View this email in your browser ([link removed])
MORNING ENERGY NEWS | 7.2.2019
Subscribe Now ([link removed])


** When will these deniers pull their heads out of the sand? Science has settled fracking's safety.
------------------------------------------------------------
E&E News ([link removed]) (7/1/19) reports: "A group of House Democrats is readying environmental legislation to introduce more federal oversight into the hydraulic fracturing process. Dubbed the 'Frack Pack,' the lawmakers are seeking additional co-sponsors for a set of five bills — already introduced in previous Congresses — that would alter how the federal government oversees the technology that has led to a natural gas boom over the last decade and upended the energy sector...The first of the bills (H.R. 3604) emerged late last week after Schakowsky introduced the 'Safe Hydration Is an American Right in Energy Development (SHARED) Act.'...'Over the past decade, there have been dozens of confirmed cases of contaminated drinking water in which hydraulic fracturing is the suspected cause,' Schakowsky said in a statement. 'Hydraulic fracturing operators and the oil and gas industries insist that fracking is safe, and does not cause water
contamination. The SHARED Act says "prove it."'"


** "[The Nord Stream 2 saga is] very frustrating, because Germany is only thinking in terms of its own parochial needs and ignoring those of the U.S.—one of its closest friends and allies—and of the other 27 Member States. Putting energy security in the hands of someone who would easily use that power to influence European politics is just not in Europe’s long-term interests."
------------------------------------------------------------


– G ([link removed]) ordon Sondland, U.S. Ambassador to the European Union ([link removed])

============================================================

Shall we make it a baker's dozen?

** B ([link removed])
** loomberg ([link removed])
(6/29/19) reports: "U.S. crude output soared to new heights in April, highlighting OPEC’s dilemma just days before the producer group meets amid growing geopolitical threats. A government report on Friday showed U.S. production grew 2.1% in April to 12.16 million barrels a day. Booming shale production from places like the Permian basin of West Texas have enabled U.S. oil output to overtake Saudi Arabia and Russia."

Menteur, menteur, pantalon en feu.

** Climate Depot ([link removed])
(6/30/19) blog: "Last Friday the mercury soared to 45.9°C (114.6°F) in Gallargues-le-Montueux in southern France according to French national weather service Météo-France. Media outlets not only blared the news, but sounded the global warming climate crisis alarms. That of course is very hot, but has it happened before? Indeed once again it turns out that Friday’s “all-time record high” is likely far more fake than real. It is now being exposed that major heat waves with even higher temperatures in fact had occurred in France in August, 1930. With the prevalence of fake climate news being what it is today, readers began digging in the archives to check the claims and found old newspaper articles from 1930. These articles reported how Paris had seen its mercury hit 38°C (100°F) “in the shade” in what was called the worst heat wave since 1870 – meaning that heat was around in 1870 as well and even stronger. The temperature also climbed to 34°C (94°C) in London. Yet those readings from Londo
n and Paris pale in comparison to what happened in southern France. In the Loire region, the temperature in fact skyrocketed to a Death Valley-like 50°C (122°F), some 4°C over the just reported all-time 45.9°C record."

Remind me who wins here.

** W ([link removed])
** ashington Examine ([link removed])
** r ([link removed])
(7/1/19) column: "Wouldn’t the costs of a carbon tax at least dissuade energy producers and consumers from using fossil fuel resources, resulting in lower emissions? And couldn’t a carbon tax be used as a substitute for painful, Green New Deal-type regulations? No, and no. First, let’s assume there is some human contribution to climate change in the form of CO2 emissions. In that case, wouldn’t the upfront costs of a carbon tax produce long-term benefits? Not really. A study, commissioned by the Institute for Energy Research, models six different carbon tax scenarios that elected officials could potentially bring before Congress. None of the modeled scenarios shows that a carbon tax would come anywhere close to producing emissions reductions in line with the requirements of the United Nations’ Paris Agreement....Any benefits to the climate would be negligible, but the costs would be severe. The Competitive Enterprise Institute has produced a video that describes how the costs of a carbon
tax would get passed along to American families. Voters realize this, and so far, the concept of a carbon tax has not been a political winner for anyone in either major party."

No plan survives first contact.

** P ([link removed])
** ittsburgh Post-Gazette ([link removed])
(6/30/19) feature: "Following British Columbia’s 2008 lead, Canada enacted a national policy last year that requires each province to create carbon pricing systems — either through taxation or cap and trade. Each province can set its own pricing level, coverage and exemptions. It hasn’t worked as well as policymakers hoped, according to a report last year by the Auditors General Canada, which said that only two of the country’s 11 provinces were on track to meet emissions reductions targets...British Columbia’s carbon tax has translated into additional costs of, for example, 8.89 cents Canadian per liter of gasoline (about 26 cents U.S. per gallon) according to the province. Carbon pricing could affect some industries more than others by forcing them to compete with foreign competitors not subject to such policies. In the U.S., a $25 per ton tax would nearly double the cost of surface-mined coal while residential natural gas would increase by 11%, and gasoline would increase 8%, according
to estimates from the non-partisan Congressional Research Service.

Energy Markets


WTI Crude Oil: ↓ $59.02
Natural Gas: ↑ $2.27
Gasoline: ↑ $2.73

Diesel: ↑ $3.00
Heating Oil: ↓ $194.90
Brent Crude Oil: ↓ $64.95
** US Rig Count ([link removed])
: ↓ 1002



** Friend on Facebook ([link removed])
** Friend on Facebook ([link removed])
** Follow on Twitter ([link removed])
** Follow on Twitter ([link removed])
** Forward to a Friend ([link removed])
** Forward to a Friend ([link removed])
Our mailing address is:
** 1155 15th Street NW ([link removed])

** Suite 900 ([link removed])

** Washington, DC xxxxxx ([link removed])
Want to change how you receive these emails?
** update your preferences ([link removed])

** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])