By Sen. James Inhofe

Fellow Oklahoma native T. Boone Pickens is back in the news and hitting the airwaves with an energy idea that I believe is pure common sense. Pickens believes, like I do, that as Americans continue to suffer from high gas prices, we need to take advantage of our abundant, domestic supply of natural gas for use as a transportation fuel. The promise of natural gas as a mainstream transportation fuel is achievable today—not 15 or 20 years from now. From Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) powered cars, to semi-trucks running on liquefied natural gas (LNG), no other commercially viable fuel burns cleaner.

America has massive reserves of natural gas. The latest report (Sept. 2007) from the Potential Gas Committee at the Colorado School of Mines identifies 82 years of natural gas supply at current rates of production. Canada’s reserves hold an additional 40 years’ supply. Raymond James Equity Research recently reported that they hold a “bearish outlook for U.S. natural gas prices.” After examining the future supply of domestic production, they released a May 19, 2008, energy report which concluded, “...we continue to see unprecedented growth in U.S. gas production that will eventually overwhelm the U.S. gas markets.”

In 2007, 130,000 Natural Gas Vehicles (NGVs) were operating on America’s roads consuming just 0.052 percent. NGV America states that, “even if that number were to increase 100-fold in the next ten years to 11,000,000, or roughly 5 percent of the entire vehicle market (a formidable goal), the impact on natural gas supplies and the natural gas delivery infrastructure would be small—equating about 4 percent of total U.S. natural gas consumption.”

The good news about natural gas as a transportation fuel, in addition to being abundant and clean, is that it is inexpensive. In April, the Department of Energy reported that the average nationwide price of a gallon of gas equivalent to CNG was just $2.04 per gallon. In some regions of the country prices are even lower -in Rocky Mountain States CNG costs average just $1.26 per gallon. In fact, many state and local governments, businesses, and consumers have been able to cut their fuel bills by more than half when utilizing natural gas as a transportation fuel. In my hometown of Tulsa, OK, for example, a person can currently refuel their CNG powered cars for just 91 cents per gallon. With gasoline prices currently hovering over $4, those are significant savings for consumers.

To help make CNG a reality, I have introduced the Drive America on Natural Gas Act, legislation that encourages the use of natural gas as a transportation fuel and sends a signal to auto manufacturers to produce and sell these vehicles domestically. Today’s regulatory burdens are daunting for those in the business of converting vehicles to run on CNG or LNG, so my bill streamlines burdensome EPA emissions certifications required for the conversion of vehicles to natural gas. The bill also establishes a natural gas research, development, and demonstration program to assist manufacturers in emissions certification, examine and improve the current nationally recognized safety codes and standards, and advance the reliability and efficiency of natural gas fueling station infrastructure.

Read more here.

Dear Colleague --

You may have seen news coverage in recent weeks about a new coalition of African-American, civil rights, Christian, agriculture, veteran, state legislative and consumer group leaders called the “Alliance to Stop the War on the Poor.” Congressional Quarterly, the highly influential inside-the-Beltway publication, wrote a piece on the Alliance this past week.

U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch has picked up on the Alliance’s messaging strongly, as have other national and state politicians.  The group’s national “rollout” in Washington, D.C. recently was a bonafide protest rally attended by nearly 100 citizens who chanted “Stop the War on the Poor.”

I bring this to your attention because this group plans to wage a series of high-profile public education initiatives in the coming months to promote greater consumer access to affordable energy—something I know you and your organization support.

The Alliance is pushing for greater supply of all domestic energy resources—coal, oil & gas, oil shale, nuclear, renewables and conservation / efficiency.  In particular, they have rallied around two pieces of federal legislation in the Congress, which you can see here.

They also say they want increased funding for low-income energy assistance programs and greater deployment of energy savings technologies in new low-income housing. And, they intend to present a major consumer-led pushback against some of the climate change “solutions” being pushed by extremist environmental activists. This new movement isn’t linked to any industry group and is run by its three national co-chairs—all Democrats who lead their own non-partisan, non-profit groups:  Roy Innis of the Congress of Racial Equality; Bishop Harry Jackson of the High Impact Leadership Coalition, the Wyoming State Senator Bill Vasey of Americans for American Energy.  You can read more about them here. The Alliance plans to be very active during the upcoming Democratic National Convention in Denver.

To learn more about this new movement, and sign up to receive occasional email updates from them, you can go here.

Best,

Jim Sims
Policy Communication, Inc.

Politics has its puzzling moments. John McCain and most of the GOP experienced one late last week. That was when five of their own set about dismantling the best issue Republicans have in the upcoming election. It’s taken time, but Sen. McCain and his party have finally found—in energy—an issue that’s working for them. Riding voter discontent over high gas prices, the GOP has made antidrilling Democrats this summer’s headlines.  Their enthusiasm has given conservative candidates a boost in tough races. And Mr. McCain has pressured Barack Obama into an energy debate, where the Democrat has struggled to explain shifting and confused policy proposals.

Still, it was probably too much to assume every Republican would work out that their side was winning this issue. And so, last Friday, in stumbled Sens. Lindsey Graham, John Thune, Saxby Chambliss, Bob Corker and Johnny Isakson—alongside five Senate Democrats. This “Gang of 10” announced a “sweeping” and “bipartisan” energy plan to break Washington’s energy “stalemate.” What they did was throw every vulnerable Democrat, and Mr. Obama, a life preserver.

That’s because the plan is a Democratic giveaway. New production on offshore federal lands is left to state legislatures, and then in only four coastal states. The regulatory hurdles are huge. And the bill bars drilling within 50 miles of the coast—putting off limits some of the most productive areas. Alaska’s oil-rich Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is still a no-go.

The highlight is instead $84 billion in tax credits, subsidies and federal handouts for alternative fuels and renewables. The Gang of 10 intends to pay for all this in part by raising taxes on . . . oil companies! The Sierra Club couldn’t have penned it better. And so the Republican Five has potentially given antidrilling Democrats the political cover they need to neutralize energy through November.

Sen. Obama was thrilled. He quickly praised the Gang’s bipartisan spirit, and warmed up to a possible compromise. Of course, he means removing even the token drilling provisions now in the bill. But he’s only too happy for the focus to remain on the Gang’s efforts, and in particular on the five Republicans providing his party its fig leaf.

Equally gleeful was Louisiana’s Mary Landrieu, the Senate’s most vulnerable Democrat. She had been sweating the energy debate, especially after her vote against more oil-shale production—a position her Republican opponent, John Kennedy, had used against her to great effect. Yet there she was, chummily standing with the Gang of 10 and boasting that she is working with “five Republicans” to “lower prices at the pump by increasing offshore drilling here at home.” Not one of the five Republicans in the Gang is facing a tough election this year. That’s the sort of security that leads to bad decisions. And theirs is the sort of thinking that could leave Republicans in a permanent minority. See more here.