Business
Business and Labor Leaders Announce Creation of Energy Advocacy Coalition
(Portland, Oregon, July 18, 2008) Citing serious concern for the future of the region’s economy, several business and labor leaders have announced the creation of Energy Action Northwest, a coalition that will advocate for clean, affordable and reliable energy supplies for the Pacific Northwest.
Edward Finklea, a Portland attorney who has an extensive background in energy issues and policy development, has been appointed as Executive Director of Energy Action Northwest, which will maintain offices in Portland.
“It is imperative to marshal both business and labor resources to the task of securing a strong economic future for our region,” stated Finklea. “This week’s announcement of such staggering rate increases by our three natural gas utilities is a dramatic signal that, until we develop a coherent and balanced approach to energy policy, our economic future is at risk,” he continued.
Energy Action Northwest will rally a broad spectrum of business and labor organizations to advocate balanced energy policies that will secure a strong economy for the region while also protecting the environment.
Bruce Martin, Energy and Environmental Manager of Blue Heron Paper Company, will serve as Chairman of the organization’s Board of Directors. “The rapidly rising costs of natural gas and electricity are unprecedented, and are challenging the competitiveness of many companies including ours, making it difficult to prosper,” stated Martin. “We have 250 people working at Blue Heron. The announcement Tuesday that natural gas rates will increase significantly for this winter is not a surprise to us. Every day we work to manage our energy costs and reduce our energy consumption. We use less energy than we did a decade ago, and a year ago, and still our total energy costs have gone up. This is just one more indication of how badly our state and region need more natural gas supplies. We are pleading with our officials to do what it takes to expand access to natural gas as soon as possible,” he concluded.
Energy Action Northwest has adopted “The Job Keepers” as its tag line. “In the absence of a balanced energy policy, jobs are at risk…jobs that pay competitive wages and that support avibrant economy,” stated Finklea. “A one-sided focus on environmental protection is a recipe for economic disaster.”
“We cannot afford a deadlock between the interests of our economy and those of protecting our environment,” stated Finklea. “It is time to end the unproductive debate that casts economic development in opposition to a clean environment. Rather, it is time to demonstrate that a strong economy and jobs can go hand-in-hand with environmental stewardship. Our central belief is that it is possible to balance the economic ledger with the environmental ledger. Not only is it possible…it is a critical priority,” he concluded.
Energy Action Northwest will advocate policies that promote energy efficiency, renewable resource development and new energy infrastructure, including natural gas. It expects to present its views before Congress, as well as with state and local policymakers, the media, and the public at large. According to Finklea, the new organization will complement, not duplicate, the efforts of other pro-economy advocacy groups such as Associated Oregon Industries (AOI), chambers of commerce, existing industrial energy intervenor groups, and industry-specific trade associations.
To obtain more information, or to join Energy Action Northwest, the public is invited to visit the organization’s web site at http://www.EnergyActionNW.org.
Business Links
Recent Comments
The fact that Skinner, the one that supposedly told Oly that illegal executive meetings were taking place, says publicly that none took place and then Oly himself is now being …
By Staci from the article Former School Director asks Ethics Commission for investigation.No Doubt you do not get it. You can connect anything if you like, Knock yourself out. The topic is proceedings related to the board of directors, Carrie wishes people …
By No Doubt ? from the article Former School Director asks Ethics Commission for investigation.There is a direct connection between the complainant on this and the recall group, they supported Seeleys then and they still do, hope I never drink that flavor of kool-aid!! …
By No doubt about it from the article Former School Director asks Ethics Commission for investigation.Like another said, this simply comes down to lack of handling communication correctly. Assuming there is the intent for some form of communication during the executive sessions? Maybe there was …
By LEAD BY EXAMPLE from the article Former School Director asks Ethics Commission for investigation.Good correction, forgetting the overlap of the four year terms of positions with the elections held every two years does cross the math every now and then. Doest not change …
By PLEASE READ from the article Former School Director asks Ethics Commission for investigation.
18 Comments
On Jul 18, 9:15 PM, Richpix wrote:
Great, more pimping for LNG. How does this sham get non-profit status when it’s obviously there to promote the interests of the natural gas industry?
On Jul 18, 10:07 PM, Patrick McGee wrote:
Unions and profiteering Businesses during the three to five year construction phase of any one LNG Transfer Terminal?
Hell yes they are going to collude to cash in on that pie.
Haven’t the construction trades unions already signed deals with NSNG/Bradwood?
Why, yes, they have so says one of those BS testimonials on KAST radio
And then they will be gone, leaving us with the aftermath and what, 10-20-30-40-50-60 jobs and some pre-diluted Property Tax that equates to a couple hundred bucks per person in Clatsop County a year?
What do you think NSNG/Bradwood is going to charge per thousand cubic feet of Natural Gas to their contracted clients as they pump it into the pipeline?
Why are we not negotiating a residual of say, 1% or so for every cubic foot of that Natural Gas to go into a County Fund to benefit all of us in Clatsop County.
At a Billion cubic feet per pumping day, that may ease the pain of us having to swallow this crap from these Speculators.
Where are all those County Business geniuses touting their acumen in using that presumed Business success in the leadership of this County?
Well, if you can get an honest number instead of Horse Scat from Joe Desmond, do the math and double it if Oregon LNG is successful in their bid for “The Skipanon”. Now “WE” have some serious change to make some serious improvements to the life quality of all of us if the residual fund is used effectively and off the backs of these same Energy Speculators exploiting our lives and environmet to the benefit of their profit margin.
On Jul 18, 11:58 PM, Ben wrote:
For once he does more than cut ‘n paste.
Profiteering businesses! Per norm, your usual bunch of hooey. Pre-diluted property taxes amounting to a couple hundred per person in clatsop county? What does pre-diluted mean? What a ridiculous thing to write. I think that’s a huge deal when most of us are groaning at $14 increase for the college bond. Per norm, your ilk think $200 per person in Clatsop County is something to sneeze at. You all have enough so the hell with the rest of us. Per norm, your ilk think you can just impose any old tax you want to on a business. Under what guise do you propose someone MAKES a corporation pay a “residual” for each cubic ft pumped? How illegal do you want to get?
Get an honest number? You imply Desmond lies. Your ilk always with the innuendo and gossip. The only thing impressive about you is for once you didn’t cut and paste and actually tried stringing more than three sentences together.
On Jul 19, 7:16 AM, Patrick McGee wrote:
Very creative parroting of what I said “Anonym Ben”.
You pretty well repeated everything I said.
Your point?
On Jul 19, 11:25 AM, Union Man wrote:
It used to be that Democrates were for good jobs and high wages, labor used to be in the Democrates camp, this working union member who has almost always voted a Democratic ticket will not vote for any one that has come out against LNG. My union brothers are talking the same way
On Jul 19, 4:01 PM, Richpix wrote:
It’s beyond me why American unions would be gaga over out-of-state corporations importing natural gas from foreign countries. Haven’t we learned enough by our dependence on foreign oil? We should be striving for energy independence instead of switching to reliance on yet another fossil fuel which must be imported.
Tell me why your union brothers want to rely on other nations for their income, or why Oregonians would want to send their money off to some corporation in another state. Once an LNG plant is built, that’s where the profits go--out of the country and out of the state.
On Jul 19, 5:47 PM, Ben wrote:
Richpix, tell me how Oregon is making its own energy now? Tell me how the normal working person can afford the energy you want to see. Tell me how, without “speculators” from out of state the “renewable” energy plants will be built and operating. We have three windmill farms that are abandoned. All windmill farms that try to go in on the gorge are blocked by environmentalists who don’t want their view spoiled when they are taking their boats out on the river. The two wave companies that had applications in have pulled them. We have a group here that want to block ALL cables from crossing our county that is completely boxed in by parks and recreational lands, and with the fear tactics they use they will probably get their way.
EXPLAIN to me the process that this new energy, that is 10-20 years out, is accessible and what the average $34,000 per year family does in the meantime.
Reliance on “foreign” fossil fuel, like Canada’s and Australia’s and those in South America. I, for one, am sick and tired of hearing how we should become China or Russia and build walls around ourselves. We became a great nation by reaching out to countries, not by building walls between us. If we had to rely on one another MORE instead of LESS maybe we would try a little harder at the diplomacy thing.
Democrats freak me out. They change their stance so many times you never know where they really stand on anything except, “What is in this for me and mine?” I am not fond of what Bush has done, nor do I look forward to Democratic presidency. The future frightens the hell out of me enough without the scare tactics of “haven’t we learned from relying on “foreigners”. I think we should have learned, from 911 and all the countries that reached out to us, from the very smallest to the largest, that we have ALLIES. We should buy from them and cultivate those friendships while helping their economies.
LNG IS the bridge to sustainable, renewable energy.
McGee - Under what guise do you propose someone MAKES a corporation pay a “residual” for each cubic ft pumped? How illegal do you want to get?
On Jul 19, 6:06 PM, Patrick McGee wrote:
On Jul 19, 10:25 AM, Union Man wrote:
It used to be that Democrates were for good jobs and high wages, labor used to be in the Democrates camp, this working union member who has almost always voted a Democratic ticket will not vote for any one that has come out against LNG. My union brothers are talking the same way
Now let me get this clear in my mind....The Unions, obviously in collusion with Northern Star Natural Gas/Bradwood Landing as they have already signed an agreement with a certain Construction Trades Union, are threatening retaliation against anybody that is “Anti-LNG and specifically those who choose to run for “Public, Elected Office”?
Is this correct “Union Man Anonym”?
Can you give us a contact name so that this may be confirmed?
On Jul 19, 7:44 PM, Jane wrote:
McGee: I thought you were boycotting this terrible site???????? As usual bullsh-t.
On Jul 19, 9:36 PM, Patrick McGee wrote:
Boycott?
Your words not mine.
This subject just happens to interest me.
You have a problem with me contributing here?
No Bovine Scat “Jane Doe” just an opinion.
This all you have to contribute to the discussion... On Jul 19, 6:44 PM, Jane wrote:
McGee: I thought you were boycotting this terrible site???????? As usual bullsh-t.
Such petty and wasted rhetoric.
On Jul 19, 11:38 PM, Ben wrote:
McGee - Under what guise do you propose someone MAKES a corporation pay a “residual” for each cubic ft pumped? How illegal do you want to get?
On Jul 20, 8:11 AM, Patrick McGee wrote:
On Jul 19, 10:38 PM, Ben wrote:
McGee - Under what guise do you propose someone MAKES a corporation pay a “residual” for each cubic ft pumped? How illegal do you want to get?
Is it illegal “Ben Anonym” for a community to negotiate a deal between its citizens and a private corporation that wishes to come in and use and exploit its resources?
Quote me the statute that says it is since you seem to be in the know on this.
On Jul 20, 9:09 AM, Rick Balkins wrote:
That would be called a tariff. Isn’t tariff’s illegal?
Wasn’t that one of the reasons for the “Boston Tea Party” and the Revolutionary War?
However, we do something like that on cigarettes. We call it a cigarette tax. What is the difference? Change of the word but same thing. There maybe some limitations. Oh yeah, there is also the sales tax and gasoline tax. Interesting it is.
Go figure. A 1% tax on proceeds per volume would be fair. These taxes xan be used for county maintainance and operations. Not employee salaries. It should be used for repair of bridges, roads, utilities and maintainance of such, emergency response. The usual. there is nothing illegal when considering that it is using County waters and infrastructure. This would be seperate of the property taxes for the building and land.
However, we have to determine whether it is a “tariff” or a “tax”. Obviously, it has been dilluted of meaning in practice. Is it not our right considering that Warrenton has a gasoline tax. The state has a cigarette tax. Consider it a tax on the LNG fuel being stored inside the county and the taxes would pay for infrastructure that would enable the county to improve infrastructure including that necassary to for emergency response relating to LNG in the case that there maybe a serious event with an LNG ship or facility. Forbid it ever happens.
It is an area of thought to look into, first. Check legality, then proceed if legal.
On Jul 20, 10:14 AM, Patrick McGee wrote:
Residual is still a fair term or “User Fee” may be better to litigate for legality but hey, they wawnt to play in our communitym and put our “Public Safety” at risk, let them pay for the privilege over and above their property tax.
All the alleged spin-off they, NSNG/Bradwood Landing declares will be just that much more gravy to add to bettering our life quality but right now they ain’t got nothing but lip service and a crap load of worn out, over used Radio ads and sponsorships in a few community events.
Bottom line is....why should we not be negotiating this Scheme/Scam in “OUR” favor as opposed to one Private Corporation with an unproven project?
You comfortable with the role “Guinea Pig” to the benefit of NSNG/Bradwood or Oregon LNG/Pipeline?
On Jul 20, 2:30 PM, great idea wrote:
Guinea pig? Guinea pig for what? Fear mongerer.
The tax will translate into higher rates, just like the tax on cigarettes and gasoline does. What a “brilliant” idea, to get us to pay more. Geeeeeeeeeeeeezus! Friggin idiots.
They ain’t got nothing but lip service? Sort of like you. A bunch of “brilliant” ideas but nothing to back it up?
On Jul 20, 3:01 PM, Sean wrote:
The “tariff” you are proposing would have to be a general one, it cannot target one corporation, which would mean that Pac NW Gas would have to also pay for each cubic ft., which would immediately effect our rates locally. Or would it only be for something leaving our county? Which means any natural gas that NW Natural has passing through, or are we at the end of the line?
It just sounds like a ludicrous proposal which in the end would cost the consumer tons of additional money and wouldn’t cost the gas companies anything. I’d bunch the guy in the nose that proposed that one to the county to ended up on our monthly bill. Especially at this part of the process when LNG isn’t even in the picture but that tariff would become law, we wouldn’t have the economic benefit of the LNG, because the law kept them out, but we’d have the damn law on the books making our lives miserable, just like 4-131 will do.
Your “ilk” just never looks at the future, do they? Just look at what they want NOW and do whatever it takes to accomplish it.
On Jul 21, 10:21 AM, Rick Balkins wrote:
There is some good points. Now with that in mind, what do you propose Patrick McGee. With these issues in mind, I rather see a whole better idea. Corporations just raises the prices some one percent or so just to have the same “profit margins. Corporations works on “profit margins”. If the cost to them goes up, they tax it from us and all their customers. Of course, it only works if the fuel is going to non-local customers. Corporations are sedistic by wrapping us at the end of a “ring” shaped network. Sure it goes to non-local customers but then at the end of the loop, it goes to us.
So in turn, we pay along with everyone else. Of course, this is no easy idea to work.
Lets look for another idea unless there is a solution to make this work without US ultimately paying for it.
On Jul 21, 12:15 PM, Patrick McGee wrote:
If NSNG/Bradwood can commit $1 million a year to mitigate potential damage to our salmon population, they can, in my view voluntarily agree to a.....let’s call it a 1% “User Fee” to go to an escrow fund, of some sort, in Clatsop County to mitigate their potential damage and impact to our resources for the life of their project and so can Oregon LNG/Pipeline.
Is it illegal?
Ludicrous?
Well, a couple of anonyms above seem to think it is but, is it really?
Like I have said somewhere around here before, NSNG/Bradwood Landing and Oregon LNG/Pipeline are not in this for “Chump Change Profits” and likley so their reluctance to divulge their income numbers to us as it is with any specific details of the “End Jobs” they boast about.
Union Shops and Unions supporting this project and 3 to 5 guranteed years of work, producing Union Dues and sweet business contracts?
What a “Feeding Frenzy” that’s going to be and it if it’s a go they will have every right to walk up to the feeding troff and partake.