Energy Tomorrow Blog
Posted February 13, 2018
Posted September 21, 2017
For a number of months we’ve been talking about the need for more efficient and predictable federal processes for the permitting of energy infrastructure – including new natural gas pipelines and added capacity. New, bipartisan legislation introduced this week in the U.S. Senate is latest move in that direction.
Posted January 13, 2015
The federal approval process for cross-border pipelines (and there are many) historically has taken 18 to 24 months, yet the White House says that more than six years isn't enough time to determine whether the Keystone XL pipeline is in the national interest.
Perhaps the State Department can help them out with analysis that argues that infrastructure of this nature is in the national interest – a point grasped by a strong majority of Americans in the Keystone XL debate – which seems to elude the White House. Now, if the White House doesn’t want to listen to what its own State Department says about infrastructure, maybe another voice will be more persuasive.
Posted December 5, 2014
Speaking to business executives earlier this week, President Obama lamented how long it takes to make infrastructure improvements in the U.S.:
“The challenge for infrastructure has been that … it’s hard to pay for things if you don’t have some sort of revenue stream. And I’ve been exploring … to see how we can do more in attracting private investment into infrastructure construction – which is done fairly effectively in a lot of other countries …”
Later, he praised the Chinese for how quickly they tackle infrastructure needs:
“… the one thing I will say is that if they need to build some stuff, they can build it. And over time, that wears away our advantage competitively. It’s embarrassing – you drive down the roads, and you look at what they’re able to do.”
For more than six years one of the largest infrastructure projects to come along in some time has been staring back at President Obama, waiting for him to say “go”: the Keystone XL pipeline.
By now many Americans – who favor Keystone XL’s construction by more than a 3-to-1 margin – probably can tick off the points arguing for the project’s approval.
Posted June 13, 2014
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Mary Landrieu says her panel will have a vote next week on the Keystone XL pipeline – now in its sixth year of federal review. The announcement prompted this statement from the office of Sen. Mark Udall of Colorado:
“If the Keystone XL pipeline were being routed through our state, Coloradans would want to know the decision was being made on the merits — and not congressional meddling. … That’s why Sen. Udall intends to again reject the notion that lawmakers know better than the engineers, scientists and experts whose responsibility it is to evaluate the pipeline application on its merits.”
Which is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Posted April 9, 2013
The ad reinforces the main reasons the full Keystone XL project should get the green light from the president:
- Job creation – Approval of the full, 1,179-mile project could put thousands of Americans to work – more than 42,000 average annual U.S. jobs over the project’s construction period, according to a recent State Department analysis. As the president said recently, job-creation and a growing economy should be “true North” for policymakers. The Keystone XL is that true North.
Posted March 18, 2013
Last Thursday approval of the Keystone XL pipeline came up during the House Minority Leader Weekly Briefing. Here is what Rep. Pelosi had to say, via CSPAN transcript
THEY WERE INTERVIEWING SOMEBODY FROM THE AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE. AND HE SAID, OH, THIS IS GOING TO BE GREAT. TENS OF THOUSANDS OF JOBS. THAT'S NOT TRUE. ENERGY IN OUR COUNTRY, YOU KNOW THIS IS ALL FOR EXPORT. SO WHATEVER YOU THINK ABOUT IT, I KNOW I WANT TO SEE WHAT THE REPORT IS FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT ON IT AND SEE WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING ABOUT IT, BUT -- THE OIL IS FOR EXPORT. THERE AREN'T THAT MANY JOBS CONNECTED WITH IT.
access deepwater drilling domestic energy energy demand energy policy government interior department offshore drilling offshore drilling ban offshore drilling moratorium deepwater wells environmental review
Jane Van Ryan
Posted December 9, 2010