Organisation Name
Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA)
InfluenceMap Query
Energy Policy and Mix
Data Source
Social Media
 
 

Score for this Data / Query Cell

-1.91

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 opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Suggesting 2030 targets to cut state petroleum usage by 50% are unrealistic. Providing a pre-written statement for other people to post on Twitter to demonstrate opposition (Californian Drivers Alliance, a subsidiary program of WSPA, 2015)

Extract from Source:

While California petroleum fuel providers are committed to helping the state lead the way in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we believe SB 350’s fuel reduction mandate is an impossibly unrealistic goal. #SB350 is a bad idea for California transportation, consumers, jobs and the economy! Please vote #NOonSB350! #CALeg

Created: 10/09/2015 Last edited: 19/04/2017

 

Strongly opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing the SB32 bill which seeks to reduce greenhouse emissions (Californian Drivers Alliance, a subsidiary program of WSPA, Twitter, August 2016)

Extract from Source:

Don't let the bureaucrats in Sacramento waste our clean air dollars. Vote No on #SB32! noonsb32.org (Links to: California Driver's Alliance website, 2015) Don't let the bureaucrats waste our clean air dollars: Sign up to keep our Legislature in control of California’s clean air public policy.

Created: 29/09/2016 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

Strongly supporting maintenance of high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing SB 350's reduction in petroleum use (Joint letter to California State Senate members, June 2015)

Extract from Source:

The California Chamber of Commerce and above listed organizations respectfully OPPOSE SB 350 (de Leon), which has been labeled as a JOB KILLER. As introduced, SB 350 is an arbitrary and unrealistic reduction of petroleum use by 50% by 2030, increasing the current Renewable Portfolio Standard to 50% by 2030 and increasing energy efficiency in buildings by 50% by 2030, without regard to the impact on individuals, jobs and the economy. SB 350 provides broad and undefined authority to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt regulations, standards and specifications “in furtherance of achieving a reduction of petroleum use in motor vehicles by 50% by January 1, 2030…” This bill does not specify whether or not CARB should adopt and implement policies that impact the demand for petroleum fuels, or whether they should adopt and implement policies that affect the supply of transportation fuels. SB 350 provides a blank check delegation of authority to CARB, and in doing so, gives no consideration to the cost or job loss associated with this to be determined regulation. Most of California’s businesses and families rely on petroleum for their day to day transportation needs and SB 350 has the ability compromise the availability of transportation fuels. The California Energy Commission reported in its 2014 Integrated Energy Policy Report that 92% of all transportation fuels in California are made up of petroleum. Businesses rely on petroleum to transport goods and people and it is unclear how this arbitrary goal will be met. Will there be a 50% straight reduction in the production of petroleum in the state? Will we have to ration petroleum to achieve the 50% reduction? At what cost?

Created: 19/04/2017 Last edited: 19/04/2017

 

Not supporting measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Suggesting technological infeasibility of measures to cut state petroleum consumption by 2030 (Californian Drivers Alliance, a subsidiary program of WSPA, 2015)

Extract from Source:

Forecasts of future fuel use in the United States are at odds with the Senate Pro Tem’s proposed 2030 reduction targets. The U.S. Energy Information Administration forecasts that even with major advances in biofuels and alternative energy technologies, 80% of the U.S. energy portfolio will be comprised of fossil fuels by 2040. [...] However, BP forecasts oil will remain the dominant fuel source in the United States, falling from 95% today to 84% by 2035. Biofuels will represent just 9%of total transportation fuels in the U.S.

Created: 10/09/2015 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

Strongly opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Directly advocating for measures that will maintain a high GHG energy mix by rejecting the SB32 Climate Bill (Californian Drivers Alliance, a subsidiary program of WSPA, Twitter, August 2016)

Extract from Source:

.@CASenatorJim oped in the Chronicle is must read: Brown’s climate bill #SB32 not ready for prime time. (Links to: SF Chronic Article) The California Legislature’s most contentious bill of the year, SB32, which attempts to establish far-reaching reductions in greenhouse emissions, is in the final stages of the legislative process. It miraculously moved out of a committee meant to hold the line on state spending with very little scrutiny or transparency. Creating cleaner air is a noble cause. We all want clean air for our children, grandchildren and ourselves. At issue is the blank check authority that SB32 hands over to faceless, unelected state bureaucrats at the California Air Resources Board. The board has repeatedly failed to produce basic performance reviews of its climate change programs. Until the air board shows sound scientific evidence of success of its programs, it is irresponsible and counterproductive for the Legislature to pass SB32.

Created: 29/09/2016 Last edited: 05/10/2016

 

Strongly supporting maintenance of high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing SB 350's reduction in petroleum use (Joint letter to California State Senate members, September 2015)

Extract from Source:

Without legislative guidance or protections against increased costs or job loss what tools could CARB employ to meet the reduction mandate: Ration the use of petroleum? Limit driving to certain days of the week? Demand vehicle efficiency without available technology? Implementation of any of those approaches will come at a high cost to the families and residents in California. Most of California’s businesses and families rely on petroleum for their day to day transportation needs and SB 350 has the ability to compromise the availability of transportation fuels. [...] Businesses rely on petroleum to transport goods and people, imagine the upset reducing petroleum by 50% will have on day to day life, getting to and from work, taking children to school, grocery shopping, getting to the doctor, the list goes on and on. PETROLEUM JOBS ARE GOOD JOBS Will there be a 50% straight reduction in the production of petroleum in the state? What would that do to the good paying jobs in the petroleum industry? The petroleum industry is a major economic engine in the state and has been helping California grow for over 100 years. In a 2014 report produced by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation, it was reported that in 2012, the petroleum industry was responsible for 468,000 jobs in the state with 104,000 of those jobs located in Los Angeles County. The industry provided billions of tax dollars to the state and local government. If half of this is taken away, the job and economic losses to the state would be devastating. [...] For these reasons and others, we OPPOSE SB 350 (de Leon) as a JOB KILLER.

Created: 19/04/2017 Last edited: 19/04/2017

 

Strongly opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Petitioning against 2030 targets to reduce the usage of petroleum by 50%. Disseminating misinformation about climate policy (Californian Drivers Alliance, a subsidiary program of WSPA, Twitter, 2015)

Extract from Source:

If #SB350 passes, @AirResources will have the power to limit how many miles you can drive. http://buff.ly/1E6fNPC (Links to: California Driver's Alliance website, 2015) [...] Sign the Digital Petition today to tell the politicians NO unfair gas restrictions! No to SB 350!!!

Created: 18/09/2015 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

Strongly supporting maintenance of high GHG emissions energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Advocating for policy makers to support unconventional oil production (Letter to Californian Assembly Member Anthony Rendon, April 2015)

Extract from Source:

The California Chamber of Commerce must OPPOSE AB 1490 (Rendon), which has been labeled as a JOB KILLER. This bill, as introduced, would ban wastewater disposal wells and all well stimulation treatments within 10 miles of a fault that has been active in the last 200 years. [...] In essence, this bill attempts to create a de facto moratorium on the above activities until the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) completes an evaluation and is satisfied that well stimulation “does not create a heightened risk of seismic activity.” [...] Hydraulic fracturing, wastewater disposal and WST have a long history in California and have been safely conducted in and around faults for many decades. In California, hydraulic fracturing has been used as a production stimulation method for more than 30 years with no reported damage to the environment. [...]  Going forward, there is a regulatory process in place to address these concerns which is why the existing SB 4 regulations, coupled with the independent scientific study, should be more than adequate to address concerns about groundwater, potential seismicity and any relation to WST or wastewater disposal. However, by imposing a ban or delay of these legally permitted activities without demonstrating a causal link to seismicity, the bill will only increase business costs, hamper California’s economy and deprive our state of much needed fuel, jobs and tax revenues.

Created: 19/04/2017 Last edited: 19/04/2017

 

Strongly opposing measures to transition the energy mix

InfluenceMap Comment:

Opposing AB 1745 in California. A bill that includes a 2040 100% mandate for ZEV sales (Press Release, March 2018)

Extract from Source:

“WSPA and its member companies oppose AB 1745, a crude and overly simplistic proposal that will hurt the majority of California families and is also likely to undermine California’s current track of success in climate leadership." [...] “An all zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate implemented by AB 1745 would come at the expense of those who can afford it the least both financially and in lifestyle – lower and middle class working families.

Created: 22/03/2018 Last edited: 22/03/2018