SBE Council chief economist Raymond Keating was in Trenton, NJ today to let the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) know that onerous regulations on natural gas development would come at a high cost to the economic welfare of New Jersey businesses and families. The DRBC held public hearings this week on pending regulations.
Keating said:
"Excessive rules and fees would amount to a de facto moratorium on natural gas development. The maze of red tape proposed by the Delaware River Basin Commission would inhibit New Jersey from taking advantage of the region's energy gold mine laying a mile beneath our feet.
"Safe development of the Marcellus Shale's vast resources through fair regulations would encourage commerce, entrepreneurship, and job growth throughout the region -- particularly good news for a state faced with a $10.5 billion budget shortfall and over 8% unemployment.
"As elected leaders, such as Governor Christie, face difficult decisions to ameliorate state financial woes, the jobs and investment available through natural gas production should come as a welcome relief."
It is important to note that on SBE Council's "Small Business Survival Index 2010: Ranking the Policy Environment for Entrepreneurship Across the Nation," which ranks the states according to their public policy climates for small business and entrepreneurship, New Jersey ranked 50th – or second worst – among the 50 states and District of Columbia.
Keating added: "The state's economic environment needs to improve wherever it can, including in the area of energy development."
DRBC is a federal/interstate government agency responsible for the water quality and supply of the Delaware River basin. The agency's commission is comprised of representatives from New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware and the Army Corps of Engineers. DRBC has schedule public hearings this week to hearing comments from the community regarding the agency's proposed regulations on natural gas development projects.
SBE Council Staff Post
Showing posts with label energy and the states. Show all posts
Showing posts with label energy and the states. Show all posts
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Monday, April 19, 2010
Offshore Energy Offers Economic Gains
Offshore energy exploration and development would provide tremendous benefits for the nation in terms of expanded supplies of oil and natural gas, with that funneling into prices and into more secure energy supplies.
But there's more, for example, in terms of increased economic output, jobs and wages...
Read the complete SBE Council Energy & Entrepreneurs analysis here.
But there's more, for example, in terms of increased economic output, jobs and wages...
Read the complete SBE Council Energy & Entrepreneurs analysis here.
Tuesday, March 02, 2010
Energy Cost Index 2010
SBE Council President & CEO Karen Kerrigan said: "Too often, our elected officials choose to ignore the reality that politics affects energy costs for consumers and small businesses. They should consider where their state ranks, and examine how policy can be changed to help bring down energy costs."
SBE Council's "Energy Cost Index 2010" looks at two major energy costs affecting small businesses, individuals and families: 1) the price of regular gasoline at the pump, and 2) the cost of electricity (average revenue per kilowatthour). Each are calculated as indices and combined into one index.
At the top - or the lowest cost states - are: 1) Wyoming, 2) Kentucky, 3t) Missouri, 3t) Oklahoma, 5) Idaho, 6) West Virginia, 7) Louisiana, 8) North Dakota, 9) Iowa, 10t) Nebraska, 10t) South Dakota, and 10t) Utah.
At the other end are the highest cost states (including the District of Columbia): 42t) District of Columbia, 42t) Rhode Island, 44) New Jersey, 45) California, 46) New Hampshire, 47) Massachusetts, 48) New York, 49) Alaska, 50) Connecticut, and 51) Hawaii. The full rankings follow at the end of this release.
Raymond J. Keating, SBE Council chief economist and author of the report, observed: "While other factors certainly come into play, governmental actions explain part of the difference in energy prices from state to state. Quite simply, higher taxes, increased regulation and more mandates on the energy front translate into higher energy costs. It's straightforward economics that should not be ignored for the sake of political pandering."
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Kansas Coal Plant and Energy Uncertainty
With former Governor Kathleen Sebelius off to serve in the Obama administration, the new governor of Kansas, Mark Parkinson, a Democrat, changed the energy game in the state.
Sebelius had blocked two 700-mega-watt coal plants from being built in Kansas. Parkinson, however, moved quickly to reach a deal with Sunflower Energy to build one new 895-mega-watt coal plant, with Sunflower pledging more investment in wind turbines, pollution controls and energy efficiency, according to a May 5 report from the Kansas City Star.
That’s a positive step forward compared to the two-year political battle Sebelius waged against expanded energy production.
However, there is no reason why the building of a coal-fired power plant must become a political card as part of a play to get legislation passed that will mandate increased use of renewables.
The most economically sound, common sense energy agenda is to remove unnecessary government costs and obstacles, eliminate subsidies or mandates favoring one kind of energy source over another, and let the market work.
Unfortunately, that too often is not the case – in the states and at the federal level.
Indeed, the threat of increased regulation regarding emissions – i.e., cap-and-trade regulation/taxation – from the nation’s capital makes energy investments uncertain. As the Star report noted: “Also, new carbon regulations from Congress could steeply increase the cost of coal plants.” That is the clearest effect of the Obama energy agenda as it is being advanced.
Raymond J. Keating
Chief Economist
Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council
Sebelius had blocked two 700-mega-watt coal plants from being built in Kansas. Parkinson, however, moved quickly to reach a deal with Sunflower Energy to build one new 895-mega-watt coal plant, with Sunflower pledging more investment in wind turbines, pollution controls and energy efficiency, according to a May 5 report from the Kansas City Star.
That’s a positive step forward compared to the two-year political battle Sebelius waged against expanded energy production.
However, there is no reason why the building of a coal-fired power plant must become a political card as part of a play to get legislation passed that will mandate increased use of renewables.
The most economically sound, common sense energy agenda is to remove unnecessary government costs and obstacles, eliminate subsidies or mandates favoring one kind of energy source over another, and let the market work.
Unfortunately, that too often is not the case – in the states and at the federal level.
Indeed, the threat of increased regulation regarding emissions – i.e., cap-and-trade regulation/taxation – from the nation’s capital makes energy investments uncertain. As the Star report noted: “Also, new carbon regulations from Congress could steeply increase the cost of coal plants.” That is the clearest effect of the Obama energy agenda as it is being advanced.
Raymond J. Keating
Chief Economist
Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
SBE Council Releases Energy Cost Index Ranking the States
On April 7, the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council (SBE Council) released the "Energy Cost Index 2009," which ranks the 50 states and District of Columbia according to key energy costs affecting business.
SBE Council's "Energy Cost Index 2009" looks at two major energy costs affecting small businesses, individuals and families: 1) the price of regular gasoline at the pump, and 2) the cost of electricity (average revenue per kilowatthour). Each are calculated as indices and combined into one index.
At the top - or the lowest cost states - are: 1) Wyoming, 2) Idaho, 3) Utah, 4) Kentucky, 5) West Virginia, 6) Missouri, 7) Nebraska, 8t) Indiana, 8t) Iowa, 8t) North Dakota, 11) South Dakota, 12t) Arkansas, 12t) Kansas, 12t) South Carolina, and 15) Oklahoma.
The highest cost states (including the District of Columbia) include: 37) Florida, 38) Delaware, 39) Vermont, 40) Maryland, 41t) District of Columbia, 41t) Maine, 43) New Jersey, 44t) California, 44t) New Hampshire, 46) Massachusetts, 47) Rhode Island, 48) Alaska, 49t) Connecticut, 49t) New York, and 51) Hawaii.
Raymond J. Keating, SBE Council chief economist and author of the report says that the costs of energy are impacted by a variety of factors, including economic growth, investment in exploration and development of resources, the particular energy resources being utilized (such as coal, natural gas or renewables), political risks (for example, in terms of risks to oil production at home and around the globe), and government mandates, regulations and taxes. Making energy more affordable and abundant should be a key objective for policymakers, according to Keating, if they want to help small businesses survive the current economic turmoil, and thrive once a recovery takes hold.
He observes: "In tough economic conditions such as these, elected officials at all levels of government need to be aware of how their policies impact energy costs, and in turn small businesses. Higher taxes and increased regulations and mandates only add to the cost burdens of entrepreneurs, and negatively affect a state's competitiveness and economy."
According to Keating, the Index will help elected officials determine how their state stacks up against the others. The full report can be read on SBE Council's website by clicking here.
SBE Council's "Energy Cost Index 2009" looks at two major energy costs affecting small businesses, individuals and families: 1) the price of regular gasoline at the pump, and 2) the cost of electricity (average revenue per kilowatthour). Each are calculated as indices and combined into one index.
At the top - or the lowest cost states - are: 1) Wyoming, 2) Idaho, 3) Utah, 4) Kentucky, 5) West Virginia, 6) Missouri, 7) Nebraska, 8t) Indiana, 8t) Iowa, 8t) North Dakota, 11) South Dakota, 12t) Arkansas, 12t) Kansas, 12t) South Carolina, and 15) Oklahoma.
The highest cost states (including the District of Columbia) include: 37) Florida, 38) Delaware, 39) Vermont, 40) Maryland, 41t) District of Columbia, 41t) Maine, 43) New Jersey, 44t) California, 44t) New Hampshire, 46) Massachusetts, 47) Rhode Island, 48) Alaska, 49t) Connecticut, 49t) New York, and 51) Hawaii.
Raymond J. Keating, SBE Council chief economist and author of the report says that the costs of energy are impacted by a variety of factors, including economic growth, investment in exploration and development of resources, the particular energy resources being utilized (such as coal, natural gas or renewables), political risks (for example, in terms of risks to oil production at home and around the globe), and government mandates, regulations and taxes. Making energy more affordable and abundant should be a key objective for policymakers, according to Keating, if they want to help small businesses survive the current economic turmoil, and thrive once a recovery takes hold.
He observes: "In tough economic conditions such as these, elected officials at all levels of government need to be aware of how their policies impact energy costs, and in turn small businesses. Higher taxes and increased regulations and mandates only add to the cost burdens of entrepreneurs, and negatively affect a state's competitiveness and economy."
According to Keating, the Index will help elected officials determine how their state stacks up against the others. The full report can be read on SBE Council's website by clicking here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)