Here is the latest:
WASHINGTON, Feb 19 (Reuters) - Upcoming federal oil and gas lease sales will be delayed as the Interior Department figures out how to weigh the climate impact of those sales without using a key tool for measuring those risks, according to a court filing issued on Saturday evening.
The length of the delay was not specified, but it stems from a Feb. 11 decision by a Louisiana federal district court judge that blocked the Biden administration from using the "social cost of carbon" - an interim estimate of $50 per ton of greenhouse gases emitted - to factor the risks of climate change into federal decision-making for permitting, investment and regulatory issues.
Read more from Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy ... 022-02-20/
Also the exact opposite thing to do if you want to slow inflations: "The Biden administration had been considering raising the royalty rate to 18.75% from 12.5% that drilling companies must pay on oil and gas leases, according to a draft notice posted last month."
Washington DC is broken.
What is Team Biden doing to lower gasoline prices?
What is Team Biden doing to lower gasoline prices?
Dan Steffens
Energy Prospectus Group
Energy Prospectus Group
Re: What is Team Biden doing to lower gasoline prices?
All of this points to higher energy prices for consumers.
Environmental rules deal new blow to US natural gas pipelines. Financial Times. For the first time in more than two decades, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission voted on Thursday to overhaul the certification process for new gas pipelines, providing for greater scrutiny of the economic need for projects, as well as their impacts on the environment, communities and landowners. The changes mean that new pipeline approvals — already subject to a lengthy review and often facing legal challenges — will become significantly more difficult to attain.
The role of US natural gas in the EU’s energy security and climate action. The German Marshall Fund of the United States. Opinion. This unclear signaling about the role of US natural gas in the EU’s energy mix does not make the latter a more attractive market. Nor is it helpful to achieving the EU’s energy-security objectives. The risks posed by Russia’s dominance of Europe’s gas supply is clearer than ever and will remain even if demand declines in coming years. More renewables and energy efficiency will reduce the EU’s dependence on energy imports but it will not change the fundamental dynamic of reliance on Russian gas supplies for many years.
Divestment doesn’t make greener energy. Washington Post. Opinion. Leading universities, including those mentioned in the Feb. 17 news article “Students file to compel fossil fuel divestment,” are spearheading the necessary climate research to develop tangible emission reduction efforts. Engaging with energy companies has proved to be the most effective approach for developing significant investments in climate and decarbonization solutions. By choosing divestment, universities remove themselves from directly influencing policy decisions as well as from being at the foreground of energy innovation.
Northeast pipeline blockade delivers trifecta of bad outcomes: dependence on fuel oil, higher prices, and more foreign energy imports. Real Clear Energy. Opinion. Spoiler alert: there is no question that the Northeastern U.S. pays more for energy than the rest of the country (and has for years), but the driving factor isn’t surging exports to other countries. Rather, it is opposition to pipeline infrastructure that has left the region unable to access sufficient supplies of affordable energy. Simply put, natural gas pipelines that could bring abundant gas supplies from Appalachia’s Marcellus shale region have been blocked at every turn over many years.
------------------
We can't let students, AOC's squad or Team Biden determine U.S. Energy Policy. This is all heading toward a very bad outcome and a much lower standard of living for lots of Americans.
Environmental rules deal new blow to US natural gas pipelines. Financial Times. For the first time in more than two decades, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission voted on Thursday to overhaul the certification process for new gas pipelines, providing for greater scrutiny of the economic need for projects, as well as their impacts on the environment, communities and landowners. The changes mean that new pipeline approvals — already subject to a lengthy review and often facing legal challenges — will become significantly more difficult to attain.
The role of US natural gas in the EU’s energy security and climate action. The German Marshall Fund of the United States. Opinion. This unclear signaling about the role of US natural gas in the EU’s energy mix does not make the latter a more attractive market. Nor is it helpful to achieving the EU’s energy-security objectives. The risks posed by Russia’s dominance of Europe’s gas supply is clearer than ever and will remain even if demand declines in coming years. More renewables and energy efficiency will reduce the EU’s dependence on energy imports but it will not change the fundamental dynamic of reliance on Russian gas supplies for many years.
Divestment doesn’t make greener energy. Washington Post. Opinion. Leading universities, including those mentioned in the Feb. 17 news article “Students file to compel fossil fuel divestment,” are spearheading the necessary climate research to develop tangible emission reduction efforts. Engaging with energy companies has proved to be the most effective approach for developing significant investments in climate and decarbonization solutions. By choosing divestment, universities remove themselves from directly influencing policy decisions as well as from being at the foreground of energy innovation.
Northeast pipeline blockade delivers trifecta of bad outcomes: dependence on fuel oil, higher prices, and more foreign energy imports. Real Clear Energy. Opinion. Spoiler alert: there is no question that the Northeastern U.S. pays more for energy than the rest of the country (and has for years), but the driving factor isn’t surging exports to other countries. Rather, it is opposition to pipeline infrastructure that has left the region unable to access sufficient supplies of affordable energy. Simply put, natural gas pipelines that could bring abundant gas supplies from Appalachia’s Marcellus shale region have been blocked at every turn over many years.
------------------
We can't let students, AOC's squad or Team Biden determine U.S. Energy Policy. This is all heading toward a very bad outcome and a much lower standard of living for lots of Americans.
Dan Steffens
Energy Prospectus Group
Energy Prospectus Group
Re: What is Team Biden doing to lower gasoline prices?
This insanity will never end