Malloy: we don’t need no stinkin’ oil

 

Dannel discovers that even hydrogen fuel cell parks run on natural gas

Dannel discovers that even hydrogen fuel cell parks run on natural gas

Malloy comes out against keystone pipeline. Interesting position for the governor of a state entirely dependent on out-of-state energy sources, and whose industries could only benefit from a stable supply of cheap fuel. “We’ll have windmills,” Malloy insisted. “Windmills, rainbows and butterflies – you just watch.” He then donned his tutu and skipped away.

29 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

29 responses to “Malloy: we don’t need no stinkin’ oil

  1. housecat

    Why, pray tell, is Dannell weighing in on this? Did someone divert the pipeline to cut through CT?

    • FF

      Hate to tell you guys, but Connecticut doesn’t need Keystone all that much. 47.4% of the state power comes from the Millstone reactors.

      • Cos Cobber

        You really are a dolt FF. Keystone is not about electricity, its about low cost fuel for autos, trains, planes and plastics manufacturing. A stronger farm belt, a stronger manufacturing sector in the upper and lower Midwest is good for all of America.

        Last I knew, people around here like and rely on autos and planes.

      • housecat

        Not sure if I agree that we (in North America as a whole ) don’t need Keystone. However, you reinforce my point that it really isn’t necessary for Malloy to weigh in on this subject, let alone chew out the Governor of a state which will be affected by it. If (for example) the Gov of Wyoming called Malloy names and took him to task over our states’s gun laws, what would your response be? Because mine would be the same as it is here: not your problem, buddy

  2. Cos Cobber

    What an idiot. Keystone is a win-win for the North American economy.

    Meanwhile, back in CT, the state is short on nat gas supplies as we phase out coal. I don’t think the anti-fracking crowd in Albany has any desire/plans/tolerance to allow for an expansion of those critical gas transmission lines through NYS to service us.

    What to do? New England will probably have to ask Quebec yet again for a supply of energy. Look for Midwest nat gas to ponder a transmission loop from Ohio through Ontario and Quebec back to New England thanks to NYS.

    • Malloy had to rebuke Bobby Jindal, who started mouthing standard right wing GOP jargon. Even the other governors were taken aback. A reminder for Cos Cobber and housecat: Bobby Jindal was the guy after the 2012 election that said the GOP had to stop being the “stupid party.” Maybe he is stupid himself..?? Congrats to Malloy for standing up to him.
      Oh and by the way, Keystone has been blocked in Nebraska by the courts when the governor and legislature tried to do an end around. Now it is under appeal. Of course, Jindal did not mention that. Pray tell, he should just keep quiet.
      Great comment by Malloy…about Jindal being a cheap shot artist.

      • housecat

        Malloy has actual problems to resolve right here in CT. He did not “have to” rebuke Jindal on an issue that does not directly affect this state. Who the fuck cares what some knucklehead in Louisiana says about a pipeline in Nebraska? Malloy’s opinion is about as relevant to this issue as the Neil Abercrombie’s (another Governor of a state nowhere near the pipeline).
        And, FYI, I’m not a Republican. Do you honestly think my inbox would be flooded with Team Obama emails if I were?

        • In fact, Jindal represents Louisiana, which has the refineries that will refine Canadian oil, so he does have a stake in the issue. You’re quite right, though, other than an interest in general energy policy, which he lacks, Malloy has no dog in this fight.

      • Cos Cobber

        I know who Bobby Jindal is. He’s irrelevant.

        And so what if Nebraska has blocked the pipeline. The democrats are finding any and everything to delay the pipeline because low cost fossil energy is bad for new wave green energy projects. Its that simple. Democrats don’t care that lost cost energy is good for all layers of society, perhaps most appreciably the bottom 50%.

        I shudder to think where this country would today without the recent domestic oil and gas boom. Its been tremendously successful at reducing our trade deficit and helping select parts of this country rebound.
        Fortunately the domestic boom has been through a thousand points of access unlike Canada’s single throat to choke.

        Its pitiful how many democrats are towing the party line on this pipeline. Its pathetic partisan politics hell bent on destruction.

        • I note that everyone jumped to the defense of Jindal on the pipeline. But his comments also referred to mandates, minimum wage, etc. He was out of line, and Malloy called him on it. Like I said, standard jargon. And sorry CC, he is thinking about running for President, so he is not irrelevant. And you and housecat do not deny his stupid party remarks; remember them??
          Keystone is delayed. CC, was the judge who issued the ruling a Democrat? Let me know if he is. Now an interesting thought: what energy should we subsidize? Nuclear is dead, too expensive. Coal is going downhill. The US gives massive subsidies to the oil companies for oil, natural gas, etc. That according to the GOP, must be a GOOD subsidy. Anything for wind/solar is a BAD subsidy, since Democrats support it. I, for one, think we need to diversify these things. I brought up a couple of weeks ago that many in the GOP in the West support green initiatives from an article in the Times. It was met with silence on this blog……
          Of course, if we stopped our subsidies of the oil companies, our gasoline bill would skyrocket, right? And Keystone fits the GOP agenda as a GOOD subsidy. So CC: when you say Democrats (note I used a capital here) do not want low cost energy, does that mean republicans support high cost energy with their past support of nuclear????? Let us know.

        • Cos Cobber

          Bob, what more is there to say about Jindel ‘stupid party’ comments? I don’t disagree with him on that. Republicans do stupid crap all the time. I’m not afraid to acknowledge this. And here’s a recent stupid Republican move. Cafaro and the few in Hartford called Republicans think the 500MM state budget surplus should be refunded to the tax payers. Its a stupid idea. Instead it should used as a down payment on our insane underfunded state pensions. I’m for fiscal principals first, political gains second.

          On the pipeline, why am I not surprised you offer up more deflection while avoiding the heart of the matter. We have an opportunity to add more low cost energy to our nation’s supply by diversifying with a fourth regional oil source beyond the gulf, west Texas and north Dakota. Its that simple. This isn’t a discussion about nuclear, wind, solar, geothermal, tidal power, or any other source. This is about oil, which helps improve the living standards for all socio-economic layers of the US, most notably the bottom 50% who are particularly sensitive to high energy bills (home heating oil/auto fuel). How soon we all forget the real pain near $5 gas gave our economy in ’06 to ’08. It was real.

          Of course, the Democrats are doing everything they can to make this about everything else other than what it is.

          As for Nebraska, you know full and well that any lawsuit anywhere at anytime can stop anything under our extensive and broad environmental laws. What the Nebraska case is really about is the flimsy political cover it is providing for those inexplicably against the project. And no, I have no worries about the judge’s affiliation because it wont be meaningful in the end (the pipeline could be rerouted through or around the state if necessary). In fact, the judge’s political affiliation never ever crossed my mind as something in play here.

          Let me know when a prominent Democrat – supposedly ‘for the people’ – supports the pipeline.

      • oh yes, i see it, the white, paternalistic Father Knows Best

  3. anon

    I didn’t hear ANY Connecticut politician say peep last week when Sikorsky cut 600 jobs, mostly from their Stratford plant where they make the Black Hawk. Where’s Malloy on this?

    • Sikorsky makes helicopters with scary guns – hence, good riddance.

      • anon

        Sikorsky has seen the handwriting on the wall for awhile. See this from the WSJ: good bye Connecticut hello Turkey.

        Sikorsky Aircraft announced plans Friday to shed 600 workers in response to weaker demand for its military helicopters following defense budget cuts in the U.S. and overseas, though also secured a new $3.5 billion deal with Turkey.
        The maker of Black Hawk helicopters has cut around 2,000 jobs over the past two years, reducing its present workforce to 16,500 worldwide as it worked to trim costs and adapt to lower Pentagon spending while pursuing international sales.

  4. Malloy expects our energy to come from that source which democrats seem to prefer: nonobtainium.

  5. towny

    Fact of the matter is: we would like to see better transit points for Bakken, whilst limiting transit access for Chinese owned oil coming out of Alberta. The comments from the above referring to the Trans Canada pipeline are naive at best.

    • Anonymous

      Naive of what? The Bakken could also be served by the same pipeline. I’ll take a fourth major oil field from a friendly country over Central American and Arab oil anyday of the week. We are still net importers of oil and we could put many more to work at our refineries as exporters should there truly prove to be a long term North American surplus.

      • towny

        Lol. The propaganda fed nationalistic fantasies are endearing but the fact of the matter is the stuff mined out of North America just isnt that great a product to frack into gasoline. The main petrochemical uses are: diesel, lube, tar, plastic and building products.

        Now be a good chap and go fill up your Toyota with some gasoline from Citgo, BP, Texaco, Shell, and then ask yourself: Why, for the past 3 decades, one could travel the world over and buy a Ford with a 50 mpg turbo diesel whilst the US is a net exporter of diesel fuel.

        • Cos Cobber

          Alberta tar sands not ideal for gasoline, so what? It will be used in some industry as an advantage. The crap they are mining in Alberta isn’t going back into a hole in the ground, it is getting bought and put to use in some value add process. Duh.

          I doubt they are building a pipeline to ship something of no use.

          Talk about exporting diesel, foreign ownership of refineries or the tar sands and oil fields is again irrelevant and confusing what is very simple.

        • towny

          Let me be perfectly clear here CC. Chinese nationalized oil is not your friend. Quit shilling for the sons of Mao.

          That transit point is worth a whole heck of alot more than what is currently on the table.

        • Cos Cobber

          I fail to see why it matters for the US if China is a major investor in Canadian Oil Sands. The majority of the economic gain will go to Canadian labor, taxes and locally incurred expenses.

          China’s role in Canada may come and go. Moreover, their participation shouldn’t be a deterrent to enhancing our industrial base which generates those precious blue collar jobs.

          • Don’t waste your breath, CC, these people aren’t actually concerned about Chinese investment dollars, or private property rights, or anything else they may throw up on the screen, they just want to stop Americans from having access to fossil fuels. What the rest of the world does with it instead is not their concern – big pictures aren’t their forte.

  6. Publius

    I find it interesting that the “standard jargon” actually refers to the Progressive talking points that are repeated ad nauseam like the massive subsidies to the oil and gas industries versus wind and solar subsidies. The “massive subsidies” of the fossil fuel industries are really those that are available to all manufacturing companies and are not particular to the oil and gas industries. These subsidies are called depreciation/amortization and depletion. These are non cash charges that reduce taxable income. Manufacturers of solar panels and wind turbines use these “subsidies” as well. The one unique non cash charge is depletion that is generally applicable to extractive industries that include fossil fuels as well as the mining industry. The mining industry is the one that provides the minerals and elements that make all of our favorite toys work, like an IProduct or the Prius.

    The subsidies directed at the solar and wind industries away from those noted above are provided to make them less expensive than they would be without them. Wind and solar are very expensive so the cost is being shifted from specific users/generators to the general public through federal and state subsidies. Fossil fuels on the other hand are not given any additional subsidies to make them competitive but rather are taxed fairly heavily at the federal and state levels. Even still, fossil fuels provide more consistent, reliable and affordable energy that alternative at this point in the technological cycle. One only has to look at Germany that went all in on the alternative energy mantra and is now suffering from sticker shock.

    Solar and wind energy makes some sense in areas where the sun shines consistently and the wind blows continuously. Solar not in the Northeast but in the Southwest. However you have the Northeast installing solar (NJ was the largest state using tax credits for this) and the very same Prog/Liberals blocking wind projects when it is in their yard. Think the Mass. liberals including the Kennedy’s blocking the Cape Wind project. Solar in the Southwest is not without controversy. These projects are on federal land (the same land where the drill count is falling) and span tens of thousands of acres. An eyesore at the least but now turning into an environmental nightmare because these projects fry birds and upsets the turtles. Ditto with wind turbines killing protected birds that would get a drilling rig or refinery shut down by the feds if as much as 1 bird was found dead on the property. Alternative energy sources are not as reliable as fossil fuels at this point.

    Nuclear is the ultimate green energy but it has been grossly mismanaged, no surprise I guess, however the Feds just issued loans guarantees of $6.5 billion for 2 nuclear reactors being built in Georgia.
    http://www.ajc.com/news/news/breaking-news/a-65b-federal-loan-guarantee-jolts-ga-nuclear-powe/ndWgF/

    Nuclear should be part of our broad energy portfolio but the hurdle is overcoming the Luddites whom think it is a disaster. Apparently the Progs have no problem with terrorists possessing nuclear capabilities (Iran North Korea, Pakistan) but a clean/green energy nuclear facility is bad. There are negatives to nuclear but repeating 3 mile Island or Fukushima is just another mantra and not an intelligent way to address the challenges.

    Sorry for the length, quite a bit more than 2 cents

    • towny

      Pub
      TY. Excellent analysis.
      There is the notion of the huge expansion of cheap credit in the disquise of stimulus that hasnt been much more than a hail mary pass- just hoping to break even.

      How bout your 2 cents on ethanol and other vegetable fuels.

      • Publius

        Towny,
        Ethanol is a fraud. It does not do as advertised and is pushing up the cost of food for everyone and it falls disproportionately on the lower/middle class. Its support knows no political bounds so it has been difficult to kill. Veggie fuels, again are a niche at this point and ultimately drives up food prices and subsidies skew the decision making of what to plant by creating demand for a particular crop at the expense of another. I don’t think putting food in your tank is a great idea. I think putting food in people’s stomachs at lower cost is the better way to go