Grumpy Editor

Obama praises solar plant: 5 jobs, no power for Nevadans

National media on President Barack Obama’s solar energy visit to the Las Vegas area on Wednesday neglected to mention that the one million glittering photovoltaic panels that served as a backdrop for his 17-minute televised speech that brought applause from the audience and heavy print/broadcast coverage, would not provide one watt of power to Nevadans who helped foot the bill, observes Grumpy Editor. 

And as for total jobs created at Sempra Energy Corp.’s Copper Mountain Solar 1 plant in Boulder City, 30 miles east of Las Vegas:  only five full-timers run the plant. 

That wasn’t exciting news to Nevadans in a state that has the highest unemployment rate in the nation, 12.7 percent. 

San Diego-based Sempra owns the facility that cost $141 million with a portion of that funded by Nevada taxpayers who consistently receive hikes in power rates --- now among the highest in the nation --- from NV Energy, Inc., which serves the Silver State.

Yet, Sempra's solar energy output from Nevada is being directed to California. 

Both NV Energy and Sempra are listed on the New York Stock Exchange. 

Meanwhile, Obama’s short visit to Boulder City did not win applause from many of its 15,000 residents who were curbed from their daily activities. 

On the afternoon the president’s motorcade traveled from Las Vegas’ McCarran International Airport, where he arrived on the Boeing 747 Air Force One, motorists, including visitors and business people, were advised to stay away from Boulder City because of congestion and road closures.

 

Energy Secretary Chu doesn’t drive to work, but…

Facing a House Subcommittee on Energy and Power on a budget request yesterday, Energy Secretary Stephen Chu --- after mention of a battery-run Chevy Volt ---  revealed he didn’t drive a car and added, “I don’t own a car at the moment,” observed Grumpy Editor.

It sounded like he was doing his best to go green.

That got a lot of coverage on radio and television news, including some comments that Chu is trying to save energy, namely gasoline consumption.

On one TV network, it was suggested that perhaps Chu walks to work.

But few bothered to check further to uncover how he reaches his desk.

CNSNews.com did.

Craig Bannister, director of communications for CNSNews.com, pointed out that while Chu technically may not own a car, an Energy Department spokesman confirmed that Chu’s transportation to work is provided by a security detail.

And that his wife owns a car.

Far from being a Chevy Volt, however, a source identified the vehicle as a BMW 325i that requires premium gasoline. 

Photos showing pain at the pump are pain elsewhere, too

Rather than repeated tired images of drivers filling up at the pumps and shots of gas station prices, print and broadcast editors should try something different to illustrate the soaring cost of gasoline --- run photos of U.S. locations were oil drilling or pipelines would alleviate the high cost and dependency from foreign lands, advises Grumpy Editor.

The aim is to remind Washington to zero in on energy independence in a country rich in oil as analysts predict gasoline prices soon could reach $5 a gallon.

U.S. field production of crude oil peaked in 1970 and has since drifted downward to the early 1950s level.

Lost in the shuffle of election news that dominated print and broadcast media late last week are comments from Jack Gerard, president and chief executive, American Petroleum Institute.

President Barack Obama “is misleading Americans about his energy strategy” in an effort to ease pain at the pump, proclaims Gerard.

“Since taking office he has declared 85 percent of our offshore areas off limits, decreased oil and gas leases in the Rockies by 70 percent, rejected the Keystone XL pipeline and has 10 federal agencies planning more regulation of hydraulic fracturing, which is key to oil and natural gas development,” reminds Gerard.

“The president’s Jekyll and Hyde approach to energy security is hurting consumers,” he adds.

“We urge the president to work with our industry to generate more supply to the market and create new American jobs."

Meanwhile, another result of higher prices at the pump --- inflation.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke yesterday (when the Dow Jones Industrials later fell 53.05 points to 12952.07) tells the House Financial Services Committe that "gasoline prices have moved up ... (which is) a development that is likely to push up inflation temporarily while reducing consumers' purchasing power."

 

Obama pushes ‘green’ UPS trucks, then relies on gasoline

While national print/broadcast media traveling with the president somehow fail to observe such things, alert Kyle Gillis, an investigative reporter for Nevada Policy Research Institute counted “22 fossil-fuel powered vehicles” --- with video to back him up --- in a presidential motorcade headed for McCarran International Airport following Barack Obama’s 20-minute speech in Las Vegas on Jan. 26, observes Grumpy Editor. 

Obama, standing in front of a United Parcel Service truck (not the usual brown, by the way) at the company’s Las Vegas hub, spoke on use of liquefied natural gas to power such vehicles. 

In his brief visit to Las Vegas, Obama praised UPS for "leading by example" in converting long-haul trucks to use liquefied natural gas rather than diesel fuel.

Obama said 14 U.S. companies have converted one million vehicles to alternative fuel during his administration, resulting in less U.S. dependency on foreign oil.

"Let's get more of these natural gas vehicles on the road," declared Obama, before heading for the presidential limousine (a gas guzzler at eight miles per gallon) to transport him to the waiting Boeing 747 Air Force One.

Think tank NPRI’s Gillis, who observed the “fossil-fuel powered” parade --- which included national media in vehicles --- earlier worked at the Media Research Center's Business & Media Institute in Washington, D.C., where he covered financial reform, auto bailouts, housing reform, taxes and the stimulus. 

See the parade of 22 fossil-fuel powered vehicles here.

 

House effort to repeal curly fluorescent bulbs flickers out

U.S. House efforts this week to repeal curly, compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs), which contain toxic mercury and are slated to replace long-used traditional incandescent bulbs, fell short of the two-thirds majority vote needed for passage --- without a peep from the Environmental Protection Agency, notes Grumpy Editor.

The EPA, with 17,000 employees at Washington headquarters, 10 regional offices and 27 laboratories, is charged with protecting human health and the environment. 

A few vigilant newspaper editorial writers in recent days alerted readers to problems with CFLs which entered the future lighting picture when Congress four years ago passed an energy bill that essentially banned the traditional incandescent light bulb that received a major thrust in 1878 from Thomas Edison’s research. 

While CFLs, made mostly in China, got the green light with new energy standards set to go into effect next year, officials have curtailed or banned mercury use in other applications, including thermometers and automotive and thermostat switches. 

Many lawmakers apparently remained unaware that when a CFL bulb (a small glass tube twisted into a spiral) shatters, mercury escapes as vapor that can be inhaled and as a fine powder that can settle into carpet and other textiles. 

A Scientific American posting three years ago was among the first to point out highly toxic mercury is especially harmful to the brains of both fetuses and children. 

At that time, the director of EPA’s Hazardous Waste Minimization and Management Division recommended opening windows and stepping outside then quickly ventilating the room when a CFL bulb breaks. 

"Get all the people and pets out of the room for 15 minutes and let the room air out,” he said.  With central heating system or an HVAC (heating, ventilating and air-conditioning) system, he warned, “you don't want it sucking the fumes around, so shut that down.”

 

Customers conserve power, so NV Energy gets rate hike

In covering utilities and their constant parade of rate increase proposals before state public utility commissions, business writers should do a bit of fact checking, even if it means looking at their own bills, rather than following information put out by the companies, suggests Grumpy Editor. 

For example, already-squeezed customers of Nevada power utility NV Energy ---  in a state already among those with the highest electricity rates in the West --- are grumbling about state Public Utilities Commission approval Monday of a 3.4 percent rate increase that goes into effect on July 1. 

The boost seems modest enough, especially when New York Stock Exchange-listed NV Energy puts “the average residential bill” extra cost at a mere $5.29 a month. 

But when customers, most living in air-conditioned homes, view their electric bill for July, they’ll see a total close to $300 --- or more, figuring a single-story 2,400-square-foot home.  That will be $10 to $15 above the like month a year prior. 

NV Energy bills include an assortment of fees and charges, such as basic service charge, local government fee, universal energy charge, temporary green power financing and renewable energy program. 

The state PUC grants the latest rate increase to allow NV Energy to recover costs related to its energy-efficiency program. 

In other words, that program is going so well, with customers conserving power, that NV Energy sways the PUC to approve a rate hike to compensate for revenue lost from more energy-efficient steps and equipment. 

Just prior to the rate increase, senior group AARP representative Barry Gold tells the Nevada PUC: 

“During a time of economic crisis (NV Energy) is asking us to pay more.  They ask us to save energy, but the better we conserve, the more it’s going to cost us.  (Nevada) already is first in foreclosures and first in unemployment.  We don’t want to be first in electricity shutoffs, too.” 

PUC chairwoman Alaina Burtenshaw, meanwhile, points to state legislators, declaring, “They’re the ones who make the laws we have to follow.” 

Look for more irate ratepayers. 

NV Energy is slated to apply for a general rate increase next Wednesday.

 

California Gov. Jerry Brown looks at sun to power state

Grumpy Editor feels the short answer to California Gov. Jerry Brown’s massive $26.5 billion budget shortfall in the oil-rich Golden State is simply to push for:  more drill, baby, drill.

More oil production would yield more income --- including taxes to Sacramento --- from more sales, more jobs and more construction, boosting the state’s economy via an industry that has been sidelined lately.  (Annual California field and offshore crude oil production has been in a steady decline since 1985.)

Seems editorial writers on most newspapers in the state haven’t figured that out.  A boost, via more oil, in the economy also would lead to more advertising from businesses, thus lifting bottom lines for worried publishers.

After all, oil remains essential to power vehicles --- from Hollywood entertainers’ extended limousines to mighty Army tanks --- plus ships and aircraft.  Wind and solar power won’t quite work in those categories.

Yet, Brown while marking his 100^th day in office as a governor (again) and his 73^rd birthday this week, signed legislation requiring California utilities to obtain one-third of their power from renewable sources.

The power firms have until 2020 to produce 33 percent of their electricity from solar panels, windmills and other renewable sources.

Such renewable origins for electricity generation will come at a higher price.  Since power companies will have to bill customers at loftier rates, it would lead to less money in Californians’ pockets for other uses ranging from travel to buying homes.

“There are people who think we can drill our way to happiness and prosperity,” the Democrat --- who garnered the “Gov. Moonbeam” title in the 1970s while serving two-terms --- declared Tuesday at a solar panel plant near San Jose.

“Instead of just taking oil from thousand of miles away, we’re taking the sun and converting it,” added Brown.

Until recent years, the California economy mushroomed from growing production of oil, an active motion picture industry, housing construction and agriculture products highlighted by citrus output.

 

‘Inflation’ doesn’t exist in Washington dictionaries

While Federal Reserve Vice Chairwoman Janet Yellen was informing the Economic Club of New York on Monday that U.S. monetary policy “continues to be appropriate” and recent price rises in oil, grain and other commodities are “unlikely to have persistent effects on consumer inflation,” the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) declared escalating global inflation “is the biggest challenge to businesses struggling to recover from the economic downturn,” observes Grumpy Editor.

That is a key finding from a survey by ACCA of more than 2,300 accountants last month.

Then yesterday, fears of rising oil prices putting handcuffs on global growth led commodities lower as the Dow Jones Industrial Average tumbled 117.53 points to 12263.58.

Most of Washington, it seems, looks the other way when inflation is mentioned.

One hopes that some statistical savvy attendee at a White House press briefing will ask if uttering the dreaded “I” word is banned in the nation’s capital.

"The huge rise in inflation has been the most worrying development to emerge from our latest survey,” says Manos Schizas, senior policy adviser at London-based ACCA with 140,000 global members.

“More than half of respondents reported problems with rising operating costs, which will hinder their ability to look for new opportunities at the time when businesses desperately need to fill the order books,” he points out.

"The number of finance professionals worried about inflation will also be a concern to governments that have put in place a range of measures to control rising prices.”

 

Blame Libya for gasoline pain at pump? Not so fast

With the price of oil reaching $106 a barrel yesterday, most media and the White House point the finger at Libya as the culprit in sending the price of gasoline to $4 a gallon and beyond, but Grumpy Editor finds that the North African nation is only a very minor player in contributing to the U.S. crude oil supply --- information that is rarely inserted in current stories relating to oil and gasoline.

One publication mentioning the minor role of Libyan oil imports is The Wall Street Journal.  Today’s top front-page story on Libyan oil mentions, “The U.S. is a small customer of Libya.”  But that’s in the 17^th paragraph of the 22-paragraph article.

Gasoline prices are up a hefty 34 cents a gallon, on average, in just 13 days, reports AAA.

Among nations receiving Libya’s crude exports, the U.S. gets a minuscule 0.5 percent (that’s half of one percent for those confused by decimal points).  That puts the U.S. at the bottom of the list of key nations on the receiving end of Libyan oil.

Put another way, the U.S. receives only 51,000 barrels a day via Libya.

That compares to Ireland, topping the list in importing 23 percent of its crude from Libya.  It is followed by Italy with 22 percent and Austria with 21 percent.

Europe receives more than 85 percent of Libya’s oil.

Of course, U.S. dependency on foreign oil imports can be reduced greatly by more domestic production.

But despite the steady upward climb of oil prices --- contributing to inflation on many fronts --- barriers remain for more domestic production that would result in less dependency on foreign imports.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar last Friday told CNSNews:  “We don’t believe that you need to drill everywhere and we don’t believe that the ‘drill, baby, drill’ program is the way that’s going to get us to the energy independence that we need for America.”

(One has to re-read that quote to understand Washington thinking.)

Salazar said the president and the Interior Department point to the need for an energy program that includes a number of different sources, especially citing renewable energy.

Also on Friday, a Rasmussen Reports survey finds 55 percent of likely U.S. voters (up from 48 percent three months ago) now oppose President Barack Obama’s seven-year ban on offshore oil and gas drilling in part of the Gulf of Mexico and along the East Coast.  

 

Noble Energy gets deep-water Gulf oil drilling permit

Perhaps the turmoil in the Middle East and Libya, triggering rising oil prices and more consumers’ pain at the pump, has pressured Washington to green light the first Gulf of Mexico deep-water oil drilling permit since the massive BP spill last spring, notes Grumpy Editor.

 The permit from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, announced yesterday, went to Noble Energy Inc., Houston, allowing continued work on a well about 70 miles southeast of Venice, La.

The New York Stock Exchange-listed company holds a significant position in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico. 

The action came after U.S. gasoline prices jumped an average 17 cents last week.

Now the question is: will expanded drilling spread elsewhere?

The U.S. currently imports more than 60 percent of its crude oil, according to the American Petroleum Institute.

Another area that would greatly reduce reliance on imports is Alaska’s Outer Continental Shelf.

That region could produce almost 10 billion barrels of oil and 15 trillion cubic feet of natural gas through 2057, according to a report by Northern Economics, a consulting firm, and the University of Alaska-Anchorage’s Institute of Social and Economic Research.

It would make Alaska the world’s eighth largest oil production area, ranking it ahead of Libya (one of the nations in current turmoil), Norway, Nigeria and Russia.

The Alaska offshore drilling also would create about 55,000 jobs, the report added.

But current Washington energy policy has put handcuffs on moving ahead aggressively with drilling in the U.S. 

The slow-moving process of issuing drilling permits "continues to stifle domestic production and puts thousands of jobs at risk in the Gulf and around the country," the American Petroleum Institute said.