H.R.6781
September 10, 2008 12:09 PM (about 1 month ago) | Overall Score: 5.0 | Replies: 0

According to this study by the EIA (http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html) I don't see how drilling the east coast OCS would be a good idea. It says that it would amount to less than a 200 day supply of oil (total reserves), and it would have no effect on prices until 2030 (if it had any). Off the coast of VA we are talking about a fraction of that. So it really doesn't lower prices or relieve our dependence on foreign oil. "Drill here, drill now, pay less" sounds nice, but that does not make it true. There is also a plan to develop wind energy production off the coast of Virginia Beach - that is a good idea. Energy plans/bills, like this one, that do not address the real issues with long term solutions rob us of our rights and our government. This is an exercise in pacification of the masses. Our representatives work for us. Do NOT let of them, with this snake oil, take credit for doing that.

S.2827
May 1, 2008 01:05 PM (5 months ago) | Overall Score: 5.0 | Replies: 0

The section of this act that is purposed for to be removed is below, as well a link to the full text. This text should remain in the act, because it keeps government agencies from buying false-alternative fuels. The purpose of the act is meant to improve environmental stewardship. Theoretically, this proposed repeal would make it possible to burn old tires for heat and call it an "alternative fuel". This is a clear attempt to remove the meat from standing environmental law. Oppose it. -------------------------------------------------------- http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ140.110 SEC. 526. <<NOTE: 42 USC 17142.>> PROCUREMENT AND ACQUISITION OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS. No Federal agency shall enter into a contract for procurement of an alternative or synthetic fuel, including a fuel produced from nonconventional petroleum sources, for any mobility-related use, other than for research or testing, unless the contract specifies that the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production and combustion of the fuel supplied under the contract must, on an ongoing basis, be less than or equal to such emissions from the equivalent conventional fuel produced from conventional petroleum sources.