View this email in your browser ([link removed])
MORNING ENERGY NEWS | 01/17/2020
Subscribe Now ([link removed])


** How is the left going to pay for their socialism if they ban this cash cow?
------------------------------------------------------------
KRBC ([link removed]) (1/15/20) reports: "According to just-released data from the Texas Oil & Gas Association (TXOGA), the Texas oil and natural gas industry paid more than $16 billion in state and local taxes and state royalties in fiscal year 2019 – the highest total in Texas history. TXOGA President Todd Staples hosted a media briefing this morning to share the new report and to provide a closer look at how Texas uses oil and natural gas tax revenue to benefit all Texans...'Oil and natural gas does more than fuel our cars, power our homes and businesses, form the building blocks of our everyday goods and secure our nation.Taxes paid by the oil and natural gas industry support teachers and schools, build roads, boost essential and emergency services, improve healthcare facilities and bolster our state’s infrastructure,' said Staples.
'Since 2007, the oil and natural gas industry has paid more than $149 billion in state and local taxes and state royalties. That’s money that benefits every Texan – whether you live near the oil patch or not,' he said."


** "Climate change is here. We are seeing worsening weather and much more intense and longer-duration weather events."
------------------------------------------------------------


–[link removed] DeYoung, VP of Network Operations at United ([link removed]) Airlines ([link removed])

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

Even without any real damage, regulators chose the 'nuclear option' on nuclear energy.

** Foundation for Economic Education ([link removed])
(1/15/20) blog: "You’ve likely heard of the 1979 Three Mile Island nuclear accident. It’s often cited as an example of the dangers of nuclear power. It’s usually mentioned in the same breath as Chernobyl and Fukushima. But what exactly happened there? Was it truly an exemplar of the grave dangers posed by nuclear power? The answer is no. No one died. No one was injured. The other reactor on the site was still in operation until September 20 (yes, September 20 of last year). The Three Mile Island incident is an example of both the recallability trap and the sometimes negative results of being too yielding to the demands of the precautionary principle....People were frightened by the event, but there was no physical harm. Only the public perception of the risks of nuclear energy was heightened dramatically. The greatest effects were on the future permitting and construction of reactors and on NRC rules and procedures...So, even though no one died or was even harmed in the Three Mile Accident,
its impact is still clearly seen today. The accident seemed major and ominous, and because it was seen that way, public pressure made new construction far more difficult than it otherwise would have been."

Who decides which parts of the economy are considered excess?

** A ([link removed])
** ssociated Press ([link removed])
(1/16/20) reports: "Germany will pay utility companies billions of euros to speed up the shutdown of their coal-fired power plants as part of the country’s efforts to fight climate change, the government said Thursday. The agreement reached after late-night deliberations between federal ministers and representatives of four coal-mining states removes a key hurdle in Germany’s plan to curb greenhouse gas emissions over the coming decades...Eric Schweitzer, who heads the Association of German Chambers of Commerce and Industry, said a key question is how the electricity coming from coal-fired power plants will be replaced in future. The government has set a target of generating 65% of Germany’s electricity from renewable sources by 2030....Altmaier, the economy minister, said that while there would less 'excess production' in Germany in the future, 'we are very sure that we can ensure sufficient electricity supply for business but also for private consumers.'"

It's the dishwashers, stupid.

** Issues & Insights ([link removed])
(1/16/20) editorial: "The left had another apoplectic fit when President Donald Trump started talking about dishwashers at his Milwaukee rally this week. How dare he focus on something so trivial when House Democrats are busy trying to remove him from office. But Trump is on to something, and the fact that the liberal elites can’t understand what it is says more about them than it does about Trump. 'Anybody have a new dishwasher?' Trump asked the audience on Tuesday. 'I’m sorry for that, it’s worthless. They give you so little water...So what happens? You end up using it 10 times...then you take them out and do them the old fashioned way, right?' Trump said that he’s 'approving new dishwashers that give you more water so you can actually wash and rinse your dishes without having to do it 10 times.' This isn’t the first time Trump has brought up the impact government energy efficiency mandates have had on dishwashers. But this time, the pundit class responded as if he’d just committed
another impeachable offense...But the exuberant cheers at the rally suggest this issue resonates with those who do use this appliance every day. And for good reason."

In: Big Green
Out: Big Labor

** T ([link removed])
** he Hill ([link removed])
(1/16/20) reports: "Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and other Democrats announced Thursday they would not support the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), citing the proposed deal's failure to address climate change. 'Despite the fact that it includes very good labor provisions, I am voting against USMCA because it does not address climate change, the greatest threat facing the planet,' Schumer said in a statement. 'Instead of advancing global climate security by outlining binding and enforceable climate commitments from all three countries, the Trump administration provides significant incentives for manufacturers to move their business and their jobs from the U.S. to Mexico, where clean air and clean water regulations are much weaker,' he continued...Several other Democrats opposed the trade deal citing climate concerns, including Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Kamala Harris (Calif.), Ed Markey (Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.), Jack Reed (R.I), Brian Schatz (Hawaii)
and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Sanders mentioned climate change as a factor in his opposition to the deal during Tuesday's night's debate, only to be cut off by the moderator who promised to address climate change later."

If you oppose a carbon tax, please ** contact us and take a stand (mailto:[email protected]?subject=Carbon%20Tax%20list)
.

Tom Pyle, American Energy Alliance
Myron Ebell, Competitive Enterprise Institute
Phil Kerpen, American Commitment
Andrew Quinlan, Center for Freedom and Prosperity
Tim Phillips, Americans for Prosperity
Grover Norquist, Americans for Tax Reform
George Landrith, Frontiers of Freedom
Thomas A. Schatz, Citizens Against Government Waste
Richard Manning, Americans for Limited Government
Adam Brandon, FreedomWorks
Craig Richardson, E&E Legal
Benjamin Zycher, American Enterprise Institute
Amy Oliver Cooke, Independence Institute
Jason Hayes, Mackinac Center
David Williams, Taxpayers Protection Alliance
Paul Gessing, Rio Grande Foundation
Seton Motley, Less Government
Nathan Nascimento, Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce
Isaac Orr, Center of the American Experiment
David T. Stevenson & Clint Laird, Caesar Rodney Institute
John Droz, Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions
Jim Karahalios, Axe the Carbon Tax
Mark Mathis, Clear Energy Alliance
Mandy Gunasekara, Energy 45
Jack Ekstrom, PolicyWorks America

Energy Markets


WTI Crude Oil: ↑ $58.67
Natural Gas: ↓ $2.04
Gasoline: ↓ $2.56

Diesel: ↓ $3.00
Heating Oil: ↓ $185.20
Brent Crude Oil: ↑ $64.80
** US Rig Count ([link removed])
: ↓ 805



** 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])