Free Markets, Free People

Like cheap gas? The EPA doesn’t

The oil shale boom has helped create a surplus of oil that has entered the market and driven prices down to under $2 a gallon. It is an economic boon to hard pressed families and businesses who use a lot of fuel. It is also a testament to how well markets work. And that’s why government is about to intrude in that market and jack the prices back up. This time under the guise of your out-of-control EPA

In spite of dramatically lower methane emissions from fracking, according to the EPA’s own data, the agency wants to impose draconian regulations on the oil and gas industry similar to those on coal.
The new rules that the White House announced on Wednesday aim to cut oil emissions of methane, a target of environmental groups, by 45% below 2012 levels, despite the fact that the emissions already show a sharp decline even as shale oil and gas production has skyrocketed.
This war-on-shale action mirrors the administration’s war on coal, with EPA rules impossible to meet economically and sometimes requiring technology that doesn’t even exist.

This is all based on the extremely shaky theory that the earth is warming due to greenhouse gasses produced by man, despite 18 years with no evidence of warming. It is also being done despite the fact that the EPA has no real reason, according to its own findings, to go after this industry:

“Reported methane emissions from (the) petroleum and natural gas systems sector have decreased by 12% since 2011, with the largest reductions coming from hydraulically fractured natural gas wells, which have decreased by 73% during that period,” according to the EPA itself.

Oil from shale has created jobs, lowered fuel prices and generally been the one bright spot in an otherwise lackluster economy. And it has been done without Federal help. Now the government is going to step in and impose onerous requirements on that will both slow production and raise production costs (then when prices go back up it will blame greedy oil companies).
You’d almost think the guy in the White House had once promised that energy prices would rise to very high levels under his administration.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

19 Responses to Like cheap gas? The EPA doesn’t

  • Drudge had several “Hottest year” and “The Earth is burning” articles up today. I didn’t bother clicking the links because I don’t need to goose my blood pressure another 20 points.

    Does anybody know if Matt Drudge really believes that garbage? Or if maybe the articles linked were putdowns of the Glow-Bull Warmenationing hysteria?

    • Thought you’d enjoy these…

      Nearly 300 Stanford professors vote to divest from reality.

      This was NOT the “warmest year EVAH”. Though that may be one of the biggest, silliest LIES EVAH!

    • Drudge throws out endless links for information purposes. That’s his schtick.

    • Your warmest year is now based on what used to be considered statistical error or background noise in the data collection…

    • The good news is that belief in so-called “Climate Change” among the 18-35 y.o. set (my peers) is much lower than older generations. In short, the meme is dying out. Despite the best propaganda efforts from the Cathedral, lack of any actual warming or increase in extreme weather events, the revelations of endemic fraud at CRU from the Climategates leaks, carbon taxes, naked wealth transfers of billions of dollars from the cash-strapped US to other nations, etc. etc. have all eroded any serious credibility to this apocalyptic cult. 🙂

    • Thought you’d enjoy these…

      Nearly 300 Stanford professors vote to divest from reality.

    • This was NOT the “warmest year EVAH”. Though that may be one of the biggest, silliest LIES EVAH!

      http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/01/was-2014-really-the-warmest-year-ever.php

      • The irony is that all the superior thermometry developed and deployed in the ’00s (which I was proud to be a part of as some of the engineering — like the SDO — was amazing), the high-point of CAGW frenzy, has just proved the null hypothesis. Going forward we won’t see spurious nonsense like Michael Mann’s hockey stick, which was all based upon a single tree. In a way, this reminds me a SETI — it failed at its ostensible mission, but the secondary observations made up for it.

  • It is also being done despite the fact that the EPA has no real reason, according to its own findings, to go after this industry

    Does anyone believe this is being done for pure environmental reasons? From the article linked…

    This war-on-shale action mirrors the administration’s war on coal, with EPA rules impossible to meet economically and sometimes requiring technology that doesn’t even exist.

    If you setup something that is impossible to achieve then obviously it is not about the “environment”, since the “environment” cannot benefit from what is impossible. But if you are interested in impossible goals in order to gain and maintain ever more power for the bureaucratic state then it makes perfect sense.

  • I DO believe that the largest contributor of atmospheric methane is the by-product of microfloral digestion of cellulosic plant fibers, including wood.

    Which, I DO believe, the EPA considers a good, natural thing…less it is happening in the ruminants that serve mankind. Whether the EPA likes it or not, it will always continue to happen, and even the bureaucratic idiots in DC can do nothing to stop it.

    Methane, like so much else the druids of the anti-science religion of the Collective soils itself over, is just a part of nature, and one mankind has been accommodating since time immemorial.

    Rational people consider it our very useful tool.

  • Capitalism and free markets create abundance; government creates scarcity.

  • Because we can socially engineer through rules and tax regulations now.
    We can “level the playing field” and “make it fair for everyone” and “spread the wealth”.

    Whoever we get in 2016, it cannot be soon enough. NO ONE can be as bad as this moron and his moron buddies in the executive branch agencies.

    Even the Clinton’s demonstrably understood there are actually limits.
    Course Bill and Hill didn’t want to destroy the place, after all, what’s the point of being the least dirty guy in the rubble pile right? They wanted to keep the lights on and the water running, as it were.
    Barack on the other hand, he wants to fundamentally change America mud huts for almost everyone.
    I’m betting he thinks his house will be up the street from the hovels and that he’ll escape all the consequences through his capital and his connections.
    He’ll be in for a happily rude awakening.

  • The Hill:
    [Tom] Steyer’s focus on climate change is not surprising. The billionaire environmentalist and former hedge fund manager spent $74 billion in the midterm election in an effort to elect more lawmakers who want to fight climate change.

    Wow !! $74 billion on a midterm

    I can understand how they are back to whining after spending $74 billion on a midterm and coming up short

    • That is insane! Even Obama only pedged a “paltry” $3 billion of US blood, sweat and tears to the UN (Congress will likely not follow through). Steyer could have just forked that all over to the 3rd world dictators that hate us and made over 20 times the impact!

      On the plus side, the guy is $74 billion poorer. 🙂

    • I call misprint. But, really, to Duh Hill, an order of magnitude is no biggie…

      And always remember…a LOT of Steyer’s mega-bucks came from investments in BIG COAL all over the planet.

      So…HEH!

      • Yeah, checking Breitbart (where they seem to actually have fact-checkers), they say $74 million. So, still a crazy amount of money, but not quite as insane. If it’s any consolation to Steyer, the Earth won’t be drastically heating-up in any case. He might also like to know that his crazy 1-percenter style spending will also protect him from unicorns and fairies. Bonus! 🙂

        • Hey, if they didn’t have no double-standards…

          they wouldn’t have no standards at all. (With apologies to Eric Clapner…)

  • As I watch the SOU, Obama is claiming responsibility for oil prices being down.