Halloween is here! Whether you are handing out candy, attending a party, or out trick-or-treating, pipelines make Halloween possible.
The costumes, face paint and hair dye that make Halloween unique are all made from oil and natural gas, and delivered through pipelines. Take for instance, the wrappers around Halloween candy – they are often made from plastic, which is created from oil. The same goes for the stretchable fabrics like polyester that weave together your favorite costumes. Without the millions of miles of existing pipelines in the United States that deliver energy safely and efficiently, many of these great Halloween products wouldn’t exist.
It’s safe to say, Halloween wouldn’t be the same without pipelines to make our favorite products possible. And without pipelines, life as we know it would be pretty scary!
A pipeline known as Line 3 has been delivering energy safely and efficiently to Minnesota for over 50 years. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission is currently holding a public comment period to receive feedback on this project.
It is now time to look toward the future and build a replacement pipeline so Minnesota residents have access to affordable and reliable energy in the years to come. Along with improving our energy infrastructure and safety standards, this project will also support good-paying jobs, provide a boost for local economies, and increase tax revenue for public services.
Utilities in Ohio are asking state lawmakers for a BIG favor at the expense of electricity customers. If they get their way, your electric utility rates could increase in order to bailout four aging and uneconomic electric power plants – including one that is in Indiana. These bailouts could cost Ohio families and companies billions of dollars.
HB 381, SB 155, and HB 239 are just three of the several bailout bills being pushed by utility companies that would raise Ohioans’ electric bills. HB 381 proposes a massive bailout to FirstEnergy for two uneconomic nuclear power plants, and SB 155 and HB 239 propose a similar bailout to several electric utility companies for two aging power plants, one of which is in Indiana.
Ohio families shouldn’t have to pay more for electricity just to pad the bottom line of electric utility companies and prop up an aging out-of-state power plant. If these bailouts pass, they will be the next in a long line of subsidies to electric companies that have cost Ohioans nearly $15 billion in utility surcharges.
Time is not on our side. With a state budget that’s more than two months overdue, the House has returned to figure out how to balance the budget and fund our state. We must act now. Tell your representative that taxing Pennsylvania energy is not the answer to Harrisburg’s spending. Stop the severance tax today!
The governor and his allies don’t seem to care that this is a dangerous tax scheme that could threaten tens of thousands of good-paying jobs, put affordable energy for Pennsylvania families at risk, and threaten America’s energy security.
Pennsylvania should not be subjected to a new tax to fund Governor Wolf’s big spending plans. We have to let our representatives know that this energy tax would harm Pennsylvania families.
The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was supposedly created to help address environmental concerns. However its negative impacts on the American people and its unrealistic mandates produce more damaging effects than benefits.
Damaging Cars: Ethanol blends of more than 10% potentially could damage millions of vehicles and void engine warranties. Many cars, especially ones created before this mandate weren’t designed to accommodate ethanol blends, especially ones over 10%.
Increased Food Cost: The RFS ultimately takes away crops that would normally be used for food. This can cause the price of food and consumer goods to increase.
Hurting Small Business: An ethanol mandate can lead to overhead and delivery cost increases. This would cause a negative chain reaction leaving less money to be reinvested, resulting in small businesses struggling to find the funds to make new hires or even meet payrolls.
With anti-pipeline protests much in the news lately, Robert Bryce, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, recently published a guest op-ed that points out how self-proclaimed environmentalists who oppose oil and gas pipelines as part of their “keep it in the ground” strategy may very well be doing more ecological harm than good.
“The Anti-Pipeline Anti-Environmentalists” explains how plans to completely switch to so-called “clean energy” instead of oil and natural gas could wreak land use havoc:
Climate activists are now hoping to block oil and gas pipeline projects across the country due to their claim that we must keep all hydrocarbons in the ground to avert catastrophic climate change. Those same activists repeatedly claim we don’t need fossil fuels because we can rely solely onwind and solar energy.
But while they obsess over our carbon footprint, climate activists don’t give a fig about the land-use footprint of renewables. Indeed, the dirty truth about “clean” energy is that it requires shocking amounts of land. In a recent report for the Manhattan Institute, I show that using wind and solar energy to reduce domestic carbon dioxide emissions by 80% by 2050 (80 by 50) will require covering about 287,700 square miles of territory — an area about the size of Texas and West Virginia combined.
Energy Citizens have been making similar points for years. Selectively choosing one energy resource over another never works. Our lifestyles depend on a commonsense mix of all forms of energy, the “all of the above” energy strategy that should be the goal of U.S. energy policies.
It’s up to us to keep reminding decision-makers in state and federal government to support energy policies – such as the reasonable use of pipelines – that will supply us with the energy we need.
The Trump Administration is now renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Did you know by 2020, all of our nation’s liquid fuel could be supplied right here in North America? To protect America’s energy security, we must preserve what’s called “Investor-State Dispute Settlement” (ISDS).
ISDS ensures that U.S.-based companies operating in foreign countries are given access to the same rights and legal protections afforded to them in the U.S. Constitution. ISDS framework allows the U.S. to conduct international business safely and efficiently by enforcing protections found in the Constitution such as due process, non-discrimination, fair treatment by the government, and compensation for the seizure of property. ISDS also promotes energy jobs in America by protecting investments abroad by U.S. companies.
Congress must defend ISDS—and our nation’s energy security and energy jobs. Please email your members of Congress now and tell them to contact the Administration and demand any new NAFTA renegotiations must include strong ISDS protections!
Pipelines have been in the news a lot lately. While activists trying to shut down new pipeline projects make wild claims about their safety, the scientific facts prove the opposite.
To prevent leaks, state-of-the-art technology similar to a doctor’s ultrasound machine or MRI is used on the inside of the pipe to scan the walls for any potential problems. In 2012 alone, $2.1 billion was spent by liquid pipeline operators to evaluate, inspect and maintain their pipelines.
Liquid pipeline incidents are down 50% since 1999.
Corrosion as a cause of pipeline incidents is down 76% since 1999.
Lawmakers and regulators should not be misled by false claims about pipelines. The industry’s commitment to safety through best practices and with the use of modern technology allows companies to ensure that pipelines deliver energy products safely 99.99% of the time. They are also needed to ensure that consumers have access to clean, affordable energy in the years to come. In the debate over expanding our energy infrastructure and greater natural gas use, it’s vital that we keep politics aside and instead focus on the long-term benefits for our country that take the form of lower energy prices, greater job creation, and environmental benefits.
That figurative barrier is called the blend wall – the threshold beyond which the U.S. gasoline supply contains more than 10 percent ethanol. Oil industry and small government advocates point to the wall in criticizing the Renewable Fuel Standard, a decade-old law requiring an increasing volume of ethanol and other renewable liquids in the nation’s fuel supply.
Automakers say they can’t guarantee that any but a few of their engines will run properly on mixes of less than 90 percent gasoline, and many fuel suppliers say it’s difficult and expensive to comply with the federal mandate.
Renewable Fuel Standard biofuel mandates could cause a lot of problems, among them potential economic harm. Like the Chronicle, Energy Citizens believes the RFS needs to be fixed.