 per barrel within the next couple of years.
In 2003 over 30,000 people died in France as a result of a heat wave, which appear with greater frequency and ferocity than at any time since weather records have been kept. Glaciers are receding. As a group, scientists have accepted global warming as a reality, and many of those same scientists place the blame squarely on our burning of fossil fuels.
Over the past 50 years, everything’s changed, yet nothing’s changed. Simply stated, there are human beings and more human beings using fossil fuels for personal transportation than ever before. There is more air conditioning, more refrigeration, and more lighting. All of which require greater amounts of electricity. Those are major changes.
Yet for all the significant changes that have occurred, there has been little change in the types of energy consumed, or – or more importance – our approach to solving any of our long-term energy issues. And, of more immediate importance to Americans, over the past 50 years we are less energy independent, not more.
If energy independence is the objective, is it better to have a plan, or is it better to let market forces determine who purchases the energy resources, and for how much? I put this question to Arnold Baker, Chief Economist for Sandia National Laboratories and former president of the International Association for Energy Economics (IAEE).
Baker indicated that having a comprehensive plan for energy independence is important, noting “it does make sense for the government to have an integrated policy for energy independence, because it is not just energy we are talking about, but economics and the environment as well. An integrated policy would balance our need for energy with our need for a clean environment and a strong economy. Additionally, it would provide a road map for others to follow.”
When asked why the U.S. has failed to put together a long-term, strategic plan for energy independence, Baker pointed out that “every individual and interest / advocacy group is affected by energy. The Sierra Club has its agenda, as does a congressional representative from Alaska or Texas or Oklahoma, as do so many other groups. You cannot find one person or organization in our society that isn’t directly affected by energy cost or energy availability. All have a voice and all influence in the debate. As a result, it’s been nearly impossible for politicians to reconcile competing interests. But it’s important to try and do so.”
According to Baker, the primary benefits to having a comprehensive energy policy geared toward independence include improved economic growth, economic and physical security, and a cleaner and healthier environment.
Improved economic growth results from being free of world oil markets and their resulting price fluctuations. Improved economic and physical security will result from, among other things, eliminating the need to be entangled in Middle Eastern politics. And a cleaner and healthier environment results from using advancements in technology to reduce emissions and find alternate methods of delivering and consuming energy.

Glenn Lewin, President, Newberry Research
Nationally, Lewin is best known for the 2002 book he authored THE BUSINESS REPORTER’S HANDBOOK, and the 2005 book COVERING BUSINESS he co-authored with Robert Reed. He has also worked on various projects for nationally known businesses such as Illinois based Caterpillar, McGraw-Hill Publishing of New York, and many other leading corporations.

Mr. Lewin holds an MA in Industrial Counseling and Psychology, with honors, from Northeastern Illinois University, with an undergraduate degree from Monmouth College, IL. In addition Mr. Lewin earned a certificate in Applied Statistics and Data Analysis from The Bradford-Gibson Institute of Management. He also completed the Harvard Graduate School of Management’s executive program in Competition and Strategy.

Middleclass Families Deserve Better

The low cost of energy is fast coming to an end and that means much more than the real possibility of $4.00 a gallon gasoline.

There are many reasons for this, pick one. Political instability in the middle east, global oil production that seems to have peaked while demand continues to rise, no new refineries coming online, hurricanes and more. All of these reasons conspire to drive up not only the price of a gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel, but also the price of natural gas.

As the price of these important energy sources climbs so will virtually the cost of all goods that are dependent on transport, and/or that are made from petroleum, or manufactured in facilities that use natural gas or oil to heat or manufacture products.

If you have concluded that means the price of everything from lettuce to jock straps will be impacted, you are right.

Yet, things seem to roll on as usual on capital hill. This is despite the fact that in the already seriously squeezed American Middle Class, families are going to take some serious hits in their budgets. But why should congress worry about what Middle America thinks when mom and dad are working to hard to have time to express their opinions.

The irony is that during the Arab Oil Embargo we had a taste of how drastically the soaring cost of energy impacted almost everything. Those who are old enough can recall interests rates climbing to 17 percent or greater, high unemployment, no economic growth, and inflation were the consequences. All of these nasty economic jolts were created by a relatively short blip to oil stream.

Now, more than thirty years later, even though we use less imported energy, the price of our oil and natural gas is set at a global price. That means America is at the mercy of all the factors that can and do increase oil and natural gas prices.

There is a ground swell of technological development of alternative energy resources as well as more traditional sources. However, changing from our current energy diet to a diet of alternative energy sources will mean setting priorities, the allocation of resources, and the processing and transportation of energy.

Congress is beginning to slowly awaken to the oncoming problem. As usual our representatives are quick to blame everyone but themselves and are going through their finger pointing exercises. Next will come the patronizing sound bites meant to assure voters that our leaders are concerned. Both parties have already made their inane suggestions about what to do, and cynics believe there will be many more lethargic energy gestures to come.

Soon, hastily conceived bills that are mostly sizzle and of little substance will be debated and voted upon. Lastly, our leaders will assure us all will be good and the nasty energy problem will go away.

Don’t let Congress lead us down the road of flim and flam. Let them know you want and expect a USA Declaration of Energy Independence policy to be forged. A policy that provides both short term and long term solutions to a problem that is as sure as taxes to affect our way of life and disposable income.

Tell your congressperson how you feel. Cast your vote and let your voice be heard favoring the development of a USA Energy Declaration of Independence.

Sunday, July 30, 2006

Congressman Kirk Does Not Respond

Wheaton IL , July 29, 2006 For Immediate Release.

Kirk and Some Other Illinois Politicians Lethargic In Responding To Energy
Question!
Keith Sanderson co-founder of USA Energy Independence and a resident of
Deerfield, IL which is in Congressman Mark Kirk’s
10th Congressional District announced today that the Congressman has been
sluggish in responding to the question regarding Energy Independence.
The question, “what are you and your colleagues planning to do to avert a
possible short term energy crisis and a probable long term energy crisis,”. was
posed by voice mail, two e-mails and also by personal conversation with one
of Kirk’s staffers on July 17th and 18th.
Other Illinois politicians, including Senators Dick Durbin and Barack Obama,
Congresswoman Judy Biggert of the Illinois 13th District, Governor Rod
Blagojevich and Republican candidate for governor, Judy Barr Topinka were asked
the same question.
So far Senator Durbin is the only Illinois politician that was queried who
has responded to the question about energy. The question posed to Durbin and
his response may be seen _www.usaenergyindependence.com_
(http://www.usaenergyindependence.com/) .
” Sanderson said. “Frankly, I am disappointed in Kirk’s apparent apathy
regarding what he plans to do to avert a possible short term energy crisis and a
probable long term energy crisis, Illinois can take a lead in the
production and processing of ethanol and other Bio-fuels. I was sure he would be
eager to respond to a constituent of the 10th Congressional District about a
subject as important as energy dependency on offshore sources..
The nonpartisan website,usaenergyindependence (http://www.usaenergyindependence.com) ,
was launched on the week of July 4, 2006. It is the definitive Internet website source for
information about USA Energy Independence. A unique feature of the web site allows visitors
to cast their votes for USA Energy Independence. Comments and views of elected political representatives and
candidates regarding USA Energy Independence are also posted on the site..
(End).

Monday, July 24, 2006

WASHINGTON - Leading House Democrats will introduce a bill tomorrow to take America in a new direction to achieve energy independence. The Program for Real Energy Security, or "PROGRESS" Act, will initiate a major national effort to make substantial gains in technology, conservation and vehicle efficiency, and the use of alternative fuels to advance America's national, energy and environmental security.

House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (MD), Rep. John Dingell (MI), Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Democrat, Rep. Jim Oberstar, Transportation Committee Ranking Democrat, Rep. Mark Udall (CO), co-chair of the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus, Rep. Stephanie Herseth (SD), co-chair of the House Democratic Rural Working Group and member of the House Agriculture Committee, and Rep. Earl Blumenauer, member of the House Transportation Committee and Task Force on Livable Communities, will introduce the bill.

The PROGRESS Act complements other House Democratic efforts on energy independence, including the Innovation Agenda and the Energizing America, BIOFUELS Act.

Monday, July 17, 2006

On June 14 via email I asked Senator Durbin of IL this question:

My question is relative to the dependency the United States has on offshore petroleum and natural gas energy resources and the consequences of this dependency. What do you believe needs to be done to avert a possible short term energy crisis and a probable long term energy crisis?

I would like to post your answer on www.usaenergyindependence.com so our visitors may gain insight to where you and other elected officials of both parties stand on this impending crisis. If you choose not to answer we will place you in the column of political leaders who elected not to respond to our question.

Here is his response on July 17.

July 17, 2006

Thank you for contacting me about gasoline prices. I appreciate hearing
from you.

I am deeply troubled about the effect of high gasoline prices on Illinois
residents. As the price of a barrel of oil has skyrocketed beyond $70,
oil companies have charged consumers far more than the companies' costs
for more expensive crude oil and for exploration and development. As a
result, Americans are subsidizing some of the largest annual profits in
the history of U.S. business. This is depleting the savings of consumers
who in many cases are struggling just to pay for food and other
necessities of life.

The increasing oil demand of a rapidly industrializing China and India and
political instability in numerous oil-producing countries are raising the
price of crude. Last year, I called on the President to begin an
investigation into whether oil companies are taking advantage of these
conditions to raise retail prices disproportionately.

We should begin by scrutinizing the mergers among the large oil companies.
These mergers have weakened competition and the accompanying pressure to
lower prices and profits, allowing five enormous oil companies to enjoy
record profits while deflecting the blame for high prices. I have urged
the President to get tough on price gouging, but he has been unwilling to
do so.

A new direction is needed in energy policy. We must cut our oil
consumption and develop promising alternative energy sources. If we
increase the vehicle fuel economy (CAFE) standards required for our
vehicles, we can save up to 100 billion gallons of gasoline by 2015. And
the reduced fuel expenses would keep billions of dollars in American
consumers' wallets each year.

I have long championed the use of ethanol, a domestically produced,
renewable energy source, and I believe it can be a significant part of our
energy policy. Ethanol reduces air pollution, buttresses our national
security by replacing imported crude oil, strengthens the rural economy,
and creates jobs as ethanol production facilities are built and operated.
In a nearly pure form, ethanol can also be an alternative to gasoline for
use in specially-designed E-85 vehicles. In 1987, I was the first member
of Congress to propose that the United States require that its gasoline
supply include 5 billion gallons of ethanol. Since then, the federal
Reformulated Gasoline Program's requirement that ethanol or other fuel
additives be mixed with gasoline in metropolitan areas has led to dramatic
reductions in ground-level ozone levels in Chicago.

Every year, Illinois produces more ethanol than any other state - about
800 million gallons. This generates nearly $6 billion a year in economic
activity for the United States and plays a vital role in the rural economy
of Illinois.

Long-term energy solutions for our nation's homes, businesses, and
vehicles will come from a variety of alternative energy resources.
Scientists and engineers are confronting the obstacles to the development
and commercialization of many promising sources of energy, such as
hydropower, hydrogen, solar, biomass, and geothermal. Congress has
offered major federal incentives for research and development to assist in
jumping these hurdles.

These steps can help America move forward toward a more stable energy
supply and a more secure energy future.

I will keep your thoughts in mind as I continue to work for a more
sensible energy policy. Again, thank you for your message. Please feel
free to keep in touch.


Sincerely,

Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator

RJD/

P.S. If you are ever visiting Washington, please feel free to join Senator
Obama and me at our weekly constituent coffee. When the Senate is in
session, we provide coffee and donuts every Thursday at 8:30 a.m. as we
hear what is on the minds of Illinoisans and respond to your questions.
We would welcome your participation. Please call my D.C. office for more
details.


Keith