The Checks and Balances Project

Industry’s new leaf?

June 19, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Maybe the oil and gas lobby’s latest efforts should strike hope in the hearts of Coloradans. Are they turning over a new leaf and willing to balance energy development with conservation interests? Maybe … maybe not.

From Colorado Oil and Gas Association Director Tisha Shuller’s “charm offensive” to Western Energy Alliance President Tim Wigely’s “poll for the people,” oil and gas lobbyists are in high gear trying to stop a public relations mess that industry themselves created.

Clearly the effort is garnering them good press like Shuller reinventing herself as the environmentalist or Mr. Wigley taking a tired poll they rehash nearly every year and parading it as proof they want to know what Coloradans think.

Mr. Wigley makes broad claims about the support for energy development using his national poll, but he fails to take a look at what people believe in his own backyard. If industry really wants to know what Coloradans think, they don’t have too far to go far to find out. They want the health of their communities, our air, and our national parks on equal ground with energy development.

A recent poll of westerners by Hart Research Associates found that nearly two-thirds of voters (65 percent) believe that “permanently protecting and conserving public lands for future generations is very important to them personally” while less than a third (30 percent) feel that “making sure oil and gas resources on public lands are available for development” is important.

Just this week, a delegation from the North Fork Valley traveled to Washington, DC calling for balance. The group included a winery owner, local official, and agricultural representative. After officials like Colorado BLM Dir. Helen Hankins and industry failed to listen to the community, they took matters into their own hand and drafted a citizen proposal which allows for responsible energy development while protecting the booming agri-tourism economy of the North Fork.

This isn’t the first time that there have been questions about Dir. Hankins continually listening to the oil and gas industry instead of local communities and conservation interests. Industry proposals to drill near Mesa Verde National Park and place a drill rig near the visitor center of Dinosaur National Monument have faced severe backlash.

Yesterday, Boulder County Councilors decided to put a three-year oil and gas fracking ban on the ballot to give its residents an opportunity to speak and industry to listen. It’s no wonder so many local communities along the Front Range are proposing hard-lines like that after industry failed to “listen” to Coloradans and instead sided with Gov. John Hickenlooper to kill numerous bills which would have protected our water, our air, and our health.

Ms. Shuller and Mr. Wigley have one thing right. A rational conversation about oil and gas drilling is long overdue. We must put our communities, our air, and our national parks on equal ground with energy development.

It’s time for the oil and gas lobby to turn over that leaf.

Filed under Equal Ground Tagged with Department of Interior, drilling, Environment, Oil and Gas, Public Lands, Western Energy Alliance

New survey proves Westerners want conservation on equal ground with drilling

June 17, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Today, the Center for American Progress (CAP) announced new public opinion research that illustrates the stark gap between Washington’s public land use priorities – heavily weighted toward pro-development policies – and what Westerners believe is an appropriate balance between oil and gas drilling and protecting treasured landscapes for future generations.

This new research clearly shows a bipartisan majority of Western voters are more interested in preserving land for recreation and the enjoyment of future generations than in using it for oil and gas drilling. From CAP’s press release:

“When it comes to public lands, oil and gas drilling is not popular (30%); instead, Western voters across party lines are most concerned with preserving access to recreation opportunities (63%) and permanently protecting wilderness, parks, and open spaces for future generations (65%).”

As CAP points out, this research confirms a severe lack of citizen accountability from our government.

On one hand, we have the Obama administration, which has leased more than 6.3 million acres of public land to oil and gas companies for drilling – more than two and a half times as much as it has permanently protected for future generations;
And on the other, a Congress that was the first since World War II to not protect a single new acre of public land as wilderness, national park, monument, or wildlife refuge – despite the opposing sentiments of their own constituents.

Read the full report.

The launch of the “Equal Ground” campaign also makes good sense in that it will push Congress and the Obama Administration to align their priorities for how we use public lands with the obvious expectations of communities across the West that rely on national parks, wildlife refuges and other open spaces to attract high-paying businesses, entrepreneurs and visitors to come to enjoy world-class recreation resources just as much as they rely on energy development – done responsibly, in appropriate places.

One way the Obama administration could start achieving the balance Westerners expect from federal policymakers is to implement its own 2010 leasing reform directives, meant to drive our local economies with a real balance between protecting public lands to support and attract high-wage businesses in the West, and using them to produce energy. These reforms give federal officials crucial tools to look at the landscape before the leasing phase, and plan out the right places to drill and the right areas to leave alone because they bring major economic benefits to the community.

But in Colorado, federal bureaucrats have failed to implement these new directives – turning the President’s balanced reforms into a broken promise for Western communities.

As John Podesta rightfully said today:

“This is a case where Washington’s policies and rhetoric are still locked in a drilling-first mindset, but Westerners want the protection of public lands to be put on equal ground. Voters do not see conservation and development of public lands as an either-or choice; instead, they want to see expanded protections for public lands—including new parks, wilderness, and monuments—as part of a responsible and comprehensive energy strategy.”

The Equal Ground campaign is supported by a variety of individuals and organizations, including The Center for American Progress, Conservation Lands Foundation, The Wilderness Society, and The Center for Western Priorities.

Filed under Blog, Equal Ground, In The News Tagged with Congress, conservation, Department of Interior, Energy, Environment, Equal Ground, Public Lands

Updated: Sec. Jewell brings home a trophy from Senate committee hearing

June 6, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

One of the oil industry’s best friends in Congress imploded a standard GOP/industry talking point yesterday when, in the face of Sec. Sally Jewell’s facts, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) admitted that oil production is up on public lands. Watch the exchange!

# # #

Secretary of Interior Sally Jewell showed up at today’s Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing loaded for bear, and she bagged an Alaskan grizzly.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski started her time by regurgitating often-repeated – and totally flawed – oil and gas industry talking points about oil and gas production on public lands. Sec. Jewell fired back, using actual statistics to point out the truth: onshore oil production on federal lands is at its highest level in more than a decade.

And when Sen. Murkowski, a true politician, tried to change the topic to offshore production, her colleague Sen. Al Franken, and Deputy Secretary of Interior David Hays pointed out that offshore numbers had (appropriately) dipped in the wake of BP’s Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf – but that offshore oil production, and offshore drilling and exploratory activity are now back at pre-spill levels and growing.

Unable to dispute cold, hard facts, Sen. Murkowski was forced to acknowledge the truth. And her admission that oil production is up on federal lands demonstrates the need for a more balanced approach between energy development and conservation.

With onshore oil production at its highest level in 10 years, the Obama Administration should adopt an equal ground policy – conserving an acre of land for every acre they lease, consistent with the balanced approach achieved by Presidents such as Bill Clinton and George H. W. Bush.

Sec. Jewell pointed out in her testimony that in 2011, recreational visits contributed an estimated $49 billion in economic benefits to local communities. Balancing appropriate energy production with protecting our treasured lands also attracts high-wage businesses and entrepreneurs to Western states – strengthening our economy for future generations.

As oil- and gas-funded politicians in the House and Senate get ready for yet another summer of pushing the same failed giveaways to oil and gas companies they’ve tried before, they’re going to have to deal with the same facts that stopped Sen. Murkowski in her tracks today. It’s tough to lose a top talking point.

A few other facts from Sec. Jewell’s testimony:

The amount of producing acreage continues to increase, and was up by about 200,000 acres between 2011-2012.
The 2010 onshore leasing reforms resulted in the lowest number of protests in 10 years – fewer than 18 percent of parcels offered in FY 2012 were protested.
BLM field offices’ processing and approval time for drilling applications fell by 40 percent between FY 2006 and FY 2012.
The Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study, released in December 2012, estimates the number of people that rely on water from the Colorado River Basin could double to nearly 76 million people by 2060.

TRANSCRIPT OF THE EXCHANGE

Sen. Murkowski, opening statement: “A related concern is the rate of falling production on federal lands. It’s true that our nation is in the midst of an historic oil and gas boom, but it’s also true that production on federal lands is in trouble. Contrary to some of the statements of the rhetoric we’ve heard, oil production from the federal estate actually fell 5% last year after falling by even more than that in 2011. Natural gas production from the same federal areas meanwhile is in virtual free fall, down 8% last year and down 23% since 2009. The fact of the matter is that America’s energy boom is happening in spite of federal policies that stymie our production. We should be opening new lands to development, making sure the permits are approved on time, and preventing regulation and litigation from locking down our lands, and if anyone’s looking for a place to start, I’ll invite you to look to Alaska.”

Sec. Sally Jewel, responding in her testimony and opening statement said: “I want to start with energy, energy onshore. Onshore oil production on federal lands is actually at its highest level in over a decade, the amount of producing acreage continues to increase and I’m very happy, Ranking Member Murkowski, to provide you with some statistics that are a little different than the comments that you just referenced in terms of oil production. I have looked at the leasing reforms that the BLM have put in place, they changed them in 2010. They’ve actually had the lowest number of protests on lease sales in ten years, so we are making progress there, and I know the team is working hard on the time for permitting approval of new projects. That will be facilitated by automation. Sequestration has impacted that a bit but we’re still committed to getting that done….and now there are more deepwater rigs operating in the Gulf of Mexico than there were prior to the deepwater horizon spill.”

Sen. Murkowski, following Wyden’s first round of questions: “but I did just want to put a statement on the record, that, you had noted in your opening statement that oil production from federal onshore lands is at its highest level in over a decade, you had noted that perhaps our commentaries differed, I had noted that oil production from the federal estate actually fell 5% and the reference there, and I think it is important to just give some of the numbers here very briefly because I think it can be confusing. Federal onshore production was at 89.5 million barrels back in 2003, its gone up to 108.7 million in 2012, so you do have a substantial increase there, but it’s not the full picture, and that was my point. Because on federal offshore production we’ve seen that fall from 532.7 million barrels in ’03, to 438.6 million barrels in 2012, so what we’ve got is federal onshore production which rose by about 20 million barrels, and federal offshore production fell by 100 million barrels, more than five times the onshore increase. So I think that it’s important that when we’re talking about this we look at the full picture so if your numbers are different than mine, I’d be happy to share them.”

Sen. Franken, rebuttal: “Can I ask, did the moratorium after the BP oil spill… isn’t that really what caused that dip? I mean, (with laughter) we had a huge thing happen, and so there was a moratorium after that. Is that ok if I ask that of Mr. Hays?”

Deputy Sec. Hays: “Yes, Senator. It is true that oil production in the Gulf did decline because of the safety issues that arose and the need to upgrade our safety standards. The good news is that EIA recently reported a very strong upward trend now, in the Gulf. The Secretary mentioned a major discovery, there have been ten major new discoveries. There are now more than fifty rigs drilling in the offshore, lease sales are very strong that we’ve had and are having in the central Gulf and the western Gulf, so we expect to be back to where we were and further, but there certainly was a time that we did a pause, and increase the safety standard and change the way we did business and that did effect we believe temporarily in the offshore.

Sen. Franken: “I just wanted to clarify that.”

Filed under News

For House Republicans, the season of oil and gas giveaways has begun

June 6, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

As reported by Politico’s Andrew Restuccia, Tuesday, House Republicans will spend the summer trying to breathe new life into tired ideas filled with industry giveaways. It’s no wonder given these politicians receive huge contributions from the oil and gas industry. Ironically, these “conservatives” want more mandates and quotas for oil companies while also cutting common sense protections for our air and water.

What Congress should focus its energy on – and what people in the West support – is balance between conservation and energy development. Instead of handouts to oil companies, our leaders in Washington should promote a diverse and thriving economy that supports main street businesses, farming and ranching, tourism, and outdoor recreation.

GOP House leadership has already said it will move the same failed giveaways it tried to push through last year, and the year before that. The problem they’re already running into is that they’ve already tried – and failed – to dupe Americans into thinking these handouts are anything else. Even a Republican energy adviser quoted in Restuccia’s story said, “It’s probably going to look a lot like it’s looked in the last four or five years.”

Westerners want more out of their elected officials than repeated political plays and messaging bills for the oil and gas industry. They want a real balance between protecting the public lands that support and attract high-wage businesses and using them to produce American-made energy.

Here’s a quick preview of the rhetoric we can expect to hear from House Republicans this summer, and the facts they will ignore:

The economy

Shot: Failure to open more federal lands to drilling will hurt job creation and economic growth in Western communities.

Chaser: Western states have grown out of the boom and bust cycle that comes with relying solely on energy development. Protecting as much public land as we lease will further build out the outdoor recreation industry, which already accounts for $64 billion in annual spending, 6 million jobs and nearly $80 billion in local, state and federal taxes.

Price at the pump

Shot: These bills are an important step toward bringing down gasoline prices.

Chaser: In 2012, an Associated Press study showed that oil production has no effect on gas prices. Meanwhile, a Goldman Sachs analysis found that Wall Street speculation was adding more than $23 to the price of crude, or as much as $0.56 per gallon at the pump.

Drilling on private lands

Shot: Increased pressure to develop on private lands is just one result of the slowdown of public lands energy development by this administration .

Chaser: The latest oil boom in the lower 48 states is due largely to an unconventional resource known as “shale oil,” (oil trapped within shale rock). The vast majority of both “shale oil” and “shale gas” (natural gas trapped within shale rock) is found under private, not public, lands. The location of these resources – not safeguards to protect air quality and water supplies – explain the shift in drilling from public to private lands.
Adam Sieminski, U.S. House, Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2 August 2012

Permitting delays

Shot: Regulatory hurdles, long delays, and policies that keep federal lands under lock-and-key have become all too common.

Chaser: Industry is responsible for the majority of permitting delays. Last year, BLM announced it is moving to an online permitting system that will hopefully help companies cut down the time it takes them to properly file permit applications.
BLM Table of Average Application for Permit to Drill (APD) Approval Timeframes: FY2005 – FY2012

Permits

Shot: The Obama administration is playing fast and loose with drilling permit pledges.

Chaser: Industry does not use the drilling permits that have already been issued for oil and gas development. In fact, there are nearly 7,000 unused drilling permits that industry could develop on federal public lands.
BLM Approve Permits – Not Drilled table

Idle lands

Shot: President Obama and his Administration have actively blocked, hindered and delayed American energy production.

Chaser: According to the Department of Interior’s Oil and Gas Lease Utilization, Onshore and Offshore report, issued May 2012, “As of March 31, 2012, approximately 56 percent (20.8 million acres) of total onshore acres under lease on public lands in the Lower 48 States were conducting neither production nor exploration activities.
DOI Oil and Gas Lease Utilization Report

The facts are not on House Republicans’ side, and neither is public opinion. A recent poll shows 9 out of 10 Westerners agree that national parks, forests, monuments and wildlife areas are an essential part of the economy. Seventy-four percent believe they help attract high quality employers and good jobs to western states.

It’s time we put conserving our treasured public lands back on equal ground with leasing them for oil and gas drilling. If oil- and gas-funded politicians continue to try and resurrect these industry giveaways, they’re just showing where their priorities lie – with the companies that fund them rather than the people they represent.

Filed under Gas Prices, In The News, Permitting Tagged with Big Oil, Checks and Balances Project, Congress, Department of Interior, Doug Lamborn, drilling, Energy, Gas Prices, Oil and Gas, Public Lands, Tipton, Western Energy Alliance

The team of oil & gas lobbyists behind Gov. Hickenlooper’s agenda

May 30, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

It should come as no surprise that in the 2013 legislative session alone, the oil and gas industry spent $1.06 million defending Gov. Hickenlooper’s pro-Big Oil agenda.

As a Chesapeake lobbyist wrote in a January 2013 memo that the lobby firm accidentally emailed to state legislators, “[Gov. Hickenlooper’s] relationship to the oil & gas industry is strong and he has been a national leader speaking out against the anti-fracturing forces that have invaded Colorado.”

Gov. Hickenlooper has had a team of oil and gas lobbyists supporting his administration’s work to gut or kill legislation at the state capitol. In fact, a Colorado Ethics Watch report released this week found that oil and gas lobbyists outnumbered oil and gas inspectors by a 28-to-17 margin during Fiscal Year 2012-2013.

That investment has paid off big for Gov. Hickenlooper and the oil and gas industry during the 2013 legislative session.

Gov. Hickenlooper gutted a bill that would have set mandatory minimum fines for oil and gas companies that pollute rivers and water. After the bill died, his administration announced it would not fine Williams Company for polluting Parachute Creek, a tributary of the Colorado River, with cancer-causing benzene so long as it adhered to a consent order.

His administration actually opposed an effort to add more oil and gas inspectors out in the field and opposed a bill which would have brought more balance to the commission that oversees oil and gas drilling and fracking operations in the state.

With huge sums of lobbying cash behind him, it is no wonder that Gov. Hickenlooper has been able to keep Colorado weak on polluter crime when it comes to oil and gas.

The report released this week by Colorado Ethics Watch found that the oil and gas industry has spent a whopping $4.7 million on lobbyists from Fiscal Years 2008-09 through 2011-12 – more than any other industry in Colorado except the health care industry.

For those tracking Chesapeake closely, the company spent $130k on lobbying efforts over the last four years. Other top oil and gas lobbying spenders since 2009 include Pioneer Natural Resources at $640k, Shell at $571k, Encana at $415k, Bill Barrett Corporation at $376k, Marathon at $293k, Williams Energy at $285k, ExxonMobil at $272k, Anadarko at $260k, Black Hills at $224k, and, of course, the Colorado Oil and Gas Association at $402k.

Filed under Colorado, Hickenlooper Tagged with Big Oil, drilling, hickenlooper, lobbying, Oil and Gas

State Department Inspector General Probing Keystone XL Contractor’s Conflicts of Interest

May 29, 2013 by gabrielelsner 7 Comments

In yet another investigation into the Obama Administration’s activities, the State Department Inspector General is probing the conflicts of interest surrounding the contractor that performed the Keystone XL review,.

The American public was supposed to get an honest look at the impacts of the Keystone XL pipeline. Instead, Environmental Resources Management (ERM), a fossil fuel contractor, hid its ties from the State Department so they could green light the project on behalf of its oil company clients.

Hiring an oil company contractor to review an oil pipeline that its clients have a financial interest in should be illegal – and it is. The Federal Government has strict laws to avoid conflicts of interest and prevent the hiring of contractors who cannot provide unbiased services.

Unredacted documents from the contractor’s proposal (revealed by Mother Jones) show that the company had worked for TransCanada, ExxonMobil and other fossil fuel companies that have a stake in the Canadian Tar Sands.

But, ERM misled the State Department at least twice in its proposal (see C&BP’s original post on ERM’s conflicts of interest)– which may have led to its selection by the State Department to review the Keystone XL pipeline.

First, ERM answered “No” to the question “Within the past three years, have you (or your organization) had a direct or indirect relationship (financial, organizational, contractual or otherwise) with any business entity that could be affected in any way by the proposed work?“ ERM appears to have added to the Yes/No questionnaire that, “ERM has no existing contract or working relationship with TransCanada.” Regardless of the addendum, the oil company contractor misled the State Department by checking “No” to the specific question above. Despite the fact that unredacted documents show that ERM worked for TransCanada and other fossil fuel companies with a stake in Keystone XL pipeline in the three years prior to its proposal.

Second, ERM claimed it was not an energy interest. The State Department question defines an energy interest in part as any company or person engaged in research related to energy development. Yet, ERM has worked for all of the top five oil companies and dozens of other fossil fuel companies. In other words, ERM is clearly an energy interest.

How can we trust ERM to perform an honest review of the Keystone XL pipeline, if it can’t answer a yes/no question honestly?

These misleading statements should have been flagged by the State Department and the contractor should not have been able to perform the review because of these seeming conflicts of interest.

Because of the issues above, Checks & Balances Project (C&BP) and 11 environmental, faith-based and public interest organizations sent a letter [.PDF] on April 8, 2013, calling on Secretary of State John Kerry and the State Department Deputy Inspector General Harold Geisel to investigate two things: first, whether ERM hid conflicts of interest which might have excluded it from performing the Keystone XL environmental assessment and second, how State Department officials failed to flag inconsistencies in ERM’s proposal.

A few weeks later, C&BP received a voicemail from a Special Agent at the State Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG):

Hello Mr. Elsner, my name is Special Agent Pedro Colon from the State Department’s Office of Inspector General. I’m calling to inform you that we have received your request and are reviewing the matter. If you have any questions please contact me at 703-284-2688.

On May 7, 2013, I called Special Agent Colon but he was unable to speak at the time. I followed up the next day and spoke with the Special Agent via phone regarding the request for an investigation. I asked a few basic questions about the status of the complaint and asked specifically if C&BP would be informed should the complaint be fully investigated by the Office of Inspector General (OIG). Special Agent Colon informed me that he could not speak to any of the questions and referred us to other staff in the OIG.

On May 9, 2013, I received an email from the OIG General Counsel saying, “that the complaint was being processed per the OIG hotline procedures and is under review.” (See the entire email correspondence here [.PDF])

I then asked the OIG General Counsel the same question he asked Mr. Colon:

If the hotline is moved out of the review process and onto the next step (an investigation?), will I be notified?

The OIG replied via email saying that the OIG Office of Investigations will not comment if it is engaged in an investigation.

The correspondence between C&BP and the OIG indicates that there is a probe into the Keystone XL review conflicts of interest.

The public was supposed to get an honest look at the impacts of the Keystone XL pipeline. Instead, ERM, an oil company contractor, misled the State Department, in what appears to be an attempt to green light the project on behalf of oil industry clients.

The American Public needs a full investigation into the conflicts of interest and misleading statements of the Keystone XL review contractor, Environmental Resources Management.

Secretary Kerry needs to stop the Keystone XL process until the Inspector General completes a full investigation of these conflicts of interest and the State Department has an unbiased review of Keystone XL’s impact.

Filed under KeystoneXL Tagged with Big Oil, Checks and Balances Project, Energy, Energy Production, Environment, ExxonMobil, John Kerry, Keystone, Keystone XL, politics, Secretary Kerry, State Department, Tar Sands, TransCanada, US State Department

C&BP Calls for State Dept. Investigation into Keystone XL Consultant’s Conflicts of Interest

May 28, 2013 by gabrielelsner 5 Comments

: Letter to Secretary of State John Kerry and State Dept. Deputy Inspector General Harold Geisel

Originally posted on April 9, 2013.

Yesterday, Checks & Balances Project and 11 environmental, faith-based and public interest organizations called on Secretary of State John Kerry and the State Department Deputy Inspector General Harold Geisel to investigate whether Environmental Resources Management (ERM) hid conflicts of interest which might have excluded it from performing the Keystone XL environmental assessment and how State Department officials failed to flag inconsistencies in ERM’s proposal. Tom Zeller, Senior Writer at The Huffington Post, wrote an article highlighting the letter callings for an investigation.

Early last month, the State Department released a 2,000 page environmental impact study for the Keystone XL pipeline claiming that the pipeline would not have major impact on the environment. But, Environmental Resources Management (ERM), the consulting firm hired to perform the “draft supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS),” has ties to fossil fuel companies with major stakes in the Alberta Tar Sands. This conflict of interest was not accurately disclosed in ERM’s answers on a State Department questionnaire. Checks & Balances Project considers ERM’s responses in its proposal to be intentionally misleading statements.

Unredacted Documents Uncover Conflicts of Interest
Last week, Mother Jones released unredacted versions of the ERM proposal, showing that three experts “had done consulting work for TransCanada and other oil companies with a stake in the Keystone’s approval.”

The unredacted biographies show that ERM’s employees have an existing relationship with ExxonMobil and worked for TransCanada within the last three years among other companies involved in the Canadian tar sands.

Here’s more from Mother Jones’ Andy Kroll:

“ERM’s second-in-command on the Keystone report, Andrew Bielakowski, had worked on three previous pipeline projects for TransCanada over seven years as an outside consultant. He also consulted on projects for ExxonMobil, BP, and ConocoPhillips, three of the Big Five oil companies that could benefit from the Keystone XL project and increased extraction of heavy crude oil taken from the Canadian tar sands.

Another ERM employee who contributed to State’s Keystone report — and whose prior work history was also redacted — previously worked for Shell Oil; a third worked as a consultant for Koch Gateway Pipeline Company, a subsidiary of Koch Industries. Shell and Koch have a significant financial interest in the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. ERM itself has worked for Chevron, which has invested in Canadian tar-sands extraction, according to its website.”

When asked about who at the State Department decided to redact ERM’s biographies, a State Department spokesperson said “ERM proposed redactions of some information in the administrative documents that they considered business confidential.” Disclosing past clients may be business confidential information, but from what the biographies show, ERM may have recommended the redactions to hide conflicts of interest from public disclosure.

Problem with ERM Answers on Conflict of Interest Questionnaire

: ERM’s Proposal to the State Department

The biographies on ERM’s proposal show that the company has had direct relationships with multiple business entities that could be affected by the proposed work in the past three years.

In the “Organizational Conflict of Interest Questionnaire,” the State Department asks (page 42), “Within the past three years, have you (or your organization) had a direct or indirect relationship (financial, organizational, contractual or otherwise) with any business entity that could be affected in any way by the proposed work?“ ERM’s Project Manager, Steve Koster, checked “No” but appears to have added to the Yes/No questionnaire that, “ERM has no existing contract or working relationship with TransCanada.”

Regardless of the addendum Koster added, he still submitted an incomplete statement when checking “No” to the specific question above. Simply put, the information provided by Mr. Koster was an incomplete statement if one simply reviews the biographies of ERM’s employees for the project.

The State Department Contracting Officer should have flagged this inconsistency when reviewing the staff biographies. ERM’s answers did not properly reveal in the Yes/No questionnaire that ERM did have a current “direct relationship” with a business enetity that could be affected by the proposed work and a relationship in the past three years with TransCanada, the company building the pipeline.

Koster’s incomplete statement on direct business relationships is not the only odd statement in ERM’s proposal. ERM also answered “No” to the question, “Are you (or your organization) an ‘energy concern?’” which the State Department defines (in part) as: “Any person — (1) significantly engaged in the business of conducting research…related to an activity described in paragraphs (i) through (v).” Paragraph (i) states: “Any person significantly engaged in the business of developing, extracting, producing, refining, transporting by pipeline, converting into synthetic fuel, distributing, or selling minerals for use as an energy source…” ERM as a research firm working for fossil fuel companies is, unequivocally, an energy interest.

So the question must be asked: If ERM is unable to accurately fill out a simple questionnaire regarding conflicts of interest, how can we trust the company to perform an unbiased environmental assessment of a 1,179 mile-long pipeline cutting through the American heartland? And, why did the State Department’s Contracting Officer not flag the inconsistencies in ERM’s Conflict of Interest Questionnaire when reviewing the proposals?

Intentions of State Department and ERM in Question

The Federal Government has strict ethics rules to prevent Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCIs) from impacting the impartiality of government contracts and to prevent hiring contractors who cannot provide independent and unbiased services to the government.

According to a white paper from the Congressional Research Service, before the State Department could choose ERM as the contractor, the “Contracting Officer” had to make an “affirmative determination of responsibility.” All government contractors (including ERM) must be deemed responsible, in part by meeting strict ethics guidelines, known as “collateral requirements.”

According to current collateral requirements, contractors must be found “nonresponsible” when there are unavoidable and unmitigated OCIs. Checks & Balances Project believes that the Contracting Officer should have deemed ERM “nonresponsible” because the company serves as a contractor for major fossil fuel companies that have a stake in the Keystone XL pipeline. If ERM were “nonresponsible”, the company would have been ineligible to perform the environmental impact review of the Keystone XL pipeline.

These potential material incomplete statements on a Federal Government proposal calls into question the integrity of ERM and threatens millions in government contracts.

If ERM were determined to be “nonresponsible” or “excluded” because of these incomplete statements, it could jeopardize ERM’s ability to perform any work for the Federal Government. Again, according to the Congressional Research Service:

“Decisions to exclude are made by agency heads or their designees (above the contracting officer’s level) based upon evidence that contractors have committed certain integrity offenses, including any “offenses indicating a lack of business integrity or honesty that seriously affect the present responsibility of a contractor.””

Certainly these incomplete statements call into question both the independence of ERM and the judgement of the Contracting Officer in making the “affirmative determination of responsibility.” This proposal process should be investigated by the State Department Inspector General to determine if ERM’s statements are cause for exclusion.

Groups Calling for Inspector General Investigation

We believe ERM used multiple material incomplete statements and had clear conflicts of interest as shown in the unredacted documents. So, why was ERM hired by the State Department?

Checks & Balances Project asked a State Department spokesperson about the conflicts of interest and the spokesperson said: “Based on a thorough consideration of all of the information presented, including the work histories of team members, the Department concluded that ERM has no financial or other interest in the outcome of the project that would constitute a conflict of interest.” Perhaps the State Department’s Contracting Offier made the decision to hire ERM because of the company’s incomplete statements on the conflict of interest questionnaire.

: Harold Geisel, Deputy Inspector General, U.S. State Department

Checks & Balances Project along with 11 other groups (Better Future Project, Center for Biological Diversity, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, DeSmogBlog, Forecast the Facts, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, NC WARN, Oil Change International, Public Citizen’s Energy Program and Unitarian Universalist Ministry for Earth) sent a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry and the State Department Deputy Inspector General Harold Geisel calling for an investigation into the matter. These incomplete statements and the determination by the Contracting Officer that ERM did not have any conflicts of interest, despite clear evidence to the contrary, are grounds for further investigation.

Filed under Uncategorized

Gov. Hickenlooper a bad example on oil-and-gas issues

May 24, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

**Cross-posted from The Hill**

By Ellynne Bannon

The cozy relationship between politicians and big business has been a fact of life in America since the days of the robber barons. Today, this affiliation is especially strong between certain governors and the oil and gas industry. And, the consequences could include drastic impacts on the health and safety of their constituents. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the case of Colorado’s Gov. John Hickenlooper.

Given that Colorado is the epicenter of both the gas boom and the controversy over its impacts, the governor has become a leading national figure on oil and gas. Earlier this year, Hickenlooper appeared in front of the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee during a hearing and stated that he drank fracking fluid, implying that it’s safe. Shortly after, he was forced to clarify that what he drank isn’t actually used commercially, stating that: “I don’t think there’s any frack fluid right now that I’m aware of that people are using commercially that you want to drink.”

It turns out that this wasn’t the last time that the governor would go to bat for the oil-and-gas industry. In fact, Hickenlooper has mastered the rhetoric of a concerned elected official, while at the same time working to help his billion-dollar oil-and-gas industry boosters cheat the rules that protect public health and water.

While Hickenlooper has claimed he would increase fines and hold industry polluters accountable, behind closed doors he helped weaken and kill legislation aimed at doing just that.

Case in point: the governor recently announced, with great pomp and circumstance, an initiative to make Colorado the “the healthiest state,” and created a safe drinking water week. Days later, and with far less fanfare, he successfully gutted legislation to hold oil-and-gas companies accountable when they pollute Colorado communities and water.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg. In January, Hickenlooper’s oil-and-gas commission put forth water testing rules criticized as weakest in the nation, which included the Anadarko-Noble loophole, a huge carve-out for two of the biggest oil-and-gas operators in Colorado.

The Anadarko-Noble loophole makes it easier for billion-dollar oil-and-gas companies to pollute water in northern Colorado, an area that’s home to some of the state’s most intense drilling and more than 25 percent of Colorado’s oil-and-gas wells. It’s also home to more than half of the most recent reported spills.

Hickenlooper’s lobbyists also worked to weaken fines for oil-and-gas companies guilty of polluting. They did this, despite the fact that Colorado already has lowest-in-the-nation fines and a well-documented problem with spills and water contamination.

In 2012, industry reported 402 spills in Colorado, 20 percent of which resulted in water contamination. Just six companies were responsible for more than 85 percent of all spills that contaminated water. Now, thanks to Hickenlooper’s efforts, these companies have even less incentive to stop polluting Colorado communities and water.

Hickenlooper has also rejected funding to increase the number of state oil-and-gas well inspectors. His Department of Natural Resources agency joined with the oil-and-gas industry to oppose additional resources to increase the number of inspectors – from 16 to 24 – for the state’s more than 52,000 wells.

The Hickenlooper administration also opposed reform efforts to increase transparency on the Colorado oil-and-gas commission. Oil-and-gas companies currently serve on the commission, which regulates their activities, posing serious concerns about conflicts of interest.

Finally, the Hickenlooper administration worked to block a public health study to see if fracking is making Coloradoans sick. Hickenlooper’s chief of public health and the environment, Dr. Chris Urbina, testified against the need for the study – which was supported by local residents and medical professionals.

Hickenlooper is, unfortunately, only one example of a state chief executive who seems to value his oil-and-gas donors over all others. New York’s Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Pennsylvania’s Gov. Tom Corbett and Utah’s Gov. Gary Herbert have all displayed similar tendencies. These elected officials need to be held accountable for their actions; they need to put the health and safety of their constituents ahead of the profits of the billion-dollar oil-and-gas industry.

Bannon is Western Lands and Energy Program Manager for the Checks and Balances Project.

Filed under Blog, Colorado, Fracking Tagged with Anadarko-Noble loophole, Colorado, frack fluid, Fracking, Governor Hickenlooper, Oil and Gas

Analysis: Colorado BLM failing to enact Obama energy reforms – creating red tape, uncertainty

May 23, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

A stunning new analysis shows striking inefficiencies at work in Colorado that should infuriate anyone looking for a smarter approach to federal oil and gas leasing – including both conservationists and energy companies.

In Colorado, leases sold by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have attracted nearly three times the number of costly, time-consuming lawsuits (known as protests) than we’ve seen in the rest of the Rockies. Our new analysis found that 76 percent of leases in Colorado were protested, as opposed to 27 percent in surrounding states, on average.

The analysis is based on BLM data recently released for the first time regarding the number of protests in each state filed by citizens and stakeholders on tracts of lands (known as parcels) available for oil and gas leasing. Protests are one of the key measurements for how controversial a particular decision to lease land for oil and gas development.

The reason for this massive discrepancy is clear:

Helen Hankins, the BLM’s top bureaucrat in Colorado, has failed to implement President Obama’s common-sense leasing reforms – designed to streamline the leasing process and reduce conflict dramatically by requiring research and analysis be completed prior to leasing.

A recent report from the Center for American Progress pointed out that:

Those reforms called for a better balance between developing oil and gas resources and the protection of other public lands resources, including nearby parks and refuges, wildlife, and historic and archaeological sites. “There is no presumed preference for oil and gas development over other uses,” states the reform document.

In other words, the reforms were meant to drive our local economies with a real balance between protecting public lands to support and attract high-wage businesses to the West, and using them to produce American-made energy – which together support 100,000s of jobs.

In states like Utah and New Mexico – where the BLM offices are implementing the reforms – protests are down, and energy is being produced. That approach is working for industry and conservation interests – and most importantly our communities and our families.

But in Colorado, Hankins has turned the President’s balanced reforms into a broken promise for our communities. Instead of helping oil and gas companies responsibly develop oil and gas resources in the right places, while protecting those lands that drive the economy and attract new business, Hankins continues to rely on decades-old plans and analyses – proposing to allow oil and gas drilling near places like Mesa Verde National Park, and Dinosaur National Monument.

By miring all sides in expensive red tape, Hankins has failed Westerners who are doing everything they can to get back to work and support their families. They expect their government to champion the Western way of life, including use of public lands in a balanced way to support sustainable economic growth.

The Obama administration must correct this failure by taking action to follow the directives in the 2010 leasing reforms now.

Filed under Colorado, Permitting Tagged with Colorado BLM, Helen Hankins, oil and gas leasing, oil and gas reforms

BLM Colorado: Public Has No Need to Know About Public Lands, Public Monies, Public Employees

May 23, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Cross-posted from ColoradoPols

In a show of arrogance that has become too typical of the Colorado State Office of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the agency is ignoring a Federal judge, media requests, stakeholders, and the public in denying public information about public activities on the public lands, according to the Durango Herald:

“This isn’t a widespread issue of public concern. It is primarily press that are concerned about oil and gas leasing and activists that are opposed to oil and gas leasing.”

The state ‘Communications Director’, one might assume, has the job as a public employee working on public lands issues and spending public monies, of informing the public and managing media relations. The ‘press’ and public are–this common-sense assumption goes–the PRIMARY purpose of his receiving a Federal salary as a taxpayer-funded public employee.

But apparently not for BLM Colorado–where public information is no such thing, and the public and media are merely distractions from what ever other self-determined more important things, like defending illegal agency actions perhaps, or intentionally seeking to divide communities.

Colorado’s North Fork Standing Up

This particular matter has its roots in the BLM Colorado State Office’s reckless oil and gas leasing policy that willfully ignores local communities, other federal agencies, state wildlife officials, local businesses and the public, to lease whatever public lands secret industry representatives nominate. This is despite Colorado having the oldest land use plans in the Mountain West, many dating back to the 1980s–like that that governs the public lands in the North Fork–most of which fail completely to properly account for, describe, consider or protect the resources and uses that exist or depend upon these lands today.

Citizens for a Healthy Community–a Delta County based conservation group–partnered with the Western Environmental Law Center to file lawsuit seeking the names of the nominators who put forward the contentious leases in that valley. They won that suit.

Here is what the judge wrote:

“Competition in bidding advances the purpose of getting a fair price for a lease of publicly owned minerals,” Matsch wrote. “Moreover, the identity of the submitter may be relevant to the plaintiff and others who may raise concerns about the stewardship records of that potential owner, a factor relevant to the environmental impact of the proposed sale.”

So, a Federal judge acknowledges that sharing information on public lands and public minerals is in the public interest and orders the public employees at a public agency to release that (public) information.

And the senior staff at BLM Colorado Office responds, to paraphrase: Make us (again).

Following the judge’s decision and the BLM Colorado’s clear loss in court, others–including the Durango Herald–have now sought identical information regarding contentious leases in their communities. Such as those surrounding Mesa Verde National Park opposed by the BLM’s own sister agency in the Department of Interior, the National Park Service.

Now, the Colorado State Office of the BLM, our public employees spending our public monies to manage our public lands and minerals, is refusing to release that information. Again. Because, apparently its Communications Director has better things to do than communicate.

Maybe like spending more time in court defending the indefensible, losing more lawsuits, and greasing the skids for oil and gas in violation of what the Federal courts have found to be in the public’s interest.

Filed under Colorado

Same story, different day: Lamborn, Tipton offer-up tired package of oil and gas company giveaways

May 22, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

House Republicans paraded out their latest series of giveaways to the billion-dollar oil and gas industry today in a subcommittee chaired by Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-CO). The bills would increase corporate welfare and a total disregard for western families and the economic health of local communities.

These reckless proposals put forth by Reps. Lamborn, Scott Tipton (R-CO), and Doc Hastings (R-WA) have failed over and over again in Congress because Americans want more out of their representatives than messaging bills for the oil and gas industry. At a time when oil and gas companies are already getting fat on the taxpayers’ dime, it’s appalling that politicians are dishing up yet another industry smorgasbord with zero regard for Western families’ safety and security.

Westerners want a real balance between protecting public lands and energy development. That balance is critical for attracting high-wage businesses and maintaining the billion-dollar outdoor recreation economy in the West.

The three tired bills paraded out yet again today include extreme measures that create quotas and mandates on behalf of oil and gas companies, and encourage risky speculation on publicly owned lands. These reckless proposals would sacrifice our drinking water, air quality, and public lands just to create more handouts that would do nothing to address our energy concerns.

These reckless measures run counter to western values and what’s best for local economies. Recent polling found that 9 out of 10 Westerners agree that national parks, forests, monuments and wildlife areas are an essential part of the economy, while 74% believe that national parks, forests, and monuments, help to attract high quality employers and good jobs to their state.

The outdoor recreation industry alone accounts for $646 billion in annual spending, 6 million jobs and nearly $80 billion in local, state and federal taxes.

Yet, House Republicans continue to push these same reckless proposals, regardless of the potentially devastating impacts to western families and economies – in order to provide more handouts to the billion dollar oil and gas industry which is already hoarding millions of acres of public lands, billions in taxpayer-funded subsidies and is focused on drilling on non-federal lands, where the best and most profitable oil resources are located.

Reps Lamborn, Tipton and Hastings, need to be held accountable for blatant disregard of taxpayer money and their continued attempts to increase corporate welfare for oil and gas companies.

Key provisions from the legislation considered today:

Rep. Lamborn’s bill (HR 1965) would:

Block the public from participating in oil and gas leasing decisions by creating “entrance fees” of up to $5,000 to join the conversation.
Mandate leasing and encourage costly oil shale speculation that has a century-long track record of failure despite billions in taxpayer-funded subsidies.
Roll back the Obama Administration’s common sense approach to the failed “rock that burns,” oil shale, which would put already scarce western water at risk.

Rep. Tipton’s bill (HR 1394) would:

Establish energy development – especially fossil fuels – as the primary use of public lands, jeopardizing the billion-dollar outdoor recreation and tourism industries and the thousands of western jobs that they create.
Require the Department of Interior to prioritize oil, gas and coal over renewable energy development.

Rep. Hastings bill (HR 1964) would:

Fast track approval of drilling permits, roads and pipelines in the National Petroleum Reserve (NPR-A) in Alaska, regardless of potential environmental impacts.
Eliminate the “integrated activity plan” for NPR-A that balances energy development with protection of wildlife habitat and other critical areas.

Filed under In The News, oil shale Tagged with Big Oil, Congress, Department of Interior, Doc Hastings, Doug Lamborn, drilling, Energy, Environment, Oil Shale, Public Lands, Tipton, water

Welcome to Frackademia 101

May 21, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

This month, the Western Congressional Caucus held their first “class” for their sham oil and gas PR effort dubbed the ‘Western Caucus University.’ The amount of oil and gas contributions to caucus members is stunning. No wonder this “Frackademia” appears to have curriculum based on industry talking points.

Below were some of the lowlights and our grades for their content.

This is the first in a series of report cards we’ll be doing on “Frackademia.” It’s a shame taxpayer dollars are being used to push blatant industry talking points.

Western Caucus University Academic Credibility Report Card
WCU Claim	Accuracy Grade	Fact
“Federal lands contain 46% of the proved crude reserves in the United States.”	F	Currently, 93% of all shale oil and mixed plays – which are the most viable and actively sought resources by industry – are located on non-federal lands. Even in the Rocky Mountain West, where more federal land is located, there are just 11% of all shale oil and mixed oil and gas plays on federal lands.
“The amount of time it takes to process a permit to drill on federal lands increased from 212 days to 228 days between 2008-2012.”	D	What the Western Congressional Caucus fails to mention is that oil and gas companies are the hold up on drill permits. According to a recent Congressional Research Service report, it took industry an average of 236 days to process an application to drill permit on federal lands, while it took the Bureau of Land Management just 71 days.
“Local governments in the West miss out on substantial tax revenues from potential energy extraction, mining, timber harvesting and other forms of economic development.”	F	A recent economic study found that western non-metropolitan counties with more than 30 percent of their land in federal protected status such as national parks, monuments and wilderness increased jobs by 345 percent over the last 40 years. By comparison, similar counties with no protected federal public lands increased employment by only 83 percent. In 2010, per capita income in western non-metropolitan counties with 100,000 acres of protected public lands was on average $4,360 higher than per-capita income in similar counties with no protected public lands.In 2012, the outdoor recreation industry alone accounted for $646 billion in annual spending and nearly $80 billion in local, state and federal tax revenues in the United States

Filed under Blog Tagged with frackademia, Oil and Gas, Western Congressional Caucus

Gov. Hickenlooper’s ‘order’ to oil and gas commission to review fines an empty gesture

May 10, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Recently, Gov. Hickenlooper put on a masterful show of playing a politician who cares about Coloradans. Unfortunately, it was just an act to distract from the fact that Gov. Hickenlooper successfully killed efforts to set mandatory minimum fines and increase caps on fines for oil and gas companies that pollute.

After killing these measures, aimed at holding polluters accountable, Gov. Hickenlooper put out a press release ordering his oil and gas commission to ‘review enforcement, fines.’ In other words, he directed his commission to take a look into their abysmal record and get back to him. That’s not leadership, it was an empty gesture to cover his tracks.

Gov. Hickenlooper’s press release doesn’t do anything to strengthen Colorado’s woefully outdated laws, which include the lowest fines in the nation for polluters. And it’s doubtful that the governor’s oil and gas commission, which includes oil and gas industry employees, will suddenly become competent at holding oil and gas polluters accountable. An analysis by the Denver Post found that Colorado rarely fines oil and gas companies who pollute. According to the Coloradoan, less than 7 percent of industry violations since 1996 have resulted in fines.

Site of Parachute spill
Source: ecoflight

Last year, the industry reported 402 spills, of which 20 percent contaminated water. Six companies alone accounted for 85 percent of all the spills that contaminated groundwater – Anadarko, Noble Energy, Encana, PDC Energy, WPX Energy and Pioneer Natural Resources.

Not only are polluters not held accountable, but Gov. Hickenlooper has routinely rewarded some of the biggest oil and gas polluters in the state. In 2010 and 2011, Noble Energy caused more spills than any other operator in Colorado – 126. Yet, Hickenlooper’s oil and gas commission gave Noble an ‘Outstanding Operator’ award.

Gov. Hickenlooper also gave Anadarko an ‘Outstanding Operator’ award in 2011, while last year, Anadarko subsidy Kerr-McGee was linked to 70 spills – more than any other operator – of which, 38 percent resulted in water contamination. With these awards, Gov. Hickenlooper has once again made it clear that he isn’t that interested in holding oil and gas companies accountable when they pollute.

Gov. Hickenlooper used the power of his office to kill stronger standards that would have held the oil and gas industry accountable when they pollute. He chose to put the interests of the industry ahead of what’s best for Colorado families and that’s a shame. Now, Gov. Hickenlooper is insulting Coloradans by acting as the concerned politician.

Filed under Colorado, Fracking Tagged with Energy, Governor Hickenlooper, Oil and Gas

ALEC’s Most Wanted: Exposing a front group for fossil fuel interests (and other corporations)

May 10, 2013 by gabrielelsner 1 Comment

The Center for Media and Democracy’s (CMD) Brendan Fischer and Nick Surgey uncovered an internal document from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) at the controversial organization’s meeting last week in Oklahoma City. The document entitled “OKC anti-ALEC photos” featured the headshots of eight reporters and public interest advocates that have written about ALEC or been critical of ALEC’s activities (as a front group working on behalf of its corporate membership).

CMD’s Surgey attempted to attend the keynote address by Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin, which was billed as open to the press. After registering for press credentials at the ALEC registration desk, Mr. Surgey ascended the escalator towards the keynote speech, but was confronted by ALEC staff members and then approached by a uniformed Oklahoma City police officer.

Mr. Fischer and Surgey recount the exchange in which Surgey had his credentials revoked and was ejected from the ALEC meeting. From PR Watch:

“I need those credentials,” the officer said.

“I registered,” Surgey replied.

“No, you didn’t,” said a female ALEC staffer, who was accompanying the officer.

“I did, downstairs,” he said.

“It was… you shouldn’t have been able to.”

The reason Surgey shouldn’t have been allowed to register, according to the ALEC staffer: “Because we know who you are.

Surgey asked the ALEC staffer for her name as she asserted that he had to leave:

Can I ask your name?” Surgey asked the ALEC staffer who challenged his press credentials.

“Erm, why?” she replied.

“Is there any reason you wouldn’t want to tell me your name?”

“Yeah, because I know who you are,” she said.

The staffer — whose organization had developed talking points claiming to support the First Amendment, which protects a free and vibrant press — added: “Because you’re going to write an article about it.”

Less than 10 minutes after registering as press, Surgey had his credentials revoked and was ejected from the ALEC meeting by a police officer. As he was escorted away, the ALEC staffer repeated: “We know exactly who you are.”

As Director of the Checks & Balances Project, I was one of the eight people featured on the “ALEC Most Wanted” document alongside other reporters and public interest advocates who have criticized ALEC’s efforts to influence state legislators on behalf of special interests. Fischer and Surgey write:

The page featured pictures and names of eight people, four of whom work with CMD, including Surgey, CMD’s general counsel Brendan Fischer and its Executive Director Lisa Graves, as well as CMD contributor Beau Hodai.

It is not known whether the photo array of people who have reported on or criticized ALEC was distributed to ALEC members or shared with Oklahoma City law enforcement.

Other targets on the document included The Nation‘s Lee Fang, who has written articles critical of ALEC, and Sabrina Stevens, an education activist who spoke out in an ALEC task force meeting last November. Also featured were Calvin Sloan of People for the American Way and Gabe Elsner of Checks and Balances Project, both of whom are ALEC detractors.

The name of ALEC Events Director Sarah McManamon was in the top corner, indicating the document was printed from her Google account.

As Fischer and Surgey point out, ALEC claims to support the freedom of the press. But in practice, the organization seems reluctant to provide transparency and access required for a free press to be functional. Instead, “ALEC assembled a dossier of disfavored reporters and activists,” and “kicked reporters out of its conference who might write unfavorable stories…”

ALEC’s sensitivity to transparency shows that the accountability work by C&BP, CMD, People for the American Way and others is working. A free society can’t work unless there is some check on the concentration of power. Now, more than ever, society needs more of the most powerful check on concentrations of power – public scrutiny. Most recently, C&BP has worked to expose ALEC’s efforts to eliminate clean energy laws in states across the country and bring to light that these attacks are being driven by powerful special interests.

ALEC exemplifies how fossil fuel corporations and other special interests have an oversized influence in our public process. And, C&BP is proud to be part of the effort to expose ALEC, fossil fuel-funded front groups and other fossil fuel interests using their power and resources to attack clean energy policies — even if it lands us on ALEC’s Most Wanted list.

Filed under ALEC Tagged with 1st Amendment, ALEC, ALEC Most Wanted, American Electric Power, American Legislative Exchange Council, Beau Hodai, Big Gas, Big Oil, BP, Brendan Fischer, Calvin Sloan, Center for Media and Democracy, Checks and Balances Project, Chevron, CMD, Duke Energy, Energy, ExxonMobil, Fracking, Freedom of the Press, Front Group, gas, Industry, Koch Brothers, Koch Industries, Lee Fang, Lisa Graves, Most Wanted, natural gas, Nick Surgey, Oklahoma City, People for the American Way, politics, Progress Energy, Sabrina Stevens, Sarah McManamon, Shell, State Legislators, State Legislatures, The Nation

Group’s new oil shale report contains wildly inaccurate claims

May 9, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

The Institute for Energy Research (IER), recently posted a blog about oil shale that doesn’t have its facts straight.

The IER blog falsely claims that the federal government put oil shale resources ‘under lock and key’. Oil shale companies have been awarded billions in taxpayer-funded subsidies and received research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) leases on publicly owned lands that don’t require the payment of bonuses, rents, or royalties.

Despite more than a century of failed oil shale projects and billions of dollars risked, taxpayers are still subsidizing oil shale research and development. Currently, there are seven such RD&D leases being pursued in Colorado and Utah. The companies include: Shell, American Shale Oil (AMSO), Enefit, ExxonMobil, and Natural Soda Holdings.

Chevron also had an RD&D holding, but abandoned it last February in order to focus on viable energy sources – hardly the first oil shale experiment to go

bust. On Black Sunday, Exxon closed its Colony oil shale project, which put more than 2,000 out of work and devastated the economy of Colorado’s western slope for years.

Arial photo of a pile of oil shale ‘ash’ in Estonia. Source: EcoCrete Project.

In their blog, IER also highlights Estonia, considered the world leader in oil shale, as the prime example of successful oil shale development – but that’s no

t factual either. Oil shale isn’t economically viable in Estonia, has caused significant water, air and land pollution, and is highly controversial.

The head of Estonia’s biggest oil shale company, Eestia Energia – known as Enefit in the U.S. – has admitted that oil shale is not profitable without large taxpayer subsidies. Underscoring this point was Moody’s recent move downgrading Enefit’s credit rating to negative, over concerns that they can’t make oil shale profitable.

In addition, oil shale is a dirty, polluting fossil fuel that’s responsible for 80 percent of all of Estonia’s pollution. Enefit’s track record includes contaminated groundwater, creating 600-foot high mountains of oil shale waste that spontaneously ignite, and causing the emission of “lots of carbon dioxide.”

IER’s blog also boasts that there are huge oil shale deposits in the U.S. But these projections are irrelevant because oil shale isn’t a viable energy source and fails the basic economic test. In other words, the return on oil shale doesn’t outweigh the investment. The amount of energy and water that it takes to superheat, mine and process oil shale – which is actually fossilized algae – is more than the energy that oil shale provides. If you need more evidence just look to the billion dollar oil and gas industry, which has almost limitless resources, and has 100 plus years of failed oil shale experiments to show for their efforts.

The IER can spin oil shale all day, but it won’t change the cold hard fact that oil shale isn’t ready for prime time.

Filed under Eyes On Enefit, oil shale, Permitting Tagged with estonia, Institute for Energy Research, Oil Shale, Public Lands, water

Five things Gov. Hickenlooper did to put oil & gas industry ahead of Colorado’s health and water

May 8, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Governor Hickenlooper likes to paint himself as an outsider, unfamiliar with the political process. But his recent actions to undermine public health, water safety – and basic common sense – have proven that Gov. Hickenlooper has become the ultimate insider – adept at helping his billion dollar oil and gas industry boosters cheat the rules, while playing the role of concerned official.

While Governor Hickenlooper has said the he’ll increase fines and hold polluters accountable, behind closed doors he’s actually been working hard to kill or weaken legislation aimed at doing just that.

Case in point: Governor Hickenlooper announces both his campaign for Colorado to be the healthiest state and safe drinking water week, then days later he successfully killed legislation to help protect water from toxic oil and gas spills.

Here’s are the FIVE THINGS Gov. Hickenlooper did to put the public health and water of Coloradans at risk and to make it easier for oil and gas companies to pollute.

Issued the weakest water testing rules for oil and gas operations in the nation…with huge carve out for Anadarko and Noble.
In January, Governor Hickenlooper’s oil and gas commission put forth weakest in the nation water testing rules –which included the Anadarko-Noble loophole for two of the biggest oil and gas operators in Colorado and Weld County – and two of the state’s biggest oil and gas polluters.
The Anadarko-Noble loophole makes it easier for billion dollar oil and gas companies to pollute water in an area in Northern Colorado that’s home to more than 25 percent of Colorado’s oil and gas wells and more than half of the most recent spills reported.
The result is that it’ll be harder to detect water contamination and to figure out which well(s) are the source of contamination in the region that needs these public safety standards the most. In 2012, industry reported 402 spills in state, of which 20 percent resulted in water contamination, and just last month, a huge spill near Parachute creek contaminated nearby soil and water with cancer causing benzene.
Lobbied against efforts to hold oil and gas companies responsible when they pollute Colorado communities and water with toxins, waste.
Governor Hickenlooper sent his lobbyists to the Capitol to weaken fines for oil and gas companies who pollute, despite the fact that Colorado has the lowest in the nation fines and a well-documented problem of spills and water contamination. In 2012, 20 percent of all reported oil and gas spills resulted in water contamination and just six companies were responsible for more than 85 percent of all spills. And the Parachute spill – which has contaminated nearby water and soil with cancer causing benzene is now being investigated by the EPA’s criminal investigations division.
Turned down money to increase the number of state oil and gas inspectors.
Governor Hickenlooper’s Department of Natural Resources agency joined up with the oil and gas industry in opposition to additional resources to help making oil and gas drilling safer by turning down money to increase the number of inspectors, from sixteen to twenty-four, for the state’s more than 52,000 wells. That’s despite the state already being short-staffed on inspectors.
Successfully blocked reform efforts to make the actions of the Colorado oil and gas commission more transparent.
Governor Hickenlooper, along with the oil and gas industry, opposed legislation that would have made important systemic changes to Colorado’s oil and gas commission – the Natural Resources Department testified against the bill. Oil and gas companies currently serve on the commission, which regulates their activities, a direct conflict of interest.
Worked to defeat public health study to see if fracking is making Coloradans sick.
Governor Hickenlooper’s chief of public health and the environment, Dr. Chris Urbina, testified against a health study – supported by local residents and medical professionals – that would help figure out if Coloradans who live near fracking are getting sicker than those who don’t live near fracking.

Filed under Fracking

Western Energy Alliance wants taxpayers to front $44 billion in handouts to most profitable companies in the U.S. – billion dollar oil and gas industry

May 6, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

The Western Energy Alliance has once again proved that they’ll go to any length to increase the profit margins of the billion-dollar oil & gas industry. Now they’re lobbying for $44 billion dollars in taxpayer-funded handouts over the next 10 years, despite the fact that the oil and gas companies are some of the most profitable in the U.S.

ExxonMobil and Chevron topped the Fortune’s rankings of the world’s most profitable companies in 2012. In fact, four of the top ten companies on the Fortune 500 list were oil and gas companies. And the big five oil companies, BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil and Shell, made a combined profit of $118 billion dollars last year and $137 billion in 2011.

The oil and gas industry has more than proven that they don’t need these excessive, wasteful subsidies – they’re making billion dollar profits while American taxpayers are paying more at the pump.

Unfortunately, this is just the latest example of Western Energy Alliance putting profit margins of a billion dollar industry ahead of what’s best for Westerners.

Filed under Gas Prices

The Maine Players Attacking Renewable Energy: The Koch Brothers

May 3, 2013 by gabrielelsner Leave a comment

In a new report, the Maine Conservation Alliance asks: are we debating renewable energy, or the Koch brothers’ profits?”

Maine’s renewable energy standards have been the prime target of the Koch Machine – front groups, think tanks, and legislators with financial ties to Koch Industries and its two billionaire owners: the Koch brothers.

The Renewable Portfolio Standard, which requires utilities to provide 30% of their energy through renewable sources, has led to $2 billion in investment and over 2500 local jobs. It has proven to be great for Maine’s economy – but it threatens the profit margins of fossil fuel companies like Koch Industries, which pumps 300 million tons of carbon into the atmosphere every year.

To dismantle the RPS, the Koch brothers have been extending influence through a legislative front group – the American Legislative Executive Council (ALEC). ALEC has contributed over $750,000 to political action committees, candidates, and parties in Maine. Senator Mike Thibodeau, one of the anti-RPS bill’s co-sponsors, has received over $15,000 from ALEC-affiliated organizations.

It is the civic duty of Mainers to decide for themselves what is best for the state’s environment and economy, not an out-of-state corporate interest. The Maine Conservation Alliance affirms that the economy is not for sale.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, clean energy, electricity, Energy, Fossil Fuels, gas, Koch, Koch Brothers, Koch Industries, Maine, oil, Renewable Energy, Renewable Energy Standard, Renewables, RPS

Gov. Hickenlooper working overtime to bring toxic waste and pollution to your neighborhood!

May 2, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

A lot’s changed since 1955 when a gallon of gas was about 29 cents. One thing that hasn’t changed are Colorado’s fines for oil and gas drilling violations – despite a huge drilling boom and large increase in spills over the past several years. Under current law, most violations can’t be fined more than a $1,000 per day, with an overall cap of $10,000.

And it turns out that the state rarely enforces these laws. Analyses by the Denver Post and Fort Collins Coloradoan found that that state regulators rarely fine violators who pollute, and less than 7 percent of industry violations since 1996 have resulted in fines.

The Parachute Creek spill, caused by Williams, has polluted soil and water with cancer causing benzene and yet 56 days later, Williams has yet to be fined for polluting and risking public health.

Despite all of this, not only has Governor Hickenlooper failed to stand up for Colorado families and protect public health, but he’s actually working overtime to help make it easier for the oil and gas industry to pollute your water and communities.

According to a new report from the Center for Western Priorities, six oil and gas companies were responsible for 85 percent of all the spills that resulted in water contamination last year. Turns out that Governor Hickenlooper’s ‘besties’ Anadarko Petroleum subsidiary and Noble Energy, Inc. (of the Anadarko-Noble loophole) were two of the six big polluters.

Earlier this week, Fox 31 Denver reported that Gov. Hickenlooper watered down legislation to protect public health and water by strengthening oil and gas drilling violation fines.

Apparently, these laws just aren’t lax enough for Governor Hickenlooper and his oil and gas industry boosters. According to the Fox 31’s news coverage:

“Andy White, the governor’s [Hickenlooper] lobbyist on all oil and gas-related legislation…sided Friday with Republicans on the Appropriations Committee and stripped those provisions — the minimum daily fine and the removal of an overall cap on fees — from the bill before sending it to the Senate floor.”

Now the question is: Will the state legislature do the right thing – protect public health and water- by holding the oil and gas companies responsible when they pollute or will Gov. Hickenpuppet continue doing the bidding of the oil and gas industry to the detriment to Colorado families and communities?

Filed under Blog, Colorado, Fracking

Western Energy Alliance brazenly flubs facts in new poll

May 2, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Western Energy Alliance is hard at work spinning their new survey, which underscores the lengths to which they’ll go to increase the profit margins of the billion dollar oil and gas industry – even when that means putting water, public health, and local communities at risk.

WEA announced their new poll a month ago, but just released the results today. Was it because they needed all that time to figure out how to spin the poll?

Unfortunately for WEA, since they included so many factually incorrect statements in the poll, they won’t be able to use their results for much other than spin sessions. And, this isn’t the first time that WEA and their vice president for government affairs, Kathleen Sgamma, haven’t been able to keep their facts straight or master basic grade school multiplication skills.

While WEA’s poll also spins that the public supports hydraulic fracturing, there are already 351 towns and cities across the U.S. that have taken action to limit or ban fracking within their borders.

Here’s a look at some of the most glaring factual errors from the WEA poll materials:

WEA claim #1: “The government has prevented oil and natural gas development on federal lands, even though less than one-tenth of 1% of public lands is being used for oil and natural gas today.”

Facts: Both the federal government and industry has aggressively pushed to increase drilling activity on public lands. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, production of crude oil is at its highest level since 2002, and data from the Department of Interior show that oil production on federal lands was up 7 percent in 2012. This is despite the fact that nearly 21 million of the almost 39 million acres of public lands leased to the oil and gas industry sit idle.

WEA claim #2: The oil and gas industry do such a great job cleaning up lands where they’ve drilled that they’re considered wilderness, or pristine areas, post-clean up.

Drilling infrastructure in Wyoming. Source: EcoFlight

Facts: Reports on reclamation efforts in Utah, Wyoming and New York have shown that:

restoration attempts often fail and create long-lasting problems that threaten western wildlife;
companies fail to provide adequately funded bonding, leaving behind billions in clean-up costs for states such as Wyoming; and
the oil and gas industry often fails to plug depleted wells – industry neglected to plug 89 percent of wells in New York.

In fact, a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) analysis pointed to a highly inadequate system for funding clean-up of oil and gas wells on public lands.

WEA claim #3: “Increased energy production of American energy from public lands will lead to lower energy costs for consumers.”

Fact: Unfortunately for WEA’s spin team, experts agree – from BusinessWeek to the Energy Security Leadership Council – that the global market actually drives consumer oil prices, not U.S. production levels, so increased U.S. drilling doesn’t lead to lower energy prices.

Polls are only worth the paper they’re printed on if they fail to relay facts in a straightforward and honest way. Clearly, Western Energy Alliance and the companies they represent such as Anadarko and Noble care more about spin than they do about facts.

Filed under Fracking

Former park rangers launch group to protect America’s national parks from irresponsible oil & gas drilling

May 1, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Former park rangers have launched a new group, Park Rangers for Our Lands, to provide solutions to irresponsible plans to drill near America’s national parks.

The former park rangers are advocating for a balance between energy development and conservation, just at a time when Colorado Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Director Helen Hankins has tried to push forward widely-criticized plans to drill next to Dinosaur National Monument and near Mesa Verde National Park. These are two areas of primary concern for the group.

According to Richard Ellis, who spearheaded the formation of Park Rangers for Our Lands:

“Our parks are under siege. Oil and gas drilling is encroaching our public lands from all sides…We need the BLM to work with its neighbors at the National Park Service and come up with common sense ways to protect the parks, the air quality in the region, and keep the West a beautiful place to visit.”

Director Hankins has come under fire, numerous times, for her oil and gas leasing plans next to Dinosaur Monument’s visitor center, near Mesa Verde National Park, perilously close to Denver’s drinking water supplies, and in the agricultural heart of North Fork Valley.

Unfortunately, this hasn’t stopped Dir. Hankins from continuing to push to open these areas for oil and gas drilling (see graphic) – despite the risks to our water, public health, farms and economies. It’s time for Director Hankins to adopt a common sense approach to oil and gas leasing that includes up to date analysis, implementing national BLM reforms – to cut down on Colorado’s highest in the region lease protests- and taking into effect the concerns of local businesses, landowners and the National Parks Service.

Filed under Colorado, In The News, Permitting

Industry presentation on energy development misses a few facts

April 26, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Yesterday, we attended an industry webinar about the future of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) energy development on publicly owned lands – Master Leasing Plans (MLPs). The intent of MLPs is to reform BLM oil & gas leasing in order to ensure smart energy development by reducing red tape for industry and proactively protecting the mountains, forests and waterways critical to western economies and communities.

The presenting lawyers were from law firm Beatty and Wozniak, P.C., whose CEO has been appointed to the serve on at least three oil & gas company boards (Storm Cat Energy, MarkWest Hydrocarbon and Denbury Resources). So, it wasn’t too surprising that the presenters’ comments about MLPs weren’t too favorable. After all, the oil and gas industry has made no secret of wanting a blank check for drilling on our publicly owned lands. But, the presenting attorneys made two glaring inaccuracies that are worth addressing:

All oil and gas leases on public lands since 2008 have been protested. FALSE

There is so much evidence to the contrary, we could be here all day. We’ll keep it simple and just point to recent testimony from former Interior Sec. Salazar on how just 18 percent of all leases offered were protested in 2012:

“Onshore oil and gas leasing reforms put in place in 2010 resulted in fewer protests; less than 18 percent of 2,064 parcels offered in fiscal year 2012 were protested, the lowest since fiscal year 2003, reducing costs and speeding development.”

BLM doesn’t have the legal authority to carry out MLPs because they aren’t in Mineral Leasing Act. FALSE

The implication here seems to be that since MLPs weren’t explicitly written into statute then BLM doesn’t have the authority to implement them. This line of reasoning doesn’t hold water as all regulating agencies, including BLM, develop specific rules for legislation passed by Congress which enable them carry out the law. BLM even has a link to the laws that apply to BLM-managed lands and the corresponding rules and regulations.

Let’s hope that next time our industry friends don’t let their oil and gas connections skew the facts.

Filed under Blog, Permitting

Rep. Hullinghorst working to end Hickenlooper Anadarko-Noble loophole- which puts Colorado’s water at risk

April 25, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Gov. Hickenlooper likes to tout Colorado’s oil and gas rules as a national model, saying that the state has found the middle ground on development. Unfortunately, his administration’s Anadarko-Noble loophole is another example of Gov. Hickenlooper putting the profits of the oil and gas industry ahead of Coloradans. The good news is that champions for local communities, like Rep. Dickey Lee Hullinghorst, are stepping in to try and fix problems like the loophole.

The Anadarko-Noble loophole provides an industry exemption from state water testing rules – already criticized as weakest in the nation – in northern Colorado, despite the fact that this is where some of the most intensive oil and gas drilling operations are located.

The loophole weakens state water testing rules in the Greater Wattenberg Area – near homes and farms in Adams, Boulder, Larimer, and Weld counties - which is home to more than 25 percent of Colorado’s oil and gas wells and some of the most intense growth in drilling activity.

As a result, it will be harder to detect water contamination and to figure out which well(s) are the source of contamination in the very region that needs these public safety standards the most. That’s not good news for Coloradans. In 2012, industry reported 402 spills in state, of which 20 percent resulted in water contamination, and just last month, a huge spill near Parachute creek contaminated nearby soil and water with cancer causing benzene.

The Anadarko-Noble loophole is part of a disturbing pattern by Gov. Hickenlooper of putting oil and gas industry profits ahead of what’s best for Coloradans. Remember the industry paid-for-ad in which Gov. Hickenlooper claimed that Colorado hadn’t had a single instance of ground water contamination from oil and gas drilling, despite evidence to the contrary (58 cases of groundwater contamination in 2011 alone)? Or how Gov. Hickenlooper said his hands were tied for suing Longmont for protecting the health of its residents from fracking?

Today the Colorado House Health, Insurance & Environment Committee will consider HB 1316, legislation that would close the Anadarko-Noble loophole and take a step in the right direction towards protecting our water and our communities. Let’s hope that the committee members will be representing the Coloradans they were elected to serve and not Big Oil and Gas when they vote on HB 1316.

Filed under Colorado, Fracking

Fracking New York with Another Conflict of Interest: Ecology and Environment’s Frackonomics

April 25, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

A major player in New York’s fracking debate has been exposed as a member of one of the largest oil and gas lobby groups in New York. Ecology and Environment Inc. was hired as an “independent consultant” by the Cuomo Administration to assess the economic impacts of fracking in New York.

On Earth Day 2013, a letter revealed Ecology and Environment to be a member of the Independent Oil and Gas Association, a pro-fracking lobbying group. This conflict of interest calls into question the integrity of the economic assessment completed for the state in 2011.

The Cuomo Administration hired Ecology and Environment Inc. to perform an economic analysis as part of the Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS). According to the Democrat and Chronicle, “The DEC at the time said it had not done enough to study the economic impacts of fracking and said it had decided to engage ‘independent consultants to thoroughly research these types of effects.’”

As it turns out, Ecology and Environment Inc. was anything but “independent.” The company’s 2011 assessment raised eyebrows due to its surprisingly sunny economic outlook for fracking. Anti-fracking groups criticized the results because the assessment didn’t include local economic costs on roads or hospitals. DEC commissioner Joe Martens responded, saying he would ask Ecology and Environment to expand the study – but that work was never publicly completed

IOGA Executive Director Brad Gill wrote in the letter to Cuomo, “The public can be assured that exploration for natural gas in New York is—and has been—safe, good for our environment and for our economy. Our New ‘New’ York must now join the nation and embrace the expansion of responsible natural gas development. We need your help.”

At the time the SGEIS was released, many were concerned that Ecology and Environment’s ties to the energy industry might have influenced their assessment. Adrienne Esposito, executive director of Citizens Campaign for the Environment, said “This is not an objective analysis done in the public interest. They went to someone with whom they have a work relationship and that also does work for energy interests.”

This letter proves the worries were not unfounded.

As a member of an active pro-fracking lobby organization, Ecology and Environment does not have an objective view towards fracking and should never have been hired to contribute to the SGEIS.

New Yorkers Against Fracking is calling for Governor Cuomo to throw out the SGEIS, due to this and other conflicts of interest. They are asking for a “new, truly independent study that regains the public’s trust and ensures science and facts drive your decision.”

Getty Images / Kris Radder

Filed under Blog, Fracking, Uncategorized Tagged with Conflict of Interest, Cuomo, ecology and environment, Fracking, gas, IOGA, New York, oil, sgeis

Oil & gas public lands management 101: How to put our farms, water, and national parks at risk

April 24, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Colorado State Director Helen Hankins has developed a pattern of offering controversial drilling plans, which when met with widespread public outcry are temporarily halted, only to be re-offered after the furor has died down.

In 2011 Dir. Hankins proposed oil and gas leasing in Park County at South Park, home to several large reservoirs for metro Denver, Colorado’s drinking water, serving over two million people.

When the City of Aurora raised serious concerns about the sale, including a lease parcel located within ¼ mile of the high water mark of a city reservoir, Hankins temporarily halted the lease plan. Unfortunately, in 2012, Hankins revived plans to lease South Park for oil and gas drilling. True to form, Hankins temporarily halted the oil and gas lease plans again after local elected officials, sportsmen and others raised significant concerns about the plans, including impacts to water quality, wildlife habitat and tourism.

In early 2012, Colorado BLM proposed drilling next to vineyards, orchards, organic farms and a dairy in the North Fork Valley. When local farmers, ranchers, businesses and residents overwhelmingly opposed the plan, Hankins, again, temporarily halted BLM’s plans to lease the area for oil and gas drilling.

Fast forward to the end of 2012, and Hankins – predictably – offered a similar plan that still threatened the Valley’s local economy and water supplies, and even included leasing land for oil and gas drilling near a public school. Residents, local business owners and others once again opposed the controversial plan, and widely criticized Hankins for basing her plan on outdated analysis and failing to pursue a balanced approach to energy development. In early February 2013, Hankins again temporarily halted drilling plans in North Fork Valley.

Name this tune: In late 2012, Colorado BLM announced plans to lease land for oil and gas drilling next to Dinosaur National Monument’s visitor center and along its southern entrance, as well as near Mesa Verde National Park. BLM’s proposal would mean that visitors could see drill rigs along with 149 million year old fossils, and create more air quality problems for Mesa Verde National Park – which is already beset with pollution problems. This time, the former Superintendent of Dinosaur National Monument, National Parks Service, and La Plata County joined the chorus of locals who raised serious concerns the drilling proposals. And, once again, Hankins halted the lease plans.

Unfortunately, since then, statements from Dir. Hankins’ staff indicate that this stoppage is temporary. In March, the local Colorado BLM assistant field manager said that the drilling leases near Mesa Verde National Park could be back on the auction block as early as this summer.

Dir. Hankins needs to end this contentious cycle of offering controversial oil and gas drilling leases, deferring them when locals rise up, and then trying to drive them back through later when protests have died down.

Dir. Hankins needs to adopt a new curriculum. She needs a smart-from-the-start approach that addresses the concerns of local residents, business owners, and the many industries that drive Colorado’s economy. She needs to adopt a balanced approach that protects the state’s drinking water, farms and national parks.

Filed under Blog, Fracking Tagged with BLM, Checks and Balances Project, Department of Interior, Fracking, hankins, Industry, Public Lands, water

In other frackademia news, Congressional Western Caucus starts a “university”

April 16, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

The Congressional Western Caucus announced last week it will launch an online, Western Caucus University. The caucus claims the point of the new website is to educate the public on “what it means to live and work in the West.” Since the western caucus is comprised of oil- and gas-funded members of Congress who commonly advocate for the oil and gas industry, it’s likely this university’s “curriculum” will include whitewashed information about drilling and fracking.

Indications are already present that the website will be used to promote government handouts of public lands – national parks, monuments, forests, and wildlife areas – to the oil and gas industry, at the expense of agricultural, outdoor recreation, and tourism industries that are economic drivers in the West. Here’s some information we’re willing to bet won’t make it onto the site:

U.S. oil production has surged to a 20 year high.

The combination of profit, geology and technology are driving oil and gas drilling to private land. 93% of all onshore shale oil and mixed oil and gas plays – the source of the recent oil boom – are found under nonfederal lands. Even in the Rocky Mountain West, where more federal land is located, 89% of the shale oil and mixed oil and gas plays are under nonfederal lands.

The Obama Administration has leased 2.5 times more public lands to oil and gas companies than it has protected.
- In the West, where most federal lands are located, the areas with more than 30% protected federal lands increased jobs by 345%, from 1970 to 2010, compared to 83% job growth in counties with no protected lands.

The outdoor recreation industry, which relies heavily on protected lands like national parks, generates $646 billion in spending each year and 6.1 million American jobs.

The Government Accounting Office and industry experts have said oil shale could use up to 140 percent of what Denver Water provides its customers, today.

Big Oil was the top campaign contributor to the Congressional Western Caucus co-chairs Rep. Cynthia Lummis ($108,050 – more than double the next biggest contributing industry) and Rep. Steve Pearce ($206,100 – also more than double).

Two questions for Congressional Western Caucus members:

Is this online advocacy paid for with taxpayer dollars?

How much input will oil and gas lobbyists have into what is included in the website?

Filed under Uncategorized

Oil and Gas Real Estate Agent Helen Hankins at it Again in Thompson Divide

April 9, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Today, the Colorado Bureau of Land Management State Director Helen Hankins’ office announced it will extend the life of about two dozen oil and gas leases acquired by SG Interests and Ursa Resources Group in Colorado’s Thompson Divide area. These leases were set to expire this year because leaseholders had failed to conduct any meaningful development in 10 years. Dir. Hankins’ move runs contrary to stated goals by the Obama administration that oil and gas companies develop leases or that land be returned to the public. SG Interests and Ursa did not have to pay for the lease extension and continue to hold the leases for speculative purposes.

Ellynne Bannon, The Checks and Balances Project western energy lands program manager released the following statement:

“Once again, Colorado BLM Director Hankins is showing what a great real estate agent she is for oil and gas companies She’s ignoring the will of the communities around Thompson Divide and putting drinking water, farming and ranching businesses at risk in order to provide another freebie to oil and gas companies. Hankins’ actions represent exactly what she shouldn’t do as a steward of the public’s land and water.”

Background facts:

Director Hankins has a long track record of ignoring public concerns and putting communities at risk. Earlier this year, Hankins proposed drilling right next to Mesa Verde National Park and Dinosaur National Monument – including parcels next to a visitor center and park entrances. Hankins also re-offered highly controversial drilling leases in the midst of Denver Metro’s drinking water supplies and the agricultural North Fork Valley.
Director Hankins’ actions are out of step with President Obama and the Department of Interior’s policy on leases not in production – which is essentially “use it or lose it.” Currently, 21 million of the total 37 million acres in federal BLM lands leased for oil and gas drilling are not in production or exploration. The oil and gas industry also holds 7,000 idle drilling permits on federal lands.
A 2012 analysis found that that hunting, fishing, grazing, and recreation activities in the Thompson Divide support nearly 300 jobs and $30 million a year in economic value. Yet, Dir. Hankins seems intent on jeopardizing these jobs and revenue stream by extending controversial leases in the Divide, where a large local constituency relies upon recreation, ranching and hunting – and clean water and air – for their livelihoods.

Filed under Blog, Permitting, Statements

C&BP Calls for State Dept. Investigation into Keystone XL Consultant’s Conflicts of Interest

April 9, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Letter to Secretary of State John Kerry and State Dept. Deputy Inspector General Harold Geisel

Originally posted on April 9, 2013.

Here’s more from Mother Jones’ Andy Kroll:

“ERM’s second-in-command on the Keystone report, Andrew Bielakowski, had worked on three previous pipeline projects for TransCanada over seven years as an outside consultant. He also consulted on projects for ExxonMobil, BP, and ConocoPhillips, three of the Big Five oil companies that could benefit from the Keystone XL project and increased extraction of heavy crude oil taken from the Canadian tar sands.

Another ERM employee who contributed to State’s Keystone report — and whose prior work history was also redacted — previously worked for Shell Oil; a third worked as a consultant for Koch Gateway Pipeline Company, a subsidiary of Koch Industries. Shell and Koch have a significant financial interest in the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. ERM itself has worked for Chevron, which has invested in Canadian tar-sands extraction, according to its website.”

Problem with ERM Answers on Conflict of Interest Questionnaire

ERM’s Proposal to the State Department

The biographies on ERM’s proposal show that the company has had direct relationships with multiple business entities that could be affected by the proposed work in the past three years.

Intentions of State Department and ERM in Question

These potential material incomplete statements on a Federal Government proposal calls into question the integrity of ERM and threatens millions in government contracts.

Groups Calling for Inspector General Investigation

We believe ERM used multiple material incomplete statements and had clear conflicts of interest as shown in the unredacted documents. So, why was ERM hired by the State Department?

Harold Geisel, Deputy Inspector General, U.S. State Department

Filed under KeystoneXL Tagged with Andrew Bielakowski, Andy Kroll, Better Future Project, Big Oil, BP, Center for Biological Diversity, Checks and Balances Project, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Chevron, Conflict of Interest, Conflicts of Interest, Congressional Research Service, ConocoPhillips, DeSmogBlog, Disclosure, Energy, Environment, Environmental Resources Management, ERM, ExxonMobil, Federal Acquisition Regulation, Federal Government, Forecast the Facts, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, Harold Geisel, Huffington Post, Industry, John Kerry, Keystone XL, Koch Gateway Pipeline Company, Koch Industries, KXL, lobbying, Mother Jones, NC WARN, Oil Change International, politics, Public Citizen's Energy Program, Shell, State Department, Steve Koster, Tar Sands, Tom Zeller, TransCanada, Unitarian Universalist Ministry for Earth

Oil shale causes 80 percent of Estonia’s pollution

April 8, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

The hits just keep coming against Estonian oil shale. A new story from Estonian Public Broadcasting sheds more light on the devastating environmental impact oil shale has on the small, European nation.

“The oil shale industry, which produces the bulk of Estonia’s energy, is responsible for about 80 percent of the pollution and carbon emissions produced by Estonia, as well as nearly all of the sulfur emissions. Quarries and landfills have also spoiled around 15 percent of Ida-Viru County’s territory, as 150 square kilometers of land has sunk or become unstable.”

Just the week before, Estonia’s Environmental Minister said that the country has maxed out on oil shale due to high water use and pollution.

Oil shale waste piles are also prone to catching fire. Last week the Estonian government had to allocate 38 million Euros [$4.9 million according to today’s conversion rate] to extinguish a fourteen-acre fire at an oil shale site.

If these problems weren’t enough, the Estonian Economy Minister is under fire for a sour investment it made with Eestia Energia, known as Enefit in the U.S., to build a new controversial oil shale plant – which has since been abandoned. A majority of Estonians surveyed want to see the Minister resign over this deal and other questionable decisions.

Thankfully, on this side of the Atlantic, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar recently finalized a smart approach to costly oil shale speculation that should help the United States avoid Estonia’s problems. The Salazar plan requires companies to prove they’ve developed oil shale technology that works, is commercially viable and won’t deplete our scarce water resources or harm our air, land and wildlife, before any commercial leases are considered.

The environmental devastation and questionable investments from Estonian oil shale are good examples of why we need Sec. Salazar’s common sense oil shale plan.

Filed under Blog, In The News, oil shale Tagged with Department of Interior, Energy, estonia, Oil Shale, water contamination

Western Energy Alliance spokesperson wins this week’s Pinocchio Award

April 5, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

The oil industry is once again trying to re-write history. Kathleen Sgamma, spokesperson for industry mouthpiece Western Energy Alliance, claimed in a news story that more lands were put under protection than drilled, during President George W. Bush’s Administration.

A quick review of the amount of lands leased for drilling compared to the amount of lands permanently protected under President George W. Bush’s Administration shows that Sgamma’s claim is false. The Bush administration opened roughly 29 million acres, an area the size of Ohio, to the oil and gas industry for lease. On the other hand, the administration only permanently protected 746,373 acres from drilling.

Kathleen – If you do the math, that means nearly 39 times more land was opened to oil and gas drilling than was protected, during the protected by the Bush (43) Administration. Even if you add in land protected by Congress during this time, his administration still opened up 7.5 times more land to oil and gas drilling than it protected.

Source: Center for American Progress

Filed under Blog, News, Permitting

Drilling and fracking threaten iconic U.S. national park, and Teddy Roosevelt’s conservation legacy

April 2, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

A new, compelling video from the Center for American Progress shows how drilling and fracking are encroaching on Theodore Roosevelt National Park. It’s an eye-opening look at how North Dakota’s industrial scale oil boom is wreaking havoc on the park and asks the question: How much are we willing to sacrifice?

Here in Colorado, just one month after deferring controversial oil and gas leases next to Dinosaur National Monument and Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado BLM Director Helen Hankins’ and her staff showed signs that Hankins may welch on her office’s commitment to protect our national parks.

Energy development and land conservation are out of balance on our public lands, and are out of balance with Western values.

The Obama Administration has leased 2.5 times more public lands to oil & gas companies than it has protected. Yet, 9 out of 10 western voters believe national parks, forests, monuments, and wildlife areas are an essential part of their state’s economy. While, 59 percent want to ensure strong standards are in place and that drilling is not allowed in critical locations near recreation areas, water sources, and wildlife.

It’s time for the BLM and the Obama administration to prioritize policies that protect our public lands and national parks.

Filed under Blog, Fracking Tagged with Big Oil, center for american progress, Department of Interior, drilling, Energy, Fracking, national parks, Public Lands

Americans for Tax Reform and Grover Norquist’s Deceptive Campaigns for Dirty Energy and Big Tobacco

April 1, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images

Grover Norquist is a familiar player in Washington debates, renowned for convincing nearly every Republican in Congress to sign a pledge to not raise taxes. But Norquist’s main job is not as a principled advocate for his brand of limited government but functioning as a paid lobbyist for whatever corporate interests are ready to write him a check. Norquist is a prominent pundit for Big Pharma and Big Tobacco, and now, he’s also batting for Big Oil.

Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), is at the forefront of the latest fight against renewable energy in the United States.

Conservative front groups and fossil fuel interests are attacking renewable energy standards in a coordinated assault to protect profits generated from fossil fuel-based electricity. Twenty-nine states have renewable energy standards and twenty-two of those have become fierce battlegrounds.

This coordinated attack on clean energy bears resemblance to the effort by Big Tobacco to prevent public health laws from impacting the profitability of tobacco companies. And it turns out, a lot of people working to dismantle renewable energy laws are deeply connected to Big Tobacco. Some, like Grover Norquist, even worked with Big Tobacco on their misinformation campaigns and are now turning their lobbying power to attack state clean energy policies.

The attacks on the Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) originated primarily from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), whose energy task force is comprised of fossil fuel companies and front groups members like ATR. In late February, several ALEC groups including ATR attempted to convince Kansas legislators to weaken their renewable energy law, which would require renewable energy to make up at least 20% of their energy portfolio.Norquist himself testified to the Kansas legislature to roll-back the RPS.

Americans for Tax Reform has received $525,000 from the American Petroleum Institute between 2008 and 2011 and $60,000 from foundations connected to Koch Industries between 2003 and 2011.

Fighting against renewable energy in the states isn’t Norquist’s only project working to protect fossil fuel interests. ATR is part of a Tea-Party “last stand” seeking to derail the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s effort to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. Last year, Norquist also made a public statement that there was “no conceivable way” he could support a carbon tax aimed at slowing global warming and pollution.

Norquist has a track record of defending industries engaged in massive denial of scientific knowledge. The dirty energy industries that fund ATR pretend that the climate change science is inconclusive despite broad scientific consensus. But that approach is not new – it was refined through millions of dollars in lobbying, public relations and front groups by the tobacco industry, which denied the harms caused by smoking.

Americans for Tax Reform, run under Norquist, has been a longtime ally of the U.S. tobacco industry and a major player in pro-tobacco tax policies. ATR’s history with Big Tobacco was pulled from hundreds of documents that live in the Tobacco Archives and documented by SourceWatch.

1990s: Big Tobacco Loses Public Opinion, Calls on Third Party Support

In the early 1990s, the government started increasing tobacco regulation via taxes and bans to compensate for the health costs of smoking. Philip Morris President Roy Marden wrote an internal memo calling attention to the need to “regain the upper hand” on public opinion of tobacco. In 1992, RJ Reynolds documented a campaign plan to “move public opinion in the right direction” – in order to weaken tobacco regulation.

One aspect of the plan was third-party coalition work, with ATR listed as a likely coalition partner. The reason: “Credible, non-tobacco voice for hearings and for generating information on issue to media, op-eds, letters, etc.” The draft plan also mentions Norquist specifically, noting, “Tim Hyde to work with Grover Norquist for possible by-line piece.”

The following year, ATR’s pro-tobacco campaign began. With the help of focus groups from eight different cities, ATR launched an advertisement in 152 newspapers targeting 51 Members of Congress. Their success was documented by Philip Morris, and used for even further campaigning.

ATR continued to campaign against tobacco taxes, so much that they were described in an internal Philip Morris review as a “staunch ally of PM for a number of years in many tax battles.”

Along with coalition support came monetary support. Philip Morris contributed $30,000 to the ATR Foundation in 1994, according to internal documents. The R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company contributed $100,000 to ATR two years later and ATR received additional money from RJR in 1997 to continue PR support of lobbying activities, one month before Norquist went on the road to speak out against cigarette tax increases.

1999: Litigation against Big Tobacco Begins, Norquist and ATR continue support

President Bill Clinton announced that “the Justice Department [was] preparing a litigation plan to take the tobacco companies to court, and with the funds [they] recover, to strengthen Medicare” in his 1999 State of the Union Address. Less than one month after Clinton’s speech, Norquist had published a media release and letters to radio show hosts complaining about the litigation – without disclosing his own financial ties to tobacco. Weeks later, Norquist wrote a letter to Kirk Blalock of Philip Morris requesting $200,000 in continued support.

Norquist and ATR spent the next few years continuing to campaign against the litigation efforts, writing letters to warn Congressmen of dire consequences.

ATR continued to receive monetary support from Philip Morris, but Norquist campaigned for even more money from a coalition of tobacco groups. He sent a proposal to Lorillard and Philip Morris titled “No taxation through litigation – stopping the federal Medicare suit.” The proposal was seeking $582,672.

What came of the proposal was undocumented, but ATR has continued to lobby on behalf of the tobacco industry. They organized an anti-tobacco tax rally in 2010, using an email list paid for by Philip Morris. They list several appeals to oppose bills that would raise tobacco taxes on their website, including a 2011 Louisiana bill and an Arkansas House Bill. In early 2012 they campaigned against California’s Proposition 29, another tobacco tax increase. Sacramento Bee editor Dan Morain asked Patrick Gleason, a Norquist aide, whether Americans for Tax Reform still accepted tobacco money, to no response.

A 2006 ruling by U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler concluded that the tobacco industry has “lied, misrepresented and deceived the American public, including smokers and the young people they avidly sought as ‘replacement’ smokers, about the devastating health effects of smoking and environmental tobacco smoke.”

The lies and deception continue with climate change denial and attacks against renewable energy standards on behalf of the fossil fuel industry. It seems Grover Norquist and Americans for Tax Reform will campaign for anything, for the right price.

Filed under Tobacco Profiles Tagged with ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, American Petroleum Institute, Americans for Tax Reform, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Tobacco, Checks and Balances Project, clean energy, Clean Energy Standards, climate change, Energy, Grover Norquist, Kansas, Koch Brothers, Koch Industries, Norquist, Philip Morris, politics, Proposition 29, R.J. Reynolds, renewable energy standards, RPS, taxes, tobacco

Keystone XL Environmental Impact Consultant’s Cozy Relationships with Fossil Fuel Interests

March 31, 2013 by gabrielelsner Leave a comment

Environmental Resources Management (ERM), the consulting firm hired to perform the supplemental environmental analysis of the Keystone XL pipeline works for and has worked for fossil fuel companies with a stake in the Canadian Tar Sands. Mother Jones’ Andy Kroll exposed the conflicts of interest in an exclusive story, which included unredacted documents that show the recent work history of ERM’s consultants.

It’s no surprise that ERM painted a rosy picture of Keystone XL’s environmental impact. Their business depends on it. ERM’s major clients in the fossil fuel industry would steer clear of an environmental consulting company that determines fossil fuel projects are not environmentally responsible. ERM claimed in the report that the Keystone
XL pipeline would not lead to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions or significantly impact the environment along its route.

Last week, Steve Horn from DeSmogBlog documented major problems with another pipeline (the 1,300 mile-long Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan (BTC)) determined by an ERM environmental assessment to be “environmentally and socio-economically sound.” Horn wrote, “An Aug. 2008 Wikileaks cable discusses a BTC explosion in a mountainous area of eastern Turkey …which spewed 70,000 barrels of oil into the surrounding area.” The BTC
pipeline caused enormous environmental damage and failed to live up to the jobs hype created by the project developers, which included BP, State Oil Company of Azerbaijan (SOCAR), Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Eni and Total.

Horn goes on to quote Mik Minio-Paluello, co-author of The Oil Road - a new book documenting the slew of destructive impacts of BTC saying, “Supposedly an environmental consultancy, in practice ERM operated more like aPR firm representing BP and now they’re fulfilling a similar role for TransCanada.”

So why does ERM operate more like a PR firm than an environmental consultancy?

Let’s say ERM provided a review claiming a fossil fuel project was skirting safety precautions or moving too quickly to ensure quality seals on the pipeline (see Keystone XL’s faulty welding here). Would a fossil fuel company, whose financial interest is building more fossil fuel infrastructure, want to hire a consultant that results in delays and increased costs for developing that infrastructure?

Checks & Balances Project contacted ERM’s Global Head of Communications Simon Garcia multiple times over the past week without any response. We requested comment on the following question: Has ERM ever determined that a proposed fossil fuel project was not “environmentally sound” in an assessment?

The answer is probably “no.”

Filed under KeystoneXL Tagged with Andy Kroll, Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline, Big Oil, Checks and Balances Project, Conflict of Interest, Contractors, Energy, Environmental Resources Management, ERM, ExxonMobil, Keystone XL, Mik Minio-Paluello, Mother Jones, oil, Oil & Gas, Oil and Gas, Oil Spill, politics, PR, Simon Garcia, State Department, Tar Sands, The Oil Road, TransCanada

Big Oil’s API insatiable lust for taxpayer handouts continues; Industry group demands that U.S. double down on failed oil shale experiments

March 27, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

**UPDATE** API’s Erik Milito may want to check with Estonian Environment Minister Keit Pentus-Rosimannus before continuing to pressure President Obama to double down on costly oil shale speculation. In an article in today’s Postimees, Minister Pentus-Rosimannus said,

“Eighty percent of our waste, water use and greenhouse gas emissions are connected with the oil shale industry. We must think together how to reduce the negative impact. With that as bottom line, I do not consider it possible for the annual extraction volume of oil shale to grow in the future.”

Estonian oil shale giant Eesti Energia’s U.S. arm, Enefit, is one of the companies trying to develop oil shale in Utah. For more on that, see our recent series Eyes on Enefit.**UPDATE**

The American Petroleum Institute (API) – see: Big Oil – called on President Obama, today, to double down on a century of failed oil shale experiments and risk western water supplies.

API’s response to outgoing Interior Sec. Ken Salazar’s smart oil shale plan was shameless, but predictable (for more on the Salazar Plan, see articles in the SL Tribune, Denver Business Journal and an editorial in the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel). Sec. Salazar adopted a reasonable approach that requires oil companies to prove any oil shale technology they might develop is commercially viable and won’t devastate water resources and air quality in the West.

The Government Accounting Office and industry experts have said oil shale could use up to 140 percent of what Denver Water provides its customers, today.

It turns out that common sense and good business practice aren’t slowing down API’s insatiable lust for taxpayer handouts. API wants to double down on 100 plus years of abject oil shale failure, despite the huge risks to the West’s scarce water supplies.

Erik Milito, API’s director of upstream and industry operations, claims that ensuring the safety of western water might delay investment in the development of oil shale technology. He ignores the fact that oil shale speculators have failed for over a century to develop any such technology, despite the billions in taxpayer subsidies – and private investments – already risked.

Western families, farmers, ranchers and business owners, already in year two of the worst drought in a decade, can’t afford to have any more of their water risked on costly oil shale speculation. We need President Obama to put the security and safety of the West’s water and communities before Big Oil’s hunger for more taxpayer handouts.

Filed under Blog, In The News, oil shale Tagged with Colorado, Department of Interior, Oil Shale, Public Lands, water

Doc Hastings defends fantasy jobs, leaves western water in the dust

March 27, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

House Natural Resource Committee Chairman Doc Hastings proved again last week that he’s more interested in protecting Big Oil subsidies than taking a smart approach to energy that protects western water.

On Friday, the Department of Interior finalized a smart, balanced approach for oil shale on public lands that helps to ensure drought-stricken communities aren’t put in further jeopardy. Since that approach means fewer handouts for oil companies, Chairman Hastings was quick to respond with a ridiculously inaccurate statement about oil shale. Hastings said that the decision “sends oil shale jobs overseas.”

First off: What jobs? There is no oil shale industry. Despite 100 years of trying, and billions risked in taxpayer-funded subsidies, oil shale has never been successfully commercialized in the U.S.

Second: How can the U.S. ship jobs – that don’t even exist in the first place – overseas? Will they go to imaginary foreign workers?

Oil shale isn’t a job creator or a viable energy source. In 2012, only days after Speaker Boehner (R-OH) and Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) finished pushing a new oil shale boondoggle through the U.S. House, oil giant Chevron closed down what was supposed to be a lucrative oil shale experiment on Colorado’s West Slope. Chevron then reassigned all three full-time workers it had on the project.

Until Rep. Hastings gets his facts straight on oil shale, he should be careful what he says. It might save him some embarrassment, and being more informed might help him protect more American communities.

Filed under Uncategorized

Tobacco, Tea Party, and Dirty Energy: Lobbyist C. Boyden Gray

March 25, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

As someone with deep ties to right-wing political circles, and strong financial ties to the tobacco industry, C. Boyden Gray fits the bill as the ideal lobbyist for the dirty energy industry. Dirty energy in many ways is the successor to the tobacco industry, given how it uses front groups and pundits to avoid public health regulations.

With impending EPA regulations for coal and gas, Gray and other lobbyists are getting busy trying to block progress on rules that would curb pollution and global warming.

C. Boyden Gray is an heir to the RJ Reynolds tobacco fortune – his grandfather was CEO of the company – and the co-chair and board member of the Tea Party powerhouse FreedomWorks Foundation. Gray is also a lobbyist for one of the worst coal corporations in America – FirstEnergy – and an outspoken critic of reforms that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and global warming.

Those three groups – tobacco, tea party, and dirty energy – have become inextricably tied together. Through fossil fuel-funded front groups, the dirty energy industry has copied tactics from Big Tobacco’s infamous operations to manufacture doubt about clear scientific evidence, with pundits and lobbyists like Gray fueling climate change denial and attacking environmental and health regulations.

Gray is a founding partner of the lobbying firm Boyden Gray & Associates, where he advocates for the fossil fuel corporation FirstEnergy Corp., named one of the top 10 worst corporations in America in 2006, among others. Prior to the founding of his firm, he was a lawyer and lobbyist at Wilmer, Cutler and Pickering (now WilmerHale), where he represented clients facing federal sanctions for violating environmental laws. Many of his clients faced significant federal criminal prosecutions under the Clean Water Act. He counseled the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Liability Fund in litigation from the Exxon Valdez and American Trader oil spills, and he lobbied against the REACH bill, which required manufacturers to test industrial chemicals and to gather health and safety data.

Gray’s influence on environmental regulations extends beyond his days as a lobbyist. Gray served as legal counsel to Vice President Bush from 1981-1988 and White House Counsel in the Bush’s presidential administration from 1989-1993.

His position in the White House, and later as chairman of Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE – predecessor to FreedomWorks), gave him power and influence, which he put to work for Big Tobacco.

In a letter found on the Tobacco Archives, Horace Kornegay of the Tobacco Institute wrote a hand-signed letter to Gray in 1981, asking for regulatory relief from “wasteful programs such as the annual reports on cigarettes and cigarette advertising.” Kornegay also urged Gray to “deal with” problems they were facing with antitrust litigation. Kornegay wrote to Gray again in 1982 to thank him for his advisement on the progress of the Presidential Task Force on Residential Relief.

In 1995, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) began drafting legislation for the “FDA Rule” – proposed tobacco regulations to prevent and reduce tobacco use by children. The intended regulations, finalized in 1996, would have been the strongest tobacco controls to date. The proposed controls included prohibiting non-face-to-face sales of tobacco products, prohibiting outdoor advertising of tobacco products near schools or playgrounds, imposing more stringent advertising regulations, and prohibiting brand name sponsorships.

During that year, Gray, as a Wilmer Cutler lawyer, testified on behalf of CSE to attack increased funding for the FDA before the Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government Subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations. Consequently, CSE lobbied hard against the FDA, calling Congressmen, meeting with allies, and advertising aggressively to emphasize problems with the FDA. Full-page ads were placed in the Washington Times and the Congressional Monitor, among other outlets.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court ruled that the FDA needed authority from Congress to pass the tobacco control bill, which didn’t become law until 2009, when President Obama finally signed the Tobacco Control Act.

After long partnership and deeply embedded ties with Big Tobacco, Gray has certainly picked up a few tactics on manufacturing doubt at the expense of the public welfare.

Currently, Gray writes a monthly column in The Washington Times, which he has used as an outlet to criticize environmental regulations, e.g. “Reducing Ozone Could Kill Jobs.” And, he recently warned of dire consequences in the case of stronger clean air regulations.

C. Boyden Gray, coal lobbyist and Tea Partier with Big Tobacco roots, is not alone. A recent academic study from UCSF confirms the connection between Big Tobacco and the Tea Party. The Tea Party’s anti-tax movements were traced back to the 1980s, when the tobacco industry fought taxes and regulation by way of third parties, such as CSE.

Climate change deniers and fossil fuel advocates are not only using the same tactics as Big Tobacco to promote skepticism, in many cases, like C. Boyden Gray, they are same people. These pundits and lobbyists know how to manufacture doubt around scientific consensus and convince Americans that public health protections are unnecessary. And when it comes to climate change, there’s no time to wait. Every delay makes it harder to prevent catastrophe.

Filed under Blog, Uncategorized Tagged with Big Tobacco, Boyden Gray, C. Boyden Gray, Koch, lobbyist, profile, tea party, tobacco

Colorado oil production up nearly 50 percent since 2010

March 18, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

According to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) oil production exceeded 48 million barrels in 2012, a 49 percent increase over 2010 levels.

The 2012 oil production levels are the highest since 1961 and are in increase of 24 percent over 2011 levels.

According to COGCC gas production reached its highest level since 1952.

Filed under News, Uncategorized Tagged with Department of Interior, Energy Production, gas, oil

Colorado BLM using stalling tactic at Mesa Verde, new drilling proposals could come back this summer

March 15, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Is Colorado BLM Director Helen Hankins backpedaling on decisions to halt controversial drilling plans next to Mesa Verde National Park, Dinosaur National Monument, and in North Fork Valley?

Barely a month after deferring oil and gas leasing decisions, Dir. Hankins’ staff are showing signs she is planning to welch on her office’s commitment to protect national parks and the heart of North Fork’s economic and agricultural center.

Earlier this week, the Durango Herald reported that:

[Connie] Clementson [Field Manager of the BLM Tres Rios office] made clear that the decision to defer the leases in Southwest Colorado does not take that land off the table for future development. After the BLM answers all the protests received about the lease sale, the land could be renominated for leasing as soon as August or November, Clementson said.

The Tres Rios field office manages lands near Mesa Verde National Park. The National Park Service criticized Dir. Hankins plans to offer leases for drilling on these lands and cited the lack of coordination by her staff.

When BLM announced the oil and gas deferrals near North Fork’s agricultural community, the Montrose Daily Press reported the following comments by Colorado BLM Communications Director Stephen Hall:

The deferral is not permanent, but the parcels won’t be offered for lease any time soon, said Steve Hall, communications director for the BLM in Colorado. “We didn’t put a timeframe on it. It’s safe to say we aren’t going to have them up (for bid) in the near future,” he said. “But we didn’t do what some had asked, which is defer them until the new resource management plan.”

Dir. Hankins already deferred those North Fork leases earlier in 2012, then reinstated most of them after the public scrutiny died down. Is that what she’s doing now? And does Dir. Hankins plan to reoffer these same, heavily protested leases based on 30-year-old data? Instead of being a real estate agent for Big Oil and driving-up speculation on public lands, Hankins should do the right thing and put our national parks, water and local economies on equal ground with oil and gas development.

Filed under Uncategorized

Wall Street Journal Editorial Twists CRS Report Like a Drill Bit

March 13, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

In an editorial today, the Wall Street Journal claimed a “sharp drop in production on federal lands is the direct result of Obama Administration policies.” They cherry pick statements from a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report to try and support their claim, but ignore sections of the report that directly refute them. The CRS report actually shows that outside factors such as price and geology are driving industry to drill on nonfederal lands, where the most lucrative plays exist.

If you read the CRS report, you learn that:

“Any increase in production of natural gas on federal lands is likely to be easily outpaced by increases on non-federal lands, particularly because shale plays are primarily situated on nonfederal lands and is where most of the growth in production is projected to occur.” (Pg. 3, 1^st and 2^nd paragraph)

“The big shale gas plays are primarily on non-federal lands and are attracting a significant portion of investment for natural gas development.” (Pg. 1, 2^nd paragraph)

“But having more lands accessible may not translate into higher levels of production on federal lands, as industry seeks out the most promising prospects and highest returns.” (Pg. 2, 3^rd paragraph)

Filed under In The News, Permitting Tagged with Big Oil, Checks and Balances Project, drilling, Public Lands

Eyes on Enefit: Financially unstable and unprofitable, and not ready for prime time

March 12, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Over the past few weeks, we’ve examined Estonian oil shale company, Eesti Energia, known as Enefit in the U.S., to find out the real story on Estonian oil shale and how it could affect the American West. The outlook is grim.

Even though Eesti Energia is widely considered the world’s leading oil shale firm and is the largest company in the world working with oil shale, it is in a financially vulnerable position. The company has made a number of poor investments, including a new bloc for an Estonian oil shale plant – an investment the Estonian State Audit Office found to be legally questionable and “not economically feasible.” Less than a year after breaking ground on the plant, Eesti Energia abandoned the project.

Things have gotten so bad for Eesti Energia that credit benchmark Moody’s has downgraded the company’s credit rating (now rated negative) twice in the past 15 months.

Even Eesti Energia’s CEO admits that oil shale is not profitable without government subsidies. The reason is simple: oil shale fails the basic economic test. In other words, the return on oil shale doesn’t outweigh the investment.

Over here in the United States, we found Enefit has run into trouble trying to commercially develop oil shale. Despite the company’s claims that extracting Utah oil shale is a “simple mining project,” Enefit has experienced significant problems. Tests show that Enefit hasn’t been able extract oil from the oil shale ore mined in Utah as easily as executives had hoped and promised, and that it requires more energy to process Utah oil shale than expected, which results in higher carbon dioxide emissions. An internal company document called the Utah test results “not promising.” And, despite all the “around the corner” rhetoric we hear from oil shale supporters, at least one Estonian expert thinks that a method for viably extracting Utah oil shale is decades away.

Company dismissals of these concerns are, as one Colorado columnist put it: “reminiscent of previous failures to extract commercial quantities of petroleum from [oil] shale.”

Even when Eesti Energia has been able to produce subsidized energy from oil shale in Estonia, the environmental impact has been disastrous. The company’s Estonian operations have contaminated groundwater, created 600-foot high mountains of oil shale waste that spontaneously ignite, and caused the emission of “lots of carbon dioxide.” A former executive at Red Leaf Resources testified before Congress that Eesti Energia’s Estonian operations were a “nasty business.”

Given this web of problems, it shouldn’t be surprising that company officials can’t seem to keep their stories straight. What is said in the U.S. often doesn’t match up to what is said in Estonia.

Oil shale – a rock that actually contains no oil – has a 100-year track record of failure in the U.S. despite the billions in taxpayer dollars that have been risked on failed oil shale experiments.

The facts from our Eyes on Enefit series argue for taking a cautious, balanced approach to oil shale. Companies like Enefit should not be given more federal land or money for oil shale experiments until they can prove that they are able to develop oil from oil shale in a commercially and environmentally sound way.

This blog is a summation of our series about Enefit, known at home in Estonia as Eesti Energia, covering the company’s financial outlook, background and status of its Utah project.

Filed under Blog, Eyes On Enefit, oil shale Tagged with Checks and Balances Project, enefit, Oil Shale, Public Lands, water

Senators get it wrong on oil & gas production at Jewell nomination hearing; Industry is following the oil to nonfederal lands

March 8, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources convened, Thursday, to question President Obama’s Interior Sec. nominee, REI Chief Executive Officer Sally Jewell. The three-hour hearing was generally friendly, but some Senators couldn’t pass up the chance to repeat oil and gas industry talking points, rather than deal in facts.

The Checks and Balances Project watched the hearing and used Twitter to fact check senators. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) all ignored the facts about western land use and energy development at various points during the hearing.

Here are five statements from the hearing where senators got it wrong on U.S. oil and gas production^*:

“They’ve driven us backward on the development of nearly a trillion barrels of oil shale in the Green River formation in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming.”

– Sen. Tim Scott (1:29:38 – 1:30:05)

The facts: BLM released a revised PEIS late in 2012 that gave oil shale speculators access to 600,000 acres of public lands. For more than a century, people have tried and failed to make oil shale – a rock that doesn’t actually contain oil – a viable energy source. Along the way, billions of American taxpayer dollars have been risked, with nothing to show for it. According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, the federal government awarded nearly $7 billion in the 1980’s (over $12 billion adjusted for inflation) on oil shale loan and price guarantees.

Being from South Carolina, Sen. Scott may not know all this about oil shale, since they don’t have any. We suggest he reads our Century of Failure report, and visits No More Empty Promises, to learn more.

* * *

“If you look at the amount of production we have off of federal lands, that you would be responsible for, has declined, when private land production has increased. So it looks like the Department of Interior was going a different direction when the economy and the market was driving it – in the private sector – in a complete different direction.”

– Sen. Joe Manchin (54:20 – 54:45)

The facts: Earlier this week the Salt Lake Tribune ran a story on a new report which shows that price and geology are the reason there’s more drilling on private lands today:

Overproduction of U.S. natural gas, not burdensome drilling regulations, is driving energy developers from western public mineral leases to non-federal lands rich in oil to the east…According to the new report, 89 percent of shale oil and mixed oil and gas in the Intermountain West occupy non-federal deposits even though the feds control much of the region’s lands.

Phil Taylor at Greenwire also wrote on oil shale production on federal lands, showing that it’s actually on the rise.

* * *

“Despite tremendous resources on federal lands, nearly all gains in energy production have occurred on State and private lands.”

– Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Opening statement)

The facts: In 2011 the Bureau of Land Management held three of its five largest-ever lease sales for the rights to drill on public land for oil and gas. Those are just some of the 6,314,914 acres of public land the Obama Administration has leased to oil and gas companies – nearly 2.5 times as much as the Administration has permanently protected. A Denver Post story, U.S. oil and gas drilling moving to private land where the shale is, cited a new report from the Center for Western Priorities on the industry’s shift to drilling on nonfederal lands, saying that:

…nationally 93 percent of the shale oil and mixed oil-gas plays and 90 percent of the pure shale natural gas plays were not on federal land.

Oil and gas companies have plenty of public land – so much that 20 million acres of leased lands and nearly 7,000 approved drilling permits lay idle. The most valuable commodities are on private lands, so that’s where industry is drilling.

* * *

“It seems the President’s ‘all of the above’ strategy has not included public land very much. It seems like our success has been on private lands, state lands, but not on public lands, federally owned.”

– Sen. Tim Scott (1:31:08 – 1:31:20)

The facts: Obviously, Sen. Scott also needs to get up to speed on basic facts on U.S. oil and gas production. If CWP’s report isn’t enough, Sen. Scott should read a recent Congressional Research Service report that stated:

Any increase in production of natural gas on federal lands is likely to be easily outpaced by increases on non-federal lands, particularly because shale plays are primarily situated on nonfederal lands and is where most of the growth in production is projected to occur.

Sen. Scott may also want to check out a report (pg. 22) from the Bipartisan Policy Center that states:

This shift [in drilling location] generally reflects a coincidence of geography. The large shale formations that have attracted most of the recent development activity are located in parts of the country where the federal government simply does not have large land holdings (including notably the Bakken, Barnett, Haynesville, Marcellus, and Fayetteville plays).

* * *

“This administration has obstructed access to billions of barrels of oil in ANWR, off our Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts, and on federal lands out west.”

– Sen. Tim Scott (1:29:38 – 1:30:05)

The facts: The oil and gas industry are sitting on 7,000 idle, green lighted drilling permits, and the federal government consistently approves drilling permits faster than industry can drill new oil and gas wells. Any delays in the permitting process are largely attributable to industry, and not the federal government.

If Sen. Scott would like to come visit the West to see this all for himself, we’d be happy to show him around.

^*Transcribed by Checks and Balances Project from Energy and Natural Resources Committee Archived Webcast,

Filed under Blog, In The News Tagged with Congress, drilling, Energy Production, jewell, politics, Public Lands, senate, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee

Denver Post Looks at Public vs. Private Lands Drilling

March 8, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

In a post on his “Balance Sheet” blog, Mark Jaffe at the Denver Post wades in to the debate about drilling on public lands. He writes:

When Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks, he replied, or at least is said to have replied: “Because that’s where the money is.”

And so it is with oil and gas, operators are drilling where the money is and that the Center for Western Priorities says just happens to be on land not overseen by federal agencies.

In the piece, he quotes industry representatives who claim that bureaucracy is holding back drilling on federal lands. In fact, as a report by the Congressional Research Service found that industry, not the government is taking longer to approve permits:

“After a lease has been obtained, either competitively or non-competitively, an application for a permit to drill (APD) must be approved for each oil and gas well…in 2006 it took the BLM an average of 127 days to process an APD, while in 2011 it took BLM 71 days. In 2006, the industry took an average of 91 days to complete an APD, but in 2011, industry took 236 days.” – pg. 8

You can read Jaffe’s full blog post here.

Filed under Uncategorized

Industry and allies twist facts on U.S. oil and gas production report

March 6, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

Price and geology have incentivized oil and gas companies to drill on nonfederal lands in recent years. Yet this fact hasn’t stopped industry group Western Energy Alliance (WEA) and Congressmen Ed Whitfield (R-KY.), who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power, from mischaracterizing a recent Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on fuel production.

“Once again, House Republicans are spinning tall tales about oil and gas production. Technology, geology and price are the big drivers that determine where and how much industry drills. The industry is following the oil and no amount of rhetoric changes that fact.” said the Checks and Balances Project’s Ellynne Bannon.

Key facts from the recent CRS report that refute claims made by House Republicans and Western Energy Alliance:

“Any increase in production of natural gas on federal lands is likely to be easily outpaced by increases on non-federal lands, particularly because shale plays are primarily situated on nonfederal lands and is where most of the growth in production is projected to occur.”

“The big shale gas plays are primarily on non-federal lands and are attracting a significant portion of investment for natural gas development.” – pg. 1

“But having more lands accessible may not translate into higher levels of production on federal lands, as industry seeks out the most promising prospects and highest returns.” – Pg. 3

“After a lease has been obtained, either competitively or non-competitively, an application for a permit to drill (APD) must be approved for each oil and gas well…in 2006 it took the BLM an average of 127 days to process an APD, while in 2011 it took BLM 71 days. In 2006, the industry took an average of 91 days to complete an APD, but in 2011, industry took 236 days. – Pg. 8

Filed under Blog, News, Permitting

New Report: Drilling Rigs Following the Oil to Nonfederal Lands

March 5, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

The Center for Western Priorities released its new Follow the Oil report today. CWP Policy Director, and report author, Greg Zimmerman used GIS mapping technology, EIA data, and other information to show that economic, technological and geological forces are moving drillers to private land. The report includes great infographics, and pretty much flies in the face of many industry claims that they’re being forced off federal lands. (The industry’s 7,0000 idle drilling permits and 20 million idle leased acres don’t help their argument either.)

Here’s an excerpt from the report’s executive summary:

“A combination of low natural gas prices and new shale extraction techniques inspired industry to look toward a more profitable commodity: shale oil. As a result, oil and gas companies moved their operations to areas where shale oil was abundant and offer the greatest potential profit.

The large majority of shale oil plays exist under nonfederal lands. Even in the Rocky Mountain West, where more federal land is located, 89 percent of the shale oil and mixed oil and gas plays are under nonfederal lands.”

Read the complete report.

Filed under Uncategorized

Eyes on Enefit: Conflicting Claims

March 5, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

For over a century, conflicting claims have surrounded the rock called oil shale. Estonian oil shale company Eesti Energia, and its U.S. arm, Enefit, are no exception to this rule. Whether it’s company executives, other oil executives or financial experts, we’ve seen numerous inconsistencies about Enefit’s financial health, technological capability, impact on the environment, and its Utah project.

Technology

What Enefit says in the U.S.	What Enefit says in Estonia
“And most importantly for our project in Utah, and for our activities here in the U.S., we also have demonstrated proven commercial shale oil production. We have our own proprietary technology. We have our own operating plants. And we’ve been operating those plants for more than 30 years. And we produce about 1 million barrels a year.” - Rikki Hrenko, CEO of Enefit America Oil. Transcript of API/Colorado School of Mines Briefing. June 19, 2012.	“But it is not a big surprise that a new technology [Enefit 280] does not work right away.” - Sandor Liive CEO, Eesti Energia. BBC Monitoring Europe, Text of report by private Estonian newspaper Postimees. November 30, 2012.
The company’s technology “does not need to be proven,” says [Enefit] Chairman Harri Mikk, who points out that Enefit has successfully operated an oil shale plant in Estonia for decades. - Utah Business. August 1, 2011. +Note Mikk has since resigned from Enefit’s Board Chair	“According to [Sandor] Liive, [oil] shale has so far been produced in Estonia by employing the trial and error method. The old Eesti Energia production plant is a proof of that – over the years, the solutions used there have been almost completely changed. - BBC Monitoring Europe, via Postimees. May 4, 2010.
	“The tests are not promising,” - Eesti Energia internal document obtained by Eesti Ekspress. Estonian Public Broadcasting. January 24, 2013.

Utah Project

What Enefit says in the U.S.	What Enefit says in Estonia
“And most importantly for our project in Utah, and for our activities here in the U.S., we also have demonstrated proven commercial shale oil production. We have our own proprietary technology. We have our own operating plants. And we’ve been operating those plants for more than 30 years. And we produce about 1 million barrels a year.” - Rikki Hrenko, CEO of Enefit America Oil. Transcript of API/Colorado School of Mines Briefing. June 19, 2012.	“The [Utah] tests are not promising,” - Eesti Energia internal document obtained by Eesti Ekspress. Estonian Public Broadcasting. January 24, 2013.
“This is a simple mining project. The mining component is nothing unique to oil shale. This is a simple mineral processing project.” - Rikki Hrenko, CEO of Enefit America Oil. Transcript of API/Colorado School of Mines Briefing. June 19, 2012.	The Salt Lake Tribune recently reported that Enefit is experiencing difficulties applying its technology to Utah oil shale deposits, and specifically that the company hasn’t been able extract oil from the oil shale ore mined in Utah as easily as executives had hoped and promised. - Utah oil shale becomes political punching bag in Estonia. Salt Lake Tribune. January 25, 2013.
	Ingo Valgma, director of the Department of Mining at the Tallinn University of Technology in Estonia, said that he believes oil production from Utah shale is not a matter of five to six years, as Enefit predicts, but more a question of decades. - Utah oil shale becomes political punching bag in Estonia. Salt Lake Tribune. January 25, 2013.
	Eesti Energia’s spokesperson says that the applied development technology needs enhancing. Eesti Energia has invested EUR 33.3mn [$43.1 million] in the Utah project since 2011, including EUR 29.6mn [$38.6 million] in the acquisition of the Utah-based oil shale exploration and development company. Eesti Energia is projecting an additional EUR 37mn [$48.2 million] investment in the Utah shale oil project by 2016. - Esmerk. January 18, 2013.

Environment

What Enefit says in the U.S.	What Enefit says in Estonia and what oil executives say
“A proven, efficient and environmentally sound means to help Utah become energy independent while providing long-term jobs for local families.” – Enefit Utah website.	“I worked in Estonia for several years. You’re exactly right. The old antiquated surface retorts that they use there are pretty nasty business. They produce a lot of semicoke. You know, they call them the Estonian Alps…. you would never want the retorts that are operating — operating in Estonia to come to the United States.” – Anton Dammer, NOSA Board Member and former Senior Vice President of Red Leaf. CQ Transcript—House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, Subcommittee on Energy and Environment. May 10, 2012
“[Oil shale is] commercially viable… And it can be done in an environmentally responsible manner.” - Rikki Hrenko, CEO of Enefit America Oil. Transcript of API/Colorado School of Mines Briefing. June 19, 2012.	“…our production involves the emission of lots of carbon dioxide.” – Sandor Liive, CEO, Eesti Energia. Interview Eesti Paevaleht website via BBC Monitoring Europe. July 4, 2011.

Commercial Viability

What Enefit says in the U.S.	What Enefit says in Estonia and what Moody’s says
“[Oil shale is] commercially viable. It is proven. We’re doing it on a large scale commercial production basis in Estonia and have been for decades. And it can be done in an environmentally responsible manner. “ - Rikki Hrenko, CEO of Enefit America Oil. Transcript of API/Colorado School of Mines Briefing. June 19, 2012.	“True, most of the investments are made under various subsidy schemes because even current free market prices are not high enough to make investments financially profitable.” - Sandor Liive, CEO, Eesti Energia. Interview, Eesti Paevaleht website via BBC Monitoring Europe. July 4, 2011.
“And most importantly for our project in Utah, and for our activities here in the U.S., we also have demonstrated proven commercial shale oil production.” - Rikki Hrenko, CEO of Enefit America Oil. Transcript of API/Colorado School of Mines Briefing. June 19, 2012.	In January 2013, Moody’s credit agency downgraded Eesti Energia’s bonds to negative, citing the evolving “business risk profile” of the company, and its inability to maintain profitability “given CO2-intensive oil-shale based generation assets.” - Moody’s changes outlook on Eesti Energia’s Baa1/P-2 ratings to negative. January 8, 2013.

Not even Enefit’s executives can agree whether or not oil shale is ready for prime time in the U.S. Oil shale companies like Enefit must prove they viable commercial technology that won’t harm our water or communities before they get any more public land.

This blog is part of a series about Enefit, known at home in Estonia as Eesti Energia, covering the company’s financial outlook, background and status of its Utah project.

Filed under Blog, Eyes On Enefit, oil shale Tagged with Checks and Balances Project, enefit, Energy, Oil Shale

Another Friday News Dump: State Department Paves Way for Keystone XL Approval

March 1, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

State Department releases Keystone XL environmental impact statement, ignores reality of climate change impacts

This afternoon, the State Department released its Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) on the controversial Keystone XL (KXL) pipeline, claiming that the pipeline will “not likely result in significant adverse environmental effects.” The SEIS paves the way for President Obama’s approval of the pipeline despite widespread concern over the climate impacts of tar sands oil.
The State Department assessment does acknowledge that excavation of the Canadian tar sands oil would result in 17% more climate change emissions than the average barrel of heavy crude oil. But the report continues to say that the KXL pipeline would have no adverse impact on climate change because if the pipeline were not approved, companies would ship tar sands oil via railroad.

In reality, the Keystone XL pipeline is a “fundamental element in the oil industry’s plan to triple production of tar sands oil from 2 million barrels per day (bpd) to 6 million bpd by 2030″ (and eventually to 9 million bpd), according to a whitepaper (PDF) from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). The NRDC whitepaper quotes Andrew Potter, a Managing Director at CIBC World Markets, an investment banking subsidiary of the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, as saying “Even if you build every single pipe that’s on the table right now… you’re still short pipeline capacity…For the growth to continue, all the proposed export pipeline capacity and more will need to be built, and soon.”

With other options for transporting tar sands oil facing significant opposition, Keystone XL is the path for tar sands industry growth. The Obama Administration just released a report that positions the President to greenlight the project. So as the President goes to make his decision in the coming weeks, let’s hope he remembers his lofty words from his inaugural address: “We, the people, still believe that our obligations as Americans are not just to ourselves but to all posterity. We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.”

For more breaking news on the Keystone XL decision, see DeSmogBlog’s live blog here.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with climate change, Keystone XL, KXL, NRDC, Obama, oil, State Department, Tar Sands

Conservation group sends BLM Director Hankins a sign

February 28, 2013 by Checks And Balances Project Leave a comment

This week, Alan Prendergast wrote in Westword about a new Environment Colorado campaign to protect Colorado’s national parks from drilling:

“When you’re a bureaucrat under fire, accused of being a tool of Big Oil, there’s nothing like a big, wet kiss from your critics to let you know you’re being watched — closely. Particularly if that greeting takes the form of a giant billboard on I-70 in Golden, not far from the Bureau of Land Management office where Colorado director Helen Hankins ponders oil and gas leases on public lands and other weighty matters.”

Since assuming her post in 2010, Dir. Hankins has executed her job as if she were a real estate agent for oil and gas companies. She has proposed allowing drilling on lands near national parks, Denver’s watershed in South Park, agricultural communities… anywhere that industry asked for it.

After a year of public outcry – that was heard all the way to the Department of Interior in Washington, D.C. – she deferred many of those leases, but that’s not a permanent solution. Environment Colorado’s roadside message to Dir. Hankins should be seen as a reminder – Do your job the way it’s supposed to be done.

Billboard on I-70

It’s time conservation be put on equal ground with oil and gas drilling.

Filed under Blog, Permitting

← Older posts

Recent Posts

Archives

Follow “The Checks and Balances Project”