March 2012 Archives

Is President Obama's effort in the last several weeks to tout his administration's commitment to energy production and to streamline energy infrastructure all talk--or is it action, too?

Obama has been talking energy nonstop as gasoline prices continue to rise. The administration has noted that domestic energy production has gone up during his term and that more drilling in the Arctic and Alaska is planned for this summer. Last week, Obama issued an executive order requesting federal agencies to expedite energy infrastructure projects, such as roads, renewable-energy generation, transmission lines, and pipelines--specifically the southern part of the Keystone XL pipeline.

What do you make of Obama's singular focus on energy these past several weeks? What factors, including the economy and environment, should the administration consider when implementing Obama's executive order on energy infrastructure? What, if anything, should Congress do in reaction to everything Obama is doing?

11 responses: Frank M. Stewart, Lance Brown, Tom Stricker, Jack Gerard, Brent Erickson, Amy Harder, Bernard L. Weinstein, Michael Brune, David Holt, William O'Keefe, Scott Sklar

Who--or what--is to blame for high gasoline prices? And what can be done to lower the prices?

President Obama says that Middle East unrest is the chief cause of high gas prices, which are averaging $3.82 across the country. His administration is employing what Obama describes as an "all-of-the-above" energy plan to gradually lessen the pain at the pump for Americans. He is also touting the record-high oil and natural gas production that has occurred on his watch.

Industry executives and other independent experts say that there are certain things Obama can do to lower gasoline prices and that he has been disingenuous by claiming some of the credit for higher oil and gas production.

What, if anything, can the federal government do to lower gasoline prices in the short term? What can Congress and the Obama administration do to wean the country off of oil so that the U.S. is less at the whim of markets and other factors? How will high gasoline prices factor into the 2012 election season?

18 responses: Matthew Garrington, Jamie Rappaport Clark, Brian Murray, Carl Pope, Paul Sullivan, Amy Harder, David Holt, Brigham McCown, Jacqueline Savitz, Bernard L. Weinstein, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Daniel Gatti, Josh Freed, Will Rogers, Kevin Massy, Amy Harder, Brent Erickson, William O'Keefe

Should the government subsidize different types of energy sources ranging from renewables to fossil fuels?

The Senate is expected to vote this week on a measure extending tax credits for the wind and solar industries and on a proposal to create tax incentives for natural-gas-powered trucks. Another measure would get rid of such subsidies. Meanwhile, the debate over whether oil and natural-gas companies should retain their tax breaks goes on.

What factors should lawmakers consider in granting tax incentives to various energy sources? What is at stake if Congress does not extend the production tax credit for the wind industry or similar tax incentives for the solar industry? What about incentives to promote natural-gas-powered trucks?

What other considerations should Washington consider with these tax incentive proposals, such as reducing the deficit and combating climate change?

16 responses: Richard Revesz, Jim Collins, Peter Lehner, Brent Erickson, Kate Offringa, Brian Wynne, Bill Meadows, Phil Kerpen, Jacqueline Savitz, Paul Sullivan, Daniel J. Weiss, Bernard L. Weinstein, Matthew Stepp, Amy Harder, William O'Keefe, Scott Sklar

What are the broader implications of new legislation that creates a national clean-energy standard?

Retiring Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., introduced a measure last week that requires utilities to generate an increasing amount of the country's electricity through the use of renewable energy such as wind and solar power. It also calls for the use of other relatively clean and carbon-neutral sources, like natural gas, nuclear power and even "clean coal" technology, to capture carbon emissions from dirty coal-burning power plants. The so-called carbon capture and sequestration technology is not yet commercially viable but has been shown in a handful of demonstration projects to significantly reduce greenhouse-gas emissions from coal-fired plants.

Bingaman's bill is unlikely to gain any traction in a Congress focused mostly on election-year politics. But Bingaman says he wants his measure--which is expected to be the last major bill he authors before he retires at the end of this year--to start a conversation about how the country can shift to cleaner sources of energy.

What parts of Bingaman's proposal have merit and what parts should be changed? Could this bill lay the foundation for broader energy and climate-change legislation in another Congress? Should Washington instead focus chiefly on high gasoline prices and other pressing economic concerns that worry voters most?

19 responses: Lance Brown, Brian Keane, Paul Sullivan, Amy Harder, Phyllis Cuttino, Bernard L. Weinstein, Rhone Resch, Eileen Claussen, Josh Freed, David Kreutzer, Kevin Massy, Bill Meadows, William O'Keefe, Amy Harder, Kevin Kennedy, Margo Thorning, Frances Beinecke, Thomas J. Pyle, Scott Sklar