Organisation Name
US Chamber of Commerce
InfluenceMap Query
Energy Policy and Mix
Data Source
Main Web Site
 
 

Score for this Data / Query Cell

-1.7

InfluenceMap has researched and collated the following pieces of evidence associated with the data source and query indicated above. Extraordinary information is indicated by a coloured flag in the upper right corner. Evidence items in order of data inputted with exceptional items first.

 

Strongly supporting policies maintaining high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing specific measures towards a transition of energy mix. Opposing closure of coal fired power plants. (Main website, November 2014)

Extract from Source:

For instance, EPA's mercury regulation is expected to shut down nearly 50 gigawatts of coal-fired electricity production, reducing energy diversity and making the power grid less resilient. Power grid reliability organizations have warned that EPA's proposed greenhouse gas regulations will increase the risk of power outages. This chart below on electricity generation diversity shows how reduced diversity affects energy security risk. Steve Eule, the Energy Institute's vice president, said in a statement, "Our index found that risks related to electricity generation diversity will rise to an all-time high by 2040, due largely to planned federal regulations targeting coal plants."

Created: 01/06/2015 Last edited: 02/01/2018

 

Strongly opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing various measures to transition in energy mix and advocating for the opening up of Arctic lands for oil exploration (US Chamber website, "New Arctic Drilling Regulations Help 'Keep It In the Ground' Movement", July 2016)

Extract from Source:

The Obama administration has made it harder to tap into American energy when it will be needed the most. Unintentionally it advances the “Keep it in the ground” movement. [...] Right now, low oil prices are keeping companies from exploring in the Arctic, but that will change. [...] The National Petroleum Council estimates there is 34 billion barrels of oil off the Arctic coast of the U.S. Unfortunately, these new regulations will make it harder to get at that energy. [...] While not intentional--federal regulators have been putting up obstacles to Arctic Ocean energy exploration years before environmental activists cranked up their demands to a new level of extreme--this action advances the “Keep it in the ground,” anti-fossil fuel agenda.Add this to the administration’s many steps to limit fossil fuel production and consumption: EPA’s Clean Power PlanUnnecessary regulations on methaneA moratorium on coal leases on federal landsClosing off the Alaska Natural Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to developmen

Created: 29/11/2016 Last edited: 04/12/2017

 

Strongly opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Calling on President-elect Trump to overturn a decision to limit offshose oil and gas production (Website press release, December 2016)

Extract from Source:

In response to President Obama’s action withdrawing large sections of the outer continental shelf for oil and gas exploration, Karen Harbert, president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber’s Institute for 21st Century Energy, issued the following statement: [...] “Congress did not intend for the president to be able to exploit a rarely used, 24-word provision to make entire seas off-limits from energy production. We hope the Trump administration will repeal this action, and will work to consider all options to undo this unlawful action. We look forward to working with the incoming administration and Congress on developing a commonsense offshore energy plan that helps grow our economy and better secure America’s energy future.”

Created: 22/12/2016 Last edited: 22/12/2016

 

Strongly supporting policies maintaining high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing specific measures to increase the portion of renewable in the energy mix (US Chamber website, January 2016)

Extract from Source:

There’s a term computer programmers learn early on: GIGO. “Garbage In; Garbage Out.” No matter how good the code, if bad data goes in, bad results will come out. EPA’s carbon regulations—the Clean Power Plan (CPP)—suffer from this problem, an Institute for 21st Century Energy report finds.  [...] The report finds that more than half (51.8%) of the CPP’s carbon emission reductions depend on renewable electricity generation. Regardless of whether this gambit is legal (the U.S. Chamber is leading a major lawsuit against the rule and this very issue), the CPP’s design is “based on layer upon layer of shaky assumptions [and] outright errors,” the Energy Institute concludes. EPA’s unrealistic assumptions and flat-out errors about renewable energy in the plan will be costly, adding $3.5 billion in compliance costs.

Created: 31/03/2017 Last edited: 04/12/2017

 

Strongly supporting high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Strongly supporting specific fossil fuel infrastructure policy (US Chamber website, January 2017)

Extract from Source:

When it comes to pipelines, Inauguration Day brought quite a change at the White House: President Donald Trump took steps to advance construction of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines[...] Contrast this to the Obama administration appeasing extreme, “keep it in the ground” groups. [...] “For too long, private infrastructure investment has been held hostage by government interference driven by fringe interests,” said Karen Harbert, president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber’s Institute for 21st Century Energy. “Today’s Executive Orders on the Dakota Access pipeline and Keystone XL pipeline demonstrate that we finally have an administration that is serious about putting American energy to work for the entire economy.”

Created: 05/04/2017 Last edited: 05/04/2017

 

Strongly supporting maintenance of high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Has co-sponsored a report that promotes the continued role of coal in the US energy mix (US Chamber website, ' 'New IHS Study', September 2017)

Extract from Source:

Last month, a study from the U.S. Department of Energy on America’s electricity grid found that a balanced and diverse set of resources was vital to our economy and our security. Now, a new study by analytics firm IHS Markit, co-sponsored by the U.S. Chamber’s Global Energy Institute, puts a price tag on just how important our current balance of coal, natural gas, nuclear, and renewable energy really is. [...] The report, ‘Ensuring Resilient and Efficient Electricity Generation,’ found that the current diverse and balanced portfolio of electricity resources is saving our nation $114 billion per year in electricity costs. As a result, the cost of electricity is 27 percent lower than it would be without such a well-balanced mix.

Created: 02/12/2017 Last edited: 02/12/2017

 

Strongly supporting maintenance of high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting policy to increase exploitation of US fossil fuel reserves  (Policy Priorities, 2018)

Extract from Source:

  Support congressional and administration efforts to expand the amount of federally- controlled areas available for energy production. 

Created: 04/11/2018 Last edited: 04/11/2018

 

Generally supporting high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Suggesting transition of energy mix is unaffordable. Emphasizing threat of energy poverty. (US Chamber of Commerce subsidiary, Institute for 21st Century Energy website, May 2015)

Extract from Source:

Even more sobering is that these outcomes would not be materially different even if developed countries emissions were “0” in 2050. As a practical matter, this would mean that all of the increase in developing country energy supply in 2050 compared to 2010 would have to be zero-emitting. The reality is, of course, that these countries continue to build fossil fuel plants with abandon. And who can blame them? Unless developed countries are willing to foot the bill, developing countries will never accept such emissions limits because of the devastating impacts it would have on their economic progress. They’ll carry on using affordable fossil fuels because they have an overriding interest in boosting growth and lifting their people out of poverty. Cutting GHG emissions will always take a backseat to these goals.

Created: 02/06/2015 Last edited: 02/01/2018

 

Generally supporting high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Evidence suggests supporting high GHG emissions energy mix - has stated that president-elect Trump's comments on energy, infrastructure and regulation are encouraging (US Chamber website, November 2016)

Extract from Source:

Dear President-elect Trump, On behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, congratulations on your election as the 45th president of the United States.[…] The business community has been particularly encouraged by your comments concerning our country’s need to rebuild infrastructure, develop all forms of U.S. energy, reduce and reform taxes, and remove unnecessary regulations and modernize the federal rulemaking system. The Chamber looks forward to working with your administration and the incoming Congress on these priorities, and we will mobilize our grassroots federation of Main Street businesses and local chambers in support of them.

Created: 12/12/2016 Last edited: 12/12/2016

 

Opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Appears to be supporting possibility of President-elect Trump overturning decision to limit offshore oil and gas production (US Chamber's Insitute of 21st Century Energy website, December 2016)

Extract from Source:

Trump Could Reverse Obama’s Offshore Energy Ban with a Stroke of a Pen [...] Just before Christmas, President Barack Obama went all Grinch on American offshore energy development. On his way out of office, he gave a hollow and solely symbolic gift to “keep it in the ground,” anti-energy zealots by blocking offshore oil and natural gas development off the Arctic and Atlantic coasts [...] But before energy opponents pop the bubbly in celebration, just as President Obama locked up these areas to development, President-elect Donald Trump could unlock them once he takes office: [...] Christopher Guith at the U.S. Chamber's Institute for 21st Century Energy argues that Trump can rescind the decree with the stroke of a pen [...] Guith argues that if Obama had really wanted to keep rigs out of these areas, he should have cited the Antiquities Act in his decision. His predecessor, President George W. Bush, easily reversed an earlier decision by his own father to temporarily restrict offshore oil and gas activity under the 1953 act, Guith notes. [...] "There is the very real likelihood of a legal challenge that would ultimately fall on the Trump administration," Guith argued. "But probably the easiest part of all of this is that, in spite of all the hand-waving, all it takes is another presidential memorandum where President Trump would say, 'I am reversing the withdrawal,' and it's done."

Created: 03/01/2017 Last edited: 04/12/2017

 

Strongly opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing specific measures to increase share of renewables in the energy mix (US Chamber, Institute for C21st Energy, 'What's in a target' report, January 2016)

Extract from Source:

The design of and justification for state carbon emissions reduction requirements in the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan (CPP) [...] In reality, however, EPA’s “source specific performance rates” are not performance rates at all. They have almost nothing to do with what EPA purports to be regulating (fossil-fueled electric generating units) and instead are based primarily on EPA assumptions that power plant owners replace coal- and gas-fired generation with massive amounts of new renewable energy. [...] But EPA’s renewable assumptions are fraught with numerous flaws that contribute to aggressive renewable generation projections, ultimately increasing the stringency of the CPP [...] Through its complex regulatory formula, EPA then uses these flawed assumptions to impose more stringent requirements on states. [...] At an average carbon price of $30 per ton, the increased CPP stringency resulting from EPA’s assumptions on these three areas alone equate to more than $3.5 billion in compliance costs. [...] In effect, the final CPP expects these states to import wind resources from other regions of the country, raising questions of legality and fairness.

Created: 31/03/2017 Last edited: 31/03/2017

 

Strongly supporting high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting specific measures to maintain high GHG energy mix. Supporting legislation to open up Alaska for oil and gas development (US Chamber website, November 2017)

Extract from Source:

Congress is also getting in the act of expanding energy development. In the just-passed budget resolution are instructions to open the Alaska Natural Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) for energy development.The U.S. Chamber supported this provision. A letter to Senators read, “Failing to develop domestic resources in an environmentally responsible manner undermines America’s national security.” [...] Increased production would be welcome for Alaska, since the state has underutilized energy infrastructure [...] This approach is in stark contrast to the previous administration. The Interior Department under President Barack Obama locked out 94% of federal offshore areas to energy development. [...]But now we have an administration that appreciates the good things America’s energy resources do for families, jobs, and the economy. For those who buy affordable, abundant energy or have their livelihoods depend on it, it must be a relief knowing there are people in Washington who side with them for a change

Created: 02/12/2017 Last edited: 02/12/2017

 

Strongly supporting maintenance of high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting DOE report and opposing policy attempts to remove coal from energy mix, arguing that it to provides 'resiliency' (US Chamber website, Above the Fold, August 2017)

Extract from Source:

[...] today’s power markets do not value resiliency, which is essentially the ability of the power grid to bounce back from a rare, but not unprecedented, event. [...] United States in 2014 stressed the power grid in atypical fashion, with system operators relying upon a deep bench of traditional generation assets to keep the lights on and homes heated. Since that event, 5,573 MW of coal-fired capacity that provided resiliency to the abnormal conditions precipitated by that unusual weather event have been shuttered.  [...] Importantly, and as we have previously said, the Staff Report recognizes that environmental regulations have taken a significant toll on the retention of the power plants that have for decades been the backbone of the country’s electricity grid. While some of the coal-plant retirements identified by the DOE could be attributed to factors such as age, the report finds that the timing of many of the retirements points clearly toward regulatory burdens.

Created: 02/12/2017 Last edited: 02/12/2017

 

Mixed support for transition of energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

The Chamber is advocating for policies to ensure continued investment in the development low-carbon and renewable energy technologies. However the Chamber has also stated that any climate-policy needs to be technology neutral, which would perpetuate fossil fuel use by default. (Association website, 2019)

Extract from Source:

The Chamber believes that an effective climate policy should: [...] Embrace technology and innovation. Advanced technologies and innovation offer the best solution for managing climate risks and reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Breakthroughs in commercially-viable technologies are necessary to enable significant cuts in GHG emissions without harming economic growth or the competitiveness of energy-intensive trade-exposed industries. The U.S. should maintain a leadership role in technologies, such as advanced nuclear, energy efficient systems and building materials, and large-scale renewables, energy storage and batteries, high-efficiency low-emission power plants, and carbon capture and storage/utilization by supporting a broad-based public- and private-sector technology portfolio. The Chamber will continue to support strengthening America’s scientific enterprise, including its national lab system. A technology-neutral climate change policy offers the best opportunity to deliver cost-effective, achievable, and meaningful greenhouse gas emissions reductions. 

Created: 23/04/2019 Last edited: 23/04/2019

 

Strongly opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Actively working through court action for a sustained role for coal whilst opposing specific measures towards a transition of energy mix (US Chamber website, 'Coal down not out', Oct 2016)

Extract from Source:

But as with the rumors of Twain on his deathbed, it’s important to understand that while coal is certainly down, it is far from out, particularly if pending EPA regulations on power plants get struck down in the courts. As the Star-Tribune has reported, the good news in the short term is that leading producers are emerging from bankruptcy healthier. [...] There are also facts not to miss over the longer term. In August, the Energy Information Administration released its Annual Energy Outlook, which includes detailed forecasts of coal production for the next 25 years. EIA projects that, without EPA’s Clean Power Plan regulations, recent declines in western U.S. coal production stabilize over the next decade and even mount a modest comeback in the latter part of the 2020s.However, if EPA’s sweeping attempt to remake the U.S. electricity system is successful, the downward trend will extend as far as the eye can see. Fortunately, the Supreme Court blocked EPA’s efforts until the judicial branch completes review of the unprecedented legal challenge against the rule brought by a coalition of more than 160 entities, including 27 states and a host of business, labor and consumer groups. The U.S. Chamber is helping to lead this fight, and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments on our challenge on Sept. 27.

Created: 29/11/2016 Last edited: 29/11/2016

 

Strongly opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Evidence suggests supporting deregulation to help support the coal industry (US Chamber's Insitute of 21st Century Energy website, 2016)

Extract from Source:

Trump and Coal: Don’t Call it a Comeback, but Regulatory Relief Matters Immensely [...] even if Trump’s ability to help create new coal jobs is limited, the odds are high that he can help save most of the 535,000 coal mining-related jobs that remain. […]EIA’s modeling makes it clear that there is no question that President-elect Trump’s commitment to scrap the CPP and end the War on Coal will save millions of tons of coal production, and in doing so, save the jobs of many miners (while helping to keep electricity affordable). Importantly, this is only one regulation. A multitude of other job-killing rules are likely to be repealed or reformed as well, thereby providing an additional boost to coal’s prospects. And while more of a wild-card, Trump’s commitment to prioritizing economic growth, if successful, could also provide significant relief. If infrastructure, tax, regulatory, and other initiatives can help the U.S. economy escape this seemingly endless period of sub-two percent growth, demand for electricity—and coal—will also see a boost. This could be particularly important to Appalachia, where metallurgical coal for steel-making comprises nearly 30% of overall production. The bottom line? Trump’s victory may not result in a comeback for coal, but his efforts to halt EPA’s crushing regulatory agenda should save countless coal jobs and ensure that coal continues to bolster the American economy with affordable, reliable energy.

Created: 12/12/2016 Last edited: 12/12/2016

 

Strongly supporting policies maintaining high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing specific measure towards the decarbonization of the energy mix (US Chamber website, February 2016)

Extract from Source:

Anyone wondering why the U.S. economy struggles need look no further for the answer than the president’s proposal, outlined by the White House on Thursday and to be formally released with the budget on Monday, for a $10 a barrel tax on oil at the wellhead. [...] the tax itself isn’t in effect yet and so cannot have plagued the economy in months past. Of course, the tax has entered a new class of presidential proposals: dead prior to arrival. But the proposed new tax well illustrates the general tenor of the president’s confused economic philosophy, manifested in his policies, and painfully felt across so much of the American economy. [...] The president outlined a long list of lovely items on which to spend more money, like “clean transportation infrastructure” and “self-driving cars,” along with the usual suspects.  Many of these areas might be ripe for spending increases, but that’s another debate.

Created: 31/03/2017 Last edited: 04/12/2017

 

Strongly supporting high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing decision to subject fossil fuel infrastructure project to an environmental review (US Chamber website, January 2017)

Extract from Source:

The Obama era is drawing to a close, but the saga of the Dakota Access Pipeline continues. [...] The Army published a notice Wednesday of its intent to prepare an environmental impact statement on the Lake Oahe crossing. Texas-based developer Energy Transfer Partners won't be able to lay pipe under the reservoir while the study is ongoing — it is currently blocked from doing so anyway. A study could take up to two years, according to the Energy Department. [...] As President Barack Obama and his administration packs up and leaves office, they threw a wrench in the works of finishing the beneficial energy infrastructure project: [...] But for this politically-charged project, Obama political appointees want the Corps to regulate an oil pipeline. Apparently coherence gets tossed aside when you’re helping extreme, "keep it in the ground," anti-energy groups.

Created: 05/04/2017 Last edited: 05/04/2017

 

Strongly supporting maintenance of high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Advocating to US policy makers to retain coal in US power mix (US Chamber Website, Above the Fold, September 2017)

Extract from Source:

In addition to more frequent power outages, the erosion of our current electricity resource mix–which includes meaningful contributions from coal, natural gas, nuclear, and renewable resources–also threatens to take a bite out of your wallet [...] Today’s diverse mix of electricity resources saves us $114 billion per year in electricity costs.  As a result, the cost of electricity is 27 percent lower than it would be without today’s diverse mix. [...]  The new report shows that higher electricity prices resulting from the erosion of our current resource mix could lead to the loss of 1 million jobs, the loss of $158 billion to our economy, and the loss of up to $845 in disposable income for every American household per year. [...]  The DOE report found that while power markets do a fair job of keeping costs low, various state and federal mandates, regulations and subsidies, along with independent market factors, are threatening to close down the very same nuclear plants and coal generation units that serve as the backbone of our reliable and resilient power supply.  This market failure leaves us vulnerable to future power outages and the economic damages previously discussed. [...]  We can avoid them by keeping the diverse mix of resources that we currently enjoy.  If power markets properly value the beneficial attributes of today’s electricity mix, including the unique resiliency provided by coal and nuclear generation resources, the markets will ensure that those attributes continue to be available [...] We urge federal regulators and legislators to act to ensure that the positive attributes of all generation resources are properly accounted for, and valued, as power markets evolve. 

Created: 02/12/2017 Last edited: 02/12/2017

 

Strongly opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting Trump Administration efforts to role back of various measures towards the decarbonisation of the US economy and advocating that congress support these efforts (US Chamber website, April 2017)

Extract from Source:

Early on in his time in office, President Donald Trump has made great strides on energy. Unlike his predecessor who only paid lip service to embracing all of America’s energy abundance, President Trump is advancing policies he expects will “start a new energy revolution.” In Oil & Gas Financial Journal, Karen Harbert, president and CEO for the U.S. Chamber’s Institute for 21st Century Energy lists off some of President Trump’s accomplishments [...] initiating withdrawal of EPA's Clean Power Plan, reversing the Obama Administration moratorium on federal lands coal leasing, and repealing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) guidance aimed at making mitigation of upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions a condition of federal environmental permitting. [...]  advance permitting decisions for the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines;rescind an EPA data-collection program on methane emissions for oil and gas facilities-a precursor to eventual regulation; [...] sign Congressional Review Act legislation repealing the Bureau of Land Management's anti-coal "Stream Protection Rule." [...] But Harbert notes Congress needs to lock in these gains: [...] When both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue work to unshackle America’s energy sector, good jobs, rising wages, and stronger economic growth will follow.

Created: 02/12/2017 Last edited: 02/12/2017

 

Strongly supporting maintenance of high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

The Chamber is opposing regulation of coal-fired power, praising coal as one of the cheapest, securest, and most abundant sources of energy. (Association Website, 2019)

Extract from Source:

Coal remains an affordable and reliable source of energy, and is necessary to generate the electricity Americans demand around the clock. We must continue to find ways to use coal more efficiently, and invest in technologies that reduce emissions. Steps should be taken to limit the harm from new and proposed rules that aim to curtail the use of one of our most abundant and secure sources of energy, ultimately harming businesses, consumers and the overall economy. […] A flood of new regulations and an overabundance of relatively cheap natural gas are putting tremendous pressure on coal. Regulations covering mercury, coal ash, cross-state air pollution, regional haze, and greenhouse gases, among other things, could make it impossible to use one of our cheapest and most secure fuels. EPA regulations will limit the use of coal, shutter a significant number of existing power plants, and effectively ban the construction of new coal power plants.

Created: 25/07/2019 Last edited: 25/07/2019