/PRNewswire/ -- Thomas A Fanning, chairman, president and CEO of Southern Company, today told members of Congress that proposed regulations aimed at emissions from power plants could reduce reliability, raise electricity prices, slow economic development and eliminate American jobs.
"My message today is that the reliability and affordability that Americans deserve could be at risk," Fanning said in testimony before the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power in Washington.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed regulation on further reducing air emissions from coal-fired power plants. The new regulation, known as Utility MACT (maximum achievable control technology), covers 125 different types of emissions. The EPA has allowed 60 days for comment.
"This is nearly a thousand-page rule with nearly a thousand more pages of technical supporting documents," Fanning said. "Sixty days is plainly inadequate for the industry to analyze this rule and its effects and offer meaningful comments."
Of greater concern, said Fanning, is the three years mandated for compliance.
"In just three years, utilities would have to develop compliance strategies for each plant, engineer solutions on a unit-by-unit basis, obtain required environmental permits, gain state public utility commission regulatory approval, actually procure and install the required technology, test the technology and implement any operational changes, and then demonstrate full compliance," Fanning said.
A study conducted for the Edison Electric Institute by ICF, Fanning testified, concluded that for the U.S. by 2015 over 80,000 megawatts of scrubbers and over 160,000 megawatts of fabric filter baghouses would have to be constructed and almost 80,000 megawatts of current coal capacity would have to be replaced.
"As the CEO of a company that has installed more pollution controls than any other utility," Fanning said, "I tell you that this cannot be done in three years."
Fanning also stressed that the Utility MACT proposal could cost the industry as much as $300 billion over the next five years.
-----
Community News You Can Use
Click to read MORE news:
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
Twitter: @gafrontpage & @TheGATable @HookedonHistory
www.ArtsAcrossGeorgia.com
Twitter: @artsacrossga, @softnblue, @RimbomboAAG @FayetteFP
Showing posts with label regulations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label regulations. Show all posts
Friday, April 15, 2011
Friday, July 30, 2010
New Poll: Americans Support Energy Production, Oppose Unfair Taxes by a 3-1 Margin
/PRNewswire/ -- A new survey released today by the American Energy Alliance (AEA) found that 77 percent of registered voters oppose efforts in Congress to tax American companies twice on income earned abroad. The poll also found that 3 out of 4 Americans agree that our energy companies should be allowed to continue offshore exploration for energy and, separately, that we should increase U.S. oil production.
"These results may not be what the leaders on Capitol Hill want to hear, but it is no surprise that even with the tragic events unfolding in the Gulf, Americans recognize the realities of our nation's economy, the abundance of energy still available here in the U.S., and the overall exemplary safety record of our nation's drillers," AEA president Thomas Pyle said.
"AEA recently commissioned a study that showed 12,000 jobs would be lost and $2.8 billion in economic activity with it, because of the Administration's six-month moratorium in the Gulf. This unpopular and unnecessary ban is costing more jobs every day and will cost every American in terms of higher energy prices and increased reliance on energy from unstable foreign regimes. Again, we urge the Administration to listen to the American people and reopen the Gulf to responsible energy development."
The survey, conducted by Jan R van Lohuizen from Voter/Consumer Outreach, comes at a time when the President and Congress are attempting to pay for environmental and other pet projects on the backs of American oil and gas companies. Two specific changes to the tax code included in the President's 2011 budget and under discussion on Capitol Hill would have the impact of increasing the cost of energy in the U.S. and could lead to even more job losses in the energy sector. The U.S. currently taxes the global income of its international companies, but provides a credit against domestic tax liability on that income in hopes of keeping American companies from being "double-taxed" on their overseas earnings. Targeting our own energy producers with this double-tax will weaken American energy companies' ability to compete with foreign energy companies.
Additionally, policymakers are looking to repeal Section 199 tax provisions which gives all businesses that manufacture goods within the U.S. an incentive to grow their U.S. operations and hire more U.S. workers. Some in Washington are attempting to repeal these provisions just on the oil industry, essentially discriminating against energy jobs. Today, the energy industry employs some 9 million workers. However, many of these jobs could be in jeopardy if the Administration and Congress continue the drilling moratorium and impose new and onerous taxes on these companies.
The survey also found that Americans overwhelmingly oppose new regulations on the energy industry and, instead, support efforts to better enforce existing laws (16%-75%).
The poll was commissioned by Save U.S. Energy Jobs, a project of the American Energy Alliance - a free market energy advocacy organization. To learn more and get exclusive information on upcoming projects, follow Save U.S. Energy Jobs on Twitter and Facebook.
-----
Community News You Can Use
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
"These results may not be what the leaders on Capitol Hill want to hear, but it is no surprise that even with the tragic events unfolding in the Gulf, Americans recognize the realities of our nation's economy, the abundance of energy still available here in the U.S., and the overall exemplary safety record of our nation's drillers," AEA president Thomas Pyle said.
"AEA recently commissioned a study that showed 12,000 jobs would be lost and $2.8 billion in economic activity with it, because of the Administration's six-month moratorium in the Gulf. This unpopular and unnecessary ban is costing more jobs every day and will cost every American in terms of higher energy prices and increased reliance on energy from unstable foreign regimes. Again, we urge the Administration to listen to the American people and reopen the Gulf to responsible energy development."
The survey, conducted by Jan R van Lohuizen from Voter/Consumer Outreach, comes at a time when the President and Congress are attempting to pay for environmental and other pet projects on the backs of American oil and gas companies. Two specific changes to the tax code included in the President's 2011 budget and under discussion on Capitol Hill would have the impact of increasing the cost of energy in the U.S. and could lead to even more job losses in the energy sector. The U.S. currently taxes the global income of its international companies, but provides a credit against domestic tax liability on that income in hopes of keeping American companies from being "double-taxed" on their overseas earnings. Targeting our own energy producers with this double-tax will weaken American energy companies' ability to compete with foreign energy companies.
Additionally, policymakers are looking to repeal Section 199 tax provisions which gives all businesses that manufacture goods within the U.S. an incentive to grow their U.S. operations and hire more U.S. workers. Some in Washington are attempting to repeal these provisions just on the oil industry, essentially discriminating against energy jobs. Today, the energy industry employs some 9 million workers. However, many of these jobs could be in jeopardy if the Administration and Congress continue the drilling moratorium and impose new and onerous taxes on these companies.
The survey also found that Americans overwhelmingly oppose new regulations on the energy industry and, instead, support efforts to better enforce existing laws (16%-75%).
The poll was commissioned by Save U.S. Energy Jobs, a project of the American Energy Alliance - a free market energy advocacy organization. To learn more and get exclusive information on upcoming projects, follow Save U.S. Energy Jobs on Twitter and Facebook.
-----
Community News You Can Use
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Friday, July 23, 2010
Coalition of Consumers Urges Senate Not to Legislate Natural Gas Demand in Energy/Climate Bill
/PRNewswire/ -- A coalition of major manufacturers, agricultural organizations and other industrial energy consumers today cautioned the Senate to avoid legislating new natural gas demand in any energy or climate change bill, saying such an approach would be "misguided" given existing strong demand growth and looming regulatory and political uncertainty surrounding access to major supply sources.
In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, 67 industrial and agriculture energy consumers -- representing farm and food concerns and makers of chemicals, fertilizer, glass, paper and steel -- expressed concern about artificially creating power and transportation sector demand for natural gas through legislative incentives. Doing so, they said, would cause the type of fuel switching that has ripple effects through the economy.
Paul Cicio, president of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA), said legislating new demand would prompt increased price volatility and higher prices. Higher natural gas prices also mean higher electricity costs.
"The impact will be felt by all consumers, not just industrial users," Cicio said. "Farmers will pay more for fertilizer, natural gas to dry their crops and electricity to run their irrigation systems; homeowners will pay more to heat and cool their homes; and manufacturers would be confronted with greater competitiveness challenges which threaten jobs at home."
The coalition said gas demand has been steadily rising in the past decade without the incentives being contemplated in the Senate and in the absence of carbon caps, which will increasingly shift more power generators from coal to natural gas. The power sector's natural gas demand has grown by nearly 30% since 2001.
"The economic recovery and our energy security will be better served if U.S. energy policy ensures American manufacturing can continue to compete globally and keep its jobs here," said Peter Molinaro, Dow Chemical's vice president of federal and state government affairs. "Our economy needs a diverse base of price-sensitive natural gas consumers -- and a diverse energy supply -- in order to reduce price volatility in all energy sectors."
The letter urges the Senate to allow the market to set supply and demand for natural gas instead of picking 'winners' and 'losers' through legislation.
The coalition acknowledged there is great hope that the large shale gas reserves will materialize as recoverable supplies. "However, history has shown that unforeseen circumstances, including the potential for both federal and state regulations to be placed on shale drilling, can either slow its production, increase its costs or otherwise dramatically alter these types of future projections."
The industrial and agriculture consumers called for a coherent energy policy that balances gas demand with the economy's need for affordable supplies.
Signatories to the letter include: American Forest &Paper Association, Dow Chemical Company, Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Land O' Lakes, Steel Manufacturers Association and The Fertilizer Institute.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, 67 industrial and agriculture energy consumers -- representing farm and food concerns and makers of chemicals, fertilizer, glass, paper and steel -- expressed concern about artificially creating power and transportation sector demand for natural gas through legislative incentives. Doing so, they said, would cause the type of fuel switching that has ripple effects through the economy.
Paul Cicio, president of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA), said legislating new demand would prompt increased price volatility and higher prices. Higher natural gas prices also mean higher electricity costs.
"The impact will be felt by all consumers, not just industrial users," Cicio said. "Farmers will pay more for fertilizer, natural gas to dry their crops and electricity to run their irrigation systems; homeowners will pay more to heat and cool their homes; and manufacturers would be confronted with greater competitiveness challenges which threaten jobs at home."
The coalition said gas demand has been steadily rising in the past decade without the incentives being contemplated in the Senate and in the absence of carbon caps, which will increasingly shift more power generators from coal to natural gas. The power sector's natural gas demand has grown by nearly 30% since 2001.
"The economic recovery and our energy security will be better served if U.S. energy policy ensures American manufacturing can continue to compete globally and keep its jobs here," said Peter Molinaro, Dow Chemical's vice president of federal and state government affairs. "Our economy needs a diverse base of price-sensitive natural gas consumers -- and a diverse energy supply -- in order to reduce price volatility in all energy sectors."
The letter urges the Senate to allow the market to set supply and demand for natural gas instead of picking 'winners' and 'losers' through legislation.
The coalition acknowledged there is great hope that the large shale gas reserves will materialize as recoverable supplies. "However, history has shown that unforeseen circumstances, including the potential for both federal and state regulations to be placed on shale drilling, can either slow its production, increase its costs or otherwise dramatically alter these types of future projections."
The industrial and agriculture consumers called for a coherent energy policy that balances gas demand with the economy's need for affordable supplies.
Signatories to the letter include: American Forest &Paper Association, Dow Chemical Company, Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Land O' Lakes, Steel Manufacturers Association and The Fertilizer Institute.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Friday, January 8, 2010
Georgia Power to Delay Plant Mitchell Conversion to Biomass
/PRNewswire/ -- With the uncertainty of how future U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations might affect industrial boiler emissions, Georgia Power has decided to delay the conversion of coal-fueled Plant Mitchell in Albany, Ga., to biomass until the EPA rules are better defined in April 2010.
The anticipated industrial boiler Maximum Achievable Control Technology rule, or "IB MACT," would regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants, such as certain acid gases, organics, metals, and possibly other pollutants, from industrial boilers and would likely affect biomass boilers like the one planned for Plant Mitchell.
"Georgia Power is committed to furthering the development of renewable energy in Georgia," said Jeff Burleson, Georgia Power's director of Resource Policy and Planning. "We're disappointed to have to delay this large biomass project and the benefits it can deliver. However, by delaying capital spending on the project we're significantly reducing the cost risk to customers."
Georgia Power had originally planned to begin retrofit construction at Plant Mitchell in April 2011 with the unit becoming operational in June 2012. A new project schedule has yet to be determined.
Once the new EPA rules are better defined, Georgia Power will evaluate the potential impact they might have on the conversion project at Plant Mitchell. The company plans to study other boiler technologies in the event the rules significantly impact the cost of the biomass boiler conversion currently planned for the plant.
Upon conversion, Plant Mitchell will have lower emissions and will be one of the largest wood biomass plants in the United States. It will also have lower fuel and operating costs when compared to continued operation using coal, thereby making the plant more cost-effective for customers.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
The anticipated industrial boiler Maximum Achievable Control Technology rule, or "IB MACT," would regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants, such as certain acid gases, organics, metals, and possibly other pollutants, from industrial boilers and would likely affect biomass boilers like the one planned for Plant Mitchell.
"Georgia Power is committed to furthering the development of renewable energy in Georgia," said Jeff Burleson, Georgia Power's director of Resource Policy and Planning. "We're disappointed to have to delay this large biomass project and the benefits it can deliver. However, by delaying capital spending on the project we're significantly reducing the cost risk to customers."
Georgia Power had originally planned to begin retrofit construction at Plant Mitchell in April 2011 with the unit becoming operational in June 2012. A new project schedule has yet to be determined.
Once the new EPA rules are better defined, Georgia Power will evaluate the potential impact they might have on the conversion project at Plant Mitchell. The company plans to study other boiler technologies in the event the rules significantly impact the cost of the biomass boiler conversion currently planned for the plant.
Upon conversion, Plant Mitchell will have lower emissions and will be one of the largest wood biomass plants in the United States. It will also have lower fuel and operating costs when compared to continued operation using coal, thereby making the plant more cost-effective for customers.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
