Just a couple hours into CEA’s Secure Our Fuels engagement and education campaign, and major news outlets are already starting to take notice. It started earlier this morning with Keith Johnson of the Wall Street Journal, who, having written on this issue in the past and done his due diligence on the potential policy implications of an LCFS, hits the nail on the head on several key points:
By blacklisting one of the key suppliers to the U.S., the new [Low-Carbon Fuel Standard] would force the U.S. to pay even more for fuel from less-friendly countries.
More expensive fuel – and more of it purchased from unfriendly overseas regimes. That’s quite a combination – and one that Johnson admits is widely recognized to result in a sharp decrease in the availability of secure, affordable energy:
Plenty of folks, from the Congressional Research Service to independent consultants, agree that low-carbon rules would likely lead to more expensive fuel, simply because there’d be less “clean” oil to choose from.
Those facts, which are hitting the local airwaves today thanks to television and radio advertisements produced by CEA, are precisely what this campaign seeks to introduce to the national dialogue on energy. And not long after the launch of our initial press release, the Nashville Post took notice, too. Under the headline “Group Wants Lamar To Know Low-Carbon Fuel Standards Are Bad,” the outlet prominently features CEA’s television advertisement urging Tennesseans to call U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander – an LCFS proponent – to change course, and stand up for consumers by not supporting such job-killing proposals.
These lawmakers might not at present know a whole lot about how an LCFS would raise prices at the pump, hemorrhage American jobs, and expand our dependence on unstable, unreliable energy – all without lessening carbon emissions – but they will. And hopefully, once brought up to speed, they’ll be in a position to do the right thing for their constituents this year.