Posts Tagged ‘emissions’

White House at war with U.S. Chamber?

Friday, October 23rd, 2009

Is the Obama administration trying to marginalize America’s largest business group?

“The uneasy relationship between the Obama White House and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has steadily eroded over the past several months, with the business group’s opposition to health care and climate change legislation triggering an all-fronts backlash from the administration,” Fox News reports, “White House targets Chamber.” “The administration is now trying to neutralize the Chamber by doing an end-run around the group and dealing directly with its members.”

“Obama and top aides quietly have met with 50 to 60 big-time corporate CEOs over the past few months in an effort to cultivate their support on key issues — the White House denies that it has encouraged any companies to sever ties with the Chamber.”

Liberal groups have highlighted such firms as Apple cancelling their Chamber membership over climate change legislation. Another influential firm, Nike, resigned its seat on the board of directors.

(It’s somewhat hypocritical of Apple and Nike to support the proposed cap-and-trade legislation pending in Congress. Both companies manufacture their products in third-world countries exempt from limits on carbon emissions. The Chamber’s membership also includes many companies with U.S. factories that would face steep costs to stay in business if cap-and-trade would become law.

Obama’s allies are turning up the heat on the U.S. Chamber as well. A group of small businesses in Iowa, called 1Sky, recently issued a news release in which they criticized the Chamber for not supporting climate change legislation.

Industry group: Low carbon proposal threatens Hyperion refinery

Thursday, September 3rd, 2009

New environmental regulations for transportation fuels being considered in Congress would deal a “devastating” blow to U.S. projects like the proposed Hyperion Energy Center in Union County, according to a coalition of business groups.

Some majority Democrats back legislation that would lower carbon emissions in U.S. vehicles. The Low-Carbon Fuel Standards, or LCFS, would penalize heavier, dirtier oil such as the crude from the Alberta, Canadian oil sands that Hyperion plans to process.

Last month, Hyperion secured a state air quality permit for its $10 billion refinery, which would process of 400,000 barrels per day.

“No permit in the world is going to save this project if LCFS is put in place,” said Chris Tucker, a spokesman for the Consumer Energy Alliance, a 125-member group that includes oil companies, retailers, trucking and transportation groups and business organizations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

At top is a YouTube video of a TV ad that the CEA is airing in South Dakota, as well as three other states — North Dakota, Montana and Tennessee — with industries dependent on heavier oil. The S.D. ad encourages viewers to call the state’s two U.S. senators — Republican John Thune and Democrat Tim Johnson.

The group’s television and radio campaign, scheduled to last two weeks, attempts to educate consumers about the issue, warning that LCFS threatens to cost Americans jobs, drive up prices at the pump and increase U.S. dependence on Mideast imports.

A broader, better known climate control bill, known as Waxman-Markey, or cap-and-trade, passed the House in June without the low-carbon fuel provision, which was removed during negotiations. But CEA officials fear supporters will revive the low carbon language and insert it into other legislation during the current session of Congress.

King’s cap and trade forum too late to influence House vote

Friday, June 26th, 2009

Journal political blogger Bret Hayworth reports that Iowa Fifth District Congressman Steve King has scheduled a public forum on so-called cap and trade legislation on July 6 at Western Iowa Tech Community College.

At first glance that sounds like a good idea, allowing King to gather advice from a panel of experts and input from audience members before casting his vote on the controversial issue. The only problem is the House is voting TODAY on the climate control legislation.

Holding a forum 10 days after the fact give the public zero chance of influencing the outcome of the House vote. If anything, it appear that King’s event is designed to shape the debate after the House bill moves to the Senate, where the chances of passage this year are less certain. King is a representative, not a senator.

Today’s Business: California-style emissions in Iowa?

Wednesday, March 4th, 2009

Stocks move higher after five days of heavy selling

After the Dow Jones tumbled below 7,000 for the first time in a decade, the market rallied today on a of a possible Chinese economic stimulus package and a slightly better-than-expected report on the services sector.

Maybe Barback Obama was right — this is a good time to buy stocks. If I were you, I’d take a wait-and-see approach, rather than take the president’s financial advice.

Mortgage help, Do you qualify?

Also pushing up stocks was today’s rollout of details for the Obama administration’s $75 billion plan to help up to 9 million struggling homeowners.

As many as 5 million homeowners who are “under water” on their mortgages, meaning they owe more than the house is worth, could get government help to refinance into new low interest rates. Another 4 million homeowners could qualify for a second provision that gives lenders and servicers incentives to restructure your mortgage to more affordable levels.

Bill seeks crackdown on vehicle emissions

An Iowa legislator wants the Hawkeye state to adopt California-style emissions standards that are more stringent than federal law.

The proposed standards would be based on a law in California that requires tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases from cars and light trucks to be cut 22 percent by 2012 and 30 percent by 2016.

Critics say the added regulations could raise the price of a passenger vehicle in Iowa by $3,000. In western Iowa, it also could drive more sales into neighboring Nebraska and South Dakota. Neither border state is contemplating adopting its own emissions regulations.