Are Republicans Coming to their Senses about Natural Gas Subsidies?
by Capitol ConfidentialIn the wake of the debt ceiling negotiations that paralyzed Washington for weeks and the ensuing last-minute deal that has been criticized by many on the right for failing to change the way Washington spends money, it looks like Republicans supportive of pending natural gas subsidy legislation are eager to avoid shining too much light on the bill – which makes sense considering it distorts the energy market by using taxpayer money to pick winners and losers in the natural gas industry.
Last Wednesday, the House Ways and Means committee abruptly cancelled a scheduled hearing on the NAT GAS Act. From Politico’s Morning Energy:
NOT ON TODAY’S AGENDA
House Ways and Means has postponed its hearing on energy tax policy, putting off a potentially testy intra-Republican squabble over the NAT GAS Act to subsidize natural gas vehicles.
What is the NAT GAS Act? Well, it’s right in line with the Obama Administration’s overreaching regulatory agenda, but because some Republicans favor it the blame can’t be laid at the foot of Obama and the Democrats. From an earlier post on Washington’s war on businesses:
-An item that’s technically legislation, not regulatory rulemaking, but stands to pack the same economically ruinous punch is the NAT GAS Act (H.R. 1380) which heavily subsidizes businesses and consumers who switch to natural gas-fueled vehicles directly benefiting billionaires T. Boone Pickens and George Soros at the taxpayers’ expense. The subsidies – ahem, ‘tax credits’ – come in at a whopping $7,500 per passenger car, $64,000 for heavy-duty trucks and 18-wheelers, and up to $100,000 for gas stations installing natural gas pumps.
Referring to government subsidies as ‘tax credits’ is the oldest trick in the book to rally Republican support for a liberal proposal, and in this case it worked. Although some Republicans have pulled their support for the bill, over 70 GOP Members of Congress are on record as still supporting the bill.
So, qui bono?
The obvious beneficiary is energy-sector billionaire T. Boone Pickens; the blueprint behind the NAT GAS Act is often referred to as the ‘Pickens Plan.’ While Pickens’ rationale for his proposal is centered on decreasing US dependence on foreign oil, it is clear that billions of dollars of taxpayer money pouring into the natural gas industry would benefit Pickens personally. From Red State:
As the Dallas News reports, Pickens is the largest shareholder in Clean Energy Fuels (CEF), which owns and operates 200 natural gas stations across the country. CEF owns BAF, a Dallas-based company that just happens to convert vehicles to run on natural gas. And Mr. Pickens also owns mineral rights to almost 200,000 acres believed to have significant natural gas resources. So he wants to have legislation put in place that would create a demand for natural gas that would then create a need to convert cars and big rigs to run on natural gas which would of course need stations to refuel as well. He’s got all the bases covered.
The NAT GAS Act has another direct beneficiary who carries much more alarming implications; none other than notorious liberal agenda-pusher and hedge fund billionaire George Soros. Soros has realized the best way to make any money in Obama’s economy is to get it directly from the government, and his fingerprints are all over the NAT GAS Act. From an earlier BigGovernment post on the topic:
According to the website GuruFocus, which tracks the investment habits and portfolio trends of some of the world’s richest people, George Soros has made some intriguing investments into alternative fuel companies of late, specifically those at the forefront of natural gas. This would not be so troubling except that, as GuruFocus points out, Soros has accurately predicted both economic bubbles and quickly growing industries. As a result, Soros’s funds have turned out a 30% return on investments since their inception.
One of the stocks Soros invested in recently is Westport Innovations (WPST), a global supplier of “solutions” that allow vehicles to operate on clean-burning fuels, such as natural gas. In fact, they are the world’s leading engineer of natural gas engines. Westport is currently working with Caterpillar to develop a natural-gas powered engine that would work in a number of utility vehicles, all of which would be eligible for the subsidies Congress is now considering. Soros’s investment funds have pumped about $122 million into WPST, and he’s added to his control as recently as December and March, when he picked up over a million shares, bringing his total to 5.5 million shares.
No other major investor shares his rosy outlook for natural gas engines, and the stock has barely crept up during the time Soros has held it, leading many to suspect Soros knows of a major future development. Could that development be Congress’s NAT GAS act? It seems likely.
It should be clear to Congressional Republicans by now that given the public’s largely negative reaction to the debt deal’s underwhelming spending cuts, and support within their own party for natural gas subsidies becoming more tepid by the day, that the NAT GAS Act is a lose-lose situation for them and for the American taxpayers. Hopefully, it was just this rationale that prompted Ways and Means to cancel last week’s hearing; lets hope their next step is to kill the bill.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
40 Comments
Y'all are going to upset Uncle Boone.
Here folks.
I've been saving this for almost a month, just waiting for the appropriate article. This appears to be a good place to post it http://www.pickensplan.com/boonecam/2011/07/07/pi... .
Just say no. It's that easy.
Who are the 70 Republicans in favor of it, and who are the Tea Party candidates that will be challenging them in the primary next year?
Anytime the government wants to reward you for behaving a certain way…look over your shoulder for the hidden agenda.
Of course the aristocracy supports natural gas. It is often said that government produces nothing, but that is not strictly true; they produce a fair quantity of methane. It's just that the quantities involved are small compared to demand, and the cost per liter is far too great to be competitive.
Hence, subsidy!
Stop all of these subsidies. And toss out all the RINOs and democrats that keep their power with them.
Good. Let's put a highlight of George Soros investment. He is out to destroy this country and the capitalistic system that made him uber-rich. Time to let the sun shine on the BIGGEST COCKROACH of the world.
"Uncle Boone" needs to have a nice tall glass of STFU.
i do not mind if some people want to use natural gas for vehicles, as some businesses have been doing this for years, but!!! it must make sense on its own, without any tax credit help. let the private sector decide what it wants to do, and don't either punish, or aid in the decision making process. what kind of comparable mileage do these vehicles get? i do know electric generators for power disruptions use modified automotive engines in them. but how safe is transporting the natural gas, how many miles to a tank? let the private sector figure this out, and make t boone use his own money to show us the way.
Is there also a linkage to the newly imposed cafe' standards at 54MPG or the new heavy truck standards? Isn't this another way to force the conversion to natural gas? I guess Soros will get paid back one way or the other.
STOP! Quit putting forth new legislation, dammit. How about going back and undoing the legislation that has done nothing more than create bigger, costlier problems? Enough already.
A lot of folks do not know this.
One of Boone's investors, in BP Capital (his hedge fund) was Madame Nancy Pelosi and her husband. This, while he was lobbying her for favorable legislation and subsidies.
Imagine that!
I have no problem with natgas as a viable alternative to gasoline. In many, many cases it's perfect. But, that being the case, why the hell does it need to be subsidized at all? Have these people lost their minds?
Dims, that complain about the oil and gas industry raking in billions, want to vote for it. So they can rake in even more billions?
Repubs, that complain that we should succeed or not based on our merits, want to vote for it. Even in the process picking winners and losers?
Just what kind of dorks do we send to Washington or is it true there's something in the water there?
All of this against the backdrop of both parties kowtowing to the Environazis! Dims 'cause they want to and Repubs 'cause they think it will get them elected! Where will this "great new" form of energy come from if we are not allowed to look for it here? Oh, I forgot, on ships from Russia. Like how California gets some of it's natgas!
I swear, it's the clowns running the circus in Swampland!
Hey, both political parties have been secretly fascist for most of our lives. It's a win-win-win for big business and politicians– and even consumers. The only losers are taxpayers and who needs them!
Seriously, big business is the Republicans' albatross just like the unions are to the Democrats. The right approach is to stop having bureaucrats pick the winner and let the free market decide.
Oh, RINOs, RINOs, RINOs. Is just me, or is "moderate" a code word for crony capitalist.
Amen. We're surrounded by a network of power hungry greedy batards. America needs to be fiscally lean with strong defense against these enemies, especially the "Downgrade President" and his International cohorts!
Easy fix. Stay the course and elect an American Republican for President. Chop the size of our Govt in half. Remove all anti-American Socialists/Communists from power, like Omarxist & Holdren, and control the teaching of our children by un-monitored Socialists. (Put CCTVs in the classrooms to enforce curriculum)
In the meantime, go forward with increased development of our oil resources and also the development of other energy sources that are on the "30 years to viability" track. Common sense is an amazing thing. It's just the opposite of Pelosi/Obama/Reid forced communism.
Is it really that easy to bamboozle Repulican politicians? Just call a subsidy a "tax credit"? Really?
Maybe instead of a War on Terror we should declare a War on Stupidity. These stupid politicans are more of a direct threat to our liberty and way of life than a bunch of cave-dwelling Islamofascist barbarians from the 7th century.
T Boone has to have a way to recover the millions he lost on wind turbines somehow. Didn't Comrade ask us all how much money do we need?Apparently T Boone at the tender age of a thousand needs a little more, God bless his little pea picken heart.
I am all for natural gas. But, never at a cost to taxpayers.
If the market supports it, good. If not, suck out some more oil and move on.
At an advanced age, shortly before his death, a reporter asked John D. Rockefeller "how much money is enough"?
Rockefeller's answer? "Just a little bit more".
Somewhat off topic, but related just as well, would you like to know what I find highly offensive, and take umbrage with? Look to the right of the home page here, and you will find an ad for Michael Bloomberg;s "Pledge Against Coal" http://www.mikebloomberg.com/index.cfm?objectid=4... . That is really starting to grate on me. Granted, Breitbart needs to pay the bills by advertising, but this?
It is an affront to everything we stand for here.
Or the plunger, Pilgrim!
Mike Flynn,
I know you all have to pay the bills, but this is an affront!
Somewhat off topic, but related just as well, would you like to know what I find highly offensive, and take umbrage with? Look to the right of the home page here, and you will find an ad for Michael Bloomberg;s "Beyond Coal Campaignl" http://www.mikebloomberg.com/index.cfm?objectid=4... . That is really starting to grate on me. Granted, Breitbart needs to pay the bills by advertising, but this?
It is an affront to everything we stand for here.
Do I need to come with my own version of "Retracto" and demand this be removed, and apologized for?
Sometimes, I wonder……………
That's a good question, Morgue. Is there some way to compile a list?
Yeah, I've noticed that too….
You don't say. You could knock me over with a feather.
A gallon of gasoline is the most powerful force for freedom ever invented.
Key word advertising. Sometimes I get some nice you know what to look at . . .
I live in Colorado ,about two miles from the firewater house and there are tons of these natural gas wells going up around me ,I speak to some of the drillers and ask them how much drilling would go on if they weren't subsidized, he told me "if you think a lot of drilling is going on now there would be a huge increase regardless, there's too much money to be made." Free market will decide what works, always has, always will.
I get it but I have to chuckle though CL, other than a few trolls AKA the choir, that buy his nonsense, that money Bloomberg is spending is supporting a right wing site, folks that he abhors.The irony is delicious.
I see the T. Boonistas are out dinging like crazy today. Must be all the true believers on that site Cowboy linked to. More likely the Sorass crowd though.
In the past, Pickens would have been shot as a war profiteer.
Ron Reale
realetybytes.com
I do not have many fans when I say something negative about Boone. But it is the truth.
Pickens really has Frank gaffney duped, over at Big Peace.
It is embarrassing to watch Gaffney fawn all over "his good friend" and "energy savant" T. Boone Pickens. One almost envisions Ol' Frank getting a tingle down his leg.
Great. Now let's see them "come to their senses" about drilling and REFINING our own oil, mining our own coal and natural gas, and building our own nuclear plants.
What would be the consequences of THAT, I wonder…
No depending on the middle east?
Very low energy prices for the urban "poor" with nuke plants serving large urbban areas?
Low gas prices for all?
Hugely increased revenues for the fed and the states?
Low taxes?
Reliable supply and fair prices for our allies?
A black eye for Chavez?
Hundreds of thousands of jobs, practically overnight?
hmmmmm…..
In pure BTU/$ terms natural gas is presently dirt cheap. 1MCF (1000 cubic feet) of natural gas has 1,020,000 BTUs – natural gas is selling (Hub price to the producer) for a fuzz under $4.10 / MMBTU (Million BTUs).
Gasoline on the spot market is selling wholesale for $2.80/gallon and it has – give or take depending on what witches brew the EPA has mandated for your specific area – 114,000 BTUs / gallon.
At present (Oh but give them a chance) there is no road tax on natural gas and with an appropriate compressor you can fill up in your garage but it takes time (as in overnight) and electricity to run the compressor which alters the dynamics on the calculations a bit. The tank size becomes a huge factor as well and a tank of natural gas on an average car will provide enough fuel to get around 200 to 250 miles. The modifications are usually set up as dual fuel systems that have both a gasoline tank and a compressed natural gas (CNG) tank that you can switch between on the fly but the CNG tank will eat up your entire trunk.
The real dynamic here is on the demand side. Were a significant portion of motor vehicles be converted or sold as CNG vehicles the demand for natural gas would predictably soar and thus the price would soar as well. At present the summer months are "injection" months for natural gas where stockpiles are placed into storage for the heavy demand for home heating during the winter months. The summer driving season would most certainly alter the "injection" portion of the equation.
In the end I think it comes down to how much you drive vs how warm you like your house in the winter to figure out if this makes any sense.
…Lee
I would recommend you click on it and other ads you oppose, that is what generates the money for the website (usually) You don't have to read it, just click and make some money for the bigs'.. I have and I still know that Bloomberg is a Dem running as a Rep.. That's even worse than RINO.
Thanks.
I'll pas, on principle.
That's better than BHO telling Chrissy that it's rain.
I have very mixed feelings on this Nat Gas thing.
Running a car or truck or bus on CNG is far cheaper and less pollution (not worried abot AGW)
but there are few places to get it and it's expensive to convert
Using more CNG would increase demand and therefore the cost of heating my home
If economy of scale existed I suspect having a CNG and or CGN/gasoline car would be only slightly more expensive.
some sort of "support" for after market conversion would make it easier to retrofit.
but I remember the scam artists in the solar industry back in the late 70's, they were "selling" tax rebates" not solar.
PLUS.. If health care is a basic human right, why a tax credit for Natural Gas but not even a full Tax right off for Health Insurance and out of pocket costs?
Gasoline stored underground and pumped into your vehicle through electronic gadgetry is one thing. Imagine natural gas or even hydrogen, with their propensity for leaks under pressure. Could a car coming in for a "fill-up" possibly ignite an undetected leak? "Oh, the humanity….". Remember Challenger? A frozen o-ring in Florida! Imagine Buffalo at 30 below. Would it be mandatory to post NO SMOKING signs in these autos? Suppose you run out of "gas" a hundred miles from the nearest "gas station", would AAA be able to rescue you with a 5 cubic foot cylinder of gas? So, our TAXPAYER DOLLARS go to re-fit, retro-fit etc. all of these enterprises so auto mfgr's can raise their prices and in the end we get screwed "in the end" as usual.
You must be logged in to post a comment.