October 2012 Climate Change Summary Report

“GRAY: EPA and its carbon dioxide ideas need to be addressed”

October 31, 2012: An op-ed in The Washington Times by C. Boyden Gray previously served as White House counsel and U.S. ambassador to the European Union, states: “No matter who wins the presidency (or the Senate), the next Congress will renew its focus on regulatory overreach, including the Environmental Protection Agency‘s. A relevant fact for the intermediate term is that U.S. greenhouse gas and other emissions have plummeted because of a dramatic increase in use of natural gas, the phaseout of CFCs and a major improvements in auto efficiency. … The courts will have to make the ultimate call on whether the 2007 legislation satisfied the immediate requirements of the Clean Air Act and whether EPA’s extraordinary stretch to apply the permitting rules to carbon dioxide is permissible. But it would be better and simpler for Congress to make a short, one-paragraph clarification that the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 satisfied the initial court decision and that, given the dramatic reduction of greenhouse gases in the U.S., any further action should be taken by Congress, not the Environmental Protection Agency.”

“The Ethanol Election Delay”

October 31, 2012: An editorial in The Wall Street Journal states: “This summer’s once-in-a-half-century Midwestern drought caused global prices for staple food products to soar by 10%—and corn in particular to jump by 25%, according to the World Bank. The food shortages across Africa, the Middle East and South America are the worst since the 1980s and have produced hunger and political instability, according to the United Nations. So perhaps this emergency is the time to relax the U.S. ethanol mandate, which diverts four of every 10 domestic bushels of corn into gas tanks. That’s equal to 15% of international corn production, burned in internal combustion engines that could run on another fuel. But this obvious solution is evidently not obvious to the Environmental Protection Agency, which, despite studying the question for more than a year, says it needs more time.”

“Fossil fuel production to hit record in 2012”

October 25, 2012: Fuel Fix reports: “The United States will produce more energy from fossil fuels than ever before this year, according to a data analysis by a University of Michigan economics professor. Mark J. Perry lit up the Internet’s energy sphere this week with a blog post that crunches numbers pulled from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. His chart shows a surge in the nation’s energy production from coal, natural gas and oil since 2009. Based on data from the first six months of 2012, Perry says the U.S. is on track to generate a record-breaking amount of fossil fuel energy this year, reaching more than 61 quadrillion British thermal units. (A British thermal unit is a measure of energy content, the amount needed to heat a pound of water by 1 degree Fahrenheit.) Further, he says the United States is more energy self-sufficient than at any time in the past two decades.”

“Report: Shale could redefine U.S. economy”

October 25, 2012: UPIreports: “The shale oil and natural gas sector in the United States could contribute nearly $500 billion to the U.S. gross domestic product by 2035, an analysis states. A report from research company IHS says growth in unconventional oil and gas production in the United States could be a key driver in future economic growth. Daniel Yergin, author of the report, said the boom in oil and gas production from shale plays in the United States is redefining the country’s energy sector. ‘The United States currently has the highest rate of growth in crude oil production capacity in the world and is virtually self-sufficient in natural gas, except for some gas from Canada,’ he said in a statement. ‘This is a stark contrast from when, prior to the unconventional revolution, it was expected that the U.S. would soon become heavily dependent on gas imports.’”

“Energy Independence For U.S.? Try Energy Security”

October 25, 2012: NPR reports: “Gone from this year’s presidential campaign are most mentions of climate change, environmental pollution, or green jobs. Former Gov. Mitt Romney, the GOP presidential nominee, prefers to call attention instead to the country’s continuing dependence on foreign energy sources. ‘I will set a national goal of North American energy independence by the year 2020,’ Romney declared in August. The line is now a standard part of Romney’s stump speech, and he repeated it in his first two debates with President Obama. With that promise, Romney joins a long line of U.S. leaders who have preached the virtues of energy independence. Few, however, have explained precisely what this goal means.”

“EIA Chief: US Could Reduce Oil Imports to Zero, but Might not Want to”

October 24, 2012: AOL Energy reports: “U.S. dependence on imported crude oil is expected to drop to 41% this year, but it could drop even faster, and even to zero, says Adam Sieminski, Administrator of the Energy Information Administration. EIA’s forecast is a substantial reduction even from 2011, when imports met 45% of US demand, and way below the record year of 2005 when the US imported 60%. Analysts agree that discoveries of new US resources, improvements in US auto fuel economy, and lower overall demand due to the recession have combined to reduce the need for imports. The EIA’s official outlook foresees imports dropping to 37% of US demand by 2035. But, Sieminski recently told the National Capitol Area Chapter of the US Association of Energy Economists in Washington, ‘It wouldn’t take a lot of pushing for the US to import no oil.’”

“U.S. Navy signs biofuel deal”     

October 23, 2012: UPI reports: “The U.S. Navy has signed an agreement with Biodico for the development of advanced biofuels and bioenergy for use throughout the U.S. military. The effort aims to enhance the operation of on-site, sustainable bio-refineries producing ‘”renewable petroleum diesel equivalent liquid fuels, bio-based products and energy using renewable resources’ at U.S. Department of Defense facilities. The project would also benefit the commercial bio-fuel market. Biodico said. As part of the agreement, Biodico will build a sustainable bio-refinery at U.S. Naval Base Ventura County that will produce biofuels and bioenergy at prices competitive with unsubsidized conventional fuel and power. Construction of the plant will be partially funded by the California Energy Commission.”

“Daniel Yergin: The Real Stimulus: Low-Cost Natural Gas”

October 23, 2012: An op-ed in The Wall Street Journal by Daniel Yergin, author and vice chairman of IHS, states: “But the energy revolution is having other effects that get less attention. The balance of payments is one. The increase in domestic oil production over the past five years will reduce our oil-import bill this year by about $75 billion. The growth of shale gas will save the U.S. from spending $100 billion a year on imported LNG, which was the likely prospect five years ago. There is also a geopolitical dimension. The increase in U.S. oil production since 2008 is equivalent to almost 80% of what was Iran’s export level before the imposition of sanctions on the Tehran regime. Without the additional oil coming from the surge in U.S. oil output, the Iranian oil sanctions could not have worked as well as they have. Domestically, growing natural gas supplies provide a foundation for a manufacturing renaissance, at least for industries for which energy is an important feedstock or where energy costs are significant.”

“Ignoring ‘Fantastic Opportunity’ of Gas Is Foolish: Lomborg”

October 22, 2012: Bloomberginterviews Danish economist Bjorn Lomborg, author and professor at Copenhagen Business School: “Fracking in a U.S. context has dramatically lowered U.S. carbon emissions, about 400 to 500 million tons, compared to the entire impact of the EU and Kyoto Protocol of about 250 million tons. So the U.S. has inadvertently lowered its carbon emissions by about twice as much just by making cheap gas available. We’ve actually managed to find a technology that’s cheaper than coal and delivers much more climate benefits. …There are significant issues, mostly around the pollution of water resources. Very definitely that’s something we need to regulate. It’s a very well understood technology. So, yes, we should regulate it, but to ignore the fantastic opportunity both of cheaper energy and lower CO2 emissions seems foolish.”

“House Republican to host forum on fuel incentives, promotion”

October 22, 2012: E&E News reports: “Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) is hosting a forum Monday with a variety of industry leaders to examine what Congress can do to promote the use of more natural gas in electric utilities and transportation as part of a long-term energy plan he hopes Congress can craft next year. The forum in Omaha, Terry’s hometown, will feature a variety of experts from trade associations, think tanks and companies focused on oil and gas development, electricity generation, transportation, agriculture and other areas. ‘The broader plan is hopefully we can start talking about a more comprehensive, 30-year energy plan, and natural gas has to be a key component of that,’ Terry said in an interview yesterday. ‘Everyone calls it a game changer — well, let’s define what that means and figure out how it’s going to be used.’”

“Hillary Clinton puts clean energy, climate change on State’s marching orders”

October 19, 2012: ClimateWire reports: “A global clean energy transformation is key to economic development, national security and fighting climate change, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said yesterday. In a major speech at Georgetown University on energy diplomacy, Clinton called the transformation to greener pathways ‘essential to reducing the world’s carbon emissions and at the core of a strong 21st-century global economy.’ Describing policies from sanctions on Iranian oil to navigating tensions in the South China Sea as central to U.S. diplomacy, Clinton said energy issues are at the heart of the Obama administration’s foreign policy vision.”

“Biofuels industry presses congressional leaders to maintain fuel rule”

October 19, 2012: The Hill reports: “Biofuels groups pressed congressional leadership Thursday to maintain a biofuels mandate when lawmakers consider drought-relief legislation. The groups want to keep the renewable fuel standard (RFS) intact. The rule requires refiners to blend 13.2 billion gallons of corn-based biofuel into transportation fuel this year. The biofuels industry has geared up for a short-term skirmish on the RFS. It wants to defeat a request for a one-year waiver from the rule by a handful of state governors who say it is untenable under drought conditions.”

“Increase the gas tax”

October 19.2012: An op-ed in USA Today by Duncan Black, blogger and fellow at Media Matters for America, states: “Some politicians and policy wonks, recognizing the need for more funding for our transportation system, but unwilling to support increasing the state or federal gasoline taxes, have embraced complementing or replacing it with a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) tax, which would have drivers pay based on a fee per mile traveled instead of on a fee for gallons used. This is a bad idea, both in terms of politics and policy. … There can be a wider debate about how we fund our transportation system, but enacting a VMT tax would replace a simple existing system with a complicated and burdensome new one. If politicians think we need more money for roads and highways, and think much of that funding should come from those who use them, then the simplest solution is the correct one. Just increase the gas tax.”

“Regressive levy will cost jobs, hurt climate”

October 19, 2012: An op-ed in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution by Scott Segal, head of the policy resolution practice and founder of the strategic communications practice at Bracewell & Giuliani LLC, states: “Those of us in the energy sector knew it was only a matter of time before taxing energy was again put on the table. If you tax the carbon content of fuel, so goes the reasoning, you will discourage emissions and collect revenues – advancing both environmental and fiscal goals. Unfortunately, as H.L. Mencken famously quipped, ‘For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong.’ In the current state of the economy, the carbon tax is today’s wrong answer. …First, the economy is still reeling with only the most minimal signs of improvement in job creation. Our ability to produce affordable and reliable electricity and fuels is a source of comparative advantage for the 20 million workers in our manufacturing sectors. … Second, the frequent claims of environmental benefits are dubious. It is not likely that other nations will follow our lead in setting up a carbon tax, meaning the price of doing business here will increase, and powerful incentives therefore will be created to move operations overseas -– a phenomenon some economists call ‘leakage.’ …Third, carbon taxes aren’t fair; in fact, they are regressive.”

“Inhofe Says Post-Election EPA Rules Will Shutter Fossil Fuel Production”

October 19, 2012: Inside EPA reports: “Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) is accusing EPA of intentionally delaying a slew of rules until after the election so that the Obama administration can skirt accusations that it is seeking to shutter fossil fuel production and associated economic pain before voters go to the polls Nov. 6 to choose between President Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney. Inhofe, the ranking Republican on the Senate environment committee, issued an Oct. 18 report that accuses the agency of delaying for political reasons 13 air, water and waste rules, including greenhouse gas (GHG) limits for power plants, coal ash disposal requirements and water law jurisdiction guidance. Taken together the rules will ‘essentially shut down American oil, natural gas and coal production,’ the lawmaker says in a statement. ‘[T]he Obama EPA has delayed the implementation of rule after rule because they don’t want all those pink slips and price spikes to hit until after the election.’”

“EU considers limiting percentage of biofuels made from food that count toward renewable target”

October 18, 2012: Associated Press reports: “Europe is considering limiting the amount of food-based biofuels that can count toward its renewable fuel targets while a drought in the U.S. has pushed up food prices worldwide and millions around the world go hungry. As part of an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the European Union had previously decided that 10 percent of the fuel used for transport in the 27-country bloc must come from renewable sources by 2020. But environmentalists argue that biofuels made from food, like corn and soybeans, may add as much or even more to greenhouse gas emissions as fossil fuels they replace because trees are often felled to grow them. Others have criticized the burning of food while there are still millions who can’t afford to eat.”

“The new ethanol: A debate over corn, oil and progress”

October 18, 2012: McClatchy reports: “The Obama administration must decide in coming weeks if it’ll temporarily lift requirements to blend ethanol into the nation’s gasoline supply. The issue has been largely dormant on the campaign trail, but it’s critical to the success or failure of the next generation of bio-fuel plants under construction today that won’t rely on corn to make fuel. A public comment period ended in early October, and now the administration must decide by Nov. 13 whether or not to temporarily suspend the Renewable Fuel Standard, created in 2005 and modified in 2007 to help the ethanol industry get off the ground by requiring its use in gasoline. …On the presidential campaign trail, ethanol is a background issue. Both presidential candidates tout plans to boost the growing domestic production of oil, particularly in the promising Bakken formation oil deposits buried beneath shale rock in Montana and North Dakota. What the candidates don’t say is that the amount of ethanol already in production today is almost four times the amount of oil that the Bakken oilfields are currently producing.”

“The EPA Is Moving The Goalposts, Even After The Game Has Started”

October 18, 2012: An op-ed in Forbes by Merrill Matthews, a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation, states: “Football fans would be outraged if every time one team was preparing to kick a field goal the officials moved the goalposts further back, making it harder to score.  And yet the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) frequently moves the goalposts further away for companies and industries trying to abide by countless federal regulations. One of President Obama’s top agenda items was to pass cap-and-trade legislation intended to limit the amount of greenhouse gas emissions.  Once it became clear the legislation had no chance of passing, the EPA decided to impose its own emissions-limiting agenda without the consent of Congress. … But then this is the EPA we’re talking about.  And moving the goalposts isn’t just a strategy, it’s the way the agency plays the game.”

“Earth’s temperatures subject to higher powers”

October 18, 2012: An editorial in The Washington Times states: “Pretending to be green is expensive. Californians have set the pace for adopting the trendy lifestyle choice but recently have cried out for relief when confronted with the true cost of saving the planet from “global warming.” As new evidence emerges about extraterrestrial forces that shape Earth’s climate, Americans from coast to coast may come to a similar realization of the futility of trying to bring down temperatures before their bank balances dry up. … As climatologists gain a more complete grasp of the forces that regulate Earth’s temperatures, Americans are left to ponder whether expensive energy sources like solar panels, windmills and biofuels will have a greater effect on their wallets than their thermometers.”

“Court hears arguments in Calif. clean fuels case”

October 17, 2012: Associated Pressreports: “In a case seeking to stop California’s first-in-the-nation mandate requiring fuel producers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, federal justices on Tuesday focused their questions on whether the law discriminates against out-of-state businesses. A three-justice panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments about the constitutionality of California’s ‘Low Carbon Fuel Standard,’ a piece of the state’s landmark global warming law, AB 32. The California Air Resources Board, the agency in charge of implementing the law, said the standard will cut California’s dependence on petroleum by 20 percent, and will account for one-tenth of the state’s goal to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. The justices focused on the law’s reliance on a ‘carbon intensity score,’ which measures pollution from a fuel’s entire life cycle — such as the type of electricity used to produce it or the fuel used to transport it to California — not just when it is burned in a vehicle.”

“EPA publishes final CAFE rule”

October 16, 2012: E&E News reports: “U.S. EPA filed its final regulation in today’s Federal Register for fuel efficiency standards set to kick in 2017 for passenger vehicles. The landmark rule aims to double the corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE, of light-model vehicles, in turn saving car owners money on fuel costs. The nearly 2,000-page filing says the new CAFE levels will require cars built in 2025 to get at least 54.5 mpg. Critics argue the rules would force automakers to make expensive cars that could probably reduce safety. ‘While the Obama administration has made the 2009 auto bailout one of the centerpieces of their re-election campaign, the reality is that these new rules will affect and cost consumers more money,’ the conservative Americans for Tax Reform said today.”

“Studies outline state-level benefits of the ethanol industry”

October 15, 2012: Ethanol Producer Magazine reports: “Two new studies were released this week, highlighting the positive effects the renewable fuel standard (RFS) has had in Minnesota and Ohio. One study, titled the ‘Minnesota Ethanol Industry: Ethanol Plants in Minnesota,’ was published by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, and provides an overview of the status of the state’s ethanol industry and the economic benefits it has created. The second study, titled the ‘Economic Impact Analysis of the Ethanol Industry in Ohio for the Ohio Ethanol Producers Association,’ was completed by the Ohio State University Extension Community Development and provides an overview of the employment benefits ethanol production has brought to Ohio. … When analyzed in terms of direct, indirect and induced impacts from both construction and operation, the industry added $1.1 billion in output to the state. Using the same parameters, the industry has supported 12,975 jobs and generated a total income $607 million.”

“IEA Sees Relief for Energy Consumers ”

October 12, 2012: The Wall Street Journal reports: “More oil supply and weaker demand over the next five years suggests oil prices will ease for consumers, the International Energy Agency said Friday. The agency warned that heightened geopolitical risks to the supply of oil will remain a fact of life, but its forecasts suggest that life for oil consumers struggling with high fuel prices will gradually improve. The IEA, which represents the interests of energy-consuming rich countries, forecast in its medium-term oil market report that global oil production capacity will grow to 102 million barrels a day by 2017, well above its demand forecasts of 95.7 million barrels a day. …Global oil demand is expected to grow at an annual average of 1.1 million barrels a day over the next five years, compared with a forecast of 1.2 million barrels a day made six months ago.”

“Senior Republican knocks aid to Al Gore-backed green companies”

October 12, 2012: The Hill reports: “House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) is questioning Obama administration financial support for green energy companies in former Vice President Al Gore’s portfolio, calling it part of a ‘disturbing pattern.’ … The Post reports that 14 green tech companies that Gore invested in directly or indirectly have ‘benefited from more than $2.5 billion in loans, grants and tax breaks, part of President Obama’s historic push to seed a U.S. renewable-energy industry with public money.’ Upton, a frequent critic of federal green energy support, calls the aid ‘reflective of a disturbing pattern that those closest to the president have been rewarded with billions of taxpayer dollars . . . and benefited from the administration’s green bonanza in the rush to spend stimulus cash.’”

“Sacrificing energy independence is not the solution”

October 11, 2012: A blog in The Hill by James C. Greenwood, president and CEO, Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) states: “Indeed, certain special interests are not allowing this crisis to go to waste. In a move cynical even for Washington, they are scapegoating the renewable fuels industry, attempting to use the drought and its impact as a way to undo the progress that has been made by the biofuels industry under the RFS. …Waiving the RFS, even for just one year, will destabilize advanced biofuels development for years to come. It could sideline new biorefinery construction in this growing field, not only hindering future innovation in transportation fuel that will help consumers save at the pump, but also holding back job creation. … The EPA should not be short-sighted when it comes to the RFS. Rushing into long-term policy changes to the RFS could have an unintended economic impact on family farmers, biofuel producers and consumers.”

“Industry touts expanded drilling as way to cut deficit”

October 11, 2012: The Hill reports: “A new industry-backed report says expanding fossil fuel production and energy efficiency measures could help close the deficit and foster North American energy ‘self-sufficiency.’ The Consumer Energy Alliance, a coalition of oil companies and groups representing energy-consuming industries such as chemical manufacturing and trucking, will release the report later this week. The report says opening more U.S. and Canadian onshore and offshore lands to drilling could bring in $803 billion in revenue for the federal government and create 1.4 million jobs by 2030. That, along with demand-reducing technologies such as wind power and biofuels, as well as policies such as vehicle fuel economy standards, would bring North America closer to energy self-sufficiency, it said.”

“Paul Ryan talks up Keystone XL approval”

October 9, 2012: Fuel Fix reports: “Mitt Romney’s administration on Day One would approve a pipeline that would run from Canada to U.S. refineries in Texas, creating thousands of jobs and pushing America on its way to energy independence, Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan said Monday. Ryan told supporters during his third trip to swing state Ohio in the last two weeks that there are enough energy resources for North America to become energy independent within eight years. ‘We need to unlock the energy we have in this country to create jobs,’ he said. Ryan blamed President Barack Obama for standing in the way of the Keystone XL pipeline and pushing too many environmental regulations that have cost jobs in the coal industry, a thorny issue for the president in southeast Ohio, where coal has a large footprint. He said similar control by Washington has hampered manufacturing growth throughout the Midwest, including Michigan and his home state of Wisconsin.”

“US geologists: Utica Shale formation in Northeast holds 38 trillion feet of gas”

October 9, 2012: The Washington Post reports: “Drilling companies beginning to explore the Utica Shale got a piece of good news Friday when the U.S. Geological Survey estimated the rock formation in Ohio, Pennsylvania and other states holds enormous reserves of natural gas and oil. Releasing its first estimate of the Utica, the USGS calculated the shale formation holds about 38 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered, recoverable natural gas, 940 million barrels of oil and 9 million barrels of natural gas liquids like ethane and propane. The Utica lies beneath the Marcellus Shale, where energy companies have drilled thousands of unconventional gas wells in Pennsylvania in recent years. The Marcellus is considered to be one of the richest natural gas reserves in the world.”

“Electric cars ‘pose environmental threat’”

October 5, 2012: BBC reports: “The Norwegian University of Science and Technology study found greenhouse gas emissions rose dramatically if coal was used to produce the electricity. Electric car factories also emitted more toxic waste than conventional car factories, their report in the Journal of Industrial Energy said. However, in some cases electric cars still made sense, the researchers said. The team looked at the life-cycle impact of conventional and electric vehicles. In essence, they considered how the production, the use and the end-of-life dismantling of a car affects the environment, explained co-author Prof Anders Hammer Stromman. ‘The production phase of electric vehicles proved substantially more environmentally intensive,’ the report said, comparing it to how petrol and diesel cars are made. ‘The global warming potential from electric vehicle production is about twice that of conventional vehicles.’ In addition, producing batteries and electric motors requires a lot of toxic minerals such as nickel, copper and aluminium.”

“Obama must halt shipping regs under E.U. carbon regime – Sensenbrenner”

October 4, 2012: E&E News reports: “A top House climate change skeptic today called on the White House to take pre-emptive action to keep the European Union from regulating greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. companies that ship goods to Europe. The comments by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) come after E.U. officials announced Monday that they would begin monitoring, reporting and verifying the carbon content of fuel used in shipping early in the new year. … ‘After introducing an illegal tax on all flights to and from Europe, the E.U. announced that it wants to force a similar scheme on shipping,’ he said in a statement. … ‘The E.U.’s airline tax begins accruing while the carrier is in American airspace,’ said Sensenbrenner, who served as ranking member on the now-defunct House Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming in the previous Congress. ‘Americans are forced to pay higher fares, even when flying U.S. carriers, to comply with the E.U. tax. If they move forward with a new shipping tax, it will impact the price of goods and manufacturing.’”

“Study finds a LCFS in Minn. would create nearly 32,500 jobs”

October 3, 2012: Ethanol Producer Magazine reports: “A study recently published by the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst explores some of the economic impacts of establishing a low carbon fuel standard (LCFS) in Minnesota. The study, titled ‘The Employment Impacts of a Low-Carbon Fuel Standard for Minnesota,’ found that enacting a LCFS in Minnesota could create nearly 32,500 jobs when analyzed through 2025. The study evaluates three possible scenarios. The first assumes no change to the distribution of transportation fuel consumption. The second assumes that the fuel mix will change in response to the federal renewable fuel standard (RFS). The third assumes a more aggressive change in the fuel mix in response to the establishment of a statewide LCFS.”

“Biofuels industry lauds automakers for approving higher ethanol fuel blend”

October 3, 2012: The Hill reports: “Automakers Chrysler, Ford and General Motors Inc. have approved use of a higher concentration of ethanol fuel in new vehicles — a significant victory for the biofuels industry. New Chrysler, GM and Ford vehicles will accept a fuel blend that’s 15 percent ethanol, as opposed to the standard 10 percent blend. For GM, that will begin with 2012 models, while Ford and Chrysler will accommodate the fuel in 2013 models, according to Oil Price Information Service, which first reported the news. The auto industry’s resistance to higher blends of ethanol — which it says are more corrosive to older engine models — has long been a roadblock in getting higher concentrations of ethanol fuel blends on the market.”

“Next cold war? Gas drilling boom rattles Russia ”

October 1, 2012: Associated Pressreports: “The Kremlin is watching, European nations are rebelling, and some suspect Moscow is secretly bankrolling a campaign to derail the West’s strategic plans. It’s not some Cold War movie; it’s about the U.S. boom in natural gas drilling, and the political implications are enormous. Like falling dominoes, the drilling process called hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is shaking up world energy markets from Washington to Moscow to Beijing. Some predict what was once unthinkable: that the U.S. won’t need to import natural gas in the near future, and that Russia could be the big loser. ‘This is where everything is being turned on its head,’ said Fiona Hill, an expert on Russia at the Brookings Institution, a think tank in Washington. ‘Their days of dominating the European gas markets are gone.’”