This summer, a bipartisan bill sponsored by Senators Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia) and John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) to expedite the permitting of energy infrastructure cleared the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. A similar bill is being considered by the House Committee on Natural Resources. 

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) reportedly wants to bring the Manchin-Barrasso bill to the floor for a vote during the “lame duck” session before January. A version of “permitting reform” could become law soon.

Senators Manchin and Barrasso, the American Petroleum Institute, and other supporters of these bills claim that there’s a crisis of energy availability, affordability and reliability in this country. And they blame that crisis on restrictive permitting processes for energy infrastructure.

But none of this is true. 

The U.S. is a net exporter of both crude oil and its derivatives, as well as natural gas. We produce more than enough fossil fuels to meet domestic demand. Likewise, we generate enough electricityon a monthly basis to meet domestic demand. Our power grid is highly reliable, with infrequent, short service interruptions mostly attributable to distribution line problems (such as downed power lines during a storm).

Even when energy availability crises do occur, insufficient generation capacity isn’t the cause. 

During the 2021 Texas freeze, all generation facilities, of every kind, struggled to generate enough power, and adding more capacity wouldn’t have helped. The Texas grid’s overreliance on natural gas in particular made it more vulnerable to gas supply disruptions because of frigid weather — and its isolation from the rest of the U.S. grid made it harder for Texas to import power from neighboring states. Worse still, corporate profiteering through generating artificial scarcity to drive up natural gas prices may have played a role.

The summer 2024 blackout during Hurricane Beryl was caused by downed power lines, exacerbated by the failure of Texas utilities to make their distribution infrastructure more resilient in the face of climate change. New generation or transmission infrastructure wouldn’t have prevented this blackout.

Americans do experience energy affordability issues, but none of them have to do with permitting of energy infrastructure. Crude oil prices soared in the summer of 2022, when a combination of factors including collusion and price fixing by some in the industry and supply disruptions caused by the Russia-Ukraine war led to a price spike. Lack of production and refining infrastructure wasn’t to blame. 

Natural gas prices showed similar trends, driven by some of the same factors. In fact, by expanding liquefied natural gas exports, the Senate bill may even increase domestic prices for natural gas, making utility bills higher.

Greenwashing Fossil Fuel Development

In addition to greenlighting more fossil fuel development, some backers of “permitting reform” also claim that weakening environmental standards will facilitate the rapid buildout of renewable energy and transmission lines for it. 

Several studies have identified the key obstacles to the buildout of renewable energy. One is the wait time for generation projects to get connected to the power grid, which is known as the interconnection queue. As of 2022, there were about 2,000 gigawatts of capacity in the interconnection queue, of which 95 percent were from wind, solar and storage projects. 

Bureaucratic delays at grid operators and utilities, not environmental regulation, were the culprit here. Another key obstacle is understaffing and lack of capacity in permitting agencies. 

But more than 95 percent of renewable energy projects already face a streamlined federal environmental review process, or do not undergo review at all, because they usually aren’t polluting and controversial. There’s simply no credible evidence that restrictive environmental laws are causing delays in bringing renewable energy online.

Likewise, the need for a massive transmission buildout to facilitate renewable energy expansion is exaggerated. There’s huge potential for expanding distributed renewable energy in or near major centers of electricity demand. 

Proponents of the Senate bill point to modeling claiming that the benefits of renewable energy and transmission line expansion will outweigh increased emissions from expedited permitting for fossil fuel projects, and more fossil fuel leasing on public lands and waters. 

However, the modeling is flawed. By relying on official government data, it undercounts emissions of methane in oil and gas drilling and transportation, as shown by numerous peer-reviewed studies. This is a serious shortcoming, because methane is a short-lived but powerful climate pollutant — 81 times more powerful than carbon dioxide over a 20-year window and 28 times more powerful over a 100-year window. 

Further, the modeling makes unfounded assumptions about climate benefits from U.S. liquefied natural gas exports replacing coal in importing countries. There’s evidence that lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of liquefied natural gas, including methane leakage and emissions from the liquefaction process, are actually worse than emissions from coal — and that the climate damage from liquefied natural gas exports outweighs any economic benefits. 

Fossil Fueled Lobbying

The push for more fossil fuel infrastructure is contrary to science. Every credible international body with expertise on this issue, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the International Energy Agency and the UN Environment Programme, agrees on the need to stop building new fossil fuel infrastructure. 

It’s also contrary to justice. Indigenous, Black, Brown and poor white communities have long borne the brunt of air and water pollution from the U.S. fossil fuel industry and the resulting health consequences. Adding to this burden would be outrageous.

There’s no excuse to ease permitting for fossil fuels along with renewable energy.

The chorus of establishment voices pushing for “permitting reform” without considering the evidence can be partly attributed to groupthink. But some of them may be acting in bad faith. 

The American Petroleum Institute supports the Manchin-Barrasso bill, which should tell you everything you need to know about who’s behind this push. 

Sen. Joe Manchin received more oil and gas campaign moneythan any other member of the Senate or House for years — and owns a coal company. Sen. John Barrasso is the third highest recipient of oil and gas industry money in all of Congress in the current election cycle. Rep. Bruce Westerman, lead sponsor of the House bill, received more than $300,000 in oil and gas campaign money, making the industry his top contributor.

In other words, leading supporters of permitting reform either have a business interest in it — or have effectively been bribed. 

If Congress wants to make policy in the public interest, using the best available evidence, they need to reverse course. They need to pass legislation banning new fossil fuel infrastructure and instead requiring the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to reform interconnection procedures to clear the backlog in connecting renewables to the grid. 

Instead of gutting the National Environmental Policy Act and other environmental laws to benefit polluting energy projects, they should pass legislation that provides funding to permitting agencies to hire more staff with relevant expertise, and requires more transparency and community engagement. There’s already a bill that does exactly that. 

The job of those who care about the climate is to compel Congress to do it.

https://truthout.org/articles/bipartisan-plan-to-reform-energy-permits-is-a-brazen-giveaway-to-fossil-fuels/

 

Today President Biden will take action to protect the entire U.S. East coast, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, the Pacific off the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California, and additional portions of the Northern Bering Sea in Alaska from future oil and natural gas leasing. In protecting more than 625 million acres of the U.S. ocean from offshore drilling, President Biden has determined that the environmental and economic risks and harms that would result from drilling in these areas outweigh their limited fossil fuel resource potential. With these withdrawals, President Biden is protecting coastal communities, marine ecosystems, and local economies – including fishing, recreation, and tourism – from oil spills and other impacts of offshore drilling.

Nearly forty percent of Americans live in coastal counties that rely on a healthy ocean to thrive. With today’s action, President Biden is ensuring that these regions can remain healthy and safe from the risk of oil spills resulting from development that would do little, if anything, to meet the nation’s energy needs.

Nearly 400 municipalities and over 2,300 elected local, state, Tribal, and federal officials across the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts have formally opposed the expansion of offshore drilling in these areas in view of its severe environmental, health, and economic threats. Nearly every Governor along the East and West Coasts – Republicans and Democrats alike – has expressed concerns about expanded oil and gas drilling off their coastlines. In Alaska, the new Northern Bering Sea protections are consistent with a long-standing request from more than 70 coastal Tribes based on the need to help sustain a vital and threatened ocean area, and the natural resources it contains that Indigenous communities have stewarded and relied on for subsistence since time immemorial.

Following this action, President Biden will have conserved more lands and waters than any other U.S. president in history.

Protecting the Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean, Eastern Gulf of Mexico and Northern Bering Sea from Offshore Drilling

Using his authority under Section 12(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, President Biden is issuing two Presidential Memoranda to protect all U.S. Outer Continental Shelf areas off the East and West coasts, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and additional portions of the Northern Bering Sea in Alaska from future oil and natural gas leasing. The withdrawals have no expiration date, and prohibit all future oil and natural gas leasing in the areas withdrawn. President Biden first used this authority in January of 2021 when he restored protections for part of the Northern Bering Sea, and again in March 2023 to withdraw 2.8 million acres of the Beaufort Sea from future oil and gas leasing, which completed protections for the entire U.S. Arctic Ocean.

Today’s action will safeguard three distinct ocean and coastal regions:

• The entire eastern U.S. Atlantic coast and the Eastern Gulf of Mexico. President Biden is protecting approximately 334 million acres of the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) from Canada to the southern tip of Florida, and the Eastern Gulf of Mexico. There are currently no active oil and natural gas leases in Federal waters off the eastern Atlantic coast. The southern section of this withdrawal matches a previous Congressional withdrawal enacted by the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006, and a subsequent time-limited 12(a) withdrawal issued by the previous administration that would have expired in 2032 without today’s protections. Today’s withdrawal builds on those prior withdrawals and helps safeguard the multi-billion-dollar fishing and tourism economies in these states.  
  
  
• The Pacific Coast along California, Oregon, and Washington. This withdrawal protects nearly 250 million acres of Federal waters off the West Coast of the mainland U.S. that are prime habitat for seals, sea lions, whales, fish, and countless seabirds. The State of California has had a moratorium on issuing new leases in its state waters since 1969, and the last Federal lease sale in the area being withdrawn was offshore of Southern California in 1984. The Governors of these states have called for full protection of their coasts for decades.

• The remaining portion of the Northern Bering Sea Climate Resilience Area in Alaska. This withdrawal will protect 44 million acres of the Northern Bering Sea in far northwest Alaska that is home to fish, sea birds, and other wildlife and where there are no existing oil and gas leases. The Northern Bering Sea Climate Resilience Area was established in 2016 and includes one of the largest marine mammal migrations in the world – beluga and bowhead whales, walruses, and seals travel the funnel of the Bering Strait each year to feed and breed in the Arctic. This is an area where oil and gas development would pose severe dangers to coastal communities, and where the health of these waters is critically important to food security and to the culture of more than 70 coastal Tribes, including the Yup’ik, Cup’ik, and Inupiaq people who have relied on these resources for millennia. The Alaskan Congressional delegation has opposed previous proposals to allow oil and gas leasing and drilling in the area.

Building on a Historic Ocean Conservation and Climate Legacy

Today’s actions build upon the Biden-Harris Administration’s ambitious climate agenda and unprecedented commitment to protect America’s natural wonders now and for future generations. The withdrawals advance two important Biden-Harris Administration priorities: honoring and protecting areas of significance to Tribal Nations and Indigenous peoples as well as States and other stakeholders; and helping to ensure our oceans and coasts are resilient to the threats of climate change and nature loss. 

The Biden-Harris Administration’s climate and conservation record includes creating three new national marine sanctuaries and a new national estuarine research reserve, including the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary off the coast of Central California; advancing designations for four additional sanctuaries; safeguarding Bristol Bay salmon fisheries; approving more than 19 gigawatts of offshore wind projects, enough to power more than 6 million homes; investing $2.6 billion in coastal communities; and releasing the first-ever U. S. Ocean Climate Action Plan.

With today’s withdrawals, President Biden has now conserved more than 670 million acres of U.S. lands, waters, and ocean – more than any president in history. This includes establishing or expanding ten national monuments and restoring protections for three more; creating six new national wildlife refuges; protecting the Boundary Waters of Minnesota, the nation’s most visited wilderness area; and withdrawing Chaco Canyon in New Mexico, Pactola Reservoir in South Dakota, and Thompson Divide in Colorado from further mineral, oil, and gas leasing.  

These actions are helping advance the President’s America the Beautiful initiative, which is supporting locally led conservation efforts with a goal to protect, conserve, and restore at least 30 percent of U.S. lands and waters by 2030.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2025/01/06/fact-sheet-president-biden-protects-atlantic-and-pacific-coasts-from-offshore-oil-and-gas-drilling/

 

President-Elect Donald Trump said Tuesday that he will reverse President Joe Biden’s ban on offshore drilling along most of the U.S. coastline as soon as he takes office.

“I’m going to have it revoked on day one,” Trump said at a news conference, though he indicated that reversing the ban might require litigation in court.

 

Biden announced Monday that he would protect 625 million acres of ocean from offshore oil and gas drilling along the East and West coasts, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and Alaska’s Northern Bering Sea. The president issued the ban through a provision of the 1953 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.

An order by Trump attempting to reverse the ban will likely end up in court and could ultimately be struck down.

During his first term, Trump tried to issue an executive order to reverse President Barack Obama’s use of the law to protect waters in the Arctic and Atlantic from offshore drilling. A federal court ultimately ruled that Trump’s order was not lawful and reversing the ban would require an act of Congress.

The Republican Party has a slim majority in both chambers of the new Congress.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/01/07/trump-says-he-will-revoke-biden-offshore-drilling-ban-on-first-day-in-office.html

 

IF AMERICA CARED ABOUT THE CLIMATE, THEN IT WOULD STOP SENDING WEAPONS TO WARZONES, AND ENCOURAGE THE FIGHTING....

 

 

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

 

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

 

HYPOCRISY ISN’T ONE OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS SINS.

HENCE ITS POPULARITY IN THE ABRAHAMIC TRADITIONS…

 

 

PLEASE DO NOT BLAME RUSSIA IF WW3 STARTS. BLAME AMERICA.