11th-hour release of energy task force files, Documents show industry had big hand in shaping policy

SF Chronicle ^ | 3-26-02 | Richard Simon, Edmund Sanders, Elizabeth Shogren, LATimes

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Notice that it took not just 1, but 3 LA Times 'journalists' to write this biased article and they are shocked that the energy industry helped shape energy policy...do you think they would be equally shocked if teacher unions helped shape education policy?

[Northpaw]

The Bush administration should have borrowed a page from Congressional Hearing protocol and sought advice from Hollywood actors that have portrayed energy executives in film.

[facedown]

In putting out 11,000 pages of documents before a midnight deadline, the Energy Department gave new ammunition to critics of the administration's energy policy, who say it is tilted in favor of the coal, gas, oil and nuclear industries.

In other words, towards the energy producers ?

How shocking.

[Lockbox]

The documents show that Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham met with more than 30 industry representatives at eight sessions between Feb. 14 and April 26.

And just who in the hell should Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham have met with, the Girl Scouts? Give me a break, of course they talked to the energy companies.

Maybe the next time there is a pollution question the EPA should not meet with the environmental groups, meet with the polluters. After all the polluters have more to lose.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

This is a big story only in the eyes of the media. They think "energy" flows out of a wall recepticle.

[Steve0113]

In other words, towards the energy producers ?

As in, those who actually know something about the subject.

How shocking.

Yes, just astounding.

[Dave S]

In putting out 11,000 pages of documents before a midnight deadline, the Energy Department gave new ammunition to critics of the administration's energy policy, who say it is tilted in favor of the coal, gas, oil and nuclear industries.

If your policy is create more energy, who else are you going to consult. You sure arent going to put the environmentalists at the top of your list because what they want will decrease the available energy. These people need a brain transplant.

[skytoo]

Any of you folks ever heard of renewable energy? Or energy efficiency, by far the most economical way of dealing with the energy issue? Supporters and generators of these pieces of the energy puzzle were not sufficiently included in the forming of the energy policy. That is the problem.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

One 1,000 mw coal fired generator equals 400 square miles of windmills. I know which one I want to keep the lights on, plants running and jobs alive, thanks.

[Vladiator]

It's not the producers that are the issue.

It's the wholesalers versus the retailers and the carriers.

Keep an eye on this and watch the dynamics. Your gas and electric company (the one that sends you the bill at the end of the month) most likely has sold off all of its power plants to "wholesalers" and now only owns some power lines.

The big struggle in all of this is who should control the price - - the "market" or the "retailers." If the "market" wins, then the wholesalers win, because they control the market.

That's where Cheney & Co. are coming from. The big utilities don't like this.

Follow the money...

[uncbob]

The Bush administration released thousands of documents on its energy task force yesterday, showing that industry groups provided substantial input in drafting the president's energy plan.

I sure HOPE SO

[PA Engineer]

Say what? Have you read the energy policy? Do have any links to support your claims about renewables? You are new here and may parrot only what you hear and feel. To give the the benefit of (extreme) doubt, please follow the link to the Whitehouse and do some reading.

When you are done with reading maybe you can dump you liberal arts degree for a more challenging life adventure such as real discipline in engineering and hard science. I also recommend a minor in logic to help unclog that mind of yours.

Energy Policy Page

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Before the recent un-bundling, investor owned utilities built, owned and operated the power plants and power lines and also sent you your monthly bill. I have a hard time understanding what was wrong with this system and why it needed to be improved to resemble gas pipelines.

[anymouse]

skytoo - member since March 20th, 2002

Another DU rat caught.

[Steve0113]

Any of you folks ever heard of renewable energy?

That's down the road, at best. We need a viable energy policy NOW.

[skytoo]

Maybe it would be a good idea for your to do some reading too. Check the following link and see what an energy policy should look like when all interested and affected parties are allowed to participate. The result is what's good for all of America, not just the bottom line of a few.

Energy Policy

By the way, it's too bad that another view such as mine can't be given careful consideration rather than getting immediate flames. I didn't expect red carpet treatment, but what's wrong with intelligent discussion rather than put-downs and baseless accusations?

[Truebador]

Why should Cheney meet with anyone except energy producers when he wasn't going to listen to anybody except energy producers?

Any "consulting" with environmental groups on Cheney's part would have just been a waste of everyone's time.

The mouse might as well consult with the cat.

[PA Engineer]

Any of you folks ever heard of renewable energy?

To answer your arrogant and presumptuous question, why yes and many more then your loony green friends. I have designed and precommissioned over 100 remote solar electric installations in the Middle East.

Or energy efficiency, by far the most economical way of dealing with the energy issue?

We have achieved phenomenal efficiency increases in appliances, heating, cooling, energy generation, and on and on and on over the past 25 years. California is an example of where efficiency has met up with the hard reality of energy shortages. The most economical approach at this time is the construction of new generating plants.

Supporters and generators of these pieces of the energy puzzle were not sufficiently included in the forming of the energy policy.

Did you read the WhiteHouse report? You linked me to a "consensus site" where the primary recommendation is further government regulation of the entire energy sector. It struck me as the left's energy sector version of Hillary Care.

You wrote: "Maybe it would be a good idea for your (sp) to do some reading too. Check the following link and see what an energy policy should look like when all interested and affected parties are allowed to participate. The result is what's good for all of America, not just the bottom line of a few."

Let me quote your eco-nazi philosophy in the first paragraph under the "Goals" section of the expert report you recommended as your authoritative "technical" bible.

The ultimate goal is to stabilize atmospheric carbon concentrations at a level that does not seriously disrupt our climate.

Your conclusion after you pompous fragmented sentences was:

That is the problem.

Maybe this was a Freudian slip of clear thinking on your part. I agree that the eco-nazi religion of centralized planning is indeed the problem.

By the way, it's too bad that another view such as mine can't be given careful consideration rather than getting immediate flames.

When you have a view to give please let us know. As I weigh into this bureaucratic site I find that I stand by my first post to you.

[Salvation]

do you think they would be equally shocked if teacher unions helped shape education policy?

Good questions for feedback to the LAT.

[Free the USA]

Check the Bump List folders for articles related to and descriptions of the above topic(s) or for other topics of interest.