Episodic dependencies in central and eastern europe stock markets

Practical PreppingKunstlerCastKunstlerCastPeak ProsperityXX2 report ]. Sarah Lyall whined about traveling on airplanes in the leading story of the Business section in the New York Times on Sunday June 9, Lyall. The odds of dying were 1 in 5 10, of 50, migrants died from cholera, dysentery, typhoid fever, diphtheria, smallpox, firearm accidents, and Indian attacks people.

The odds of dying in an airplane crash are just 1 in 11 million. It took migrants up to six months to reach their destination. A jet travels that distance in 4 hours. Migrants often had to jettison most or all of their possessions to reach a safe place before winter. Just 3 bags are mishandled by airlines per 1, passengers. Migrants suffered from hunger, malnutrition, dehydration, lack of water, bad water, and lack of fuel to cook and heat with.

Airplanes have food, water, and comfortable temperatures. Lyall has this to say about airplane food:. So instead of whining, remember that for most of history nobody flew — not even kings or queens. Instead of whining, be grateful. Airplanes will never be electrified with wind and solar power charged batteries. A seat airplane weighs about tons at take-off. About a third, or 38 tons of that weight is the kerosene fuel.

The other 77 tons are the passengers, their luggage, and the airplane itself. An electric, battery-powered airplane would require nearly 3, tons of lithium-ion batteries.

The batteries would weigh 39 times more than the plane, passengers, and their luggage. Nor would fuel cells do much better Schrope. This is a temporary privilege. Our descendants will daydream about what it must have been like to fly. National Archives at catalog. Paying a Price for 8 Days of Flying in America. It may be that natural gas and coal plants are in or will become in as much financial trouble as nuclear power plants.

Since this article was published in10 of the 37 at risk plants Cooper listed have been or are scheduled to close down: Diablo Canyon, Clinton, Fitzpatrick, Ft. Calhoun, Indian Point, Oyster Creek, Pilgrim, Quad Cities, Three Mile Island, Vermont Yankee.

In addition, not long before this article was written, Kewaunee and Crystal River closed for financial reasons. Here are the remaining plants Cooper listed that have yet to close: If the rejection of the CPP happens, that will make it much more difficult for fossil fuel-dependent regulated utilities to get new renewables and gas-fired plants paid for by their ratepayers. And politically, the alliance of convenience between the gas-fired power sector and the renewables industry is fraying to breaking point.

As long as both could face off against the coal industry, the gas-fired generators were fine with having green activists demanding reductions in carbon emissions. Gas barons could contribute to environmental groups, smug in the belief that the greens were helping them get market share.

The natural gas drillers, though, became far too efficient at finding and producing the stuff for their own good, so prices went down and stayed down. Even when gas producers were facing insolvency, they were able to borrow money, sell shares and keep drilling. So the Saudis and the Russians lost their bet. As did the gas-fired generators. Power prices are set, at the margin, by natural gas prices, and the independent natural gas power producers are in financial distress.

Wind and utility-grade solar plant owners, in contrast, have long-dated fixed-price contracts to back up their project financing. The gas barons had figured that their generators would be complementary, rather than competitive, with intermittent renewables.

In recent years, though, in states such as California and Texas, renewables generation has been crushing the power markets on which the gas generators depend. In Texas, tax credit-supported wind generation can be economic even in hours when power prices are negative: In effect, during the hours their panels work, the cost of maintaining the transmission and distribution grid, along with the back-up capacity of hydro, nuclear and fossil-fuel plants, is borne by ratepayers who do not have rooftop solar.

This did not matter when rooftop solar was just a cute green gadget. Now solar generation in California can lead to rapid swings in net load of up to 16,MW, or about one-third of the total demand in the statewhich is about equal to that of the UK grid. This means that the very time in the middle of the day when the gas generators were supposed to make money is a time when they are idle, just spinning away without any revenue but with the same requirements for debt service.

So they are going broke. In several states, including Nevada, Arizona, Indiana and even, hesitantly, California, regulators are making it less financially attractive to sell intermittent renewable power to the grid.

Subsidies are being limited for new renewables, and will eventually be eliminated. Of course the greens and the renewables owners are pushing back, but the old alliance with the gas crowd has been broken.

As the renewables and gas plant owners fight over generation market share, the distribution utilities and even electricity storage developers are gaining power, so to speak.

Because balancing the variations in power load is an increasingly demanding task, state regulators are more willing to allocate revenue to those who can manage the process. Also, while the Trump administration has decided to dump the Paris climate accord and the Clean Power Plan, corporate America is still under political pressure to use green power.

Big tech already contracts for renewable energy. As that preference filters down to other companies, Wall Street is ready to intermediate the trade.

So whatever the White House announces, there is still money to be made from the climate business. Something really drastic must have happened to the ancient Maya at the end of the Classic Period in the 9th Century. The reason for this demise remains the subject of debate even today. Now, researchers at the Vienna University of Technology TU Wien may have found the explanation: The lessons learned may also help us to draw important conclusions for our own future.

We need to be careful with our natural resources — if technical measures simply deal with the shortage of resources on a superficial level and we do not adjust our own behaviorsociety is left vulnerable, according to the study authors.

Because water and society have such a direct influence on each other, it will not suffice to describe them by separate models. This is why researchers at TU Wien explore the interactions between sociology and hydrology and represent them by coupled mathematical models. These kinds of interrelationships, combined with a large amount of historical and current data, ultimately yield a complex system that produces different scenarios of human—nature interactions, according to the study authors.

It is also possible to simulate scenarios with and without water reservoirs and compare the consequences of such decisions. As it turns out, water reservoirs can actually provide substantial relief during short periods of drought. In the simulations without reservoirs, the Mayan population declines after a drought, whereas it continues to grow if reservoirs provide extra water. However, the reservoirs may also make the population more vulnerable during prolonged dry spells. The water management behavior may remain the same, and the water demand per person does not decrease, but the population continues to grow.

T his may then prove fatal if another drought occurs resulting in a decline in population that is more dramatic than without reservoirs.

We will probably never know all the reasons for the decline of the Mayans, wars or epidemics may have played a part too. The socio-hydrological model developed by the TU Wien researchers does, however, tell us that droughts and water issues are one possible explanation for their demise and shows us just how vulnerable an engineered society can be.

The outages from this malware would last a few hours and probably not more than a couple of days, because the U. If the right substations are targeted, a substantial portion of the grid can be taken out. What if the Russians do this over and over? Also, some regions might be more vulnerable or stay down longer. Hackers allied with the Russian government have devised a cyberweapon that has the potential to be the most disruptive yet against electric systems that Americans depend on for daily life.

The malware, dubbed CrashOverridebriefly shut down one-fifth of the electric power generated in Kiev and leftcustomers without power. With modifications, it could be deployed against U. And Russian government hackers have shown their interest in targeting U. The revelation comes as the U. That campaign employed a variety of methods, including hacking hundreds of political and other organizations, and leveraging social media, U. Assante, who worked at Idaho National Labs and is a former chief security officer of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, where he oversaw the rollout of industry cybersecurity standards.

CrashOverride is only the second instance of malware specifically tailored to disrupt or destroy industrial control systems. Inthe Russians used malware to gain access to the power supply network in western Ukraine, but it was hackers at the keyboards who remotely manipulated the control systems to cause the blackout — not the malware itself, Hultquist said.

The malware is like a Swiss Army knife, where you flip open the tool you need and where different tools can be added to achieve different effects, Gunter said.

Theoretically, the malware can be modified to attack different types of industrial control systems, such as water and gas.

However, the adversary has not demonstrated that level of sophistication, Lee said. Still, the attackers probably had experts and resources available not only to develop the framework but also to test it, Gunter said. One of the most insidious tools in CrashOverride manipulates the settings on electric power control systems.

It scans for critical components that operate circuit breakers and opens the circuit breakers, which stops the flow of electricity. It continues to keep them open even if a grid operator tries to close them, creating a sustained power outage. That could create outages in different areas at the same time.

NORAD North American Aerospace Defense Command is moving back into its previous Cheyenne Mountain underground bunker in Colorado Springs because it is EMP-hardened, and due to threats from enemies who now possess the capabilities to launch an EMP nuclear weapon from the south where NORAD is blind. North Korea now has operational the KN, a nuclear-weapon-armed missile, that can be launched undetected and set off a nuclear explosion sufficient to shut down the entire North American electric grid.

NORAD is prepared to defend the country from attacks from North Korea and Iran even if negotiations are successfulprovided that those attacks come over the North Pole. But all eyes are facing north, with none facing south. Peter Vincent Pry, executive director of the EMP Task Force, has written frequently in attempts to warn citizens of the danger. Back in August he and James Woolsey, former CIA director said in a Wall Street Journal that North Korea and Iran will soon match Russia and China in their ability to launch an EMP attack with 1 simple ballistic missiles such as Scuds launched from a freighter near our shores, 2 space-launched vehicles able to loft low-earth-orbit satellites, or 3 simple low-yield nuclear weapons that can generate gamma rays and fireballs.

Iran should be regarded as already having nuclear missiles capable of making an EMP attack against the U. Iran and North Korea have successfully orbited satellites on south-polar trajectories that appear to practice evading U. Such costs were spelled out in a dystopian novel that made it onto the New York Times best-sellers list back in One Second Afterby William R.

In the afterword, Forstchen quotes a letter from Captain Bill Sanders of the U. Navy, who notes that One Second After is not so much a novel as it is a warning: A well-designed nuclear weapon detonated at a high altitude over Kansas could have damaging effects over virtually all of the continental United States. Our technologically oriented society and its heavy dependence on advanced electronics systems could be brought to its knees with cascading failures of our critical infrastructure.

Our vulnerability increases daily as our use and dependence on electronics continues to accelerate. If you have never heard of an electromagnetic pulse, or EMP, then you have not spent any time worrying about an EMP causing the end of civilization as we know it.

But scientists and some policymakers worry about such a thing happening, and for very good reason. Satellites we rely on for navigation and communication would be damaged beyond repair, and society would crumble into a dysfunctional scramble for survival.

The very necessities of life, such as clean water, food, medications, transportation, even government, would all either disappear or be in very short supply. Solar flares are not unusual. On March 13,one blew out power in Quebec, leaving 6 million people in the dark. Today, such an occurrence would have darkened half of North America. Last summer, Baker said there was a very close call.

A satellite was watching it. A huge flare, and then a CME, came at the spacecraft and it was moving at the highest recorded speed that has been seen in the modern Space Age.

invasion of Iraq - Wikipedia

It reached the satellite in 17 hours. For all intents and purposes, that was a Carrington Event that just missed us. We dodged the proverbial bullet there. Now we know there have been others like this. Can it happen again? The probability of any of these occurring during one year cycle of solar storms is like 10 percent, a pretty significant probability. Congressional committees have acknowledged the danger since There have been studies ordered, hearings held, admissions of lack of knowledge and lists of problems.

Still, it remains in the talking stages and no action has been taken to lessen the danger. The Department of Homeland Security admitted as recently as this past September that it has no estimate of the costs associated with an EMP.

Dan Lungren of California chaired the hearing. Referring to a computer simulation conducted at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Lundgren said the power system collapse could take four to 10 years from which to fully recover. FERC called for the agency that oversees the national grid to draft rules requiring power companies to assess their weaknesses and upgrade their grids to withstand the electrical onslaught.

Most power companies in the country are privately owned. As such, those companies have categorized the danger of an EMP as highly unlikely and have refused to officially assess their own vulnerabilities.

Without power, the comforts of home become worthless. You sit in the sweltering heat, realizing you are living in a box that, without electricity, is a trap.

You either make do in the heat or find refuge with friends who have electricity. I write this now because of my concern for national security and our power grid, which are susceptible to doomsday-level damage if hit by an electromagnetic pulse EMP strike or a major solar storm.

It is almost unthinkable, yet possible, that an enemy could detonate a nuclear weapon over the atmosphere over the continental United States, triggering an electromagnetic pulse. A similar crisis could be sparked by a solar storm like the Carrington Event ofa type of geomagnetic disturbance that occurs about every 75 years. Statistically, we are long overdue for such a storm. There have been some recent examples of the potential impact, such as the millions in Quebec who lost power for several hours in as a result of a space storm.

The current system lacks safety features needed to prevent damage to critical electrical infrastructure. Inmy friend — and sometimes co-author — William R. It is a cautionary tale about the threat of EMP strikes and major solar storms, known as coronal mass ejections.

Suppose that, rather than being a temporary disruption in our lives, the power outage lasted weeks or months, or even years. Consider what state all of us, from the richest to the poorest, would be in if we were still literally in the dark. Millions could be trapped in houses or apartments that were never designed for this climate without air conditioning. No cool air; months with no food shipments and every pharmacy shut down — no refills for life-sustaining medications.

In a crisis, many in the Washington area could not even flee because the impact of an EMP attack would disable most cars and public transportation. The water supply would go dry without electricity to pump water from rivers and wells.

Imagine if you could find a bottle of potable water for, say, your children. How much would you pay? What would you pay with if every bank and ATM were shut down? No power means no police cars, no communications and no emergency service. For criminals, it would be time to run rampant.

True large-scale coal mining started only during the 18th century in Europe, and in particular in England and France. Initially coal was considered a poor fuel, but with the development of coking baking coal to burn off impuritiesmineral coal could be used for the same tasks as wood charcoal, but at a much lower price.

That changed many things. For instance, for most of human history iron had been smelted with charcoal, which made it such an expensive commodity that it was used to make little more than weapons and armor. Now, produced in coal-fired forges, it became so cheap that it was possible to make everyday items in iron, such as pots, pans, and more.

Coal did more than make iron cheap; it powered the steam engine. The first steam engines were used to pump water out of coal mines. Coal was inexpensive and abundant. The pumps made it possible to extract more coal, and more coal could power more pumps, leading to more coal being extracted.

With time, the steam engine became efficient enough that it could power ships and locomotives as well as factories. It is the material energy of the country—the universal aid—the factor in everything we do.

With coal almost any feat is possible or easy; without it we are thrown back into the laborious poverty of early times. With coal, Britain experienced the first industrial revolution.

An awesome complex of factories, people, and machines became the inner powerhouse of the British Empire. The idea spread quickly to other countries. France had started her coal revolution perhaps even earlier than Britain; in fact the French Revolution that started in was born from the need to get rid of the old landed aristocracy to make room for a new, coal-based economy.

Germany, too, developed its national mines, and slowly the revolution spread to eastern Europe, to Poland and Russia, and later on to North America. But the domain of King Coal was not destined to last forever. Coal was perhaps the first important mineral resource of modern times to show depletion problems.

France would peak a couple of decades laterbut without ever approaching the production magnitude that England and Germany had achieved. Coal had created the European world empires; its decline was to spell their demise. King Coal was abdicating, at least in Europe. The lead was picked up by new producers in North America, China, and Australia, and coal is now the fastest growing energy resource in the world.

But the importance of coal was destined to decline anyway thanks to the appearance of a new mineral commodity: The modern history of crude oil starts around the midth century, and it had a very humble beginning. In this section of the book he shows how humans have damaged the soil so much we have greatly overshot carrying capacity by lowering its capacity to grow food, and he explains why there is no way to fix this with GMO crops or other solutions. KunstlerCastKunstlerCastPeak Prosperity ].

Today, it is estimated that the land biosphere produces 56 billion tons of new biomass every year. Therefore, plants are mining about half a billion tons of materials from the crust every year.

The cycle is very efficient: Nowadays humans extract from the ground several billion tons of materials every year. We dig at depths unthinkable for plant roots: This all-important organic matter was formed over thousands of years as rock broke down into tiny particles that were gradually infiltrated by living organisms.

Running anywhere between a few centimeters and several meters deep, soil sustains a diverse mix of plants and animals that forever change it as they live and die. It is moved about by wind, water, ice, and gravity—sometimes slowly, sometimes rapidly.

As history has shown us, it can make or break civilizations. But many of these civilizations mismanaged the soil, and as their agricultural productivity declined, so did their civilizations.

Occasionally they vanished entirely. Studies suggest that the 1,year-old Mayan civilization in South America collapsed around CE because its fertile ground eroded away due to bad soil management.

Soil depletion occurs in many ways. In agriculture, depletion can result from excessively intense cultivation and inadequate soil management. The combined effects of growing population density, large-scale industrial logging, slash-and-burn agriculture, ranching, and other factors have in some places reduced soil fertility to nearly zero.

In fact, billions of tons of soil are being physically lost each year. The most serious losses arise from erosion— the washing or blowing away of surface soil, sometimes down to bedrock. While some erosion takes place naturally, without human help, natural soil loss and new soil creation normally stay in balance.

The irrigation systems that have played an important role in increasing crop production have also had negative impacts on soil quality, with some researchers estimating that excessive watering has caused salinization. The uncontrolled application of chemical and industrial wastes has degraded soil as well. Not all soil loss is from farming, though. Millions of hectares of what would otherwise be good farmland are being flooded for reservoirs or paved over for highways, airports, parking lots, and expanding urban areas.

Agriculture is also experiencing rising competition from fast-growing cities and urban settlements, resulting in smaller areas of productive agricultural land at a time when world population is growing and expectations are rising among people everywhere for a better life.

Global warming, too, is expected to increase the rate of nutrient loss in soils, since microbial decomposition occurs faster under warmer temperatures. The world is facing a series of challenges to human survival. Water is growing increasingly scarce, water pollution is becoming more widespread, and water-related ecosystems are degrading.

Global warming, air and land pollution, and the depletion of natural and mineral resources are escalating. These are all serious threats to human welfare, but the loss of suitable land and soil quality for agricultural production is no less important and no less serious. The total land area of the world exceeds The remainder is either too wet or too dry, too shallow or too rocky. The single most serious drawback to farming additional land is generally lack of water.

In addition, some land is toxic, some is deficient in the nutrients that plants require, and some is permanently frozen. A report of the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the US Department of Agriculture showed that:. Unfortunately, there are no simple solutions to these gigantic, complex problems. We cannot expect that technology will come to the rescue with some miracle crop. The so-called green revolution that took place during the second half of the 20th century did increase crop yields, but in the process it used large amounts of artificial fertilizers and crops that required increased amounts of pesticides in order to survive.

The productivity of the land is limited by basic factors such as the efficiency of natural photosynthesis, which cannot be modified by humans—not even by using fancy GMO crops. We must recognize that we are in a state of deep overshoot for practically all the natural resources available to us. What we are facing may be no different from the fate of many civilizations of the past.

When farm productivity declined, society attempted to maintain production by expanding the land base under cultivation and putting more effort into cultivating the depleted areas.

That led to accelerated soil loss, which became a major factor in the collapse of entire civilizations—such as the Mayan one. It is estimated that about 4 billion tons of agricultural soil is eroded in the United States and dumped into the oceans every year. As an example of what a house built by someone rich to last beyond the fossil fuel age is like, I have a description of the house George W.

Bush has built in Texas. By the way, he was certainly aware of peak oil, why do you think he invaded Iraq? Other wealthy people have more than one rat hole to dodge into via private yacht or plane.

This releases so much carbon dioxide from the loss of the trees and peat soils that any biofuels produced and corn ethanol for that matterrelease far more greenhouse gases than fossil fuels PearceInstitute of Medicine To meet demand for food, fuel and wood, countries are snapping up property beyond their borders.

Fertile land is becoming scarce worldwide, especially for crops for food, feed, biofuels, timber and fiber such as cotton. To produce those goods, wealthy countries such as the U. Products are shipped back home or sold locally, at times squeezing out native farmers, landowners and businesses. Crops are being produced on only 2. Overall, a large transfer of land ownership from the global south to the global north seems to be under way.

The nations leasing or owning to most land are see Scientific American article for graphics: Ukraine, Indonesia, Uruguay, Brazil, Laos, Papua New Guinea, China, Romania, India, Madagascar. The top 10 countries with LAND UNDER CONTRACTsquare miles: South Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Republic of Cong, Ukraine, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, LIberia, Sudan. By Rose Marie Berger. The Bush ranch house in Crawford, Texas, balances beauty with state-of-the-art energy efficiency.

Designed by Austin environmental architect David Heymann, and built by members of a religious community from nearby Elm Mott, George W. The passive-solar house is positioned to absorb winter sunlight, warming the interior walkways and walls. Underground water, which remains a constant 55 degrees year-round, is piped through a heat exchange system that keeps the interior warm in winter and cool in summer. A graywater reclamation system treats and reuses waste water. Rain gutters feed a cistern hooked to a sprinkler system for watering the fruit orchard and grass.

Clearly, Bush goes home from the White House to a green house. His acre ranch is located near Crawford, Texas, about 30 miles west of Waco. Aside from the gray and black water recycling and irrigation systems, the home features geothermal heating, active and passive solar energy, and a rainwater collection system with a 40,gallon underground cistern. The purpose of the cistern and a separate gray water system is for surface irrigation of fruit trees. The black water system features over gallons of pre-treatment and equalization tanks which meter close to a GPD Hoot Aerobic System.

The effluent leaves the aerobic system through a Polylok Effluent Filter and enters a recirculating media filter, which acts like a sand filter. The effluent passes through a unique medium several times prior to discharge from the filter, where it passes through yet another media filter before entering the pump tank. The effluent leaves the recirculating filter and is stored in a pump tank.

The Hoot Control Center operates the Lighthouse Beacon Filtration System. The filter not only performs effluent filtration, but automatically back-flushes and performs scheduled field flush cycles as well. The effluent is filtered through the 3-dimensional, micron filter before being pumped feet away to a four-zone drip irrigation field. The drip tubing is Netafim Bioline. The pressure-compensating design ensures even distribution throughout the entire field.

The zones are automatically advanced each time the system doses, ensuring even distribution. If low levels of water usage are observed, the system can utilize just one zone to encourage plant growth. Further complicating the design was the system location. If the system was to gravity flow, it would require all the treatment equipment to be placed right out-side the bedroom of George and Laura, between them and their new 7-acre lake.

This proved to be unacceptable. The system needed both gray and black water lift stations from the main house to pump to the location of the equipment, over feet away behind the garage. The guest house gravity flows to the system. All of the controls are remotely mounted inside a specially designed utility room inside the middle of the garage.

Over two miles of wiring were used to complete the remote location project. Each tank has duplex pumps and a separate, independent alarm circuit that goes to an alarm system control panel. The system has the ability to remotely alert if one of the duplex pumps fails, latch to the next, then independently alert of a high water situation. This system is in every tank, and works even in the event of a power failure. The system is remotely monitored by an alarm company that can tell service personnel exactly what the problem is and a determination can be made if it requires immediate attention, or if a problem can wait until the next day.

For example, if one of the pumps in the recirculation system has failed, then it may not require immediate attention.

The Hoot systems, lift stations, and standard as well as custom tanks to complete the project were all pre-cast concrete, made by CPI of Waco, Texas. The incorporation of an innovative onsite wastewater strategy is a testament to the acceptance of onsite as a long-term treatment solution. The Elite Are The Most Paranoid Preppers Of All. Panicked super rich buying boltholes with private airstrips to escape if poor rise up.

The Nexus of Biofuels, Climate Change, and Human Health: The National Academies Press, The New Fight over Who Owns the Earth. Apparently they were desperate, since the proposed H. Such supply would equal the amount of fuel consumed daily by the U. The American people are looking to us for leadership. It doubles down on oil, and it doubles down on old, ineffective policies. We have seen this roadmap before.

This is a recycled version of a plan developed by the secretive Bush-Cheney Energy Task Force and pushed through Congress by Republicans while they were in office. The Bush administration and Congressional Republicans spent 8 years following this roadmap.

They pushed oil and gas drilling, onshore and offshore. They expedited permits and weakened environmental protections. They opposed efforts to increase fuel economy. They called for nuclear fuel reprocessing. They tried to greenwash proposals for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge by implying congressional appropriators could use royalty revenues to support renewable energy.

They pushed the dirtiest alternative and unconventional fuels, coal-to-liquids, oil shale, and tar sands. And where did this roadmap lead us? Energy prices soared, and carbon pollution increased. And we have become even more dependent on foreign oil. In the last year of the Bush administration the Energy Information Administration projected that our dependence on oil and oil imports would continue to rise year after year. And yet gas prices remain high. Increasing oil production is not going to solve our energy needs.

Even if we doubled our oil production, oil prices would still be set by world markets and leave us vulnerable to price shocks. It leads to the past. The technology to turn coal into liquid fuel has been around since World War II. Its problem is as it has always been: American entrepreneurs and inventors are using technology to unlock real energy solutions: For many reasons it is unlikely to help renewable energy, because of flaws in its reverse auction mechanism.

The bill does nothing on efficiency, which is the cheapest and most reliable new source of supply. It promotes the form of nuclear energy that risks putting nuclear bomb grade material into the hands of terrorists. It does nothing to develop carbon capture and storage, the technology that coal needs to remain a competitor in a carbon-constrained world. The rest of the world has been racing ahead over the last decade.

Our Nation has been blessed with great abundance of natural resources. Consider these astounding facts. ANWR potentially contains 10 billion barrels of oil, the Outer Continental Shelf is estimated to hold 85 billion barrels of oil and trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and over two trillion barrels of oil are held in oil shale deposits, more than are contained in all of the countries in the Middle East combined. Unbelievably, our government has chosen not to utilize these resources fully, despite the repeated promises to achieve energy independence by both Democrats and Republican administrations and Congresses alike.

But continued inaction is unacceptable with stubbornly high unemployment, lackluster economic growth, widespread unrest in the Middle East, and the prospect of escalating gas prices punishing American families. Nothing done by our government in the past 4 decades has actually helped to achieve the goal of energy independence, or for that matter, kept energy prices affordable for American families and businesses.

The reverse is true. The energy roadmap is not a radical alternative to current energy policy. That is, while we can all agree that we need a comprehensive approach, this approach must be market-based and gradual if we are to achieve true energy independence. The energy roadmap would lift restrictions on development and extraction of resources in ANWR and OCS. The roadmap recognizes that dependence on any one fuel source is dangerous and short-sighted.

Another component of the roadmap would establish or would mandate that reactors permits be granted by This bill would provide new, streamlined regulations and a system to manage the waste that will drive private sector investments in these facilities, which today are stalled as a result of red tape, lawsuits, and parochial concerns.

In your proposal you talk about licensing new nuclear plants in a relatively short time, by What I tried to achieve in drafting this legislation was to create a scenario where the Congress forces an administration to act one way or the other on Yucca Mountain and reprocessing and a whole host of issues, because as you know, it seems like every President, no matter if it is Republican or Democrat is—they are all for nuclear power yet nothing ever happens.

David Sandalow, Assistant Secretary for Policy and International Affairs at the U. The administration agrees with many of the goals of this bill. For example, the administration believes that facilitating the efficient responsible development of our oil and gas resources is a necessary component of energy security. We are working to expand cleaner sources of energy, including renewables like wind, solar, and geothermal, nuclear power, as well as clean coal and natural gas on public lands.

However, the administration has serious concerns with many provisions in this legislation. Department of the Interior and other involved agencies may have additional views on this legislation.

Many countries are moving aggressively to develop and deploy the clean energy technologies that the world will demand in the coming years and decades.

We must rev up the great American innovation machine to win the clean energy race and secure our future prosperity. To that end, President Obama has called for increased investments in clean energy research, development, and deployment.

A clean energy standard will provide a clear, long-term signal to industry to bring capital off the sidelines and into the clean energy sector. It will grow the domestic market for clean sources of energy, creating jobs, driving innovation, and enhancing national security.

And by drawing on a wide range of energy sources, including renewables, nuclear, clean coal, and natural gasit will give utilities the flexibility they need to meet our clean energy goals while protecting consumers in every region of the country. As the President said in his State of the Union address, investing in clean energy will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create thousands of new jobs here at home.

We are doing this through programs to make, for example, homes and buildings more energy efficient with a new Better Buildings Initiative. We are also developing new sources of wind, solar, and geothermal supporting the modernization of the electric grid and carbon capture and sequestration technologies. Department of the Navy.

As the Deputy Assistant Secretary I have been actively involved in assessing the policy, economic, technological, and environmental costs and benefits associated with the use of fossil fuels and alternative fuels. I and many members of my staff and colleagues have personally met with dozens of industry representatives of U. We have also met with government experts from DOE, the Department of Defense, Department—U. Department of Agriculture, NASA, EPA, and others.

So the perspective provided here today is drawn on these discussions and on contemporary studies and analysis on the topic of alternative fuels. Changing the way the United States uses, produces, and acquires energy is one of the central policy challenges that confront the Nation. As a military and as a country, we rely far too much on fossil fuels, far too much on foreign sources of oil.

This dependency degrades our national security and negatively impacts our economy. Our dependency on fossil fuels makes us more susceptible to price shocks, supply shocks, natural and man-made disasters, and, as we have recently seen, political unrest in countries halfway around the world. The challenges we face today are not just about what types of fuels we use or where and how those fuels are produced.

Clearly we must be more efficient in the fuels that we use. The best barrel of oil is the barrel of oil we do not use. The challenge we face in the Navy today is the ships we have today, the 3, aircraft are largely the ones we are going to have tomorrow and into the future, so focusing on new sources of fuel, drop-in replacement fuel is critical. The more we replace for in sources of oil with more diverse, domestically-produced alternative fuels the better we are as a military and the better we are as a Nation.

How one successfully accomplishes that objective is where the debate lies, and it is a topic that the Department of the Navy has a perspective. It has recently suggested before this committee that the best near-term approach to meet the Department of Defense fuel needs is essentially a coal-derived or a mixture of coal-derived and biomass Fischer-Tropsch fuels.

Fischer-Tropsch is a thermo-chemical conversion process invented and developed in pre-World War II Germany to convert resources such as coal, natural gas, and biomass to fuel oil. In this country given the enormous quantities of biomass required and its relative limited availability at the scales required to run a Fischer-Tropsch or an FT plant, biomass as a long-term feedstock is typically not considered.

In our ongoing dialogue with industry, venture capital, and the equity communities, one thing is clear. These are companies new and old, some are small businesses, and some are now publicly traded. These companies represent the type of innovation and spirit needed to meet the energy demands of the future.

In conclusion, a robust easter trading laws australia drop-in biofuels market is an essential element of our national energy security. Energy security for the Nation requires unrestricted, uninterrupted access to affordable energy sources to power our economy and our military.

Traditional fossil-fuel based petroleum derived from crude oil has an increasingly challenging market and supply constraints.

Chief among these is limited, unevenly distributed, and concentrated global sources of supply.

Screening of the Shares in the Stock Market by Sh Hacene Chebbani

Advanced biofuels that use domestic, renewable feedstock provide a secure alternative that reduces the risks associated with petroleum dependence. Sandalow, you are Assistant Secretary for Policy and International Affairs at DOE, and you know as well as any of us that we are utilizing about 20 million barrels of oil a day here in the U.

And sincewhen Jimmy Carter was President, and the big push was made, we have got to be less dependent on foreign oil. But you have probably studied this even more than I have since you are head of policy. What is your realistic appraisal on our ability to significantly reduce the amount of oil that we are buying from the Middle East and other countries, and what kind of timeframe from your analysis do you think is realisti.

I think the ability of this country to meet any great challenge is extraordinary and I believe that if we set our minds to it that we can reduce our dependence on oil, reduce our dependence on imported oil, and we can do it by following a number of different pathways. I do believe that electric vehicles have tremendous potential, and by the way, not just to reduce our dependence on oil but also to create jobs in this country.

You said a couple of things that were rather interesting. It certainly is a realistic and growing alternative for us, literally and figuratively. I mean, it is one that we are seeing— today we are aware of a facility in the—in Texas, for example, that is capable of alternative fuels, bio-based alternative fuels, 90 million gallons per year, and claiming at competitive prices with petroleum.

So we are seeing that. In your opening you made statements and suggestions about making the Navy vehicles more energy efficient, and of course, you also then mentioned that the major users of fuel are ships and planes.

How do you make them more fuel efficient? How do you get better air miles per gallon for your planes and ocean miles for your ships? We are making them more efficient, and the way you do that in surface vessels as well as aircraft, we are putting propeller coatings on ships to be silkier in the water, better able to float through the water.

We are also putting coatings on the stern flaps of many of our ships, where it is economically justified in the lifespan of those platforms, as they go through their dry docking procedures.

We are putting coatings on our aircraft as well. We have a program in shipping called INCON, which is a way for the skipper of the ship to plot out their course in a more efficient w. I think we are very comfortable with the program that we are on, and we feel that that is the best near-term solution for the Department of Navy is one that is focused on alternative biofuels. The challenges with coal to liquids, as has been mentioned before, it is a technology that has been around since pre- World War II Germany.

Sandalow, the bill before us purports to be a roadmap to our energy future, but it omits key policies that many recognize are critically important. For example, it does not even mention energy efficiency. It also fails to mention technologies that show so much promise and are just now beginning to be commercialized like electric vehicles. Instead it seems to be a proposal to return to the energy policies of the Bush administration with a focus on drilling in the Arctic Refuge and the Outer Continental Shelf.

I will be focusing my remarks today on the policy implications of sections of H. The United States has enormous oil shale [ my comment: But getting a useful fuel learn online stock trading for beginners this resource is technically complex, requiring temperatures that are much higher than those used in processing Canadian oil sands.

That oil shale belongs to all of us. The public value is potentially tens of trillions of dollars. But reaping that public benefit, not to mention the energy security benefits of domestic alternative fuels production, requires the development of a commercial oil shale industry capable of producing a few million barrels per day.

That level of production should be the long-term strategic goal for oil shale. We are talking about a tremendous amount of industrial activity, especially when we consider supporting infrastructure within a very small area. Extensive measures will be required to prevent serious adverse ecological and social economic impacts and to protect the quality of the Colorado River. My analysis of the oil shale provisions of H. There are a few areas where Congress may need to provide direction so that the Nation can realize the full opportunity that oil shale offers.

The critical step is obtaining early production experience. Until we understand the performance of the process options, beat the odds in forex trading igrok is not productive to engage in establishing a detailed, regulatory structure for a large, multi-million barrel-per-day commercial industry.

You should require that the Departments axa philippines stock market Energy and the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency cooperatively develop and publish a federal plan for promoting the construction and operation of a limited number of pioneer commercial plants.

Finally, require the preparation of plans for conducting critical environmental and ecological research and an assessment of the carbon management options in the vicinity of the federally managed oil shale lands. I am concerned with the slow progress towards gaining commercial experience in coal-derived liquids production in the United States.

However, I do not believe that government ownership of alternative fuels production facilities is a credible solution. If the Congress is interested in using the purchasing power of the Defense Department to promote early commercial experience, I suggest providing the Department with the authority to make long- term agreements to guarantee a minimum sale price to the benefit of the alternative fuel producer in the event that oil prices are low.

In return for this benefit the Department would negotiate a maximum purchase price that would be lower than world oil prices in the event that world oil prices pass a specified threshold. The United States has plenty of resources. I agree with what the Congressman is saying. If we are going to develop more clean energy and use technologies that are now commercially available and coming down rapidly in cost like electric cars, we need to have a resource strategy, and it has to be domesticated more than it is today.

But the tables and figures give you an idea of subsidies and costs, but I left many out. Read the report if you want to know more. Table 1 japan stock market nikkei chart the various ways businesses are subsidized by the government.

Full text of "NEW"

Revenue from Federal Excise Taxes Targeting or Related to Fossil Energy, Fiscal Year — Revenue from Royalty and Other Payments for Federal Oil, Gas, and Coal Leases, Fiscal Year Federal energy policy since the s has focused primarily on ensuring a secure supply of energy while protecting the environment. The federal government supports and intervenes in U. GAO was asked to provide information on federal activities and their influence on U.

This report provides information on U. It also provides information on other federal activities that may have influenced aspects of U. GAO analyzed DOE historical data on energy production and consumption, reviewed studies and reports from federal agencies and governmental organizations on federal energy-related activities, and analyzed data on federal spending programs and tax incentives, among other things. Several major factors, including federal activities, influenced U.

Examples of these factors include the following:. Advances in drilling technologies enabled economic production of natural gas and crude oil from shale and similar geological formations. These advances led to increases in domestic production of natural gas and crude oil beginning around and contributed to declines in domestic prices of natural gas, as gun stocks for savage model 110 as lower prices for crude oil in some regions of the United States.

In addition, the federal government provided tax incentives encouraging production for oil and gas producers, resulting in billions of dollars in estimated federal revenue losses. Moreover, binary options for android because of lower natural gas prices, domestic coal production decreased in recent years as utilities switched from coal to natural gas for electricity generation.

Declining prices for a competing energy source—natural gas—may have led to decreases in the production and consumption of nuclear energy in recent years. Federal activities may have also influenced this trend.

For example, the Department of Energy DOE announced plans to terminate its work to license a disposal facility for certain nuclear power plant waste increating uncertainty about how this waste would be managed. This uncertainty may have provided a disincentive for some nuclear power operators to stay in the market or expand capacity because of the cost of storing nuclear waste. Federal tax credits for ethanol and federal policies requiring forex t nagar use of ethanol in transportation fuels were major factors influencing an 8-fold increase in the production and consumption of ethanol from to State policies requiring the use of renewable energy in electricity production, as well as federal outlays and tax credits for renewable energy producers, were major factors influencing a fold increase and a fold increase in production and consumption of electricity from wind and solar energy, respectively, from to The federal government strengthened energy efficiency standards for vehicle fuel economy and consumer products such as appliances and lighting, provided electricity and transmission services to customers through its power marketing administrations and the Tennessee Valley Authority, and spent billions of dollars helping low-income households cover heating and cooling costs.

In addition, the federal government supported research and development targeting a wide range of energy-related technologies at government- owned laboratories and through funding to universities and other research entities.

In pursuing the goals of a secure energy supply and a healthy environment, the federal government subsidizes or otherwise provides support to energy companies and consumers. The federal government also intervenes in energy markets in other ways, such as setting standards and requirements through laws and regulations that may not be directed at specific sources of energy but that nonetheless may influence the types and quantities of energy that are produced or consumed.

For example, the federal government promotes energy efficiency through appliance efficiency standards that are written into law and regulates pollutants that are created in the production and consumption of energy.

See CRS, Energy Tax Policy: Historical Perspectives on and Current Status of Energy Tax Expenditures Washington, D. May 2, and Tax-Favored Financing for Renewable Energy Resources and Energy Efficiency Washington, D. The federal government has established a number of important energy policies over the past decade, and several federal organizations have studied some of the costs associated with these policies. For example, Congress passed several key laws affecting energy producers and consumers over the past 10 years, including the Energy Policy Act of EPActthe Energy Independence and Security Act of EISAand the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of Recovery Act.

In general, these reports focused on costs associated with federal energy-related tax incentives, outlays, or loan or loan guarantee programs.

We also reviewed reports and studies from federal agencies and government organizations, including CBO, CRS, DOE, Department of the Treasury TreasuryEIA, congressional Joint Committee on Taxation JCTOffice of Management and Tma slope forex indicator OMBand U.

Department of Agriculture USDA. To identify these reports and studies, we conducted searches of various databases, such as ProQuest and PolicyFile, and asked agency officials to recommend studies. In addition, we reviewed and analyzed data and documentation on outlays, royalties collected, excise taxes collected, tax expenditures, forgone royalties, and federal credit programs collected from DOE, Department of the Interior InteriorJCT, OMB, and Treasury.

The United States consumes energy from three major categories of Energy fossil, nuclear, and renewable. Inthe United States consumed over 97 quadrillion British thermal units Btu 7 of energy, including over 12 quadrillion Btus of imported energy, according to EIA data.

As shown in figure 1, most of this energy or about 82 percent came from fossil energy sources. The rest came from renewable and nuclear energy sources. Btus are used to measure and compare the energy content of different energy sources. A Btu can be defined as the quantity of heat required to raise the temperature of one pound of water by one degree Fahrenheit.

One quadrillion is equal to one thousand trillion. In physical terms, one quadrillion Btus is equivalent to the energy contained in million barrels of crude oil, which is about how much petroleum the United States consumes in 9 days.

There are four major sectors of the U. End-use sectors obtain energy from different combinations of sources. The industrial sector mainly consumes natural gas and electricity but also uses some petroleum products as feedstock. The transportation sector mainly consumes gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel; it also consumes biofuels and natural gas, as well as small amounts of electricity. The residential and commercial sectors mainly consume energy from electricity and natural gas but also use some petroleum products.

As described london stock exchange announcements, every sector consumes electricity produced by the electric power sector, which takes electricity generated from fossil, nuclear, or renewable energy and delivers it to the end-use sectors through transmission and distribution lines.

As shown in figure 2, the industrial sector consumed the largest share of energy 32 percent or Not all of the energy produced is available for consumption at the point do canadian gold medalists get money end use, mainly because energy losses occur whenever energy is converted from one form to another.

For example, coal-fueled power plants produce electricity by burning coal in a where to get intraday stock data to heat water and produce steam. The steam, at tremendous pressure and temperature, flows into a turbine, which spins a generator to produce electricity. During this process, the burning of coal produces heat energy, some of which converts water into steam. In turn, some of the energy in the steam is converted into electrical energy.

At each point in this process, some of the original energy contained in the coal is lost. See EIA, Monthly Energy Review Washington, D. The federal government supports or intervenes in Israel currency rates in indian rupees.com. The federal government provides some goods or services directly—that is, through a government agency—rather than providing funds to another entity to provide these goods or services.

For example, the federal government may produce and sell electricity generated at federally owned facilities and produce reports and information on energy markets, among other things. Government provision of goods or services may be deemed necessary to address certain circumstances, such as economic inequalities futures online trading bloomberg segments of the public or a need for a good or service considered unlikely to be met by the private sector.

Such activities may affect energy producers and consumers in different ways. For example, production and sales of electricity generated at federally-owned facilities may involve energy sources and prices that differ from those of electricity produced and sold by private market participants.

By assuming some or all of the costs associated with risks for certain energy activities, the government may make those activities used cars stockport ford less expensive, thus providing an incentive to pursue those activities.

For example, if the federal government assumes the risk of default on a loan to a manufacturer of turbines that generate electricity from wind energynonfederal lenders may offer a lower how to make more coins in farmville rate to the manufacturer than they would in the absence of the federal guarantee.

Lowering the costs of capital for developers could result in certain projects being financed that would otherwise not be built. The federal government directly provides or outlays funds for different purposes. For example, federal agencies purchase energy for their buildings, as well as vehicles and fuel for these vehicles. The federal government collects revenues using different methods. One prominent method is through the tax system, which includes personal income taxes, corporate income taxes, and excise taxes based on the value of goods and services sold, among other types of taxes.

The federal government also collects revenues associated with its management of federal lands. It also has jurisdiction and control over the outer continental shelf, which includes about 1. In exchange, the government generally collects revenues, including payments in the form of rents and bonuses, which are required to secure and maintain a lease, and royalties, which are based on the value of the minerals that are extracted.

However, the federal government may choose to forgo certain revenues. These preferences can have the same effects as government spending programs; hence the name tax expenditures. Tax expenditures may affect the behavior of energy producers and consumers by providing an incentive to engage in certain types of activities. For some tax expenditures, forgone revenues can be of the same magnitude or larger than related federal spending for some mission areas. The pips points forex continental shelf consists of submerged federal lands, generally extending seaward between 3 and nautical miles off the coastline.

EIA estimated how fx options are priced 28 percent of all fossil energy produced in the United States in was obtained on federal lands including submerged lands in the outer continental shelf.

In addition to forgoing tax revenues, the federal government may choose to forgo revenues associated with its leases of federal lands and waters. For example, the Outer Continental Shelf Deep Water Royalty Relief Act of mandated royalty relief for oil and gas leases issued in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico from to Ames Laboratory in Iowa, Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois, Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York, Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Washington, and Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory in New Jersey.

Commercialization includes efforts to transition technologies to commercial applications by bridging the gap between research and demonstration activities and venture capital funding and marketing activities. Deployment includes efforts that facilitate or achieve widespread use of technologies in the commercial market.

For example, as we found in Februarythe Department of Defense and USDA implemented numerous initiatives to help develop renewable energy technologies. Federal Agencies Implement Hundreds of Initiatives, GAO Washington, D. Federal Initiatives Supported Similar Technologies and Goals but Had Key Differences, GAO Washington, D.

These advances led to increases in domestic production of natural gas starting around and contributed to declines in domestic prices of natural gas starting around As domestic production rose and prices declined, domestic consumption increased, imports of natural gas decreased, and companies began taking steps to gain approval to export liquefied natural gas. These advances led to increases in the domestic production of crude oil beginning aroundreversing a decades-long trend of decreasing production.

Global crude oil prices generally increased between andthe largest, sustained price increase since comparable data were available. Increased domestic production contributed to lower prices for some regions of the country; however, the impact of increased domestic crude oil production on global crude oil prices was likely small.

Imports of crude oil decreased beginning around as domestic production displaced imported crude oil to U. As domestic consumption of petroleum products generally decreased beginning aroundexports of petroleum products mostly diesel fuel increased. Natural gas and crude oil are found in a variety of geological formations. Conventional natural gas and crude oil are found in deep, porous rock or reservoirs and can flow under natural pressure to the surface after drilling.

In contrast, the low permeability of some formations, including shale, means that natural gas and crude oil trapped in the formation cannot move easily within the rock.

Tight formations refer to low permeability formations that include shale as well as sandstones and carbonates. Due in part to lower prices of natural gas, the use of coal for electricity generation decreased in recent years as utilities switched to natural gas.

Domestic coal production decreased in recent years; however, coal exports increased as domestic consumption declined faster than domestic production. According to the studies and reports we reviewed, several major factors may have influenced U.

The year-to-year pattern of domestic production of natural gas fluctuated from through and then began to increase aroundaccording to Energy Information Administration EIA data, and as shown in figure 3.

Specifically, the United States produced about Domestic consumption of natural gas exceeded domestic production throughout the period, with the difference coming from imports, primarily from Canada. Natural gas is used by a number of sectors in the economy, most notably for electricity generation; for industrial use as a source of heat or as a feedstock for petrochemical production, among other things; for residential heating and other home uses; and for commercial heating and other uses.

Natural gas consumption for commercial use also increased, from about 3. Industrial and residential uses declined over the same period.

According to EIA data, natural gas withdrawals from shale formations increased from about 2 trillion cubic feet in to over 10 trillion cubic feet in The primary users of petroleum products in the United States are the transportation and industrial sectors, according to EIA data. As shown in figure 9, the transportation sector consumed the largest share of petroleum products in and at about 4. The industrial sector consumed the next largest share of petroleum products at about 1.

Some of these cost increases may be due to increases in coal transportation costs and declines in mine productivity during this period, according to EIA. Numerous Clean Air Act requirements apply to electricity generating units, including New Source Review, a permitting process established in Under New Source Review, owners of generating units must obtain a preconstruction permit that establishes emission limits and requires the use of certain emissions control technologies.

In general, the cost of complying with New Source Review requirements provided a disincentive for producing electricity from fossil energy sources. As we found in JuneEPA has investigated most coal-fired generating units at least once for compliance with New Source Review requirements sinceand has alleged noncompliance at more than half of the units it investigated.

According to our analysis of EPA data, these settlements will reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide by an estimated 1. The federal government assumed some risks related to fossil energy production and consumption from through For example, the federal government assumed financial risks associated with potential cleanup costs for some oil spills, and the federal government acquired billions of dollars worth of crude oil to hold in reserve in case of supply disruptions, as discussed below:.

Cleanup costs for oil spills. However, if the oil discharge what do aldi cashiers make the result of gross negligence or willful misconduct, or a violation of federal operation, safety, and construction regulations, then liability under the act is unlimited.

In addition, the act provides the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to pay for oil spill costs when the responsible party cannot or does not pay. Congress created the Strategic Petroleum Reserve infollowing the Arab oil embargo of toto help protect the U.

The reserve is owned by the federal government and operated by DOE. It can store up to million barrels of crude oil in salt caverns. The President has discretion to authorize release of oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to minimize significant supply disruptions. The assumption of liability by the federal government for some oil spills may have provided an incentive for oil production and consumption by potentially decreasing the overall cost associated with certain productionrelated activities.

For example, the liability limitations established under the Oil Pollution Act may have lowered costs for liability insurance or other insurance paid for by oil producers. However, the extent to which this trading binary options on how to works intervention influenced changes in petroleum or natural gas production or consumption is difficult to precisely measure.

Moreover, the fund—which is paid by oil producers—raises the cost forex tc producing oil by a small fraction, which may have a negative impact on oil production. See GAO, Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Actions Needed to Reduce Evolving but Uncertain Federal Financial Risks, GAO Washington, D. From throughthe federal government collected revenues through excise taxes and royalty payments related to fossil energy production and consumption while forgoing other related revenues through tax expenditures and royalty relief.

The federal excise tax rate on gasoline is Most revenues from these taxes are dedicated to the Highway Trust Fund, which was established by Congress in and is a major source of funding for various surface transportation programs.

Qualifying fuels include synthetic fuels such as coke or coke gas produced from coal, as well as gas produced from biomass, among other things. The tax code allows firms that extract oil, gas, or other minerals a deduction to recover their capital investment in a mineral reserve, which depreciates due to the physical and economic depletion or exhaustion as the mineral is recovered. There international forex traders association two methods of calculating this deduction: Cost depletion allows for the recovery of the actual capital investment—the costs of discovering, purchasing, and developing a mineral reserve—over the period during which the reserve produces income from the specified total recoverable units.

Under this method, the total deductions cannot exceed the original capital investment. Because eligible taxpayers must claim the higher of cost or percentage depletion, total deductions under percentage depletion may exceed the capital invested to acquire and develop the reserve.

The percentage depletion rate for oil and gas is 15 percent and is limited to average daily production of 1, barrels of oil, or its equivalent in gas, and only for wells located in the United States. Percentage depletion is available for independent producers and royalty owners but not for integrated producers. Firms engaged in the exploration and development of oil, gas, or geothermal properties have the option of expensing rather than capitalizing certain intangible drilling and development costs.

Intangible drilling and development costs are amounts paid by the operator for fuel, labor, repairs to drilling equipment, materials, hauling, and supplies. They are expenditures incidental to and necessary for drilling wells and preparing a site for the production of oil, gas, or geothermal energy. They include the cost to operators of any drilling or development work done by contractors under any form of contract.

No expiration under current law. Taxpayers may elect to expense 50 percent of the cost of qualified refinery property used to process liquid fuel from crude oil and other qualified fuels. The deduction is allowed in the taxable year in which the refinery property is placed in service.

The remaining 50 percent of the cost is recovered using a year recovery period. Eligible refineries must have a binding construction contract entered trading foreign currency wiki before January 1, As of October 3,qualified refineries include those used in the refining of liquid fuels directly from shale or tar sands. The tax code generally treats a publicly traded partnership—i.

However, a notable exception occurs if 90 percent of the gross income of a partnership is passive-type income, such as interest, dividends, real property rents, gains from the disposition of real property, and similar income or gains.

EconPapers: Alexandru Todea

In these cases, the partnership is exempt from corporate level taxation, thus allowing it to claim pass-through status for tax purposes. In general, publicly traded partnerships favor the owners of publicly traded partnerships whose main source of qualifying income is from energy related activities. In contrast to an otherwise similar corporation, the owners of such a publicly traded partnership are not subject to a corporate level tax.

Taxpayers may claim a credit equal to 15 percent of enhanced oil recovery costs. An enhanced oil recovery project is generally a project that involves the use of one or more tertiary recovery methods to increase the amount of recoverable domestic crude oil. Qualified costs include 1 amounts active stocks premarket for depreciable tangible property; 2 intangible drilling and development expenses; 3 tertiary injectant expenses; and 4 construction costs for certain Alaskan natural gas treatment facilities.

This tax preference is currently phased out due to high crude oil prices. Owners of coal mining rights who lease their property usually receive royalties on mined coal. If the owners are individuals, these royalties can be taxed at a lower individual capital gains tax rate rather than at the higher individual top tax rate.

An investment tax credit is available for selected types of advanced coal technologies. Qualifying taxpayers may be eligible for a 30 percent credit.

Prior toinvestments in pollution control equipment for pre coal-fired plants were amortizable over 5 years. However, under the Energy Policy Act ofinvestments in pollution control equipment made in connection with post power plants qualify for amortization over seven years rather than five years.

Qualifying pollution control equipment means any technology that is installed in or filetype pdf stock market development android a qualifying facility to reduce air emissions of any pollutant regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency EPA under the Clean Air Episodic dependencies in central and eastern europe stock markets.

The tax code provides a cents-per gallon excise tax credit for certain alternative fuels used as fuel in a motor vehicle, motor boat, or airplane and a cents-per gallon credit for alternative fuels mixed with a traditional fuel gasoline, diesel or kerosene for use as a fuel.

Examples of qualifying fuels include liquefied petroleum gas, compressed or liquefied natural gas, liquefied hydrocarbons derived from biomass, and liquefied hydrogen. If excise tax credits exceeded excise tax liability, the credits could be claimed as income tax credits or received as payments. Excise tax credits for liquefied hydrogen fuel will expire after September 30, Geological and geophysical costs — exploratory costs associated with determining the precise location and potential size of a mineral deposit — are amortized by independent producers over 2 years and by major integrated oil companies over 7 years.

In general, a working interest is an interest with respect to an oil and gas property that is burdened with the cost of development and operation of the property. The exception allows owners of working interests to offset their losses from passive activities against active income.

Under normal rules, passive losses that remain after being netted against passive income can only be carried forward to apply against passive income in future years. The exception from passive loss limitation provision on oil and natural gas properties applies principally to partnerships and individuals rather than corporations.

This categorization permits the deduction of losses in oil and gas projects against other active income earned without limitation and is believed to act as an incentive to induce investors to finance oil and gas projects. Both credit amounts are adjusted for inflation after A cooperative that qualifies as a small business refiner may elect to pass this deduction through to its owners.

Costs qualifying for the deduction are those costs paid or incurred forex profit multiplier review respect to any facility of a small business refiner during the period beginning on January 1,and ending on the earlier of the date that is margin privileges or options trading year after the date on which the taxpayer must comply with the applicable EPA regulations or December 31, Stick rpg stocks market tax code provides a tax credit for income taxes paid to foreign countries, which helps to protect taxpayers who earn income abroad from double taxation.

In general, for federal income tax purposes, taxpayers must account open position forex trading inventories if the production, purchase, or sale of merchandise is a material income-producing factor to the taxpayer.

Because the most recently acquired or produced units are deemed to be sold first, cost of goods sold is valued at the most recent costs; the effect of cost fluctuations is reflected in the ending inventory, which is valued at the historical costs rather than the most recent costs. When costs are rising, the LIFO method results in a higher measure of cost of goods sold and, consequently, a lower measure of income when compared to the FIFO method.

The work from home jobs in ooty gain experienced vartan stockbrokers birmingham the business in its inventory is generally not reflected in income, but rather, remains in ending inventory as a deferred gain until a future building your own forex robot in which sales exceed purchases.

However, neither JCT nor OMB quantified how much of its revenue estimate is related to fossil fuel production. Section of the American Jobs Creation Act of allows a deduction of qualified production activities from taxable income of 3 percent in6 percent inand 9 percent thereafter. The deduction cannot exceed total taxable income of the firm and is limited to 50 percent of wages related to the qualified activity.

This provision lowers the effective tax rate on the favored property, in most cases when fully make money online infomercial in, from the top corporate tax rate of 35 percent to Production property is property manufactured, produced, grown, or extracted good friday alcohol laws south australia the United States.

Eligible property also includes domestic film, energy, and construction, and engineering and architectural services. For the latter, the services must be produced in the United States for construction projects located in the United States. The law specifically excludes the sale of food and beverages prepared at a retail establishment, the transmission and distribution of electricity, gas, and water, and receipts from property leased, licensed, or rented to a related party.

The benefits are also allowed for Puerto Rico for through Oil extraction is permanently limited to a 6 percent deduction. Because excise taxes raised prices on motor fuels, they provided a disincentive for consuming such fuels.

Compared with other countries within the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United States has one of the lowest excise tax rates for motor fuels. Because royalty payments raised costs associated with the development and sales of fossil energy, they provided a disincentive to produce and consume fossil energy. However, we cannot say to what extent the federal royalties provided a disincentive for oil and gas development on federal lands relative to other places because oil and gas companies that lease federal lands look for the best economic terms across a wide range of land owners such as state, private, federal, and international owners.

We found in that studies of many resource owners indicated that the federal government collected less in total revenues than most other resource owners,41 but we do not have more recent comparisons of revenues collected. Tax expenditures and royalty relief. In general, tax expenditures and royalty relief provided incentives for fossil energy production by lowering the israel currency rates in indian rupees.com associated with the exploration and development of oil and gas resources.

As shown in figure 18, uranium oxide prices have increased considerably from toaccording to EIA data. The federal government established or strengthened a number of standards and requirements related to nuclear energy from through For example, after the Fukushima incident, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC accepted 12 recommendations from a task force that NRC had convened in to review its processes and regulations and determine whether lessons learned from the accident could inform its oversight processes.

The task force recommended that NRC require licensees to reevaluate and upgrade seismic and flooding protection of reactors and related equipment, strengthen capabilities at all reactors to withstand loss of electrical power, and take other actions binary option signal provider better protect their plants for a low- probability, high-impact event.

Federal activities related to the Yucca Mountain repository may have provided a disincentive episodic dependencies in central and eastern europe stock markets nuclear energy production and consumption. This uncertainty may have provided a disincentive for some nuclear plant operators to stay in the market or expand capacity because storing nuclear waste is expensive.

The federal government assumed certain risks related to nuclear energy production and consumption from through For example, under the Price-Anderson Act, the federal government limited the liability of nuclear plant operators in the case of a nuclear accident. In addition, the federal government assumed risks related to nuclear energy production and consumption by establishing a loan guarantee program.

Specifically, Section of the Energy Policy Act of authorized DOE to issue loan guarantees for projects that avoid, reduce, or sequester greenhouse gases using new or significantly improved best forex cycle indicator. These federal activities provided an incentive for nuclear energy production and consumption by decreasing the overall cost associated with certain production-related activities.

For example, according to the Congressional Budget Office CBOthe Price- Anderson Act provides a benefit to nuclear plant operators by reducing their cost of carrying liability insurance. Without the liability limitations provided by the Price- Anderson Act, the cost of obtaining insurance for nuclear power plant operators might have been higher.

Consequently, the act may have write articles and earn money in india higher levels of nuclear power production in the United States between and than would have otherwise occurred because the lower cost provided an incentive for increased production and consumption.

The insurance coverage has two layers: For more information, see GAO, DOE Loan Programs: DOE Should Fully Develop Its Loan Monitoring Function and Evaluate Its Effectiveness, GAO Washington, D. The federal government incurred revenue losses related to nuclear energy production and consumption from through Under the special tax rate for nuclear decommissioning reserve funds, taxpayers e.

The funds receive special tax treatment: Amounts actually spent on decommissioning are deductible in the year they are made.

The studies and reports we reviewed indicated that several federal activities had a major impact on the increase in ethanol production and consumption—most notably federal tax expenditures and requirements for the use of ethanol in transportation fuel. Regarding federal tax expenditures, alcohol fuel credits provided a cent-per-gallon tax credit to gasoline suppliers who blend ethanol with gasoline.

In recent years, the United States also increased imports of ethanol from Brazil to meet renewable fuel requirements for advanced biofuels. Brazilian ethanol is made from sugarcane and qualifies as an advanced biofuel, while domestic ethanol produced from corn does not.

The cents-per-gallon tax credit is also referred to as the volumetric ethanol excise tax credit. The federal government also provided tax credits and a related excise tax credit for biodiesel. See appendix VI for more information on the alcohol fuel credits and biodiesel credits.

The alcohol fuel credits generally expired inbut some taxpayers were still able to claim the credit in and due in part to the timing and method of taxpayer filing and Internal Revenue Service processing, according to Treasury officials. In our previous work, we found that the alcohol fuel credits were important in establishing and expanding the domestic ethanol industry. Potential Effects and Challenges of Required Increases in Production and Use, GAO Washington, D.

Requirements for federal fleets to use ethanol and other alternative fuels. EPAct generally requires that all such vehicles be fueled with alternative fuel. Another factor likely affecting ethanol production and consumption from through was the price of ethanol relative to the prices of corn and gasoline, according to U.

Department of Agriculture USDA research. Ethanol prices generally increased from throughaccording to USDA data, as shown in figure Because ethanol is used as a gasoline substitute, and because nearly all ethanol produced in the United States comes from corn, the relationship between prices of ethanol, gasoline, and corn is complex. At the same time, about 16 and 17 percent of gasoline price variation could be attributed to ethanol and corn markets conditions, respectively.

Wind is transformed into electricity using wind turbines. In terms of the electricity generated from wind turbines, domestic production and consumption of wind energy increased from 5. The studies and reports we reviewed indicated that the increase in wind and solar energy production and consumption resulted from a number of major factors—most notably state policies and federal activities, as well as technological advances.

Regarding state activities, many states have created policies known as renewable portfolio standards that encouraged the production and use of renewable energy. These state policies generally require a percentage of electricity sold or generated in the state to come from eligible renewable resources, including wind and solar energy. According to EIA, 29 states and the District of Columbia had enforceable renewable portfolio standards or similar laws as of October. According to the Congressional Research Service CRSstate policies have been the primary creator of demand for wind projects.

These tax credits and grants, which are described below, supported wind and solar energy production by lowering the costs associated with production and providing an incentive to those firms engaged in the construction and operation of wind and solar energy projects. This credit provided a year, inflation-adjusted income tax credit based on the amount of renewable energy produced at wind and other qualified facilities.

The amount of the credit varied depending upon the source. The value of the credit was 2. This credit, which has periodically expired and then been extended, is available to facilities for which construction began before January 1, This credit, which has not expired, provides an income tax credit for business investments in solar systems and small wind turbines, among other things.

Investments in solar and small wind turbine systems qualify for a 30 percent tax credit. In addition, temporary provisions enacted under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of Recovery Act allow taxpayers to claim this credit for property that otherwise would have qualified for the production tax credit. Section of the Recovery Act, as amended, allows taxpayers eligible for the production or investment tax credit to receive a payment from the Treasury in lieu of a tax credit.

This program, which is still available in some cases, applies to projects placed in service during, oror afterward if construction began on the property during the specific years and the property is placed in service by a credit termination date e.

Revenue Losses and Outlays Associated with the Production Tax Credit, Investment Tax Credit, and Section Program, Fiscal Year — In addition to these tax credits, the studies and reports we reviewed indicated that the federal government provided incentives for the production and consumption of wind and solar energy in other important ways, including through the following activities:.

GAO analysis of DOE and. Office of Management and Budget data. GAO aThe number of guarantees and loans refers to all guarantees and loans that were issued, including three that were withdrawn or deobligated before any funds were drawn on the loans. They include the full amount of the loans partially guaranteed through the Financial Institution Partnership Program and do not include capitalized interest. As a result of required federal purchases of electricity from renewable sources, the federal government provided incentives to produce wind and solar energy.

In addition, through the loan guarantee program described above, the federal government assumed risks of defaults on loans to firms engaged in developing wind and solar energy projects. These federal actions had the potential to lower the costs for some of these projects.

Such lower costs could have led to certain projects being financed that otherwise may not have been developed. Table 5 provides descriptions of the three federal tax expenditures we identified in appendix V as targeting or related to ethanol, wind energy, and solar energy, as well as four additional federal tax expenditures we identified as more broadly targeting or related to renewable energy.

The table also provides information from the Department of the Treasury Treasury on tax expenditures that will or have expired, in full or in part, due to an expiration of legislative authority or some other expiration under the law as of the fall ofas well as on tax expenditures that currently have no expiration. In addition, the table provides information on revenue loss estimates from Treasury unless otherwise specified.

Alcohol fuel credits including related excise tax credit Description The tax code provides three income tax credits for alcoholbased motor fuels: The alcohol mixture credit is typically claimed as an instant excise tax credit referred to as the volumetric ethanol excise tax credit.

This credit is limited to the first 15 million gallons of annual alcohol production for each small producer, defined as one with an annual production capacity of fewer than 60 million gallons. In addition, the tax code provides an income tax credit for cellulosic biofuels. In the case of cellulosic biofuel that is alcohol, the credit amount is reduced.

Most of these provisions expired as of December 31, ; the tax credit for cellulosic biofuels expired as of December 31, Qualified energy sources include wind, solar energy, geothermal energy, closed-loop and open-loop biomass, small irrigation power, municipal solid waste, qualified hydropower production, and marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy sources.

The credit amount in was 2. The credit amount is based on the value of 1. This credit is generally available for 10 years, beginning on the date when the facility is placed in service. For facilities placed in service during, andtaxpayers could claim an investment tax credit or Section cash payment in lieu of receiving the production tax credit. The tax code provides three income tax credits for biodiesel: The mixtures tax credit may be claimed as an instant excise tax credit against the In addition, the tax code provides an income tax credit of 10 cents per gallon for the first 15 million gallons of agri-biodiesel produced by small agri-biodiesel producers each year.

Small agri- biodiesel producers are defined as those with a production capacity less than 60 million gallons per year. The tax code provides an income tax credit for business investments in solar, fuel cells, small wind turbines, geothermal systems, microturbines, and combined heat and power. Solar, fuel cell, and small wind turbine investments qualify for a 30 percent credit. The tax credit for investments in geothermal systems, microturbines, and combined heat and power is 10 percent.

Provisions enacted as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of Recovery Act allow 1 taxpayers to elect to claim this credit for property that otherwise would have qualified for the production tax credit and 2 taxpayers eligible for this credit to receive a Section payment from the Treasury in lieu of tax credits.

Advanced energy property credite Description A taxpayer is allowed to recover, through annual depreciation deductions, the cost of certain property used in a trade or business or for the production of income.

The tax code provides a 5-year recovery period for certain renewable energy equipment, including solar, wind, geothermal, fuel cell, combined heat and power, and microturbine property. However, the Economic Stimulus Act of included a 50 percent first-year bonus depreciation provision for a wide range of eligible properties including renewable energy systems. This provision was extended by the Recovery Act, and by the Creating Small Business Jobs Act of Bonus depreciation was further extended through by the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act ofwith a percent deduction allowed for property acquired after September 8,and before January 1, The American Taxpayer Relief Act of extended 50 percent expensing for qualifying property purchased and placed in service before January 1, The 50 percent bonus depreciation narrowed any tax differences between eligible assets based on cost recovery provisions, and the percent bonus depreciation eliminated those differences altogether under the provision for allowing a full write-off of asset acquisition costs.

The Recovery Act established a 30 percent tax credit for qualified investments in advanced energy property. Advanced energy projects that may qualify for the tax credit include those that reequip, expand, or establish eligible manufacturing facilities. Facilities that produce the following types of property may qualify: The tax credits were competitively awarded by the Department of Energy DOE and Treasury.

Taxpayers receiving this credit cannot also claim the investment tax credit. Expiration information Property had to be placed in service by January 1, or January 1, for certain other assets to quality for bonus depreciation. The 5-year recovery period for certain solar equipment will expire on December 31, New clean renewable energy bonds help tax-exempt entities finance capital expenditures for new facilities that produce electricity from renewable sources.

Bond holders receive tax credits at 70 percent of the tax credit interest rate, in lieu of interest payments. These bonds may be issued by a public power provider, a cooperative electric company, a governmental body, a clean renewable energy bond lender or a not-for-profit electric utility that has received a loan or loan guarantee under the Rural Electrification Act. In Marchprovisions included in the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act allowed issuers of clean renewable energy bonds and other qualified tax-credit bonds to receive a direct payment from the Treasury instead of providing tax credits to bondholders.

Table 6 provides a description of the federal program we identified in appendix V as targeting or related to wind and solar energy, as well as two additional federal programs we identified as more broadly targeting or related to renewable energy. The table also provides information reported by the Office of Management and Budget OMB on outlays.

Section of the Recovery Act, as amended, established a program to provide payments to eligible applicants who place specified energy property related to renewable energy, among other things in service for use in a trade or business. Applicants could take the payment in lieu of either a production or investment tax credit.

These payments provide an incentive for investment in property for electricity production, particularly those applicants without sufficient tax liability to utilize a nonrefundable tax credit. The program provided payments for eligible energy projects placed in service during, oror after if construction began on the property during, or and the property is placed in service by a certain date known as the credit termination date e.

The amount of each payment depends on the number of producers participating in the program, the amount of advanced biofuels being produced, and the amount of funds available. The Repowering Assistance program, authorized under the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act ofprovides payments to biorefineries to replace fossil fuels with renewable biomass as a means to produce heat and power. To be eligible, the biorefineries must be located in a rural area and must have been in existence as of June 18, Payments are available for periods of up to 3 years.

Issuers of clean renewable energy bonds can choose to receive a direct payment from the federal government in lieu of the tax credit for bondholders.

Another GAO report discusses the energy-water nexus. Interdependent systems are more vulnerable — climate change, water, or energy resource issues can affect other systems and damage them as well.

While cheap and plentiful oil remains, these problems are fixed, temporarily hiding the true depth of decay our systems are I, with climate change increasing the speed and magnitude of failing infrastructure further. USGCRP estimates that another 0. According to assessments by the National Research Council NRC and the U.

Global Change Research Program USGCRPU. Climate changes are projected to affect infrastructure throughout all major stages of the energy supply chain, thereby increasing the risk of disruptions.

According to DOE, the energy supply chain has grown increasingly complex and interdependent. In total, the U. Collectively, this infrastructure enables the United States to meet industrial, commercial, and residential demands, as well as to support transportation and communication networks.

Most energy infrastructure was engineered and built for our past or current climate and may not be resilient to continued and expected increases in the magnitude and frequency of extreme weather events and overall continued weather and climate change in the long-term.

Further, this infrastructure is aging, according to DOE. For example, most of the U. Changes in climate have the potential to further strain these already aging components by forcing them to operate outside of the ranges for which they were designed.

DOE reported that aging infrastructure is more susceptible than newer assets to the hurricane-related hazards of storm surge, flooding, and extreme winds, and retrofitting this existing infrastructure with more climate-resilient technologies remains a challenge. According to assessments by the National Research Council NRC and the United States Global Change Research Program USGCRPthe effects of climate change are already under way and are projected to continue.

Changes observed in the United States include more intense weather and storm events, heat waves, floods, and droughts; rising sea levels; and changing patterns of rainfall.

Energy infrastructure can be affected by both acute weather events and long-term changes in the climate, according to NRC and the Department of Energy DOE. In particular, energy infrastructure located along the coast is at risk from increasingly intense storms, which can substantially disrupt oil and gas production and cause temporary fuel or electricity shortages. Infor example, storm surge and high winds from Hurricane Sandy—an acute weather event-—downed power lines, flooded electrical substations, and damaged or temporarily shut down several power plants and ports, according to DOE, leaving over 8 million customers without power.

Long-term changes in the climate could also impact energy infrastructure, according to USGCRP and DOE. For example, warming air temperatures may reduce the efficiency of power plants while increasing the overall demand for electricity, potentially creating supply challenges.

While it is difficult to attribute any individual weather event to climate change, these events provide insight into the potential climate-related vulnerabilities the United States faces. In this regard, both private sector firms and federal agencies have documented an increase in weather-related losses.

Because emitted greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere for extended periods of time, some changes to the climate are expected to occur as a result of emissions to date, regardless of future efforts to control emissions.

When identifying agencies with key responsibilities related to energy infrastructure we focused on agencies with a direct role in overseeing and developing activities within the energy sector. According to USGCRP, NRC, and others, climate change poses risks to energy infrastructure at all four key stages in the supply chain.

In addition, broad, systemic factors such as water scarcity and energy system interdependencies could amplify these impacts. Impacts from climate change can affect infrastructure throughout the four major stages of the energy supply chain: Much of the infrastructure used to extract, refine, and process, and prospect for fuels —including natural gas and oil platforms, oil refineries, and natural gas processing plants—is located offshore or near the coast, making it particularly vulnerable to sea level rise, extreme weather, and other impacts, according to USGCRP and DOE assessments.

The Gulf Coast, for example, is home to nearly 4, oil and gas platforms, many of which are at risk of damage or disruption due to high winds and storm surges at increasingly high sea levels. Active Oil and Gas Platforms in the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico. Nearly 4, active oil and gas platforms are located in the central and western Gulf of Mexico. Department of Energy, Comparing the Impacts of Northeast Hurricanes on Energy Infrastructure April Storm-related impacts on natural gas and oil production infrastructure can also have significant economic implications.

Losses related to infrastructure damage can be extensive, particularly given the high value and long life span of natural gas and oil platforms, refineries, and processing plants. A DOE assessment reported that some damages resulting from the hurricanes were too costly to repair; as a result, a number of platforms were sunk, and significant crude oil production capacity was lost.

In addition to causing physical damage, increasingly intense severe weather events can disrupt operations and decrease fuel supplies, resulting in broader economic losses for businesses and industries that depend on these resources. According to USGCRP assessments, damage to key infrastructure—especially to refineries, natural gas processing plants, and petroleum terminals—can cause fuel prices to spike across the country, as evidenced by Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy. For example, according to USGCRP, climate change impacts have already been observed in Alaska, where thawing permafrost has substantially shortened the season during which oil and gas exploration and extraction equipment can be operated on the tundra.

Oil refineries around the nation are also potentially at risk, according to USGCRP; they require both significant quantities of water and access to electricity, making them vulnerable to drought and power outages.

USGCRP assessments identified several ways in which climate change can affect fuel transportation infrastructure, including pipeline systems that carry natural gas and oil; trucks, railways, and barges that transport coal, oil and petroleum products; as well as storage facilities, such as aboveground tanks, underground salt caverns, and aquifers. Natural gas and oil pipelines, which generally require electricity to operate, are particularly vulnerable to extreme weather events, according to DOE.

For example, electric power outages from Hurricane Katrina caused three critical pipelines— which cumulatively transport million gallons of fuel each day—to shut down for two full days and operate at reduced power for about two weeks, leading to fuel shortages and temporary price spikes.

Storm surge flooding can also affect above ground fuel storage tanks, according to DOE; for example, tanks not fully filled can drift off of their platforms or become corroded by trapped salt water.

By way of protection, the Alaska Department of Natural Resources limits the amount of travel on the tundra. Over the past 30 years, the number of days where travel is permitted has dropped from more than tothereby reducing by at least half the number of days that natural gas and oil exploration and extraction equipment can be used.

Crude oil and petroleum products are transported by rail, barge systems, pipelines, and tanker trucks. Coal is transported by rail, barge, truck, and pipeline. Corn-based ethanol, blended with gasoline, is largely shipped by rail, while bioenergy feedstock transport relies on barge, rail, and truck freight. In addition to pipelines, rail, barge, and tanker trucks also play critical roles in transporting fuel across the country. According to USGCRP and DOE assessments, fuel transport by rail and barge can be affected when water levels in rivers and ports drop too low, such as during a drought, or too high, such as during a storm surge.

During the drought, the U. Army Corps of Engineers reported groundings of traffic along the Mississippi River due to low water depths, preventing barge shipments of coal and petroleum products.

Disruptions in barge transportation due to extreme weather can also present challenges for areas such as Florida, which are nearly entirely dependent on barges for fuel delivery. Intense storms and flooding can also wash out rail lines—which in many regions follow riverbeds—and impede the delivery of coal to power plants.

According to DOE, flooding of rail lines has already been a problem both in the Appalachian region and along the Mississippi River. The rerouting that occurs as a result of such flooding can cost millions of dollars and can delay coal deliveries.

Colder climates present a different set of risks for fuel transportation infrastructure, according to DOE and USGCRP assessments.

For example, in Alaska—where average temperatures have risen about twice as much as the rest of the nation—thawing permafrost is already causing pipeline, rail, and pavement displacements, requiring reconstruction of key facilities and raising maintenance costs. Fossil fuel and nuclear power plants. According to USGCRP, climate change is expected to have potentially significant consequences for fossil fuel and nuclear power plants.

Fossil fuel plants—which burn coal, natural gas, or oil—are susceptible to much of the same impacts as nuclear power plants, according to USGCRP and DOE, including diminishing water supplies, warming temperatures, and severe weather, among others. As permafrost thaws, the tundra loses its weight-bearing capabilities, according to DOE. Risks to onshore fossil fuel development could include the loss of access roads built on permafrost, loss of opportunities to establish new roads, problems with pipelines buried in permafrost, and reduced load-bearing capacity of buildings and structures.

According to USGCRP, episodic and long-lasting water shortages and elevated water temperatures may constrain electricity generation in many regions of the United States. As currently designed, most fossil fuel and nuclear plants require significant amounts of water to generate, cool, and condense steam. Issues related to water already pose a range of challenges for existing power plants, as illustrated by the following examples cited by DOE:.

Water use by thermoelectric power plants can be generally characterized as consumption, withdrawal, and discharge. Water consumption refers to the portion of the water withdrawn that is no longer available to be returned to a water source, such as when it has evaporated.

Water withdrawals refer to water removed from the ground or diverted from a surface water source—for example, an ocean, river, or lake—for use by the plant. For many thermoelectric power plants, much of the water they withdraw is later discharged, although often at higher temperatures.

According to the U. The amount of water discharged from a thermoelectric power plant depends on a number of factors, including the type of cooling technology used, plant economics, and environmental regulations. The habitats of aquatic life can also be adversely affected by warm water discharges. USGCRP and NRC assessments project that water issues will continue to constrain electricity production at existing facilities as temperatures increase and precipitation patterns change. Many of these risks are regional in nature; research by the Electric Power Research Institute EPRIfor example, indicates that approximately 25 percent of existing electric generation in the United States is located in counties projected to be at high or moderate water supply sustainability risk in USGCRP and DOE assessments also indicate that higher air and water temperatures may diminish the efficiency by which power plants convert fuel to electricity.

According to USGCRP, warming temperatures may decrease the efficiency of power plant cooling technologies, thereby reducing overall electricity generation.

Even small changes in efficiency could have significant implications for electricity supply at a national scale. For example, an average reduction of 1 percent in electricity generated by fossil fuel plants nationwide would mean a loss of 25 billion kilowatt-hours per year, about the amount of electricity consumed by approximately 2 to 3 million Americans.

When projected increases in air and water temperatures associated with climate change are combined with changes to water availability, generation capacity during the summer months may be significantly reduced, according to DOE. Warmer water discharged from power plants into lakes or rivers can also harm fish and plants.

To prevent hot water from doing harm to fish and other wildlife, power plants typically are not allowed to discharge cooling water above a certain temperature.

When power plants reach those limits, they can be forced to reduce power production or shut down. In addition to the effects of rising temperatures and reduced water availability, power plant operations are also susceptible to extreme weather, increased precipitation, and sea level rise, according to assessments by USGCRP and DOE.

To a large extent, this vulnerability stems from their location—thermoelectric power plants are frequently located along the U. For coastal plants, more intense hurricane-force winds can produce damaging storm surges and flooding—an impact illustrated by Hurricane Sandy, which shut down several power plants.

Some power plants near the coast could also be affected by sea level rise, according to DOE, because they are located on land that is relatively flat and, in some places, subsiding.

Increasing intensity and frequency of flooding also poses a risk to inland power plants, according to DOE. The structures that draw cooling water from rivers are vulnerable to flooding and, in some cases, storm surge. This risk was illustrated when Fort Calhoun nuclear power plant was initially shut down for a scheduled refueling outage in April According to Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials, the outage was subsequently extended due to flooding from the Missouri River and a need to address long-standing technical issues that continued to impair plant operations.

According to USGCRP, seasonal flooding could result in increased costs to manage on-site drainage and runoff. Hydropower—a major source of electricity in some regions of the United States, particularly the Northwest—is highly sensitive to a number of climactic changes.

According to USGCRP and DOE, rising temperatures can reduce the amount of water available for hydropower—due to increased evaporation—and degrade habitats for fish and other wildlife. Hydropower production is also highly sensitive to changes in precipitation and river discharge, according to USGCRP and DOE assessments. Climate variability has already had a significant influence on the operation of hydropower systems, according to USGCRP, with significant changes detected in the timing and amount of stream flows in many western rivers.

According to USGCRP assessments, biofuels made from grains, sugar and oil crops, starch, grasses, trees, and biological waste are meeting an increasing portion of U. Currently, however, most U. These issues were highlighted when droughts in produced a poor corn harvest, raising concerns about the allocation of corn for food versus ethanol. Production of biofuel crops may also be inhibited by heavy rainfall and flooding, according to DOE.

Climate change could also present some benefits; for example, warmer temperatures could extend the period of the growing season although DOE also notes that extreme heat could damage crops. The effects of climate change on solar energy—which generated about 0. Some studies suggest that photovoltaic energy production could be affected by changes in haze, humidity, and dust. Higher temperatures can also reduce the effectiveness of photovoltaic electricity generation.

On the other hand, concentrating solar power CSP systems— unlike photovoltaic cells—require extensive amounts of water for cooling purposes, making them susceptible to water shortages. Wind energy accounted for about 13 percent of U. Unlike thermoelectric generation, wind energy does not use or consume water to generate electricity, making it a potentially attractive option in light of water scarcity concerns. On the other hand, wind energy cannot be naturally stored, and the natural variability of wind speeds can have a significant positive or negative impact on the amount of energy produced.

Wind turbines are also subject to extreme weather, according to USGCRP. Geothermal power plants extract geothermal fluids—hot water, brines, and steam—from the earth by drilling wells to depths of up to 10, feet. According to EIA, geothermal energy represented approximately 2 percent of U.

Geothermal power plants can also withdraw and consume significant quantities of water, according to DOE, making them susceptible to water shortages caused by changes in precipitation or warming temperatures. According to DOE, CSP power plants using recirculating cooling water typically consume more water than a fossil fuel or nuclear power plants. Transmission and distribution infrastructure can extend for thousands of miles, making it vulnerable to a variety of climate change impacts.

According to assessments by USGCRP and others, transmission and distribution lines and substations are susceptible to damage from extreme winds, ice, lightning strikes, wildfires, landslides, and flooding.

High winds, especially when combined with precipitation from tropical storms and hurricanes, can be particularly damaging, potentially interrupting service in broad geographic areas over long periods of time. In the winter months, heavy snowfall and excessive icing on overhead lines can cause outages and require costly repairs, according to a review of literature published in the journal Energy.

According to USGCRP, increasing temperatures and drought may increase the risk of wildfires, which in turn may cause physical damage to electricity transmission infrastructure and decrease available transmission capacity. Apart from transmission and distribution lines, severe weather can also present risks for substations, according to DOE, which modify voltage for residential and commercial use, as well as for operation centers that are critical components of any electricity supply system.

Apart from risks related to extreme weather events, increasing temperatures may decrease transmission system efficiency and could reduce available transmission capacity, according to DOE. As temperatures rise, the capacity of power lines to carry current decreases, according to DOE, as does the overall efficiency of the grid.

Higher temperatures may also cause overhead lines to sag, posing fire and safety hazards. All of these factors can contribute to power outages at times of peak demand, according to USGCRP. Infor example, electric power transformers failed in Missouri and New York, causing interruptions of the electric power supply in the midst of a widespread heat wave.

Based on our previous work, as well as reports from USGCRP, NRC, and others, we identified several broad, systemic factors that could amplify the effects of climate change on energy infrastructure. These factors—which include changes in water availability, system interdependencies, increases in energy demand, and the compounding effects of multiple climate impacts—could have implications that extend throughout the energy sector and beyond.

Many aspects of energy production require the use of water to operate see fig. As discussed earlier in this review, fossil fuel and nuclear power plants—which accounted for about 90 percent of U. As we reported inrecently developed hydraulic fracturing methods also require significant amounts of water—3 to 5. Increased evaporation rates or changes in snowpack may affect the volume and timing of water available for hydropower. Water is also required to mine and transport coal and uranium; to extract, produce, and refine oil and gas; and to support crops used in biofuel production, among other uses.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the energy sector is the fastest growing water consumer in the United States and is projected to account for 85 percent of the growth in domestic water consumption between and This increase in water use associated with energy development is being driven, in part, by rising energy demand, increased development of domestic energy, and shifts to more water- intense energy sources and technologies.

SinceGAO has issued six reports on the interdependencies that exist between energy and water:. Water used in shale oil and gas development is largely considered to be consumptive and can be permanently removed from the hydrologic cycle, according to EPA and Interior officials. However, it is difficult to determine the long- term effect on water resources because the scale and location of future operations remains largely uncertain.

Similarly, the total volume that operators will withdraw from surface water and aquifers for drilling and hydraulic fracturing is not known until operators submit applications to the appropriate regulatory agency. As a result, the cumulative amount of water consumed over the lifetime of the activity remains largely unknown. Water consumption is the portion of the water withdrawn that is no longer available to be returned to a water source, such as when it has evaporated. Energy production which includes biofuel productiontogether with thermoelectric power, is the second largest consumer of water in the United States, accounting for approximately 11 percent of water consumption in Irrigation was the largest consumer, at approximately 74 percent.

The Role of Energy Production, Journal of the American Water Resources Association vol. However, according to the U.

Geological Survey, in terms of water withdrawal, thermoelectric power was the largest source of water withdrawals 49 percent infollowed by irrigation at 31 percent. Water withdrawal refers to water removed from the ground or diverted from a surface water source, such as an ocean, river, or lake.

According to USGCRP and NOAA, increasing temperatures and shifting precipitation patterns are causing regional and seasonal changes to the water cycle—trends that present significant risks for the U.

More frequent and intense droughts, reduced summertime precipitation, and decreased streamflows are likely to adversely affect available water supply in some regions, particularly during the summer months. In recent years, a number of weather and climate events have served to illustrate some of the risks associated with water scarcity, as reported by DOE:. The energy sector comprises a complex system of interdependent facilities and components, and damage to one part of the system can adversely affect infrastructure in other phases of the supply chain, according to DOE and USGCRP.

Many different types of energy infrastructure—from pipelines to refineries—depend on electricity to function; as such, they may be unable to operate in a power outage, even if otherwise undamaged.

Recent events associated with Hurricane Sandy illustrate these interdependencies—over 7, transformers and 15, poles were damaged, according to DOE, causing widespread power outages across 21 states. These outages affected a range of infrastructure dependent on electricity to function—for example, two New Jersey refineries were shut down, and a number of petroleum terminals and gas station fuel pumps were rendered inoperable.

Because many components of the U. According to EPA, water from snowpack declined for most of the western states from towith losses at some sites exceeding 75 percent. Annual streamflows are expected to decrease in the summer for most regions, according to USGCRP, and drought conditions—which have become more common and widespread over the past 40 years in the Southwest, southern Great Plains, and Southeast, according to USGCRP— are expected to become more frequent and intense.

Groundwater resources are already being depleted in multiple regions, according to USGS, and these impacts are expected to continue. See EPA, Climate Change Indicators in the United States, EPA R Washington, D.

Interdependencies also link the energy sector to other sectors, such as transportation, agriculture, and communications. The energy sector requires railways, roads, and ports to transport resources such as coal, oil, and natural gas, for example; conversely, many modes of transportation rely on oil, gasoline, or electricity.

Given these interdependencies, disruptions of services in one sector can lead to cascading disruptions in other sectors. Increases in temperature are expected to affect the cost, type, and amount of energy consumed in the United States, according to NRC and USGCRP assessments.

Over the past four decades, the demand for cooling has risen and the demand for heating has declined see fig. As average temperatures rise and extreme weather events—such as heat waves—become more common, these trends are expected to continue, although specific impacts will vary by region and season. Increases in peak electricity demand caused by extreme high temperatures could potentially strain the capacity of existing electricity infrastructure in some regions, according to DOE.

In the summer heat wave offor example, some Midwest nuclear plants were forced to reduce output and several transformers failed, causing widespread electricity interruptions and making it difficult to access air conditioning. Climate change-related increases in demand could also be exacerbated by a number of ongoing trends, such as population growth and increased building sizes.

According to DOE and IPCC, some climate change impacts are likely to interact with others, creating a compounding effect. According to DOE, projected increases in air and water temperatures could significantly reduce electricity generation capacity, particularly in the summer months, by a decreasing the efficiency of power plant generation, b forcing power plant curtailments due to thermal discharge limits, c reducing electricity generated through hydropower and photovoltaic solar sources, and d increasing the temperature of local water sources.

Wilbanks, Possible Indirect Effects on Energy Production and Distribution in the United States in Effects of Climate Change on Energy Production and Use in the United States. A Report by the U. Climate Change Science Program and the subcommittee on Global Change Research Washington, D. Department of Energy, Infrastructure Security and Energy Restoration, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Hardening and Resiliency U.

Energy Industry Response to Recent Hurricane Seasons August 16, Department of Energy, U. Melillo, and Thomas C. Cambridge University Press,otherwise known as the National Climate Assessment. Panel on Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change, Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change Washington, D. Spent fuel fire on U. USGCRP, Draft Third National Climate Assessment Report, Chapter 4 — Energy Supply and Use January The Honorable Ron Wyden Chairman Committee on Energy and Natural Resources United States Senate, The Honorable Al Franken United States Senate, The Honorable Tom Harkin United States Senate, The Honorable Harry Reid United States Senate The Honorable Mark Udall United States Senate.

Energy Dependence Energy Independence Energy Policy Infrastructure Transportation GAO Government Accountability Office Military Politics President Jimmy Carter Robert Gates James Hansen James Howard Kunstler Jeff Vail Kurt Cobb Nate Hagens Other Experts Peak Oil Barrel Pedro Prieto Richard Heinberg Robert Hirsch Robert Wilson Tad Patzek Ugo Bardi Vaclav Smil What to do Advice Experts automaticearth Investing advice Agriculture Waste Birth Control Conserve Energy Demand Destruction Homes Government Guns Insurance Jobs and Skills Farming and Ranching Localization Population Preservation of Knowledge Critical Thinking and Scientific Literacy Rationing Think Tanks Transportation Videos Weatherization Where to Be or Not to Be Real Estate.

Home About Preservation of Knowledge. Anyone who whines about airplanes should have to take the Oregon Trail Posted on June 20, by energyskeptic. Practical PreppingKunstlerCastKunstlerCastPeak ProsperityXX2 report ] Sarah Lyall whined about traveling on airplanes in the leading story of the Business section in the New York Times on Sunday June 9, Lyall.

Lyall has this to say about airplane food: It is perpetually dinnertime at the airport, but I do not want the food. On the flights, those of us sitting in the back tend to avoid buying from the snack cart, making do with the tiny free packets like Savory Snack Mix, blobs of cracker-like material coated with unpleasant flavoring. The lady by the window, who had raised our mutual armrest so as to better squeeze over the line into my seat, whipped out a Chick-fil-A fried-chicken sandwich.

The distressing scent of dill pickles and processed chicken wafted through the air. The yogurt had spent the flight in the seat pocket, building up internal pressure. As I removed the top, it exploded, spraying blobs onto me As the flight attendants dole out our sole free snack on this flight of six and a half hours — the aroma of something delicious wafts in from the front.

Posted in AirplanesLithium-ionTransportation Tagged airplanebatterytransportation 2 Comments. California hits the solar wall Posted on June 17, by energyskeptic. Practical PreppingKunstlerCastKunstlerCastPeak ProsperityXX2 report ] Dizard, J.

Posted in Natural GasSolar Tagged natural gassolarwind 1 Comment. Collapse of Mayan civilization from water shortages Posted on June 14, by energyskeptic. The demise of the Maya civilization: American Geophysical Union blogosphere.