John Peterson

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. As a retailer all my life, that's what a gas company is. They're a retailer. I sold food. They sell gas. And as their business decreases, their profits go down, but their pipeline system, their pumping stations and all of their costs remain the same. My hesitation is with the cleanest energy we have, why do we want to restrict the use of it, because there's no NOX, no SOX and a third of the CO2. It seems like we ought to be more focused on making it affordable so that volumes remain constant and we don't have this problem. Again, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, this is a complex issue, and I wish we had more time to really debate it, but it is a very important issue because this language was in the energy bill because we had problems across this country around our centers where a lot of electricity is used. New York is the biggest user of electricity, but if we do this, we're saying that we have enough. If surrounding States such as Pennsylvania, an energy exporting State, took the same attitude, New York would be in the dark. Indeed, more reasonable New Yorkers realize this as demonstrated by the following statement from Mr. Gil Quiniones, Chair of the New York Energy Policy Task Force: ``The designation of vitally needed transmission corridors will enhance the public welfare both in the Nation at large and in New York City as the Nation's most critical financial and commercial center.'' Join me in defeating this amendment. This is scare tactics. These are very limited powers that are used already on gas transmission lines. They've not been abused, but when we have disagreements between States and we have local groups who are just anti everything in energy, we need the ability to get electric and gas to our cities so they can function.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, tonight I'd like to share with the House what I think is the most important issue facing this country. Later this week we will have an energy bill, or a so-called energy bill, because the number one issue facing America, in my view, is available, affordable energy. First, I'd like to look at my chart on my left here, and this is the energy as we utilized it in 2005. It has not changed much in 2006. It changed very little in 2007. The number one form of energy that we use is oil, 40 percent. The second item is natural gas, 23 percent. Now, natural gas is used to heat our homes, to heat our businesses. It's used by many people. Many people are not aware that it's used in making many goods. Petrochemicals use it as a fuel and use it as an ingredient. Fertilizer uses it as a fuel and as an ingredient and so does polymers and plastics. In fact, most of the man-made materials today have natural gas in them as an ingredient, and they also use natural gas as a fuel to make the product. Plus, we also now generate more than 20 percent of our electricity with natural gas. So natural gas is the one that's been growing in use but not in production. Coal is an equal amount which we use a lot to generate electricity mostly, 23 percent, heat a few factories. Nuclear, again to generate electricity. Hydroelectric, again to generate electricity. Biomass is the one that's been growing. Nobody talks much about it. But it's woody waste, it's used in the pellet industry for pellet stoves to heat our homes. It's one of the new uses of wood waste made out of saw dust. Also, biomass is used in power generation. It is used to top coal loads so that they bring the air standards down because it burns cleaner, and many factories are now using waste pallets and waste wood to heat their factories because it's a cheap fuel. Geothermal is one that's growing slowly. It's usually with new construction, not old, because of the underground work that's needed to use geothermal to heat your home or business. Wind and solar are the ones we hear a lot about. Hydrogen is not even on here, but hydrogen vehicles is another one I should mention. But this shows you, and I guess the part that is worrisome is that all of our energy bill deals with the last four: biomass, geothermal, wind and solar, or hydrogen. The numbers in them are so small. We are all for them. The energy bill also does some good things. It does deal with conservation, wiser use of all of our forms of energy, better CAFE standards, although I am not sure that's in the bill, although there is talk about that being there, use, getting more fuel efficient cars. But there's a lot of things in this bill that are very alarming. I believe that our 66 percent dependence on foreign oil will increase under the proposed legislation, because this bill goes in the wrong direction. Today, oil reached $79 a barrel, closed at $78.77, record high. I talked to some energy people this evening at a dinner, and they would be surprised if it doesn't reach $100 this summer or this fall. Everything is in place. There is a world shortage of oil. We are not producing as much as we should be, and the tremendous consumption by countries like China and India and all the developing nations are now using huge amounts of oil. They are roaming around the world, signing up contracts, while we sort of sit along the sidelines dealing with the lower four. The Wall Street Journal yesterday reports that the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries posted record revenues of 650 billion last year on high crude prices and increased oil production, 650 billion, many of those our dollars. Another move to use energy as a political weapon, Russia announced today that it's cutting off Belarus off from its natural gas supply. At the same time, Russia is trying to annex the North Pole in a very controversial move, contravention of international law, to feed its energy lust. Yesterday, it was announced that Venezuela has joined China, Norway, Canada and Spain to produce energy right off the Florida coast. The Iranians and the Chinese are inking new energy production agreements with Venezuela. Dow Chemical just announced that it's going to build a $22 billion chemical facility in Saudi Arabia because natural gas supplies in this country are too tight, energy prices are too high. What most people don't realize is that natural gas is not a world price. We had $78 oil today. The whole world does. We have had the highest natural gas prices in America of the whole world for 6 years, and that has endangered the financial stability of chemical companies and fertilizer companies and plastic and polymer companies and steel and aluminum and bricks and glass that use huge amounts of natural gas to make them. Recently, the Business Roundtable, which represents 160 CEOs of the leading companies in America that use energy, 4.5 trillion in annual revenues, with 10 million employees, wrote in a letter recently, ``None of the House [energy] bills addresses the critical need to increase domestic supplies of petroleum liquids and natural gas. Energy security means having well diversified sources of energy--not putting all of our eggs in one basket. Alternative fuels will not eliminate the need for traditional energy resources and, without additional supply, the tight market conditions that have put pressure on prices are likely to persist. The result may well be greater reliance on imports,'' and there are many who predict that we have been increasing our dependence, 2 percent every year. Some think we will spurt up to 70 real quickly, because of the energy bill. The result, the unnecessary and counterproductive impediments to oil and gas leasing, on Federal lands, contained in this bill, report by the Natural Resources Committee, will have an immediate negative effect on domestic production and should not be adopted by the House. It will cut off 9 trillion cubic feet of natural gas from the Colorado Roan. It will cut off 2 trillion barrels of oil shale from oil shale resources. It will cut off 18 percent in Federal on-shore production, because it is removing the redundant NEPAs. Currently, we have off limits the Outer Continental Shelf, and this little spot in the middle here is the new Colorado Roan Plateau. It's a huge, clean natural gas field in Colorado that was set aside as the Naval Oil Shell Reserves in 1912 because of its rich energy resources. There is more natural gas there than was in the bill that was passed last year in the gulf. Cutting off the Roan Plateau was not the subject of any hearings, markups, and was done at the 11th hour. It also cuts off 2 trillion barrels of oil shale from oil reserves in some of the similar areas there, 2 trillion barrels. Now, that's the largest oil reserve known left. Like coal oil shale may prove to be our key to hundreds of years of energy security. This bill throws the key away by neutering the current oil shale program. Meanwhile, China is developing its oil shale. The NEPA program, NEPA studies, redundant NEPA study was legislation that I helped to get in the energy bill which says that redundant NEPAs are not necessary. Historically, groups who are trying to prevent drilling from happening would force producers into multiple NEPA studies, a NEPA study, an environmental impact statement. Many times before they were allowed to drill a well, they would have done three, four or five of them, each taking a year. I had talked to people who had leased land, and 7 years later had not produced any oil. That will not serve America well. The bill we are going to be considering cuts off 10 billion barrels from the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. This is an interesting one, cuts off interagency communication for oil and gas permitting. Historically, all of the agencies, when they were permitting oil and gas, like Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, EPA, Fish and Wildlife Service, Army Corps of Engineers, would all work together in their permitting process and would all work together collectively in enforcing them. This legislation says they must all deal with the person separately, which makes it much more difficult to produce energy. I want to next bring up the next chart here. Total net U.S. petroleum imports. Prior to this energy bill, I believe it was called energy independence. Folks, the legislation we are going to consider this week will increase energy dependence. It will give us no independence. This shows you the study path of dependence. Many of us predict this bill put another spike here because it locks up good reserves, and it takes away what opportunities we have. It's vital to America that we produce fossil fuels. In my view, we ought to be opening up the Outer Continental Shelf, and I will talk about that in a minute, which is, for natural gas, I have a bill to do that, and I will talk about it in a few minutes. But we also ought to have a program promoting coal to liquids, because the Germans fought us in the war when we blockaded them and prevented them from buying energy, any oil. They made their energy out of coal. Their processes are still known. There are several processes that have been developed, but these processes need to be streamlined. We need to build some pilot plants. We need to make sure that in the future we are not growing our dependence to 70 and 80 percent on foreign countries. Interestingly enough, the Air Force is doing their own work. They have been experimenting with coal to liquid. They have been experimenting with natural gas to gas liquid, which would make natural gas prices even higher because there is not enough supply, because they don't want to be dependent in the Air Force. They use 2\1/2\ billion gallons of jet fuel a year, and they want at least at least 60 percent of that to be from American products. They can't do that today. They are dependent on foreign oil. The interesting thing we need to know, where does the foreign oil come from? Exxon is the 14th largest oil company in the world. The 13 larger are government-run oil companies. Most of the companies like Iran, Iraq, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the government owns the oil company, owns the oil, opens the refineries, owns the marketing strategy, and even countries like nearby Mexico. We have all of these countries in the world. Most of the ones that are the big oil producers are not democracies. They are not particularly close friends of ours. There is much concern in the world today that 80 some percent of the known oil and gas reserves are opened by governments that are monopolies that own the whole shebang. They own it in the ground. They own the refineries. They own the marketing systems. Unfortunately, the fear is that Venezuela is going down the same road that Mexico went. Mexico has huge reserves, but they have always been a government monopoly. They don't put money back into the oil fields, and so today they can't produce enough of their own. We actually export oil and gas both to Mexico when they ought to be exporting to us and to the rest of the world because they have huge reserves. Because they are government run, they are corrupt. They steal from the oil reserves, money, and use it for other purposes and don't invest back. So their fields are so antiquated that they can't produce. There are many that are afraid today because in the last 3 or 4 years, three or four or five countries have taken over what were partly owned companies from the big oil companies, chased them out, taken over their equipment, taken over their refineries, taken over their operations, taken over their ownership, and they are now government-run monopolies. That's unfortunate, because they are doing the same thing that Mexico and other countries have done. They are not putting their money back. They have kicked out the smartest people in the country on how to produce oil, how to do refineries, how to produce the energy we need, and so there is great concern around the world that, as they continue to do this, their ability to produce will decrease and decrease, and the oil supply will be shorter and shorter. We sit here today with $78, $79 oil, $78.87, and we are storming the gulf away from probably $90 oil or any little blip in one of these big producing companies, and $100 oil. In fact, someone was telling me today of a pipeline he was worried about that produces 2 million barrels a day, and he said that pipeline is too long, in a very dangerous situation in the world. If it was blown up, we would have $100 oil in a couple of days. Should America be dependent on foreign, unstable countries, not democracies, not our friends, for the lifeblood of our country? I don't think so. Let's bring the chart back up on energy here. I am for all of these renewables. I want all the wind we can get, all the solar we can get, all the ethanol and biodiesel we can get, geothermal. Why we aren't putting more hydroelectric in because we have dams all over this country that have never had hydroelectric hooked up to them. We should be expanding nuclear. With the greatest coal reserves in the world, we should be force feeding coal to liquids and coal to gas mass. Now, some of the arguments I have had is, because of carbon sequestration, we can't do coal. Well, folks, we better do coal. We can work on the carbon sequestration as we refine the process of developing liquids and natural gas from coal. Now, natural gas, I believe, is our road to the future, for the immediate future. We have huge reserves of natural gas, Outer Continental Shelf. Let's bring that world map back up here or the United States map back up here again. We have huge reserves offshore. We only produce in the gulf, but we have huge reserves up and down the coast line. Now, I have legislation that will open up the Outer Continental Shelf, and it's vital that we do that. It's vital that we produce, because we, every electric generating plant we have built recently is natural gas. So if we continue to have a hot summer, we will use a tremendous amount of electricity. In hot weather, they turn on the gas plants, peaker plants. Before, 12 years ago, we only used natural gas for peaking plants. That was high use in the morning and high use at night, but where they were not allowed to run during the day, only in emergency. But then we took that restriction off, so now 98 percent of all the plants built in 12 years have been natural gas plants. They are cheaper, they are easier, but it's the most expensive electricity we are producing today. They are 22 percent of the volume, and they are 55 percent of the cost of electricity, because natural gas is so much higher than it used to be, because we have not produced natural gas in adequate numbers. But if we produced our offshore, if we continued to produce more in the West, we could bring natural gas prices down so we are not the highest in the world. When Dow Chemical moved its big plant to Saudi Arabia that they are building right now, they didn't want to do that, but their natural gas bill went from $8 billion per year to $22 billion per year and continues to rise; $8 billion to $22 billion. Nobody talks about that. Clean, green natural gas, it heats 50-some percent of our homes, 60- some percent of our businesses. It is used to make ethanol, it is used to make biodiesel, it is used to make hydrogen, and it could be fueling one-third of our vehicles. And if we did that, because you can burn natural gas in a gasoline engine. You have to use a different fuel system, but it is just a change. We know how to do that. But it has to be affordable, there has to be financial incentives there, and so we need to do that. But the unfortunate part is America is just kind of going along like we have always had cheap energy. And I sometimes get angry at Congress and I get angry at the administration because energy has not been as high a priority as I think it should have been. But then 6 years ago, we had $2 natural gas and we had $10 oil; the world was awash in it. The only concern people had was we were importing too much of it from foreign countries and we weren't producing our own. But as cheap as it was, it didn't really matter. But we are a long way from $2 natural gas and $10 oil. The average price of natural gas to the home last year was $12.50 per thousand and the current price of oil is almost $79, and expected to go higher. So it seems to me that there would be a sense of urgency in this Congress and that legislation that we would be looking at this week would really deal with availability and affordability of energy. But, unfortunately, people keep saying that renewables must take over. Well, I wish they could. I am for them all, clean renewables. But clean, green natural gas can really bridge us until we have renewables playing a more significant role, until we have some new break-throughs. My legislation to open up the Outer Continental Shelf will allow the first 25 miles to be locked up by law. Today, we are locked up for 200 miles. We are the only country in the world that I know of that has locked up the Outer Continental Shelf, and that is from 3 miles to 200 miles; that is considered our territory to produce. Everybody, Canada, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, these are pretty green countries, New Zealand, Australia. They all produce there. Everybody talks about Brazil being energy independent. They are, because of ethanol. But it is not just ethanol. Ethanol was just a little piece of it. They also produced energy on their Outer Continental Shelf, and they don't now depend on anybody else for energy. Unfortunately, we can't ever get there. We will always be dependent on foreign countries for energy. There is no way America can be self- sufficient, but we sure ought to be trying. We sure ought to be moving in the right direction instead of continuing to be more dependent. We are now 17 percent dependent on natural gas. Thank God for friendly Canada to the north. They produce about 15 percent, and we get about 2 percent of LNG. That is liquefied natural gas. That is another whole issue. I am not opposed to it. It is very expensive. You have to build new sending ports, you have to build huge sending ports, you have to build huge receiving ports that nobody wants; and there has been great resistance to that. And you have to build the biggest ships known to man to bring that natural gas here. But, again, we are buying it from foreign, unstable, nondemocratic countries. Some say, it is okay for emergency, but don't we have enough of that? But clean, green natural gas, if we produced, opened up the Outer Continental Shelf, my bill, 25 miles remains closed; the second 25 miles, States' rights. They can open it if they choose to. The next 50 is open, but the States still have a say. If they don't want it produced, they can pass a law that their Governor signs that keeps them in the moratorium. And then the second 100 miles would be open. Now, I would like to open it for oil because I think we should, but we haven't been able to pass clean, green natural gas. A natural gas well has never polluted a beach. A natural gas well has never polluted anything. It is a simple six-inch hole drilled in the ground with a steel casing put in behind it and the pipe is rigged up to allow natural gas to flow into a system. Offshore, if you are past 25 miles, you will never see it. You only can see 11 to 12 miles. It will never be seen. You will never know it is there. And you can check with the people in the gulf, the best fishing in the gulf is where we produce gas and oil. The fish are attracted to the rigs. It helps make new reefs; it helps make barriers to protect them. It does not hurt aquatic life. In fact, it is probably the most environmentally friendly place to produce energy, and we as a country have said we are not going to do that. We are not going to produce energy there. In fact, we are not going to produce energy at all if we can help it. The bill before us this week will restrict the production of energy in a whole lot of ways. I have already listed them. And that is very unfortunate for America, because there is a lot of incentives for renewables. But if you double wind from one-sixteenth of a percent, you now have one-eighth of a percent for energy. That doesn't change much. That doesn't really change anything. And solar, we keep hoping for break-throughs, but it is even a smaller fraction. And geothermal is a big expense, and it is usually done with new construction. But in my country, I find out that when it gets below 10 degrees or 15 degrees into really hard, cold winter weather, it doesn't work well enough and people start looking for other kinds of heat. Let's have the chart here on my bill. The NEED Act is the bill we hope we can amend into the energy bill. It would open up the Outer Continental Shelf for gas only. And we do some things here that we think are important. States will get 37.5 percent. That will be up to 150 billion. That is with the known reserves. And we have never done modern seismographic out there, so most people who produce oil figure there is three times as much out there than we think because the old seismographic of 40 years ago wasn't very good and today we have much more sensitive seismic that will tell us exactly what's out there. We are going to give 100 billion to the government for the Treasury; $32 billion will go into a fund for renewable energy that will help us promote the renewables of the future; $32 billion will go into carbon capture and sequestration research, because there are those who determined that we must capture carbon. I am not sold totally on that; I am still somewhat skeptic, but let's provide the money so we can capture the carbon and we can produce energy without putting carbon in the atmosphere if that is what they believe to be correct. We put $20 billion to clean up the path of the Chesapeake Bay, the exact amount of money they say they need to clean up the Chesapeake Bay; $20 billion to restore the Great Lakes, exactly what they said they needed to restore the Great Lakes; $12 billion for the Everglade restoration; $12 billion for the Colorado River basin restoration; $12 billion for the San Francisco Bay restoration; and $10 billion for LIHEAP and weatherization, which we have to fund because energy prices today are forcing people out of their homes. I come from rural America. We have big old farmhouses, and people hate to leave their original farmhouses. Some of them, their parents and their grandparents were raised there. They like it there, they are comfortable there, it is a nice location. But they are hard to heat. They are big old plank houses, they are not built like houses today, and it takes a lot of energy to heat them. And people, with today's oil prices and natural gas prices, are forced out of their homes. That shouldn't be in America. With the energy prices that are facing us this year, this winter, by the time Americans drive their vehicles with possibly $3.50, $4 gasoline, and very high gas and fuel oil to heat their homes, they will be choosing between being warm, having adequate food, and other staples of life. I know last winter, which was a very mild winter in my area in Pennsylvania, up until January and then it was very, very cold from January 15 on for about 3 months; but overall, it was considered a mild winter because the first half was very mild. I know people that kept their homes at 58 degrees. Seniors in America shouldn't have to live in a 58-degree house. That is not how it ought to be. They ought to be able to afford to heat their homes. And the tragedy is if we were allowed to produce, if this Congress would stop locking up the Outer Continental Shelf, if they would open up the reserves in the Midwest which some of them are taking off in the energy bill, we could have adequate natural gas in this country; the price could be affordable; Americans could be warm; and, the very best jobs in America like petrochemical and polymers and plastic and fertilizer and glass and steel plants and bricks could be made in America, and middle-class working Americans could continue to have the jobs that have historically allowed them to live a quality of life and raise their families. Natural gas and energy prices overall are going to change the American economy. We are right on the verge of how much this economy can absorb. I was talking to someone who has worked on this all their life. They said they are astounded that $70 oil has not stalled our economy. They are just holding their breath because they know it can't get much higher without stalling our economy and putting our economy into a recession and possibly a world recession. These kind of energy prices. America has to get busy. China is building coal plants weekly, nuclear plants monthly, building the largest hydro dams in the world and cutting deals all over the world for gas and oil and coal. They are out there because they know, like so many other countries know, energy is scarce today, it is high priced, and they have to be about securing their future. This Congress has been negligent year after year in dealing with energy, and here we are now facing an energy bill that is actually going to move us backwards. The Pelosi energy plan has no energy in it. In fact, it takes energy out of the supply stream we have today and will force dependence up on foreign unstable parts of the world, with false hopes that we can conserve. And I am for conservation. I am for all of the better light bulbs and more efficient appliances and all the things and more efficient cars. All of those things. But they move the pendulum very slowly. New CAFE standards take 10 to 15 years for the new fleet to fully be here. All of these other appliance changes, it is only when a person buys a new appliance does it impact. And I know people who have refrigerators that are 15 and 20 years old, and until they replace that they are using an older, wasteful refrigerator. Folks, we need to have energy as the number one issue facing this Congress, energy availability and affordability. We became the strongest Nation in the world because we were the first to discover oil, harness oil, and give us an energy source that started the Industrial Revolution. The whole transportation revolution came from this country because we produced energy. We are choosing today to not produce energy, and we will fritter away, we will become a second rate nation in a very few years if we continue the wrong energy policy. And if we pass the energy bill that we are going to be facing on Friday, I believe we will increase dependence quickly, we will actually cause Americans to be forced to move out of their homes in the near future, not be able to live in the homestead because they can't afford to heat it. We will continue to force millions of jobs overseas as we have in the past. Chemical plants have been built overseas in the last few years; they will continue to be rebuilt overseas. They can't move quickly, or they would have already been gone. It is a $2 billion, $3 billion, and $4 billion investment to build a small chemical plant, and $10 billion and $20 billion to build a large one. Folks, they are in the process of doing that. We now make 50 percent of our fertilizer offshore. In fact, the ethanol issue is an interesting one, because we are taking food stock, corn. And to grow the corn, we have to have lots of fertilizer. It takes a lot of fertilizer to grow corn. And 50 percent of the fertilizer that we are using to grow corn is coming from foreign imports. Does that make any sense? I don't think so. Because clean green natural gas can solve all those problems. I look at natural gas as the clean fuel that bridges us to the future. No NOX, no SOX, a third of the CO2 if you are worried about CO2. And why the environmental groups are against clean green natural gas, I will never know, because some of the renewables are not nearly as clean as clean, green natural gas.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, it is a cause for celebration in the Fifth District of Pennsylvania today. This year marks the 75th anniversary of an American icon, Zippo lighters. In 1932 George Blaisdell developed the first Zippo lighter in a garage in Bradford, Pennsylvania. Today, though most products are disposable or available with limited warranties, the Zippo lighter is still backed by its famous lifetime guarantee: ``It works or we fix it for free.'' A motto of a company that truly believes in its great product. In almost 75 years and nearly 450 million lighters later, where last year alone 50,000 lighters a day were produced in Bradford, Pennsylvania, Zippo lighters are a legacy of good business, and almost 70 percent of them are exported all around the world. Today George Duke, Mr. Blaisdell's grandson, owns the company and is chairman of the board. Gregory Booth is Zippo's president and CEO. I know them both and appreciate their resolve to keep Zippo lighters manufactured in America and, more importantly, in Bradford, Pennsylvania. I commend them for their devotion to the people of Bradford and congratulate Zippo and the Zippo family for 75 years of great business.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, it's a delight to come to the House tonight and talk about an issue that I believe is vital to America's economic future, vital to the strength of our families, of our communities: energy. I want to congratulate the leadership of the House. Next week is going to be energy week. We are going to be having bills coming from the Resources Committee, the Ways and Means Committee. I think, tonight, tomorrow, we will be dealing with some energy issues in the farm bill, because I personally believe available, affordable energy is the number one challenge facing America. Now, from what I have seen in the committee structure, and I am hoping when we get to the floor we will have amendments, and we will have more discussion, but there are some concerns. I know that the bills coming to the floor remove incentives to produce domestic energy. That's energy produced in America or offshore. I know there is increases in taxes on domestic energy production. That's extra taxes on those who will produce, process energy here in America. But I see no incentives to produce the basic fossil fuels, oil, gas, nuclear, coal, or some that I think are potentially helpful, coal to liquids and coal to gas. I have a chart on my left here that shows us the current use of energy, 23 percent clean, green natural gas; 23 percent coal, mostly for power generation. Down here, we have 40 percent petroleum, and a large portion of that is our transportation system, but it's used in other ways too. Then we have nuclear energy in the kind of a light, grayish blue color over here. Now, the ones we really have all the hope for are here in the 6 percent; that's our renewables. Now you will hear everybody promoting renewables, and we should. But let's look at what amount we today have from renewables, and how we can grow them. We are going to have lots of incentives, and we have had lots of incentives. The 2005 bill had incentives for all renewables. Solar is .06 of a percent of our energy supply today; .06, that's not even 1/10 of 1 percent. Now the one that surprised a lot of people is biomass, 2.4 percent. A lot of that's woody waste, it's the pellet stove industry, it's waste being burned in boilers to heat factories, to dry wood. Lots of places where they have wood waste, they put in wood-burning boilers. It's also been used to top coal-burning boilers so they can meet air quality standards, because wood burns cleaner than coal. Then we have geothermal. We know geothermal is using ground heat, ground temperature, water temperature; but it's .36 of a percent. Then we have hydroelectric that's 2.7. That's a figure that's declining because we have actually taken dams out in this country. Then we have wind, which we hear a lot about today, but it's .12 of a percent of our energy portfolio. I guess my concern is that we have a growing need of energy in America, somewhere, 2, 2.5 percent a year; and we all know that we must conserve. We must use energy more wisely. This chart shows you that. But it appears to me that all the hope, and all the faith, and all the incentives are going to be out here. We should have them out there. But if we don't produce more natural gas, if we don't produce more oil, and if we don't at least develop coal to liquids or coal to gas, then the growth in the renewables will not even meet the demand in the growth in energy use in the country, so it's very concerning. Now, I believe the one that we really miss out on is natural gas. Natural gas heats 57 percent of our homes. It heats probably 70 percent of our businesses. It's used in huge amounts to make electricity. I think 20 percent of our natural gas is now used to make electricity, and natural gas is a major ingredient in making ethanol. We currently have 116 ethanol plants, and we have 78 under construction, and seven that are under expansion. Up to 95 percent of these plants, we use clean, green, natural gas to run their boilers to make ethanol. So that is very vital to us that we have adequate amounts of clean, green natural gas. It's interesting that hydrogen is one that's not a percentage, but it's one that we talked about in hydrogen vehicles, but the hydrogen we make today is made from what? Natural gas. Biodiesel, not on the chart, but another item that's starting to perk out there. We use, again, a lot of natural gas to make biodiesel. Now, the problem we have had in America is we use a lot of natural gas, and here's the reason why: about 12 years ago we took away the prohibition of making electricity with natural gas. When this happened, we started to have a shortage. As the use of natural gas goes up, and we are not supplying more natural gas, we are getting huge price increases. Just 6 years ago, natural gas was less than $2 a thousand. Last year the average price to homeowners was about $12.50 a thousand, huge increases. Now, this has been monumental to business. Dow Chemical, chemical companies use huge amounts of natural gas; 55 percent of the cost of making chemicals in America is natural gas. They use it as an ingredient; they use it as a fuel. Dow Chemical's gas bill in 2002 was $8 billion, a lot of money. In 2006, it was $22 billion, and today it's rising. The problem we have is we have continued to make ethanol, all our chemical plants, fertilizer plants, fertilizer, 50 to 70 percent of the cost of making nitrogen fertilizer, natural gas. Natural gas is an ingredient. All the ladies who like skin softeners, a major ingredient in skin softeners is natural gas. Natural gas is in our carpets. It's in our drapes. It's in many of our clothes. It's in plastic products; 45 to 50 percent of polymers in plastic cost is natural gas. All the good industries we have left in this country use huge amounts of natural gas. For the last 6 years, we have had the highest prices in the world on natural gas because we have refused to open up new fields. We have refused to reach offshore. We have made it difficult in many parts of the West to produce natural gas. We look at it as something evil to drill a 6-inch hole in the ground, put a steel pipe in and let gas out. Yet it's what fuels the country. America is great because we always had cheap affordable energy up until 6 years ago. Another factor many Americans don't know, and too many Members of Congress don't know is that natural gas is not a world price, when, currently, oil is $75, $77 a barrel, pretty painful for our economy, but it's pretty painful for all our competitors around the world too. But for 6 years, America has had the highest natural gas prices in the world. That's something we need to do something about. We can see a chart here of what it's done to manufacturing. We have lost more jobs in America because of natural gas prices. As natural gas prices have risen, manufacturing price jobs have dropped because the fertilizer industry in the last 2 years, 40 percent of manufacturing went offshore. They are hanging on with a string. If we don't bring natural gas prices down in the world average price, our farmers will be using foreign fertilizer to grow corn to make ethanol. Doesn't sound like a winner to me. But it's vital, because one more chart here on trade, that a huge percentage of the trade deficit in this country is because of energy. We're buying our energy, our oil, 66 percent of our oil today comes from foreign, unstable, unfriendly countries. I find that a worry. The bills we have coming up next week deal not with increasing domestic production, because when you decrease domestic production, you increase foreign imports. Now, everybody says we should be independent, energy independent. It's an impossibility on oil. I wish it wasn't. Natural gas, we have reserves offshore, we have reserves onshore. We could be total supplying all of our own natural gas. We currently supply 80 some percent of ours, about 16 percent from Canada and a couple of percent LNG. But on oil, we have been gaining 2 percent a year in the last 10 years, every year, of foreign dependence. That's because we are buying this huge amount of energy from foreign countries, not our friends, and currently OPEC is in charge. OPEC has been controlling prices the last year again. For a while, they didn't have control. They are back in control. As we look at where we buy our oil, Canada is one of our biggest suppliers, but they are really the only friendly one that we are really close friends with, and it's the one that we could be comfortable with. The rest of the countries aren't even stable governments and could topple tomorrow. We currently have $75, $76, $77, I am not sure where it is today, but it was bouncing around there, and that's with no storms in the gulf and with no country that's in trouble at the moment. If we have one of the big exporting countries in trouble, and a couple of storms in the gulf like we did 2 years ago, we could be at $85, $90 and we could be approaching $3.50 and $4 gasoline. We all know the devastation that will have on us. I have legislation I want to brief you on before I run out of time, I know I am getting short, but I have legislation called the NEED Act. It's about opening up the Outer Continental Shelf. It's 3 miles to 200 miles offshore where we have energy. Every country in the world produces on their Outer Continental Shelf but America, every country in the world, Canada, Norway, Sweden, all those green countries. They all produce energy offshore. We have chosen to lock our Outer Continental Shelf up. It's a terrible mistake. It's the last environmentally hazardous way to produce gas and oil. My bill is gas only. It gives States control of the first 50 miles. The first 25 are locked up; the second 25 are open, if they want them open. The second 50 miles is open unless they have legislation, and they can even close it; and the last 100 miles is open automatically. It would open up great reserves so we could have access to natural gas so we could stabilize prices in this country, so we could have energy to heat our homes, affordable energy to heat our business, energy to maintain the employment base in America that we are losing. If we don't stabilize natural gas prices, we are going to lose the petrochemical business. Dow Chemical just committed $32 billion to Saudi Arabia where gas is $1.25, where ours runs $10 or $12. Folks, we have to bring natural gas prices down so we can maintain what's left of the fertilizer industry, polymer and plastics industry. The steelmakers tell me they can't stand any more high prices, aluminum makers. My prediction, if we don't deal with the natural gas crisis in America, Americans will not be able to heat their homes affordably. Small businesses will not be able to stay in business if they use any amounts of energy, and we will be shipping all of these great jobs that made our country strong and to give our jobs to the working middle- class people of America, we are just going to be giving those away to other countries. I predict the big bulky items, even like bricks and glass, will be made in nearby Trinidad, which is an island north of South America, only one day away in a ship where gas prices are only 90 cents. I believe it's vital that as we approach the energy issue next week, that we talk about production, that we talk about how we continue to have adequate energy in America, and how we specifically have adequate natural gas to maintain the industries we have left. If we have an energy bill that only makes it more difficult to produce domestic industry, if we have an energy bill that only makes it more expensive to produce and if you tax, the production of oil and gas, if you tax the production of any kind of energy, if you tax that, you raise the price, you raise the price to consumers, because they pay it, we end up paying it as consumers. So it's vital. In my view, it's vital that we have an energy bill next week and we have an open debate and we have lots of chance for amendments, we get to talk about it. What would coal liquids do? I think the President has proposed cellulosic ethanol. Now, it's a good idea. That's making ethanol out of cellulose instead of corn, but the problem is, it's still in the laboratory. It's close to being able to come out of the laboratory, and, therefore, is funding six plants, futuristic. I am for that. We ought to be doing the same to coal liquids. The Germans have made liquids and gas out of coal in World War II when they had embargoes and couldn't get oil. So we ought to be streamlining that process and having it ready. We ought to be juicing up our nuclear. We need all of the 35 nuclear plants that are under permit process today to be built by 2030 to just maintain 20 percent of our electric grid to remain nuclear, no growth. The growth in the need of oil and gas continues, as our economy continues, and the problem we have today that we didn't have a few years ago. Just 6 years ago, gas was $2 a thousand, oil was $10 a barrel, just 6 years ago. And today there is a shortage of oil in the world, and we have competitors like China and India that are consuming energy at a much faster growth than we are. They are increasing their energy use 15 to 20 percent a year. They are buying up reserves all over the world. They are building coal plants, coal-to-liquid plants. They are building nuclear plants. They are building the biggest hydro dams in the world. They are preparing for their economic future. In America, because we have never had an energy shortage like this, we have had little shortages for months and years or part of a year in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s when there were world crises, but the current prices, as high as they are, are a floor on which we are going to have spikes. When we have spikes and we have $100 oil, Americans are going to struggle. They are going to struggle to heat their homes, they are going to struggle to drive their cars, especially the poor Americans, and the companies that use a lot of energy are going to struggle to make products and compete in the global marketplace. I think it is vital next week that this Congress deals with energy openly. I want all the renewables to be promoted and incentivized and, yes, even subsidized. But when they are fractions of a percent, you can double them or triple them in 5 years, and they are still a fraction. They will not meet the needs of our society in the next couple decades. We have to have fossil fuels. Some people hate fossil fuels. We need to use them as clean as we can. We need to use them as wisely as we can. We are going to have to conserve, because I want to tell you, the next spike in energy crisis, the Americans are going to be conserving because they are not going to have the money to pay for it. They are going to have to cut down their travel, they are going to have to keep their houses cold, and that is not how Americans should live. This Congress should not be restricting access of the Outer Continental Shelf. We should not be restricting access to the vast reserves that are in this broad country. We know how to produce energy today. We ought to be forcing forward coal-to-liquids. We ought to open up the Outer Continental Shelf. And those who scream about the oil companies making huge profits, it is my opinion that the oil companies have made huge profits because of Congress and the administration. When you restrict supply, then you increase price. And so when oil companies and gas companies invested in reserves and did that with the hopes that they would be worth $30 a barrel, and they became worth $75 a barrel, they are going to make a lot of money. If you had a monopoly on any issue or any item, and you expected to sell it for $10 a profit, and then the supply gets short and you can sell it for $30, you are going to make a lot more money. That is just basic economics. So the reason oil companies have made a lot of money is they invested in oil, they invested in gas reserves assuming that their prices were going to be far less. And when our government decided that we weren't going to produce it domestically, we were going to depend on foreign countries because foreign worked cheap; it didn't really matter even 6 years ago. There was a lot of concern about our growing dependence on foreign energy, but it didn't matter. It was cheap, $2 for gas, $10 for oil. Nothing competes with that. There is no reason to go in any other direction. But that is all behind us, and it is all behind us because there is actually shortness of energy in this country and in the world. And so we are huge competitors. China will surpass us in energy use very soon. India is using huge amounts. All the developing countries, as they develop their auto fleets and their manufacturing bases, they are all using huge amounts that they didn't before. They lived very simple lives. So as the world progresses, the need for energy will grow. And America seems to me to be the country that is doing the least to prepare for its energy future. And its energy future is available, affordable energy, and we should have lots of gas, lots of coal, lots of oil, all the renewables we can get, expansion of nuclear. We need to be looking down every road, every new way of producing energy we can, and the cleanest and greenest we can have it. And we should be conserving it as much as we can and not wasting it. But, folks, we are in trouble. As a country, we are facing serious problems, because energy that is affordable and available may not be with us in just the short months and years ahead. Two storms in the gulf this summer, one or two of the sending countries that export oil have a problem in their government. It happens all the time. Eighty percent of the energy of gas and oil in the world is owned, controlled, marketed by countries that are not democracies, not our friends, and they own the oil company. Exxon is the 14th largest oil company in the world. The 13 larger are monopoly oil companies owned by the government, and those are who we are going to depend on. America needs to secure its energy future. It needs to produce adequate amounts of gas, oil, coal, and all the renewables we can. We need to have an energy policy. And I hope next week we can debate all these facts. Natural gas is the clean green fuel that can be the bridge, help us with ethanol, help us with hydrogen, help us with biodiesel, and even a third of our auto fleet can be fueled with natural gas. We would save 2\1/2\ million barrels of oil a day. America needs to prepare for its energy future.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. I will be very brief because I believe the amendment has been agreed to. My amendment is a simple amendment that says Federal funds cannot be used to establish or collect tolls on Interstate 80 in Pennsylvania.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. I will yield to the gentleman.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. I thank the two gentlemen. We will let the process move forward. This was offered both on behalf of Congressmen Peterson and English. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. According to the Department of Transportation in 2005, his area received $580 million for its construction of a $1.4 billion, that's a pretty big percentage, of a 19.6 mile light rail system serving metropolitan Phoenix. Why should people from Forest County have to pay that? I should make that argument. We can use it. Mass transit gets huge amounts of money, and Arizona gets lots of that. The largesse goes to the urban areas that have the ability to get it. One thing about the earmark process, I am not saying it's perfect, but I have never asked for an earmark that I wouldn't defend publicly in any setting. I am proud today to ask this Congress to give $100,000 to the Hunting and Fishing Museum in little Forest County, that is trying to rebuild their economic base, enhance their tourism and teach our young people the value of wildlife and fishing and hunting and the beauty of the area. That's a noble issue. I will gladly support the ability to help that rural county. I ask support of this Congress for this earmark.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the amendment and claim the time.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I find it ironic today the maker of this amendment represents one of the more affluent parts of America, one of the parts of America that wouldn't be there, wouldn't be growing and prospering without billions and billions of Federal investment. We can start with the 336-mile diversion canal that diverts water from the Colorado River so they can irrigate the desert and make it a city. It seems to me that's a pretty expensive economic development project taking desert and making it grow. Mesa last year, his home area, $35 million of their budget is Federal money, and he keeps talking about the process. Well, I think I understand the process, and I'd be glad to debate the process with him any day, anytime, anywhere. I've been in business all my life, retailing. I served in local government 8 years, State government 19 years, Federal Government 11 years, and I understand process. Rural America is not a part of the process of funds from the Federal Government. This bureaucracy you brag about how they allocate money and how they hand it out as if this was some pure process. Rural communities don't have planning departments. They don't have planning directors. They don't have consultants. They don't hire lobbyists like Mesa and Phoenix and Arizona do. They're fighting for their economic lives. This little forest county is less than 10,000 people. I think the population went from close to 5,500 to 7,500 because we opened a prison there. It used to be the home of an Evenflo Bottle Company, and those people would like to see a little investment in economic development in that community. It used to be the home of a glass plant. It used to be the home of a cabinet factory. They're all gone. It is a beautiful area, some of the most beautiful parts of America. It is the best hunting and fishing in America, and tourism is the only tool they have that's working. This Hunting and Fishing Museum is another tool to try to keep hunters and fishermen and travelers and visitors to visit that part of the area. Another thing, its interactive displays teach young people about hunting and fishing. We have a lot of people today that don't have fathers at home teaching them to hunt and fish. The Hunting and Fishing Museum is going to have classes. They're going to have classrooms. They're going to teach young people the joy of hunting and fishing. I find you take a young man and you teach him to fish, you teach him to hunt, you get him involved in a sport, he's less likely to be in crimes, drugs and on the streets. It's a part of the fiber of America. There is no urban museum that isn't loaded with Federal dollars to build it. Rural museums don't have that same pathway. I defy a museum in America that doesn't have Federal funding in it. Because a little community asks for 50 or 100,000, this is some sort of a crime? I'm sorry. I'm not going to apologize. I served Forest County as a State House member, a State senator and now a Congressman. I ran a business within 10 miles, and many of these people were customers of mine when I had a supermarket. These are good people fighting for their economic lives trying to build this museum. The State has allocated $4 million, but they have to get matching money. This $100,000 will get them another $100,000 from the State, because as they raise money, they get money. I gladly debate this museum. It's a good investment for the future for Forest County and for America. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I cautiously come to the floor today, but I'm troubled by the process here. I come from a Great Lakes State, Pennsylvania. We cherish the Great Lakes, but we're passing a resolution today because of a newspaper article, a column, and we have legislation without any hearings. This is why we don't have refinery capacity in America. In light of recent attention given to the Indiana Department of Environmental Management's permit to the BP refinery, I would like to provide the facts and clear up misunderstandings, says the Department of Environmental Management in Indiana. The BP wastewater permit was issued in accordance with State and Federal environmental laws which are protective of human health and environment. The State coordinated with EPA during the permitting process to ensure that the final permit was compliant with the Clean Water Act. On April 5, 2007, EPA issued a letter that they had no objections to the permit being issued pursuant to the Clean Water Act. There are many inaccuracies in the recent media reports. They have given no exceptions to environmental conditions for this facility. The wastewater treatment permit meets all State laws and regulations that apply to the facility and project. Many of the limits placed in the permit are actually more protective than required by Federal law. We need to deal with these issues with the facts, not newspaper reports. We can't build refineries in America. We blame the refineries. This happens every time they try. I'm not for pollution in Lake Erie, but I would like to have had a hearing where Indiana could have had its case heard. We shouldn't be here on the floor debating this with very little knowledge and hysteria. The future of refining in America, the future of energy availability in America, we must have clean water and clean air, but if we are going to have a political reaction without the hearings, without the information, we shouldn't make these kind of decisions on the floor of the House. I'm for cleaning up the Great Lakes. I have a bill on the outer continental shelf to produce natural gas that will give $21 billion to Great Lakes cleanup. That's a bill that will help us get rid of the sludge of the past. I just wish this wasn't before us without adequate process and hearings so we could understand what's really happened there, where we have a real knowledge of information, because we desperately need the capacity they're talking about.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. I want to thank my friend from Nebraska for his leadership here tonight and for his sharing time with us. I personally believe that energy is the Number 1 issue facing America's economic future. I don't think, I think that available, affordable energy is a greater threat to the American economy than terrorism is. That's my personal view. Before we talk about natural gas, I want to look at what we're using. Now, these are 2004 figures, but they've changed very little. It takes the Energy Department several years to compile them. These are the figures that we made the last chart out of a few months ago. Currently 40 percent of our energy is petroleum. Just about 22.9 or 23 percent is natural gas, and a similar figure is coal. Now that's 86 percent. Then you get down here to nuclear, 8.2, and now you're up to 94 percent. So renewables are those figures on the left. And the largest, which surprises a lot of people, is biomass, which was 2.8, hydroelectric, 2.7, geothermal, 0.3, solar, 0.06, and wind, 0.01. Now, I think we need to look at that. And then we look at the next chart, which is the Energy Department's estimates. Now, these are the people that deal with us every day. In 13 years, in 2020, these figures don't change much, according to their statistics. Now, I hope they're wrong because the energy bills that are coming at us do not deal with petroleum, do not deal with natural gas, certainly do not deal with coal and do not deal with nuclear, which provides 94 percent. And I don't believe they deal with hydroelectric. That's another 3 percent. And so we have about 4 percent that's in play. And I think what we have to be concerned about, if we focus on that 4 percent, woody biomass, solar, wind, geothermal and hydrogen, can we take care of the needs of this country, because when you don't have emphasis on these, and you don't continue to drill new wells, and you don't continue to promote coal to liquids or coal to gas to furnish our mass amounts of energy needs, then these volumes go down, and that's where we've been at as a country. We've had a policy not to produce American energy, oil, gas or coal. We are gaining 2 percent foreign dependence every year, so we're at 64 percent. We've been gaining. Since I have been in Congress it's been 2 percent a year, every year. And that's a trend that nobody thinks is appropriate or positive for America because it's foreign, unstable, often unfriendly countries with unstable governments. Some new statistics that I'll just add to this that are a little concerning; 80-some percent of the oil and gas in the world is owned by countries that do not have democracies, unstable countries. They own the energy of the world. In fact, Exxon, our largest oil company, is 14th in the world in ownership of energy. There are 13 countries that own, starting with Saudi Arabia and Russia and Iran and Iraq, and you can tell that's not exactly our friends, on down the road, all of those types of countries that own the energy of the world, and we are totally dependent. Now, I'm pleased that the House and the Senate are both going to be dealing with an energy bill, but I think it's important that we have some energy production in those bills. Now, the natural gas issue is one that has, I think, is really driving us economically in the wrong direction. We use 20 some percent of our natural gas now to make electricity. The gentleman from Nebraska just mentioned that his State doesn't do that, but the country does that. The States of California and Florida, the big users of energy in this country, consume huge amounts of electricity produced by natural gas, and that's an increasing figure daily. About 12 or 13 years ago we took away the moratorium. It used to be just used for peaking plants in the morning and the evening because people felt natural gas was to precious to use to make electricity. Natural gas is the feedstock for hydrogen, which the Representative from Nebraska talked about is one of our future fuels. We currently make it out of natural gas. Ethanol, the big push on ethanol consumes huge amounts of natural gas in the production of ethanol, so we don't make ethanol without consuming huge amounts of natural gas. The same with biodiesel. It's the feedstock. Now, here's where the rubber meets the road in America. Natural gas is an ingredient in almost everything that's manufactured, or it's used in large amounts to heat, treat and bend products. Petrochemicals, all the petrochemical companies, 55 percent of their cost of producing their chemicals because they use natural gas as an ingredient, they use it as a fuel is natural gas. Polymers and plastics, 45 to 50 percent of their cost is natural gas because they use it as an ingredient and they use it as a fuel. Fertilizer, from 50 to 70 percent of the cost of making fertilizer to grow the corn to make the ethanol is made by natural gas. In the last 2 years, 50 percent of our fertilizer production has gone offshore. Petrochemicals, polymers and plastics are moving offshore. Why? Because America has the highest natural gas prices in the world, and have had for 6 years. That was not true 6 years ago. South America, a buck and a quarter. Our average retail price last year was between 12 and $13. Like I said, we have consistently, for 6 years, had the very highest natural gas prices in the world. To show you, Dow Chemical uses huge amounts of natural gas. In 2002, they spent $8 billion to buy natural gas. In 2006, they spent $22 billion, and of course those numbers just keep rising. If we don't deal with the natural gas issue, America will not compete as a nation, because we use natural gas in producing almost all of our products, whether it's melting steel, melting aluminum.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Certainly.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. They just committed $32 billion to build new plants in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Libya.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. That's right.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. There's about 100 chemical plants in the world under construction, none in the United States. And that's a tragedy because those are some of the best working man jobs. When you bend steel, when you bend aluminum, when you heat treat products, when you dry grain, you use natural gas. I mean, natural gas heats 60 percent of our homes, heats about 70 percent of our businesses. Now, if natural gas was affordable, it would be the natural next fuel for vehicles, because we could fuel, if it was affordable, we could fuel a third of our auto fleet and that would be much quicker than CAFE. And I'm not opposed to CAFE. But it would be much quicker than all the things they're talking about because it could displace 2.5 million barrels a day, just for short haul vehicles who don't go long distances. One of the problems with natural gas as a vehicle fuel is distance because you can't store, you can't have a big enough gas tank to run long distances on a tank of natural gas. But we have, on the Outer Continental Shelf, that's from 3 miles to 200 miles offshore, every country in the world produces both gas and oil there. Now, they may have 20-mile distance out or 30-mile distance out. But they produce, after you pass 11 to 12-mile it's out of sight. And countries around the world, when I tell them we don't produce there, just look at us and they say, why? Norway, Sweden, Great Britain, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, all environmentally sensitive countries, they all produce there. We're the only known modern society that does not produce oil and gas. Now, I have a proposal that opens it up for gas because we have not been able to pass it. I would support oil, but natural gas is more important to us because how it fuels our industry, how it heats our schools, how it heats our homes, how it heats our hospitals, how it plays such a role in our economy, how it's an ingredient in so many of our products, in fertilizers and petrochemicals and plastics. So we need natural gas. So I put the priority, and we have a bill that says the first 20 miles remains locked up. The second 25 miles State option, State control, and the next 50 miles is open unless the States pass a bill to lock it up. They can do that. The second hundred miles is just open. That's the bill that I have proposed. And I think it's vital to the future of this country, because if we opened up the Outer Continental Shelf on the East and West Coast and the rest of the gulf we would have ample supply of natural gas for many, many years. Now, we need to produce other kinds of fuel. I mean, what I think a lot of people are not aware of is there is an energy shortage in the world. In fact, right now OPEC controls the price. I believe the price ends the day at somewhere between $75, $76 for oil. Gas is about 7 bucks, which is the cheapest it has been, but this is the slowest time of year in the use of gas. This is gas that is going into storage that you add a couple, 3 bucks to, and then there are distribution costs, and it comes back out on a next year's average price. And this year the price of gas is higher than last year so far in storage. So we are going to have a 25 to 30 percent increase in gas prices, and it appears we are going to have, because here we are with not one storm in the gulf, which always disrupts supply. Right at the moment, we don't have a large sending country in trouble with their government. So things are kind of calm, and we have $75 oil, and we are at the high usage time, right in the mid-summer. So now all we have to do is have a storm or two in the gulf, like we did 2 years ago, and have a country have some sort of disturbance or a government overthrown, and we have $85 or $90 oil, and we know what that is going to do to the American economy. In fact, I am not sure we are really sure what $3 gasoline, which is prevalent today, is going to do to the economy long term because we have had spikes for short periods of time. But now, in my view, $3 is the base price, and it is going up from there. It is just a matter of how much it goes up. I think what is important for Americans and Members of Congress to understand is that we have to really get serious about energy policy for this country. I am for wind and I am for solar and I am for geothermal and I was part of the Hydrogen Caucus when I first came. I am for all of those. But they are tiny fractions when you look at the amounts they produce. And we also know that wind has its opponents and solar has just had trouble getting off the ground. I mean, it just has trouble growing. I read an article today that said ethanol, the new fuel, we spent $5.1 billion last year, subsidizing that by paying the tax on it. So it doesn't come free. And it seems foolish to me that we as a country now want to buy our natural gas from foreign countries and bring it in ships and be once again dependent. I have had that argument with a lot of leaders in the last few years that LNG could be part of the solution, but it is not the solution. And that has turned out true because countries like Spain and Japan outbid us because they will pay more for a tanker load of natural gas than we can afford to. So we don't often get it because it becomes a commodity once a ship is loaded. But I want to get across to Members of Congress and to the American people is that we want to be for the clean and green fuels, but I think natural gas is one of those. Natural gas is one of the cleanest fuels we have. And if we had ample supply of it, we could be expanding the use of it, not just detracting the use of it. It could be our bridge until we figure out how to make cellulosic ethanol, until we figure out how to get hydrogen vehicles, until we figure out how to charge our cars up at night with electric and have batteries that will last and all these things we are working on, we need a bridge to get to them because what is going to happen if we allow ourselves to have $100 oil from foreign countries, unstable governments, who are totally going to own this country? The major balance of payment, and I will just show you that in conclusion, is the last chart here. This is one on manufacturing decline as natural gas prices have risen. But here is the one on the balance of payment. The major portion of the balance of payment, a huge portion, is energy prices. And as energy prices go up and we continue to import, that figure is going to grow. We could almost cut our balance of payment in half if we stopped importing energy. Now, we are not going to be able to do that but we could move a long ways. But we need cola liquids. We need to develop the hydrogens and the winds and solars and all of those. We need to do more nuclear. We need all of those because China is increasing their energy usage 15 to 20 percent a year, and they are just drying up the marketplace. They are just sucking it dry because they are, and many other countries, are developing a strong energy portfolio; so they have energy. The United States has done little to secure its economic future with clean, green, affordable energy. And I hope when we finally pass bills here that we have some energy in them that will secure our economic future with clean, green, affordable energy and specifically natural gas.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. We have anywhere from a 50- to 100-year supply. There are huge amounts in the Midwest, but the Outer Continental Shelf has actually not been measured. But we had old seismographic 40 years ago. Actually this Congress has prevented, and I see the Senate right now is preventing, seismographic from being done in the portion of the gulf that has not been produced.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Not only do we prohibit usage but we prohibit the measurement. Now, there was a lot of drilling off the coast of Florida a few years ago. We bought those leases back. That was very fertile gas. There is very fertile gas up in Georgia, the Carolinas, Virginia, New Jersey. The east coast is loaded with gas, and it is very rich, and it is where the population is. And when you produce in the ocean, it is out of sight. It is beyond the site line. The habitat for fisheries improve. They love to be around the rigs. They love to be around the platforms. And, of course, the underground piping comes in the ground under the water. It is not even seen. It is clean, green fuel. And they talk about it harming a beach. I don't know how gas harms a beach. I have never seen dirty natural gas. It's clean. It doesn't stain anything. It isn't colorful. It's just a gas. So it has been somewhat amazing. We have lots of natural gas.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. When we started down that road, natural gas was less than $2 a thousand. And it has hit as high as $14 and $15 in peak periods. But Daniel Yergen, who wrote the book ``The Prize,'' spoke in the Senate shortly after that process started, and I happened to be there with Steve Largent. And he said if we don't open up supply, we are going to make natural gases so high that Americans will struggle to heat their homes, struggle to run their businesses, struggle to heat their hospitals. We are not going to make products in this country much longer that consume a lot of natural gas. I predict if we don't deal with the natural gas issue, simple things like glass and bricks will be made in Trinidad, where gas is about a buck a thousand. That is not very far from here. Trinidad is in northern South America, probably a boat, a ship, a day away. It wouldn't take long to get to the east coast with a ship of bricks and glass. And that is a tragedy if we start importing those kinds of things that the American working man has made. This is about jobs for working people. It is about the economy for the working people of this country. Energy punishes the poor and the middle class. The rich will go right along. The rich environmentalists who are against will live right on. They won't change their life-style. They will live in their huge homes and fancy cars and they will do their thing because money is not a problem. But the middle-class working people will not have a middle-class job anymore. They will have a poor man's job. And the poverty rate in this country will skyrocket.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Some of the best jobs in America are producing energy. When you buy Luke Oil gasoline down here, that is produced in Russia, and only the person selling it makes money in America. Mr. Pearce can tell you how many people make money because he knows that business in the production of energy. He will give you some great information.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida and those cosponsoring this legislation. I couldn't agree more that we must prevent or do everything we can to make sure there is not a cartel. There is some hard evidence though. Dow Chemical recently shared with me their natural gas cost. In 2002, they spent $8 billion for natural gas. In 2006, that same bill cost them $22 billion. And it is rising. It is the reason they are now investing $32 billion in Qatar and Saudi Arabia and Libya, because natural gas is dirt cheap there. New chemical plants are going to replace us. Mill Hall Clay Products was in my district for 83 years making clay pipe. They went out of business this year, and the sole reason was natural gas cost prices. When it would reach a certain level, they no longer could be profitable, and they are history. Natural gas, clean, green natural gas, is our bridge to the future, and we must have it affordable. Currently, it is in high usage to make ethanol. We use a lot of it to make biodiesel. When the wind and solar, the sun doesn't shine, we turn on a natural gas power plant. Natural gas is our bridge to the future. We could displace a third of our auto fleet, short-haul vehicles with natural gas, and remove the need for 2.5 million barrels of oil a day. But folks, it is great to urge that we don't have a cartel formed, but Russia is working hard at this. We just hope and pray that they are not successful because we know what they want to do; they want to control the price. I had this debate with the President some time ago on Air Force One that LNG was going to be the answer to our future natural gas needs, and 2 years later we are not importing much more natural gas than then because we can't buy it. When a ship gets filled with natural gas, it is a commodity. Spain outbids us routinely. Japan outbids us routinely. Our ports, we have been trying to build ports and have not been able to get them permitted. They are only at 40-some percent of capacity. Why, because we can't buy it because of the demand in the world marketplace for it, countries who don't have any. Our fortunate part is America can be self-sufficient on natural gas. We could not import one cmf if we chose to produce it. Canada currently furnishes about 15 percent of our gas. We get about 2 percent with LNG. The rest we produce ourselves, but we have locked up much of our mainland. We have locked up our Outer Continental Shelf. We can go out of sight where it isn't in sight. There has never been a natural gas well that has ever polluted a beach. And if it is out of sight, nobody knows it is there. Since 1913, Canada has produced natural gas in our Great Lakes, and they sell that gas to us. We don't even know it is there. The ship moves in, they drill their well, and the underground guys go down and put the piping in. Then they sell the gas to us. If they are slant drilling, they are probably selling us our own gas. Clean, green natural gas should never be a long-term problem for America. All we need is the will to produce it. Clean, green natural gas, it is the best fuel we have. No NOX, no SOX, a third of the CO2. The whole climate change issue, natural gas is the biggest, most significant change we can make. And we don't need to lose the Dow Chemicals in the future. We don't need to lose the Mill Hall Clay products in the future. We just have to get out of our minds that a gas well is not something that pollutes. It is a hole in the ground with a pipe in it that lets clean, green natural gas out. We need to make sure that we never have a cartel setting our prices like we do in oil. Today the oil prices are in the $70s, because the cartel is in control. They have been in control for a couple of years now. They lost control for a while. They are back in control today, and they control the price of energy. We must not let that happen with natural gas. We have had the highest natural gas prices in the world for 6 years because it is not a world market. And we must change that so that we can compete. We will lose our chemical plants, our fertilizer plants, our polymer plants, our plastic plants. We will lose aluminum and steel that we have left. And I predict, because gas is only a buck and a quarter in Trinidad, just a short distance from here, one day on a ship, we will be making glass and bricks there and bringing them here, and the working people of America will not have a job because of high natural gas prices. That is an issue that this Congress needs to deal with. It is important that we do not let a cartel form. We can't stop that, we can only sell, and we must continue to sell, but we can prevent it by producing the clean natural gas that is abundant in this country.