View this email in your browser
MORNING ENERGY NEWS  |  09/17/2020
Subscribe Now

If Trump gets reelected, the Harris/Biden crowd can always move to Canada.


Spiked (9/17/20) column: "In February 2009, Ontario passed its Green Energy Act (GEA). It was signed a week after Obama’s Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act in the US, following several months of slow and arduous negotiations. It also had grand plans to start a ‘green’ recovery following the financial crash – although on a more modest scale. This was the plan: increased integration of wind and solar energy into Ontario’s electricity grid would shut down coal plants and create 50,000 green jobs in the first three years alone...But on 1 January 2019, Ontario repealed the GEA, one month before its 10th anniversary. The 50,000 guaranteed jobs never materialized. The ‘decolonisation’ of energy didn’t work out, either. A third of indigenous Ontarians now live in energy poverty. Ontarians watched in dismay as their electricity bills more than doubled during the life of the GEA. Their electricity costs are now among the highest in North America. In truth, the GEA had a devastatingly negative impact. And the need to disentangle it will burden Ontarians – especially poorer ones – for at least a decade to come."



"The strength of the Constitution lies entirely in the determination of each citizen to defend it."

 

– Albert Einstein

Imagine that. Solar panel subsidies aren't slowing fires...


New York Post (9/14/20) opinion: "The massive fires raging in California are being blamed squarely on climate change. Alongside ominous photographs of orange skies, the front page of the Sunday Los Angeles Times blared: “California’s Climate Apocalypse.” Golden State Gov. Gavin Newsom says the cause is climate change. Anyone who thinks differently, he insists, is in denial...This past decade, California has seen an average burnt area of 775,000 acres. Before 1800, however, California typically saw between 4.4 and 11.9 million acres burn every year. In other words, up to 12 percent of the entire area of the state — had its modern boundaries existed in the 18th century — burned every year. Old newspapers across the country were filled with descriptions of terrible fires. Back then, “skies were likely smoky much of the summer and fall in California,” as one academic paper noted. Elsewhere in the country in 1781, “the smoke was so dense that many persons thought the day of judgment had come,” The New York Times reported a century later...And the main reason we are now seeing more and bigger fires is because our century of fire suppression has left what researchers call a “fire deficit” — all the fuel that should have burnt but didn’t. It is now waiting to burn even hotter and fiercer...Californian fires are slowly coming back to their prehistoric state because of the enormous excess fuel load. Putting up solar panels and using biofuels will be costly but do virtually nothing to fix this problem. Prescribed burns will. What we choose depends on the information we get."

How about the global trend? Downward. 👇


NASA (9/16/20) reports: "The control of fire is a goal that may well be as old as humanity, but the systematic monitoring of fire on a global scale is a much newer capability. In the 1910s, the U.S. Forest Service began building fire lookout towers on mountain peaks in order to detect distant fires. A few decades later, fire-spotting airplanes flew onto the scene. Then in the early 1980s, satellites began to map fires over large areas from the vantage point of space...One of the most interesting things researchers have discovered since MODIS began collecting measurements, noted Randerson, is a decrease in the total number of square kilometers burned each year. Between 2003 and 2019, that number has dropped by roughly 25 percent. As populations have increased in fire-prone regions of Africa, South America, and Central Asia, grasslands and savannas have become more developed and converted into farmland. As a result, long-standing habits of burning grasslands (to clear shrubs and land for cattle or other reasons) have decreased, explained NASA Goddard Space Flight scientist Niels Andela. And instead of using fire, people increasingly use machines to clear crops."

If this is such a great policy, why is The Wolf so scared to let the voters decide?


Utility Dive (9/16/20) reports: "The Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board (EQB) on Tuesday voted 13-6 to launch a formal rulemaking process required for the state to join the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a carbon cap and trade program among 10 Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states.nAccording to analysis by the state's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), joining RGGI would reduce carbon emissions by an estimated 188 million tons between 2022 and 2030, produce a net increase of more than 30,000 jobs and boost Pennsylvania's gross state product by $1.9 billion. Opponents of the measure, however, say it will dissuade businesses from investing in the state and result in a loss of jobs. Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, D, in October committed the state to joining RGGI and since then, the issue has become contentious. Lawmakers have passed legislation restricting the state from joining the carbon market without legislative approval but the governor has said he will veto the bill." 

Energy Markets

 
WTI Crude Oil: ↓ $39.88
Natural Gas: ↓ $2.22
Gasoline: ~ $2.18
Diesel: ~ $2.40
Heating Oil: ↓ $122.22
Brent Crude Oil: ↓ $42.01
US Rig Count: ↑ 288

 
Friend on Facebook Friend on Facebook
Follow on Twitter Follow on Twitter
Forward to a Friend Forward to a Friend
Our mailing address is:
1155 15th Street NW
Suite 900
Washington, DC xxxxxx
Want to change how you receive these emails?
update your preferences
unsubscribe from this list