Red Rock Rural Water is getting set to host an event that focuses on area drinking water as it relates to agriculture.
The event, which is slated for July 29, is called "Drinking Water Resources & Agriculture Field Day."
Red
Rock Rural Water General Manager Domnic Jones recently pointed out that
water and agriculture are two highly-valued local resources.
"This
event invites all owners of property within the DWSMA, better explained
as the Drinking Water Source Management Area," Jones said. "It is our
goal to further educate the public on the importance of groundwater
protection, acknowledge the sensitive areas and increase the awareness
of how proper nutrient management helps the bottom line of our area
producers."
This event is an opportunity to learn more about rural water issues in southwestern Minnesota.
In April 2007, the Morris Sun Tribune ran a pretty good feature on the development of rural water systems in southwest Minnesota, Blueprints for success?. Poor quality drinking water stymied economic growth; some farm well water wasn't suitable even for livestock. A Minnesota Department of Health newsletter article focused on RRRW in 2003.
Photo: Some of the water system's namesake red rocks in Cottonwood County.
Another Southern Minnesota newspaper chimes in on Congresswoman Bachmann's silliness about drilling. In Oil is where you find it, the New Ulm Journal editorial board says:
U.S. Rep. Michelle Bachmann has joined the growing list of those who
insist we must drill for oil wherever it may be in order to lower fuel
prices.
Bachmann, after a tour of energy sites in Colorado and
Alaska with other Republican members of Congress, says we can cut our
gas prices in half if we tap our own energy sources more completely.
Well,
a lot of oil experts dispute that. The easy-to-reach oil has been
tapped, they say. If we do drill everywhere we can, the U.S.'s oil
supply is still on a downward turn.
We've heard others who make a
lot of sense when they say the best way to reduce our dependence on oil
is to simply use less of it. If Americans can reduce their consumption
of oil, and we are by far the world's leading consumer, it would have
an immediate impact on supply and demand - not by increasing supply but
by lowering demand - and that should affect the prices. . . .
Both cite Bluestem Prairie for posts in which we debunkedmalarky in these claims when Brian Davis--and his letter-writing camp followers--made them earlier. Now Brian's BFF Bachmann and the Boehner Bunkum Brigade are recycling this rot. We're all for composting and fertilizer, folks, but it's the middle of the summer, folks, and broadcasting it this time of year defies the best practices for manure management.
"We are the only country in the world that does not allow off-shore
drilling, and yet we're the largest consumer of oil and the third
largest producer," he says.
These pearls of wisdom about how the U.S.A. doesn't allow off-shore drilling will come as a shock to the folks working at the U.S. government's Minerals Management Service. Its website outlines its mission:
The dedicated men and
women of the Minerals Management Service regulate domestic energy
production off America’s coast on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
We also collect and disburse royalty revenue generated from energy
production on all Federal and American Indian lands. In our short,
25-year history, we have disbursed more than $176 billion to states,
American Indians, and the U.S. Treasury.
We, the people
at MMS, oversee an offshore energy program that provides about 27
percent of America’s domestic oil production and about 15 percent of
our domestic natural gas production. Without MMS’s hard work, our
nation’s reliance on foreign sources of oil would likely be even
higher than it is today.
. . .we've repeatedly documented Davis's own loose relationship with facts.
Now, we see signs that this disorder may be contagious. Editors: fact
check those stories if your staff writers have gotten near this
campaign. The journalistic reputation you save may be your own.
Image: When Brian Davis is around, facts fly out the window. Ouch!
Third update: The answer below didn't satisfy Hailperin, who asked in an email for examples of actual drilling going on. We located a July 22, 2008 press release from the MMS, Tropical Storm
Dolly Activity Statistics Update:
Offshore oil and gas operators in the Gulf of Mexico are evacuating platforms and rigs in the path of Tropical Storm Dolly. The Minerals Management Service has activated its Continuity of Operations Plan team to monitor the operators’ activities. This team will be activated until operations return to normal and the storm is no longer a threat to the Gulf of Mexico oil and gas activities.
Based on data from offshore operator reports submitted as of 11:30
a.m. CST today, personnel have been evacuated from a total of 49 production platforms, equivalent to 6.8 % of the 717 manned platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. Production platforms are the structures
located offshore from which oil and natural gas are produced.These structures remain in the same location throughout a project’s duration unlike drilling rigs which typically move from location to location.
Personnel from 6 rigs have also been evacuated; this is equivalent to
4.9 % of the 123 rigs currently operating in the Gulf. Rigs can include several types of self-contained offshore drilling facilities including jackups, submersibles and semisubmersibles.
Hope the presences of 123 rigs is good enough (the MMS was kind enough to provide definitions of production platforms and drilling rigs, which we have highlighted).
If Dr. Hailperin wants us to make sure everyone of them is actually in the process of drilling, we suggest he buy us a plane ticket to the Gulf, charter a nice yacht, and we'd be happy to spend the rest of the summer checking each and every rig out. [end update].
Second update: Max Hailperin wonders in the comments section if it would be possible to have production without any new drilling. A good question which can be answered by looking at the lease sales pages on the MMS's website. Lease sales are ongoing in open areas. The final proposal for the 2007-2012 program, for instance, included only one currently area now off-limits, in the Mid-Atlantic off the coast of Virginia. According to page 69, this now-forbidden area is a small piece in the 5-year plan. Should the moratorium not be lifted:
Only a small level of activity and production was estimated to occur as a result of including the area off Virginia; therefore, the level of impacts that would not occur without a sale and resulting activity would be small as well.
As readers can see, lease sales are taking place in open areas in the Gulf of Mexico and off Alaska. Since leases are regularly offered up, drilling--and that production the MMS touts--are indeed allowed offshore in these areas. We thank Dr. Hailperin for posing the question. Davis is still simply wrong: drilling is allowed in open areas. [end update]
Update: Looks like we're not the only one to notice this latest gaffe. We had just posted this entry, only to find a scathing press release in our inbox from Eric Fought, the new kid on the block at the state DFL's communications office:
Brian
Davis: Fighting for Big Oil
Davis energy plan puts oil companies over middle-class families, still distorts truth
(July 22, 2008) — Republican First District Congressional
candidate Brian Davis continues to demonstrate that his energy plan puts Big
Oil companies over middle-class families.
In a July 21 Star Tribune
chart on energy policy, Davis
stated that he opposes increased restrictions on speculation in oil markets.
Many reports argue that speculation plays a significant role in driving oil
prices higher worldwide.
In addition, Davis
continues to distort the truth on energy policy. In another recent example,
Davis claimed in a July 20
interview with Minnesota Public Radio that “[w]e’re the only
country in the world that does not allow off-shore drilling.” Facts from the Minerals Management Service (
MMS ), the federal agency that oversees off-shore
drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), directly contradict
Davis’s claim, showing that the OCS accounts for about 27% of
America’s domestic oil production.
"Mankato-area highway improvements — including new
interchanges on Highway 14, expansion of that highway to four lanes to
New Ulm, a Highway 169 bypass in St. Peter and other Highway 169
upgrades — will all be losers under a 20-year plan state highway
officials will unveil next Monday."
Go read the rest, and attend the meeting next Monday at 12:30 p.m. if you are able.
Speaker Pelosi's aide weighs in on action the leader wants taken on gas prices, according to the Washington Post's Capitol Briefing Blog:
Gas Prices
• Republicans have blocked comprehensive legislation that would have
increased oil production here at home and forced oil companies to use
the land they control or lose it. The legislation also would have
accelerated production in the 20 million acres in the National
Petroleum Reserve Alaska (NPRA) that could produce 10.6 billion barrels
of oil -- more oil than is in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
• Democrats will continue to call on the president use the full powers
of his office to expedite construction of natural gas and oil pipelines
from Alaska as soon as possible and fight to bring transparency to the
markets and to end speculators' ability to artificially inflate the
price at the pump.
• Action can be taken right now to reduce the price of gas right away -
releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. There is nothing
new or untested about releasing oil from the Reserve or deferring
purchases during times of economic instability. Presidents Bush,
Clinton, George H.W. Bush have all released oil from the SPR.
The final suggestion has been bashed by many conservative bloggers, even though a much greater sell-off has been proposed Newt Gingrich. It's funny how much wrath has been generated by Pelosi's suggestion to release ten percent v. Gingrich's plan to put fifty percent of the SPR on the market as we posted in Things that make you go hmmm: speculators, oil reserves, and Republican talking points. Minnesota's conservative bloggers scolded Pelosi, but not a peep that we know about Gingrich's modest proposal.
"The Star Tribune asked members of Minnesota's congressional delegation
and congressional candidates a number of questions regarding energy
policy."
It's interesting to go through the chart to compare and contrast the positions Southern Minnesota's three congressional candidates take on the laundry list of questions.
The three First District contenders agree that federal fuel taxes shouldn't be increased, Congress shouldn't reduce speed limits and that the government should increase the number of refineries. Nor do they favor a windfall profits tax.
One surprise area of agreement is on subsidies for "alternative" energy sources (we favor the term "renewable"); Walz, Day, and now suddenly Davis, all favor subsidies for wind, solar and biofuels. This marks a change for Davis, who has spoken out against subsidies for wind and biofuels in the past. In fact, on July 20, MPR reported:
Davis wants to cut subsidies for ethanol and wind.
We're curious about the time frame for Davis's answers, since the Strib chart is dated July 21. Was the Rochester Republican providing one answer to the Strib questionnaire and a different take to Minnesota Public Radio? Or where the questions simply worded differently?
The Strib apparently didn't ask about renewable energy standards and biofuel mandates. Walz and Day have voted for such measures on the federal and state level, respectively; Davis opposes them. Walz and Day also agree about increasing fuel efficiency standards; the chart shows Davis in opposition. Unless he has changed his stance on this issue as well, Davis actually favors eliminating fuel efficiency standards completely.
Walz and Day favor placing restrictions on speculation in oil markets; Davis does not. This is a distinctly minority position on the issue in Minnesota, with only the GOP candidates in the Fourth and Fifth districts joining Davis in simple opposition to the idea. Endorsed Third District GOP candidate Erick Paulsen and Seventh district DFL Collin Peterson gave answers that " added comments or otherwise qualified answer, a response that did not lend itself to a simple yes or no."
All of Paulsen's responses fell into that category; hopefully, he'll release his answers to the public, so voters in the Third will be able to gain a clearer view on where he stands. Congressman Walz also gave qualified answers to questions about deep-sea drilling and oil shale fields, so we hope he will do the same for those questions.
Walz parts company with both Republican primary opponents on drilling in ANWR, as well as subsidizing the nuclear power industry and so-called "clean coal" to liquid technology.
We just found the assessment of the MN-01 GOP primary as "increasingly ugly" and That of Walz being "in as good a position as any freshman to keep
his seat" in Real Clear Politics.
Minnesota 01: Mankato Democrat Tim Walz is popular in his
district, and with $433,000 raised through the Second Quarter and $1.21
million in the bank, he's in as good a position as any freshman to keep
his seat. An increasingly ugly Republican primary is only making
matters better for Walz, as State Senator Dick Day continues an uphill
battle against party-endorsed Mayo Clinic physician Brian Davis. Davis
raised $292,000 in the Second Quarter and ended with $377,000 in the
bank, while Day raised just $11,000 and still has $45,000 on hand. The
two will square off on September 9.
Help Tim Walz top his $97 thousand+ last quarter from small contributors (versus
under $30 thousand for self-funding Davis) by contributing $20, $50 or
more via this link. The current FEC pre-primary reporting period ends on August 20 for Minnesota's federal candidates. Regardless of who wins that ugly primary, Walz will need the funds to continue getting his message out via his grassroots field operation.
As Gov. Tim Pawlenty and a gaggle of DFL and Republican legislators
press for nuclear-power development by initially removing Minnesota's
ban on the controversial plants, a respected investment analyst has
issued a sobering report on skyrocketing costs and sinking prospects of
building nuclear generators.
In fact, it appears to many
observers that the only way to advance nuclear power in the United
States is to sharply increase government subsidies to an industry
that's already far ahead of other electric-generating forms in
receiving direct and indirect taxpayer support.
According to
recent estimates, building a new nuclear plant is nearly four times
more expensive than installing wind turbines and 2.5 times higher than
coal-fired plants yielding equivalent electricity. And while uranium
fuel for nuclear plants is inexpensive relative to coal and gas, wind
has zero fuel costs.
The article concludes:
The U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO)
issued a report last October that summarized subsidies for major
electrical-production sectors; it said (PDF):
• Of $11.5 billion
in energy research support, nuclear power received $6.2 billion, fossil
fuels (coal and natural gas) received $3.2 billion, and renewables
(wind and solar) got $1.4 billion.
• For direct subsidies
over the same period, fossil fuels (coal and gas) received the lion's
share at $13.7 billion, renewables (wind and solar) got $2.8 billion,
and nuclear received nothing because a production tax credit for new
facilities did not take effect since no new plants were built. However,
nuclear plants did benefit from the Price-Anderson liability limitation
The Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act in the event of an
accident, something that analysts say is worth hundreds of millions of
dollars per year in saved insurance costs. (In fact, without he
liability protection that was enacted in 1957, the nuclear power
industry likely would not exist in the U.S.)
As they push nuclear power, neither McCain nor Pawlenty — nor other
advocates, for that matter — discuss whether they would favor
increasing government subsidies for the energy source. But without
subsidy support, observers say it's unlikely that Wall Street financing
will be readily available.
In the First, Congressman Walz favors keeping nuclear power in the mix, as does Dick Day. GOP endorsed candidate Brian Davis favors promoting nuclear power, but cutting off subsidies for wind, asserting that renewable energy must live or die by the market. Somehow, Davis has managed to overlook the public inventment that would help underwrite new nuclear power plants.
Moreover, the industry has tried to get legislation passed that would remove congressional budget oversight from federal loan guarantee programs. According to the Hill, industry analysts have estimated that "nuclear utilities would need $50 billion in loan guarantees in the next two years."
In June, Frank Bowman, head of the Nuclear Energy Institute, called for additional government support in an op-ed piece published in the New York Post. Since investors are reluctant to support the industry without public subsidies
(and Davis doesn't like subsidies), we're curious how an extreme free
market kind of guy comes to advocate atomic power--while dissing wind,
solar and biofuels for their slice of the public investment pie.
. . .Davis's campaign that can make even the most solid journalist lose sight of simple facts. We saw this in the Austin Daily Herald article, Davis to again challenge Walz, an article based on the premise that Walz had defeated Davis in 2006 (Walz had actually defeated six-term incumbent Gil Gutknecht).
Then the Pioneer Press misreported fundraising figures for Q2 and had to issue this CORRECTION. (The reporter had spent some time with Dick Day and Davis on the campaign trail).
The latest victim of Davis Misinformation Syndrome is Mark Sommerhauser of the Winona Daily News. In today's article, Davis outpaces Day in GOP fundraising, we read:
In March, 1st District delegates gave Davis — a political newcomer — a
first-ballot endorsement over Day, an 18-year veteran at the Capitol in
St. Paul.
Here at BSP, we've repeatedly documented Davis's own loose relationship with facts. Now, we see signs that this disorder may be contagious. Editors: fact check those stories if your staff writers have gotten near this campaign. The journalistic reputation you save may be your own.
Image: When Brian Davis is around, facts fly out the window. Ouch!
The Mankato Free Press editorial page looks at the discussion about the new generation feedstocks in Corn debate should be just the beginning. The editorial takes note of the debate at the most recent governors' meeting and concludes:
And keep in mind that
while it’s true that corn alone isn’t the answer, it has shown itself
to be an innovation and a viable pathway to something more
comprehensive down the road. Let the debate continue regarding the
degree to which switchgrass and wood-waste products might supplement
corn.
And who better to address these crucial decisions than the governors of the states?
Leadership among the governors, who
collectively represent every regional interest in the nation, can and
should carry great weight in Washington. If they can help to formulate
a plan that makes sense for us all, it will be more than Congress has
been able to achieve until now. If such a consensus can truly be
achieved, the somewhat disjointed, meandering road toward independence
would take a major step toward something the nation can get its hands
around.
So don’t get caught up in the corn debate, except as a starting point to an achievable end. And keep talking.
Shoppers at grocery stores across the country are complaining about high food prices.
Saturday, one lawmaker was listening. . . .
Read the rest at the WDN. We look forward to spotting the distortions in the GOP-endorsed candidate's latest visit with the press, up next week in the Pipestone Star.
The Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) holds too little oil to
reduce gas prices more than a few cents per gallon, and new sources of
oil could take decades to develop, according to government analysts. . . .
. . .But opening the refuge to drilling "is not projected to have a large
impact on world oil prices" or the price of gasoline, said Budzik of
the Energy Information Administration (EIA). Tapping the refuge could
cut the cost of a barrel of oil by perhaps 2 percent and shave 1 cent
to 3 cents off the pump price of a gallon of gas, he said.
As for the Outer Continental Shelf, the EIA said it "would not have a significant impact" on oil prices before 2030. . . .
That's pretty much what we've been saying here at BSP for weeks now, after reading various government reports.
Another item in the mix is conservation. A Reagan-administration official on conservation:
Even an advocate of expanded drilling and mining says it should be
done in tandem with an aggressive government effort to lower
consumption, which he says is the quickest route to lower gas prices.
"The low-hanging fruit is not energy production, it's conservation,"
said Robin West, an energy consultant who ran the U.S. offshore
drilling program while assistant secretary of the Interior under
President Ronald Reagan. "The simplest way ... is enforce the speed
limit ... and then drop it."
West also favors government action to require greater fuel
efficiency than a 35 miles-per-gallon target recently approved by
Congress, and more spending on mass transit.
In the First, none of the candidates favor lowering the speed limit that we know of (Walz opposes it). Walz supports increasing fuel efficiency, or CAFE, standards; Brian Davis wants them eliminated completely. We don't know where Day stands on this. Walz supports bill that would punch up mass transit; don't know where Day and Davis are on this piece of the puzzle (we have our hunches, but that's for them to say).
Day does have other, clearer, opinions. He believes
in developing alternative energy. He says oil drilling in ANWAR and
off-shore will quickly reduce gas prices. He wants local police to
enforce federal immigration laws. He says taxes are a detriment to
progress. He's proud to be a veteran.
And he thinks the Republican
endorsed candidate, Mayo Clinic Doctor Brian Davis, may be very bright,
but Day says Davis doesn't know how to write a bill or negotiate with
Democrats.
"What we're trying to do is take my experience, name recognition, and
have I done a good job or not over the last 17 years," he says. "That's
going to be --if I can get out to everyone and they talk about it
enough-- that's what's going to be important to a whole host of people."
Davis is back to touting his brilliant eight-month career as an engineer 25 years ago (which followed his summer jobs and 2 semesters of work study at a reputable Chicago engineer firm) before he went on for years of post-graduate study in mechanical engineering (biomedical specialization) at MIT. And yes:
Davis wants to cut subsidies for ethanol and wind.
An argument can be made for reducing subsidies for corn ethanol--as the new Farm Bill did in reducing the blenders' credit for corn ethanol--but we have to wonder what's up with a candidate wanting to cut wind industry incentive who runs for office in a district that's one of the country's leading wind energy producers. The report notes that Day supports "alternative" (cough, renewable) energy. Indeed, like all state legislators in the First, regardless of party, he voted in 2007 for the state's renewable energy standards.
Those tired of Michele Bachmann's "silly, simplistic" antics might stop by a morning fundraiser for El Tinklenberg that Congressmen Walz and Oberstar are hosting at Vance Opperman's office tomorrow in Minneapolis. Hasslington has the details.
"Senator Coburn still manages to
practice medicine and spends time in Washington only when necessary.
Both of which I strongly endorse!"
Does this mean that Southern Minnesota will get a part-time congressman
if Davis is elected? That would certainly be a switch from Walz, who holds dozens of open public
meetings in the district, seeks out his constituents in local grocery stores, and serves on three committees in Washington? Will voters in the Republican primary consider the question as well, given that Day, a retired IBM sales representative, has a track record of working solely in the Minnesota Senate?
This may answer Minnesota Central's question about why a doctor
earning $411,720 a year would swap that for one brining in $169,300 (having turned down a pay raise because Congress hasn't balanced the budget, Walz learns less than this). Back in June, MC wondered:
And a sidebar comment about Dr. Davis. Voters, such as me, must wonder why someone would want take a pay cut of over $240,000?
In 2007, Davis apparently didn't think it's important to work full-time for the
people who would send him to Washington. We suspect many Southern Minnesotans would think that nearly $170 grand is fulltime pay, given that the 2006 American Community Survey* unofficially put the median family income in the First at $ 60,401, with the median per capita income at $24,320.
Perhaps Davis should clarify whether he's still endorsing the idea of working part-time on public policy if elected.
*Accessed today. We chose the ACS over the 2000 Census figures for the district because they are somewhat higher. They are, however, not official estimates. In 1999 dollars, the 2000 Census gives the median family income in the First as $50,143, while the individual per capita income clocked at $19,889. For sake of fairness, we have used the unofficial figures.
The Twin Cities press is running a short article on how Coleman, Franken to share stage at Farmfest. Later that afternoon, after Governor Pawlenty's keynote address, there will be a "Congressional Candidate's Forum on Agricultural and Rural Issues" featuring the following cast of characters:
Candidates * Congressman Collin Peterson (D), (Seventh)
* Glen Menze (R), (Seventh)
* Congressman Tim Walz (D), (First)
* Brian Davis (R), (First)
* Dick Day (R), (First)
* Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R), (Sixth)
* Elwynn Tinklenberg (D), (Sixth)
* Congressman John Kline (R), (Second)
* Steve Sarvi (D), (Second)
* Erik Paulsen (R), (Third)
* Ashwin Madia (D), (Third)
Questions will be asked by a panel of Farm Organization Leaders
Senator Day took up the challenge. Familiar with ag issues from his service in the Minnesota legislature, Day objected to some provisions in the bill, according to past newspaper reports such as this one in the Fairmont Sentinel and this article in the New Ulm Journal. The earmarks Day references were put into the bill by the U.S. Senate; the tax breaks for race horses, for instance, was promoted by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky).
Davis has remained fairly mum publicly about farm policy. In Google searches for the web, news, and blogs, we couldn't find anything; nor was there any mention of the Farm Bill and farm policy on Davis's campaign website. The only time Davis mentions farms is in a passing reference in his support of repealing estate taxes (more on that later).
This will be the first time that Walz is on stage with either Day or Davis, and the first time Day and Davis will be in public together since Davis received the GOP endorsement. Perhaps Davis will try to blend in with the crowd on the stage. We'll be listening.
To the silly, simplistic grandstanding by
U.S. Rep. Michelle Bachmann who has launched a crusade to get oil
companies to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
The freshman Republican from Minnesota was
on CNN last week in advance of a trip she and other Republican members
of Congress are taking to ANWR.
In the interview, Bachmann said, “There
couldn’t be a more perfect place to drill,” than ANWR. Her reasoning?
The region, she said, is “actually in complete darkness many days of
the year,” and “There are no trees in ANWR.”
And Bachmann continued her claims that America could return to $2-a-gallon gas, if only drilling could speed ahead.
Never mind that the Bush administration’s
own studies predict that drilling in ANWR would likely drop gas prices
by only a couple of cents per gallon and it would take 15 or more years
for the effect to be felt.
Oil companies already hold rights to
millions of acres of domestic oil drilling land and production has
increased in places such as North Dakota.
Drilling in a pristine area — even one
sometimes in the dark and treeless — is unnecessary, foolish and would
provide no noticeable benefit.
Guess the paper probably doesn't approve of Davis's plan to drill in ANWR either. Congressman Walz wants to expedite drilling and production in the already open areas of Alaska, but not ANWR.
. . .we have in the Bakken oil field in North Dakota, South Dakota and
southern Canada, another ten billion barrels of oil. If we would just
access, for instance the North Dakota Bakken oil field, that would
increase America’s energy reserves by over 50%.
In a report updated on July 18, 2008, KARE-11 reported in North Dakota's Oil Boom that there are 350 active wells right now in North Dakota.
It's no wonder Congresswoman Bachmann isn't getting an award from the National Geographic Education Foundation (as did Congressman Walz).
John Adams is at it again. No, not the dead one, but the Brian Davis supporter in Mazeppa, who writes frequent letters and posts (allegedly) as "Patriot" at the Rochester Post Bulletin.
His latest missive in the Red Wing Republican Eagle, parrots the GOP slogan du jour, "Drill Here, Drill Now." It's nothing less that what we expect from him, given his past scribblings about global warming and the cult of Brian Davis. Now he's venturing into bashing second-generation biofuels. He writes in part:
If there’s any value in these slogans, it’s that they expose the
Democrats’ flawed energy policies — higher taxes on domestic energy
producers, bans on drilling and exploration, heavier dependence on
foreign imports, increasing mandates for energy alternatives such as
cellulosic ethanol of which not one barrel has been produced — all to
pacify environmental extremists.
We'll leave off an in-depth examination of the first three in his laundry list as well as his attribution of motive (the tourism and other industries in Florida, for example, may have had as much to do with bans off the Florida coast as environmentalists, extreme or otherwise, and some restricted offshore areas are military training waters). That stuff is the usual paranoid style's list of offenses and discovery of the villain.
Let's look at the claim that doesn't rely on ideology or complex explanation, but can be affirmed or dismissed. Adams jeers at one piece of the puzzle:
. . .increasing mandates for energy alternatives such as
cellulosic ethanol of which not one barrel has been produced . . .
Is that true: that not one barrel cellulosic energy has been produced?
He's wrong. Cellulosic ethanol doubters need only look west to Upton, Wyoming, to find a plant producing cellulosic ethanol. The Black Hills Pioneer reports in What has happened to ethanol?:
. . . The bright spot in all of this has been cellulosic ethanol, fuel
produced from wood or other biomass. KL Process Design Group of Rapid
City operates the Western Biomass facility in Upton, Wyo., and has been
successful since cellulosic ethanol is guarded from the problems
corn-based ethanol are facing and prices for the fuel are keeping up
with oil prices.
“Ethanol is trading up $1 higher than it was a
year ago. I remember selling ethanol for $1.70, and now it's selling
for $2.70, so we've seen great strides for the industry there, and all
along keeping the price of gas down for the consumers,” said Slunecka. . . .
. . .Things are going well enough for KL Design
Group that the company is looking for a second site to construct
another cellulosic ethanol plant. “Our hope is to find a location in
and around the Black Hills area,” he said.
The commercial-scale pilot plant, operating since August 2007, is expected to produce 1.5 millions of ethanol a year from wood waste. Not much, but a start, and one successful enough for the company to duplicate. The company uses enzymes to break down the waste wood.
Adams needn't take our word for the existence of the Wyoming facility and its production. Here's a YouTube video tour of the Western Biomass plant:
And while this plant may be the first in the United States to produce cellulosic energy by the barrel, it's not going to be the last.
Another pilot project, being set up by Gulf Coast Energy in Alabama last month, will use gasification to create ethanol from wood waste; should the project prove viable, the company will expand it to 45 million gallons.
Such plants are used to test and perfect processes for large-scale commercial facilities, and from what we gather from news reports, energy companies are signing on for the ride. Shell, for example, is increasing its stake in Iogen Energy Corp from 26.3 percent to 50 percent. Why? Because Iogen's research facilities are finding a way to produce cellulosic ethanol:
Shell said it would increase its stake in Iogen Energy
Corp, a subsidiary of Iogen that focuses on technology
develompent, to 50 percent from 26.3 percent.
Shell also said it would consider investing in a full-scale
commercial plant for the Iogen technology, which makes ethanol
from wheat straw. It did not disclose how much it will invest
in the privately held company.
Iogen, which is also backed by Goldman Sachs Group Inc
(GS.N: Quote, Profile, Research), has run a demonstration plant in Ottawa since 2004 that
can produce about 2.5 million liters of ethanol a year from the
plant stalks that are left behind after farmers harvest crops.
It is planning to open a C$500-million ($500 million)
commercial-scale plant in Saskatchewan, Canada's largest
wheat-producing province, in 2011. That plant would produce
about 90 million liters (23.78 million U.S. gallons) of ethanol
a year.
Obviously, these facilities are producing barrels of cellulosic energy.
Adams also misleads readers in suggesting that support for investing in cellulosic ethanol is an exclusively Democratic franchise, and yet our own governor's
record in Minnesota and his "Securing a Clean Energy Future"
call to action as chair of the National Governors Association suggests
otherwise. Another Minnesota Republican, Senator Coleman, was a
co-sponsor of the National Security and Bioenergy Investment Act of 2005.
Pawlenty says biofuels will be a big part of the nation's energy future but the type of biofuels will evolve and change.
Gov.
Jon Huntsman of Utah echoed that notion when he dismissed the idea of
an energy argument along the lines of to drill or not to drill for oil.
"The choices increasingly are plentiful," he said on C-SPAN Sunday.
"The
question before policy makers really is what are the choices we have to
get us from today's very hydrocarbon dependent world to one, 20, 30, 40
years from now, that will be much less hydrocarbon dependent," he said.
Adams is doing a heckova job for a guy who purports not to like slogans or extremists--but evidence increasingly leads us and others to the conclusion that reliance on both slogans and extreme exaggeration are the cornerstone of Brian Davis's "energy policy" and its allegiance to fossil fuels and no fuels efficiency standards. Adams is a passenger in this clown car.
In his Friday Update, for example, Minnesota First blogger Apollo, a moderate independent, wrote:
Brian Davis continues to expose himself as a unfit to serve our
district. He accuses Tim Walz of "shortsightedness" for trying to
advocate for the technology and energy policy that is in fact very
forward-looking. Rather than looking for more oil, like a junkie jonesin' for his next fix,
Tim Walz refuses to give in to the pressure to pander that the good
doctor has apparently succumbed to. Dr. Davis is even more disingenuous
in claiming that Tim Walz does not support more drilling. He does, just
not in pristine habitats; rather, Mr. Walz supports drilling for oil in
already-designated areas that have yet to be tapped. Brian Davis
provides little details about his energy policy in this post, but
luckily he has bestowed his wisdom on us previously and his simplistic, vacuous policies have been widely debunked here and elsewhere. If Tim Walz is shortsighted, then Brian Davis is positively blind.
[Update] The Blueman notes that Brian Davis joins Bachmann and Kline in disregard of oil prices. Kimball's point is that Davis, like Bachmann and Kline, repeat NRCC sock puppet chatter, but can't talk about crafting real, bipartisan solutions. [end update]
Research continues on developing additional feedstocks, such as cattails, switchgrass and the so-called "Tilman blends" of prairie grasses. To scorn the research and development of these potential energy resources is blind indeed.
Update: Another one of our favorite First District RPM activists and LTE writers, Leroy Vetsch, is back in the pages of the Worthington Globe today with Davis is the man to represent us.
Loyal readers of BSP may remember our post, Urban legends R us: China drilling myth repeated in LTE in which Vetsch, treasurer of the Nobles County RPM and another Brian Davis cult follower, had an earlier letter published in which he duly recited the NRCC talking point. Can these guys ever make an argument without a side dressing of horse apples? [end update]
Another day, another Brian Davis attack release duly posted on his blog, this time misrepresenting the provisions of the DRILL Act (do you suppose he's actually read it before the NRCC talking points were cut and pasted into the release?).
While we were napping, Walz campaign manager Chris Schmitters sent us this statement:
As usual, millionaire Dr.
Brian Davis is distorting the facts. In today’s negative attack, Dr. Davis
accuses Walz of voting against new oil drilling. But his facts are wrong. Tim
Walz proudly co-sponsored H.R. 6515, the DRILL Act, which would increase our
domestic oil supply by speeding the development of the National Petroleum
Reserve – Alaska, fast-tracking completion of its oil pipeline so we can bring
that oil to market, stopping Alaskan oil from being sold to the Chinese and
other foreign nations, and passing ‘Use It or Lose It’ which makes oil companies
drill on the leases they have or give them up to another company. Republicans in
Congress stopped the bill because it didn’t include enough favors for their
friends and contributors at Big Oil. Once again, the Davis plan favors Big Oil
and partisan politics, while Tim Walz’ plan helps middle-class families through
common sense solutions." Chris Schmitter,
Campaign Manager, Tim Walz for U.S. Congress
How dare Schmitters question our Republican overlords! For ourselves, we noticed that Rochester's own wannabe lordling has reworded his resume:
"Brian Davis trained as an engineer, receiving a B.S. in Nuclear
Engineering and Master's and Ph.D. degrees in Mechanical Engineering. In addition, he has several years of work experience in the electric power industry."
This is completely true, even if he doesn't say that some of those years include his summer jobs, two semesters of work-study, and eight months as an engineer at a reputable Chicago engineering firm (all over 25 years ago). No doubt Davis was focused on devising federal energy policy at the time.
Davis earned a bachelor of science degree in nuclear engineering at the
University of Illinois and worked for three years as an engineer in the
electric power industry.
Now he boasts about the degrees, instead of the work experience. How fun is that!
Meanwhile, a kind man in Rochester sends us this word on the Davis driving record puzzle (see end of post here):
Yes, Brian Davis lives in Zip Code 55902 in Rochester, consistent with
the court records .His wife has the same address. There are no other
Brian Davis listings in Rochester in the local phone books.
That suspended drivers license must have been a hardship for whomever it was. Hopefully, a partner or friends drove the miscreant around until the license was reinstated. We dedicate this Beatles tune, performed here by Paul McCarthy, to everyone who helped a friend, partner or co-worker without a license.
Standing just off U.S. Highway 14 right-of-way in Maplewood Park
Thursday, First District Congressman Tim Walz announced the Highway 14
expansion would be getting $766,000 in federal money to help move the
project along.
"I'm here today to talk about the Department of
Transportation grant funding that is going to provide about $766,000
for two major sections of this road, the one from North Mankato to New
Ulm, and the section we're standing on here, $451,000 that will provide
the ability to move the utilities in preparation for the four-lane
expansion," Walz said.
In lauding the work that the Highway 14
Partnership and its president, North Mankato Mayor Gary Zellmer, had
done in getting this grant funding, Walz also commended the ground work
supplied by New Ulm Mayor Joel Albrecht who wasn't in attendance for
the day's event.
Minnesota Central wonders Will John Kline respond to fuel prices and the DOD budget? Good question. The Rochester Democrat posts Tim Walz's press release urging President Bush to jawbone oil companies. We're going to have to bone up on the historical example, President Kennedy "jawboning" U.S. steel companies.
I didn’t realize it had grown as big as it has,” said Hojberg [of Clark's Grove]. Hojberg
said he was interested by the number of politicians campaigning, which
included current Owatonna Mayor Tom Kuntz, Owatonna High School teacher
Kory Kath, state Rep. Patti Fritz, state Sen. Dick Day and U.S. Rep.
Tim Walz. All the candidates were walking the route with their
supporters Friday afternoon.
At the Post Bulletin, a letter writer objects to Walz's vote to patch the AMT in a revenue-neutral way; a rousing war ensues in the paper's always lively comment section. We seem to really be getting to Southern Minnesota's Most Beloved Conservative Blogger, Othelmo da Silva, in the comments at the paper's Political Party blog.
And so we offer this musical tribute, in the hope that it will sooth his anxiety. Now we are off to the lake for a little wholesome fun:
Update: Alas, poor Othelmo. Rather than receiving this classic performance in the spirit in which it was offered, he instead fisks our "About" page, claiming that we edited it on July 3 to add our residence. Too bad that he doesn't understand Google cache, which preserves earlier versions of a post. We've captured the screen shot from the last cache of the page, dated June 30. Click on the thumbnail to see the earlier version of the page. The editing only concerned where I blog, not where I live.
What could possibly possess this poor soul that he grasps at such readily discredited straws in an attempt to redeem his own "fail"? He drips venom, then bites his own posterior. [end update]
We've noticed that whenever Brian Davis opens his mouth to repeat the NRCC's talking points about energy policy, there's a tag line about his work as an engineer in the nuclear power industry, credentials which are meant to lend those views as certain gravitas.
For instance, a recent column in the Worthington Globe, featured this capsule bio:
Brian Davis trained as a nuclear engineer and worked in the nuclear power industry. He is a physician and a Rochester resident.
We've pointed out before that Davis had worked a year in the field after graduating from college with an undergraduate degree in engineering.
Not so. In looking at Davis's Facebook page, we discover that his professional career after graduation was a few months shorter than we thought.
Between 1977 and 1983, I worked
at Sargent & Lundy Consulting Engineers 4 summers, 2 college
semesters and full-time after graduation for 8 months. The work
included mechanical design and drafting, nuclear safeguards and
licensing, project management, engineering mechanics, and radioactive
waste management.
Davis spent more time at the firm as a work study student (see campaign bio) than as an engineer. We're going to hazard a guess that Davis had a summer job and took part in a co-op education program at the University of Illinois. His eight-month professional career upon graduation ended in January 1983, just over 25 years ago.
Curious how the mainstream press doesn't seem to have picked up on this. Perhaps Republican primary voters will consider the contrast between Davis's slender vita in the energy industry with Day's more substantial career in public service.
We'll have more on the new whopper in the Worthington Globe column before the weekend's done. Can't say when that will appear, as we are headed for the lake and leaving the laptop and Mr. Aircard behind.
Update 7-7-2008: Our promised post is coming today.
It also occurs to us to remind readers that much of the renewed interest in nuclear power has been spurred by the plants' very low emissions of CO2; thus, nuclear power is touted as a means to reduce turn back climate change. We think that it's a source that should be in our nation's energy portfolio, provided that construction costs, realistic views on uranium supplies in the face of increased global demand, and resolution of disposal issues (including reprocessing spent fuel) are part of the discussion.
However, since Dr. Davis believes that energy policy should never be based on what he terms "global warming religion," he's not making this argument. In a January email, he set out several principles for setting energy policy. One was:
Our nation’s energy policy and economic well-being should not be based
on the deeply flawed theory that carbon dioxide produced from fossil
fuel combustion will lead to catastrophic climate change. [end update]
Transportation and energy issues dominate today's congressional news in the First. Federal grants that will assist in the improvement of Highway captured much attention. The Waseca County News reports Walz presents Highway 14 grant:
Funding for the expansion of Highway 14 got a boost Thursday morning
when First District Congressman Tim Walz and members of the Highway 14
Partnership met in Waseca. They stood on the grass across from
Kiesler’s Campground, their backs to the highway they all want to see
converted to a four-lane.
Walz, a Mankato Democrat, was in town
to announce federal grants for two sections of Highway 14. Joining him
were the mayors of Waseca, Owatonna, North Mankato and Courtland and
officials from Waseca and Owatonna.
Walz said the highway is a major artery in the First District, used by 80 percent of the area’s largest employers.
He
said the Federal Highway Administration grant is the result of the
financial commitment the state of Minnesota has made to the finish the
project.
The grant was also made possible, Walz said, because of
the commitment of the partnership members who understood the need to
band together to get a new highway built. The new highway will improve
safety and the economy and infrastructure for the future, he said.
In The Carbon Footprint Trail, Tom Driscoll at the Fillmore County Journal takes a long look at ways in which local power co-ops are trying to reduce CO2 emissions. Both Congressman Walz and Davis were interviewed for the story.
Davis's global warming denial looks to be pretty light-weight in context of the rest of the story, especially when contrasted with Governor Pawlenty's efforts for conservation and energy efficiency. Guess that's what happens when you touts slim credentials (one year of work after receiving his undergraduate degree) from an industry Davis hasn't worked in for nearly 25 years (Davis began working on his mechanical engineering degrees in 1983, after graduating from college in 1982).
The Rochester Post Bulletin writes that GOP leader outlines strategy during speech at Mayo Civic Center. The strategy talk was about how to defeat Walz, not how to devise long-term energy policy. No word in the article as to whom Cole delivered his strategy pep talk. We suppose it's nice that Tom Cole's visit resulted in one or two pieces of earned mainstream media for the Davis campaign.
The Open Enrollment blog at the Winona Daily News' River Valley blogs looks at Walz vs. NCLB.
The Houston County News reports Houston County amongst those declared federal disaster area; the article mentions Congressman Walz's efforts, working with Senators Coleman and Klobuchar and Governor Pawlenty, to help secure the federal disaster declaration by the president.
The Iraq and Afghanistan wars linger on, but they
already are producing a new generation of politicians looking to
represent Minnesota in Congress.
In the 3rd Congressional District, Marine veteran Ashwin
Madia, the surprise Democratic challenger, is seeking the open seat. In
the 2nd District, Steve Sarvi, a National Guard member who served in
Kosovo and Iraq, is taking on a Vietnam veteran. And the 1st District
is represented by Tim Walz, a 24-year National Guard veteran, in his
first term running for re-election.
The three are part of an emerging trend nationally — veterans
of the two wars eager to take their concerns and the lessons they've
learned to Washington. . . .
It's important to note that Tim Walz served in a support operation in Italy for Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan) but is not a combat veteran of OEF. Both Madia and Sarvi served in country in Iraq. Here's the new chart on competitive races from the Cook Political Report.
We had posted yesterday how MN-02, once considered completely safe for John Kline, was moved into the more competitive "likely Republican" from "solid Republican." Those pesks at IDHA note that Sarvi, Madia and Tinklenberg have just been endorsed by the Minnesota Nurses Association. Looks like the Republican Party of Minnesota will be playing defense in all three of its remaining congressional seats.
In Welcome Home for Minnesota Soldiers,KAAL TV reports that 400 Minnesota National Guard members from Mankato-based 2nd Battalion who had been serving in Kosovo will return to the USA by the end of next weekend. The Albert Lea Tribune says they're coming back between July 10 and 14 in Albert Lea troops returning from Kosovo.
Happy Birthday, America!
Fanfare for the Common Man Update: We spoke too soon about earned media for Brian Davis's campaign; the Grand Forks Herald has published an AP reports about Brian Davis's self-funding of his campaign. In 1st District candidate says spending won't change, we learn:
A doctor running for Congress in southern Minnesota says he won't
increase spending of his own money despite the new freedom he got with
a recent Supreme Court ruling.
The high court ruled against
campaign finance laws that allowed higher contribution limits for
opponents of candidates using more than $350,000 of their own money.
But Dr. Brian Davis, who is running for Congress in the First District,
says he never planned to hit that limit anyway. He has loaned or
contributed nearly $200,000 to his campaign so far.
Davis says he does agree with the decision.
He's
running in the Republican primary against longtime state Senator Dick
Day. The winner of that primary will run against first-term Democratic
Representative Tim Walz.
That $200,000 figure is quite interesting. At the end of Q1, Davis had contributed $58543.76 to his campaign and loaned his committee $24,000, for a total of $82,543.76. If the amount has escalated up to nearly $200,000, he tapped into his own reserves at a greater pace in the quarter that just ended--perhaps to the tune of $100,000 or more.
Like most graduates of St. Peter High School of a certain age, we took freshman English from William Harvey, or Mr. Harvey as we all called the formally attired bachelor schoolteacher. In his class, we learned about mythology, read "Tale of Two Cities" and other classics, and best of all, learned to memorize poetry.
Or else: Poets' Corner temporarily awaited any of us who failed to recite Frost, Yeats or Housman correctly. This early training prepared me for the more brutal recitations of poesy at the Ozarks Famous Writers School under the bellowing watch of the late Jim Whitehead (actually a pussy cat for all his southern bluster).
Congress recently passed legislation that included the 21st Century G.I. Bill. The Herald explains how Mr. Harvey (and St. Peter) benefited from the original bill:
Mr. Harvey grew
up on a farm in the Spencer, Iowa, area and after completing his own
high school studies in 1942 he went into the Merchant Marine and U.S.
Army where he served in World War II in such places as North Africa,
Sicily, New Guinea, the Marshall Islands and through the Panama Canal
six times.
He was then discharged in 1946 and began farming with
his brother Jim but was eventually recalled to serve in the Korean War
with the Army.
"When I got out of the service for good at age
31, I was urged by the VA (Veteran's Administration) not to return to
farming," Harvey said. "Instead, they said I should take advantage of
the GI Bill and go to college."
That career advice by the VA turned out to be a blessing for students here in St. Peter.
Harvey
began attending Augustana College in Sioux Falls, S.D., in 1955 and
graduated with a degree in English and a minor in history. It was
through that school's placement office that he learned of the opening
at St. Peter and through a friend who also interviewed here, he decided
to pursue the position.
It was great to have a role model like that in a small town--a war veteran and Golden Gloves winner who stood up for literature, especially poesy, and proper grammar. We still remember the thrill of learning about ancient Greece when we were assigned Theseus for our research paper in the mythology unit. Minotaurs! Labyrinths! Great stuff.
The article mentions that Mr. Harvey, who retired in 1993, still enjoys his cabin up near Chisholm. And that recalled a poem we'd memorized (then sought out and learned to love the music of the poet's other works). And here it is, as lovely now as when we were in ninth-grade:
The Lake Isle of Innisfree by William Butler Yeats
I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree, And a small cabin build there, of clay and wattles made: Nine bean-rows will I have there, a hive for the honey-bee, And live alone in the bee-loud glade.
And I shall have some peace there, for peace comes dropping slow, Dropping from the veils of the morning to where the cricket sings; There midnight's all a glimmer, and noon a purple glow, And evening full of the linnet's wings.
I will arise and go now, for always night and day I hear lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore; While I stand on the roadway, or on the pavements grey, I hear it in the deep heart's core.
The Cottonwood County Citizen reports in Red Rock Rural Water to host water, ag field day:
