Energy Policy

The woman who says she represents North American Power is not telling the truth about the benefits of buying electricity from her company. "You can save up to 10, 15, 20 percent of your bill, depending on your usage," she says in a telemarketing call to my house. But the rate she eventually quotes is only about 7 percent less than the standard price offered by Baltimore Gas & Electric — something the average customer would have no way of knowing. And of course the percentage savings won't vary even if my "usage" goes up to that of a steel mill.

In his speech before the Newspapers Association of America/American Society of News Editors Wednesday, likely GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney accused the president of changing positions to get re-elected. For instance, Mr. Romney charged that, "As president," Mr. Obama "delayed the development of our oil and coal and natural gas. Now, as candidate Obama, he says he favors an energy policy that adopts an all-of-the-above approach. " That's not exactly right. Yes, Mr. Obama still says he's in favor of an all-of-the-above energy policy, but that hasn't slowed him down in his pursuit of his very-few-of-the-above policy.

What a great, common-sense commentary by Charles Campbell on President Obama's misguided energy policies ("U.S. energy policy: slow national suicide," Nov. 21). Mr. Obama once again shows he is not a backer of U.S. energy self-reliance, while helping the Chinese to boot. As usual, he talks big about China, but he is actually much more willing to help the Chinese and the Brazilians than he is to help Americans. Whether he and his leftist friends realize it or not, the world is moving forward, and if we continue having to count on Middle Eastern oil, we will be a third-rate nation before we know it. Lyle Rescott, Marriottsville

Peter Morici attacks President Barack Obama for pursuing an energy policy which seeks to develop alternative energy sources ("Obama's bad bet," April 3). He brings up the Solyndra debacle, begun under theGeorge W. Bush administration, as evidence that we should just "drill, baby, drill" and deal with the environmental risks engendered. The problem with Solyndra was ultimately a political one, and it certainly should not be taken as evidence that we should stop seeking alternative energy sources.

Op-ed contributor Peter Morici talks about "Obama's failed oil policy" (April 26), but what has really failed is the lack of energy policies from President Reagan right down to President Obama. The last president to talk seriously about a national energy policy was President Carter, and his call for a long-term vision was largely ignored. Thirty years later we still depend on fossil fuels and drive gas-guzzling vehicles. Blaming high gasoline prices on someone who's been in office less than three years is ludicrous.

The recent Senate vote on the Keystone XL Pipeline ("Senate rejects GOP effort to advance oil pipeline," March 9) demonstrates the pathetic Republican energy policy. First, it advocates opening up more offshore sites for oil drilling leasing despite the fact that millions of acres currently under lease to oil companies have never been explored. Then it advocates construction of the Keystone Pipeline threatening the Ogallala Aquifer that is crucial to Midwest agriculture by a company whose prior pipeline experience has resulted in accidents and spills.

In his op-ed, "Gulf spill a lesson nation must heed" (May 10), Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin makes the argument that environmental groups have been slow to articulate: The BP oil spill is not just a failure of the oil companies or federal regulators — it is a failure of our energy policy to shift to clean energy sources. The recent string of energy disasters — the fatal natural gas plant explosion in Connecticut in February; the deadly Massey mining collapse in West Virginia in April; and the ongoing BP oil geyser in Louisiana — represent more than just the physical risks of the energy extraction.

I asked my German son-in-law how his brother's new home in Hamburg was coming along. He said that the government supports his use of all of the existing modern technologies of geothermal, solar and wind, high efficiency insulation, windows, and appliances to reduce energy costs. Thus, one of the most powerful economies in the world can seamlessly decide to close all nuclear plants within the decade without a ripple from their populace because they have been preparing for the future.

In his speech before the Newspapers Association of America/American Society of News Editors Wednesday, likely GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney accused the president of changing positions to get re-elected. For instance, Mr. Romney charged that, "As president," Mr. Obama "delayed the development of our oil and coal and natural gas. Now, as candidate Obama, he says he favors an energy policy that adopts an all-of-the-above approach. " That's not exactly right. Yes, Mr. Obama still says he's in favor of an all-of-the-above energy policy, but that hasn't slowed him down in his pursuit of his very-few-of-the-above policy.

In 1969, three unrelated events occurred that have since been combined with political bungling to slowly strangle the U.S. economy. Moammar Gadhafi overthrew King Idris of Libya. He nationalized Western oil company reserves with no retribution from the U.S. Sensing our weakness, all of the other OPEC nations abrogated their concession agreements with U.S. companies. The Arab producers cut back production and embargoed the U.S. because of our support for Israel. Middle East despots have been in the driver's seat ever since, and as the Arab Spring seems increasingly likely to empower Islamists, things are unlikely to get better.

I asked my German son-in-law how his brother's new home in Hamburg was coming along. He said that the government supports his use of all of the existing modern technologies of geothermal, solar and wind, high efficiency insulation, windows, and appliances to reduce energy costs. Thus, one of the most powerful economies in the world can seamlessly decide to close all nuclear plants within the decade without a ripple from their populace because they have been preparing for the future.

The recent Senate vote on the Keystone XL Pipeline ("Senate rejects GOP effort to advance oil pipeline," March 9) demonstrates the pathetic Republican energy policy. First, it advocates opening up more offshore sites for oil drilling leasing despite the fact that millions of acres currently under lease to oil companies have never been explored. Then it advocates construction of the Keystone Pipeline threatening the Ogallala Aquifer that is crucial to Midwest agriculture by a company whose prior pipeline experience has resulted in accidents and spills.

The news article by Gus Sentementes about the reasons for the current rise in gas prices ("Increases fueled by demand in China and India, turmoil in Mideast," Feb. 22) curiously omits three other and more important reasons for the rise in gas prices: failure of the Obama administration to approve new U.S. land and offshore oil drilling permits, failure to approve the Keystone XL pipeline to Texas, and failure to proceed with investigations into oil speculation. In 2007, when gas prices were at the unbelievable rate of $3.22, then-Senator Barack Obama demanded the FTC investigate "big oil. " In the 2008 presidential election year, presidential nominee Barack Obama blamed the Bush administration for lacking an energy policy to combat high oil prices.

As a connoisseur of the wide open spaces between what politicians say and what politicians do, I saw promise in Gov. Martin O'Malley years ago. "Taking on BGE to stop the rate hikes" was his main 2006 campaign message, an assignment that was doomed from the first, stirring television ad. The Baltimore Gas and Electric price increase of that year was cemented in law and history, a fait accompli engineered in no small degree by O'Malley's Democratic...

The basic problem with Charles Campbell's commentary on energy policy is that drilling for oil and gas, which he strongly advocates, creates toxic substances that continue to poison the planet ("U.S. energy policy: Slow national suicide," Nov. 21). Mr. Campbell makes no mention of Germany and other countries which are decades ahead of us in terms of solar energy and conservation. He also makes no mention of the environmental and social costs of cheap oil, or of the vast amounts of energy wasted in gas-guzzling cars and trucks because we lack decent mass transit systems.

What a great, common-sense commentary by Charles Campbell on President Obama's misguided energy policies ("U.S. energy policy: slow national suicide," Nov. 21). Mr. Obama once again shows he is not a backer of U.S. energy self-reliance, while helping the Chinese to boot. As usual, he talks big about China, but he is actually much more willing to help the Chinese and the Brazilians than he is to help Americans. Whether he and his leftist friends realize it or not, the world is moving forward, and if we continue having to count on Middle Eastern oil, we will be a third-rate nation before we know it. Lyle Rescott, Marriottsville

It's been a rough month for Canada. America's biggest trading partner and overall non-jerk country just wants to sell some oil to its friends. Canada is sitting on a black-gold mine, but its oil sales are unable to keep pace with production -- a problem that will only increase as the nation further taps the Alberta oil sands and Arctic territory. Canada's conservative prime minister, Stephen Harper, understands that energy means influence and independence. It would be tough to argue that Canada is on some kind of power trip, and it's not difficult to understand why the country is interested in establishing oil trade deals that would help its closest ideological allies retain their energy independence.

The article in Tuesday's paper pertaining to the Constellation-Exelon merger ("PSC should be skeptical of Constellation-Exelon merger," June 28) is the exact reason why nearly two years ago I filed a lawsuit against the Maryland Public Service Commission concerning the merger of Constellation with the French company, EDF. The lawsuit is now on appeal in the Court of Special Appeals. We can go back to at least 1992 to point out the exploitation of the customers of BGE — just look at the high rates and poor service which the customers experience.

It's been a rough month for Canada. America's biggest trading partner and overall non-jerk country just wants to sell some oil to its friends. Canada is sitting on a black-gold mine, but its oil sales are unable to keep pace with production -- a problem that will only increase as the nation further taps the Alberta oil sands and Arctic territory. Canada's conservative prime minister, Stephen Harper, understands that energy means influence and independence. It would be tough to argue that Canada is on some kind of power trip, and it's not difficult to understand why the country is interested in establishing oil trade deals that would help its closest ideological allies retain their energy independence.

In 1969, three unrelated events occurred that have since been combined with political bungling to slowly strangle the U.S. economy. Moammar Gadhafi overthrew King Idris of Libya. He nationalized Western oil company reserves with no retribution from the U.S. Sensing our weakness, all of the other OPEC nations abrogated their concession agreements with U.S. companies. The Arab producers cut back production and embargoed the U.S. because of our support for Israel. Middle East despots have been in the driver's seat ever since, and as the Arab Spring seems increasingly likely to empower Islamists, things are unlikely to get better.