Skip to main content

NPRA discusses carbon restrictions

Hydrocarbon Engineering,


Proposed limits and fees on carbon dioxide emissions threaten jobs at US oil refineries and petrochemical plants, along with other manufacturing jobs, and would raise energy costs and hurt American families, the president of the NPRA said in an appearance before a House subcommittee on 28th April 2010.

Charles T. Drevna’s comments
‘I don’t believe Congress wants to over tax and over regulate the domestic refining and petrochemical industry into extinction, only to see them replaced by their foreign competitors exporting their products to our shores, NPRA President said in written testimony to the House Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment. ‘But make no mistake: overzealous policies could have disastrous effects and become a self inflicted wound as our country struggles to climb out of the Great Recession.’

‘Members of NPRA are not anti clean energy,’ Drevna said. ‘They’re not anti green jobs. They are simply believers in an energy policy based on sound economics and sound science rather than science fiction. They want to provide jobs that are well paying, long lasting and that strengthen our nation’s economy. And the operators of refineries and petrochemical plants want to keep their own domestic manufacturing operations, and manufacturing by others in the US, strong and thriving.’

‘Some people think we can reorient our energy supply system and our reliance on oil simply by saying that’s what we do,’ Drevna added. ‘They embrace other energy sources like starry eyed lovers, seeing perfection and ignoring flaws. The fact is, however, that there is no miracle source of energy that is clean, efficient, affordable and abundant with no downside. If such a source existed, our nation would have embraced it long ago and we’d all be using it today.’

‘It’s indisputable that petroleum based fuels are abundant, easily accessible and very efficient,’ Drevna said. ‘Until alternative energy sources can make that claim, we not only should, but must and will continue to use these resources wisely and efficiently for decades to come.’

‘I am not arguing for an all petroleum future, or saying we should consume as much petroleum as possible as quickly as possible,’ Drevna said. ‘NPRA supports clean energy and policies that enhance energy efficiency. We also believe that the US requires an energy portfolio that is as broad as possible, encompassing both traditional sources such as petroleum, coal, and nuclear energy, and supplemental sources ranging from wind to geothermal to biofuels.’

‘What we do not support are government policies that are counterproductive, unrealistic, and economically harmful to American families and businesses,’ Drevna said. ‘Decisions regarding our nation’s energy policy need to be based on sound economic theory rather than theories that simply sound good. And these decisions need to be protective of environmental goals.’

‘Policies to increase our nation’s energy security must be based on a realistic combination of the development of our own resources and the utilisation of resources from abroad that are stable and beneficial to the US,’ Drevna said. ‘Right now, no nation on the plant limits its access to its own oil and natural gas deposits as much as the US. Continuing these severe restrictions, and then complaining about our reliance on unstable foreign sources of petroleum, is illogical. Our policies need to be pragmatic and flexible.’

The full report is available at www.npra.org

Read the article online at: https://www.hydrocarbonengineering.com/gas-processing/29042010/npra_discusses_carbon_restrictions/


 

Embed article link: (copy the HTML code below):