Virginia Politics On Demand - August 2010

Volume 1, Number 5. August 2010

The New Manhattan ProjectCongressman Randy Forbes

“Cap and Trade”Politics in the Ninth

A Taste of CharlottesvilleThis Month’s Photo Essay

Is George AllenThe Once &

Future Senator?

The BP Oil Spill haschanged the

offshore drillingdebate in Virginia

The Tea Party: What’s the Point?

Unlocking SouthsideVirginia’s Geologic Treasure

Bearing DriftVirginia Politics on Demand

J.R. Hoeft, [email protected]

Michael Fletcher, [email protected]

Alan Moore, [email protected]

Jane Dudley, Photo [email protected]

Contributors this issue:

DCHJames GabeleGreg HabeebJason W. JohnsonShaun KenneyAlan MooreJim RileyWard SmytheKrystle D. Weeks

Guest Contributors

Congressman Randy ForbesRay Ganthner, Virginia EnergyIndependence Alliance

© Copyright 2010

Stay Connected to Bearing Drift.

Click HERE to receiveBearing Drift Magazine by email.

BearingDrift.com /

In this Issue

Next Month: Bearing Drift on Education

4 Letter from Bearing Drift

6 The New Manhattan Project Guest Editorial by Congressman Randy Forbes

8 Bearing Drift Interview Is George Allen The Once & Future Senator?

DCH

16 The BP Oil Spill has changed the offshore drilling debate in Virginia Including interview with Congressman Bob Goodlatte J.R. Hoeft

24 Unlocking Southside Virginia’s Geologic TreasureRay Ganther, Virginia Energy Independence Alliance

32 Could the “Golden Leaf” Be America’s Golden Ticket to Energy Independence?

Jason W. Johnson

36 “Cap and Trade” Politics in the NinthGreg Habeeb

38 Virginia in Pictures: A Taste of Charlottesville

Krystle D. Weeks and James Gabele

42 The Tea Party: What’s the point?Shaun Kenney and Alan Moore

46 The Final Ward

Volume 1, Number 5 / August 2010

BearingDrift.com /

Letter from Bearing Drift

J.R. [email protected]

Energy.

It powers our laptops. Keeps ouriPhones working. Gets us to work.Cooks our food. Makes our clothes.Delivers all our products we desireto market.

All in all, it makes modern life whatit is.

And for all its benefits, there arealso considerable costs.

Some energy is perishable. Someof it is inefficient. Some of it can’tprovide for all our needs. Some ofit interferes. Some of it is difficultto obtain. Some of it is dangerous.Some of it is capable of causingdisasters of epic proportions.

In other words, energy is somethingwe expect, occasionally take forgranted, and become aware of itwhen it becomes cost prohibitive,or is a hindrance, or disturbs ourway of life.

Energy is – for the most part – asintrinsic and complex as human lifeItself.

Which means it’s a perfect politicaltopic!

The reality is energy is somethingwe really can’t live without, but,like anything, is something we haveto be cognizant of finding balance(both economically andenvironmentally).

So, what is the role of governmentin finding that balance?

Ah, yes…the question de jure.

What should government regulate?Should it intervene with propertyrights? Should it inspect andoversee private enterprise? Shouldit set standards? Should it tax it?

Most people like to boil downdebates into some simplistic blackand white - you can’t do that withenergy.

Helping us look at the energyquestion are Reps. J. Randy Forbesand Bob Goodlatte, as well asformer Virginia Governor and U.S.Senator George Allen. We thankthem very much for helping usunderstand this important topic alittle better.

As I wrote in the last issue, there’sno way we can explore everyaspect of a particular topic, but thatwon’t stop us from having funlooking into it! Enjoy!

What should governmentregulate? Should it intervenewith property rights? Shouldit inspect and oversee privateenterprise? Should it setstandards? Should it tax it?


The New Manhattan ProjectGuest Editorial by Congressman Randy Forbes

Congressman Randy Forbes was elected to represent Virginia's4th Congressional District in 2001. He is a ranking Member ofthe House Armed Services Readiness Subcommittee. He is oneof only a few individuals to have been honored with the highestcivilian award offered by both the United States Army and theUnited States Navy.

In 1942, the U.S. federal government, in response to thepressures of the ongoing global situation, formed a groupwhose central mission was to study the use of atomicenergy in creating an atomic weapon. That unique researchand development mission came to be known as theManhattan Project. The Manhattan Project took place inmore than 30 different locations across the nation, eachlocation sharing the same goal of creating an atomicweapon, a feat that seemed nearly impossible at the time.

The government searched across the country to form ateam made up of the most brilliant scientists andresearchers in hydrodynamics, neutron diffusion,plutonium, and fission piles. The chosen scientists andresearchers joined together in one of the largest, mostchallenging scientific missions our nation has everundertaken. Our governmental leaders at the time knewthat the project was too big and too complicated for agroup of federal government employees to undertake onits own, and they likely knew that Congress’ involvementwould have hindered the mission with politicized rhetoric.Instead, they went to the best and brightest scientists andresearchers in the field who, by coming together,developed the seemingly impossible nuclear technologythat changed the course of history.

However, at the root of any initiative must be a projectthat relies not on taxation like we’ve seen with recentcap-and-trade legislation, but rather on the ingenuity andresourceful spirit of the American people that has madethis nation great. It must be a bold enough plan to changethe trajectory of our nation, and it must rely on scientificingenuity and breakthroughs - not the federal government- to find reliable sources of energy. When our governmentset out on the original Manhattan Project, it did not lookwithin its own bureaucracy, it looked toward the Americanpeople, who it knew would take on the challenge and relishthe opportunity to show that the United States and itspeople can and will conquer any challenge put before them.

That scenario is not too different from what the UnitedStates is currently facing in terms of energy. Our nation’senergy challenges touch nearly every aspect of Americanlife - from the personal pocketbook, to our nationalsecurity, to conservation and the environment, to ourglobal competitiveness. And like so many other nationalchallenges, ending our dependency on oil must be apriority of our nation.

BearingDrift.com /

We stand at a crossroads in energy development in theUnited States, and we have some questions to askourselves as a nation: Will we rely on innovation to pursuealternative energy sources and achieve a cleanerenvironment? Will we embark on a bold mission to makeET - energy technology - to the 21st century what IT –information technology - was to the 90s? Will we choose aplan that will create lasting economic security and secureour global competitiveness for years to come?

Energy independence should not be held hostage by thegovernment bureaucracy. We should approach alternativeenergy development with lasting, incentive-based solutionsthat encourage competition and ingenuity amongAmericans. To that end, I have introduced a nationally-acclaimed legislative initiative that includes these pillarsthat are necessary to achieving energy independence. MyNew Manhattan Project for Energy Independence is a planthat brings together a new generation of scientists,researchers and innovators to overcome a unified nationalchallenge, just as we did with the original ManhattanProject in World War II. It establishes goals that would leadthe United States toward achieving 50% energyindependence in ten years and 100% energy independencein 20 years.

To achieve these goals, the New Manhattan Project willbring together scientists and researchers from across theUnited States in a competitive format among groups,schools, teams, or companies to reach each one ofseven energy goals:

� Double CAFE standards to 70 MPG while keeping vehicles affordable� Cut home and business energy usage in half� Make solar power work at the same cost as coal� Make the production of biofuels cost-competitive

with gasoline� Safely and cheaply store carbon emissions from

coal-powered plants� Safely store or neutralize nuclear waste� Produce usable electricity from a nuclear fusion reaction

These goals are not easy. The processes to reach them arenot simple. Many Americans may think they are impossible,but if there is one thing that is certain, it is that Americaneeds some wins today. The New Manhattan Project wouldput our nation on a direct path toward energyindependence, while helping create lasting economicsecurity for our nation and its families, and securing ourglobal competitiveness for years to come. The NewManhattan Project will write a new page in our historybooks reflecting once again that the size of ouraccomplishments is only limited by the size of ourdetermination.


Bearing Drift InterviewIs George Allen:

The Once &Future Senator?

By DCH

BD: Governor Allen, welcome to Bearing Drift. Sincelosing your re-election bid for U.S. Senate in 2006, youhave emerged as an outspoken advocate fordeveloping domestic energy. Through the AmericanEnergy Freedom Center, you have engaged energyissues nationwide, bringing your unique perspective asGovernor of a coastal state and former U.S. Senator toyour new role.

I have to start by asking you about the DeepwaterHorizon oil spill. Advocates for domestic energyproduction have been arguing for years about openingup the outer continental shelf, the Arctic NationalWildlife Refuge and selected federal lands to oil andgas exploration and future drilling. There had been nosignificant accidents since the Exxon-Valdez spill in1989. Republicans have urged “drill, baby, drill” onanyone who would listen. And then, we have an oilspill that dwarfs Exxon-Valdez as an environmentalcatastrophe. Given this disaster, shouldn’t we backoff from offshore drilling?

GA: Well, first off, we need to learn the causes of thisdisaster. BP is responsible and we have to determinewhere the mechanical, procedural and human errorsoccurred. It’s essential to learn from what went wrongto prevent similar accidents from occurring in the future.

There will be plenty of litigation regarding this disaster.BP will be held responsible and they should be, but weshould not back off from offshore drilling. Instead, weneed better safeguards, procedures and mechanics toprevent this from happening again.

We need to find out what are the best techniques andprocedures. We can learn from places like Norway orCanada, who explores for oil and gas in their GrandBanks, which is great for fishing, they require a reliefwell to be drilled at the same time as the main well.

Continued on Page 10


BP is responsible and we have to determinewhere the mechanical, procedural and human errorsoccurred. It’s essential to learn from what went wrongto prevent similar accidents from occurring in the future.


BD: The president has put a 6 month moratorium onoffshore drilling. was this a good decision: why or whynot?

GA: I don’t think it’s a good decision. It’s actually reallycock-eyed. Just last fall, the Obama administration lent$2 billion to Brazil's state owned oil company for oiland gas exploration off their coast. Now, it’s a safeinvestment. We’ll likely recoup it. China lent them $30billion and will get paid back in oil. But it is not at allconsistent for our government to financially supportdrilling there in Brazil but oppose and prohibit it here.

Backing off of exploration and drilling now wouldmake us more dependent on foreign oil. Cuba may bedrilling right off the Florida coast - with Russiansupport - and we wouldn’t be doing a thing. Up to100,000 jobs could be lost if exploration off the GulfCoast is shut down - that’s just not good for America.

BD: Cap-and-trade legislation is premised on the ideathat the earth is warming in a dangerous way becauseof human activity and that changes to our activity canstop environmental catastrophe. Do you believe theearth is warming dangerously, and, if so, what canhumans do about it? Also, you oppose cap-and-tradelegislation. In the U.S. Senate, you consistently votedfor developing domestic energy resources, includingdrilling in ANWR. How would “cap-and-trade”legislation, such as the Waxman-Markey bill, affectVirginians?

Interview with George AllenContinued from Page 8

GA: My science courses at UVA were in climatologyand environmental sciences. The truth is that ourplanet has been warmer and colder in the past andwill be warmer and cooler in the future. We are partof a solar system and such variations occur naturally.

It is the hubris of man to think that we can controlmother nature and affect the temperature. As towhether the earth is currently warmer, cooler orstable, we have to look at long term statistics. The realquestion is how much of any change is man-made. Tome, this is a debatable issue. Pollutants that causesmog (nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide) and acid raidshould be regulated. They are harmful and unhealthy.Yet right now, the regulatory focus in Washington ison odorless, colorless carbon dioxide in the atmosphere- 96% of which occurs naturally and is the basis ofanimal, plant and human life. There’s a problem insaying that the 4% of human contributed carbondioxide is causing a drastic change in temperature -and that we can fix it with taxes.

It’s hard for climatologists to accurately predict theweather in 10 days - let alone 50 years but this capand trade scheme is premised on fixing globalwarming by reducing global output of carbon dioxide.Yet, we already know that other countries won’t takesimilar action: not China, India, France, Russia or Brazil- because they know it will hurt their competitivenessand their citizens.

BearingDrift.com /

Cap-and-tax legislation and EPA regulations of CO2amount to economic unilateral disarmament. It wouldbe grossly irresponsible to impose this burden on ourfamilies, knowing the effects on global temperaturewould be minuscule to non-existent but food costswould be higher. Fuel costs would be higher. Energycosts would be higher. There would be fewer jobs.We would be less competitive. And all that we buywould cost more.

The folks hurt the worst are lower and middle incomefamilies. They will be forced to spend a higherpercentage of their income on energy. Advocates saythat they will subsidize energy or electricity costs forlower income households with fees from carbon taxes.But, if you don’t cause the harm in the first place, thenyou won’t have to mitigate the damage with energywelfare.

This would result in a massive redistribution of wealthas taxes go through the government to offset increasedenergy costs. It also redistributeseconomic wealth from the US toother countries. Again, a cap-and-taxprogram would transfer wealth outof this country for a minusculeimpact, and, if the U.S. does thisalone, no impact on globaltemperatures.

BD: Virginia is rich in naturalresources. From the coalfields of thesouth to oil and natural gas off ourcoastline, the Commonwealth hasample energy sources. Yet many are

concerned that developing those resources carriesinherent risks to our environment. What are the risksof developing our energy resources? are the goals ofhomegrown energy and environmental preservation Incompatible?

GA: Above all, our greatest resource is the people ofVirginia. But coal is the most valuable of our naturalresources. We have also found some natural gas butexploration would be necessary to determine howmuch of that and oil are off our coast. All of these canbe extracted in a safe way. Coal provides a number ofgood paying jobs in Southwest Virginia - not justmining but in all the related industries. It is importantfor our railroads and ports. It helps our balance oftrade as a state and a nation and people in SouthwestVirginia are very positive about it.


Above all, our greatest resource is the people of Virginia.But coal is the most valuable of our natural resources.


Lonesome Pine airport in Wise County, hospitals andarea industrial parks - are located on reclaimed land -where active coal mines once were. When I wasGovernor, the Red Onion mine was donated by a coalcompany to be used as a prison. It brought economicdevelopment to the area and was widely supported bythe local communities. So, to the elites who areopposed to developing this natural resource, I like tosay, ‘ask the people of Southwest Virginia about it.’They are overwhelming supportive of coal mining andalso of gas exploration. Regulation to diminish theadverse impacts of such exploration and mining havebeen mostly reasonable and helpful. We need to usethese resources smartly and employing the bestTechniques.

BD: Nuclear and hydro-power are the primary sourcesof electricity in Virginia. As our power needs increase,will these remain our primary power sources, or willrenewable sources play a much larger role?

GA: Actually, there’s not much hydro-power in Virginia.Our power needs are mostly met by coal (37%),nuclear (40%), gas (17%), hydro (2%), then by wind,solar, waste to energy and other alternatives (3-4%).I hope that coal and nuclear would be Virginia’s basefor electricity. Inexpensive power is key to economicdevelopment. Most renewable power sources are alsomore expensive. States with less expensive sources ofelectricity have cheaper rates per kilowatt hour.Hydroelectric, for instance, is dependent on having theright terrain, as in Idaho, Oregon & Washington). WestVirginia, Wyoming, Kentucky, North Dakota, andMissouri utilize coal for their low electricity rates.These low rates matter a great deal - especially for

technology companies. The fact that Virginia’selectricity rates are half the cost of New Jersey,Connecticut and New York helped us attract jobs toVirginia when I was Governor. The two most affordablesources for electricity are coal and hydro.


In our economy, the demand for power is outstrippingnew generation by 2 or 3 to one (according to theNorth American Electricity Reliability study). Demandwas three times higher than supply before the recession.

One of the issues with nuclear power is its high initialcapital costs and unresolved questions about how tohandle the highly radioactive spent fuel. The plan wasto maintain a national repository in Yucca Mountain,Nevada but this was shut down by the Obamaadministration. Most of the new proposed new reactorswill be sited with existing locations. For example,

BearingDrift.com /

Dominion here in Virginia is looking to add a reactor atLake Anna where they already have two. And thepeople of Louisa County are very supportive becausethe power company brings considerable revenues tothe county, allowing them to keep property taxes lowwhile maintaining quality schools and services.

Renewables like wind and solar are practically limited- they are part of the mix but not base load qualitybecause they produce an intermittent supply. Windenergy is highly subsidized and very expensive toconsumers. Initially the citizens of Massachusetts willpay $0.22 per kWh for off-shore wind power andultimately, over a period of years, they will pay $0.37per kWh for the off-shore wind power. The nationalaverage cost of electricity is $0.095. Obviously, it isless desirable for energy consumers to locate in aplace with high electricity prices because of thesubstantially higher cost of doing business.

Forbes Magazine rates Virginia as a good place to dobusiness and everything from taxes to energy costsare included in that rating. Energy costs here are 30%less than the national average. That is a huge factorfor businesses, especially the data storage facilitiesthat are needed now as electronic record keepingbecomes standard.

Our country is losing jobs in manufacturing - 300,000jobs have been lost in the chemical and paperproducts industry alone. And they have gone tocountries where natural gas costs are a great deal less.These countries allow access to resources - not doingso here puts us at a competitive disadvantage.

The good news that is rarely reported is that thanks to

our plentiful coal, as well as gas and oil, we are #1 inthe world when it comes to energy resources,followed by Russia and Saudi Arabia. Any othercountry would consider these resources to be ablessing but Washington insiders treat them like acurse. To use a sports analogy from my book, wehave been “punting on first down” on energy policysince the 1970’s OPEC oil embargo. If we want toexpand jobs, we need to stop locking down ourresources and develop them in order to achievestrategic American energy independence, alongwith all its benefits - like new, high-paying jobs andaffordable food.


Energy costs here are 30% less than the national average. That is a huge factor forbusinesses, especially the data storage facilities that are needed now as electronic

record keeping becomes standard.


BD: Talk about alternative energy sources: is ourdependence on fossil fuels long term and increasingor near term and waning with the development ofnew technologies?

GA: Fossil fuels provide 85% of the energy for ourcountry overall. For electricity, key sources are coal,nuclear and natural gas and, to a somewhat lesserextent, (renewable) hydro.

I do view ultra clean coal technology as a new andnear term alternative energy that is both affordable,more efficient and safe for the environment.

Batteries for ground transportation are also on thehorizon. With nano-technology, vehicles can be builtof lighter, stronger materials; and battery technologywill improve dramatically. Even with theseimprovements, batteries that power groundtransportation will need to be recharged and thatmeans they need electricity which will still comeprimarily through coal, nuclear and natural gas powergeneration.

When it comes to the energy supply, there is not asilver bullet; rather, we need silver buckshot:Solar, albeit expensive, will remain useful forindividual buildings. Wind causes environmentaldamage, its transmission requires controversialpower lines and it is unreliable; however, it can beuseful in some areas. Hydro-power is limited tospecific areas. All of these can be part of the solutionbut we still need coal, nuclear and natural gas -abundant and reliable sources of energy for oureconomy.

When it comes to the energy supply, there isnot a silver bullet; rather, we need silver

buckshot: Solar, albeit expensive, will remainuseful for individual buildings. Wind causes

environmental damage, its transmission requirescontroversial power lines and it is unreliable;

however, it can be useful in some areas.Hydro-power is limited to specific areas. All of

these can be part of the solution but we stillneed coal, nuclear and natural gas -

abundant and reliable sources of energyfor our economy.

BD: Should the federal government subsidizealternative energy research while discouragingtraditional or fossil fuel development or should allenergy development possibilities be treated equally?

GA: The ideal is to let the free market decide thewinners and losers based on the most affordable,reliable energy sources. And, in such a market, thewinners are obvious. The Obama administration hastalked about doing away with energy subsidies at theU.N. - but without subsidies, coal, oil and natural gasare the winners for their respective niches (electricity,ground transportation, and manufacturing). Innovationwith these resources is still occurring - to make themeven more efficient: other counties are even usingcoal synfuels for aviation.

So that’s the ideal. But if there are going to beincentives and market manipulation (where thegovernment takes sides), there are two ways to do it:incentives or mandates. I prefer incentives. When Iwas governor, for example, we allowed more fuel


BearingDrift.com /

efficient cars and motorcycles in the HOV lanes,creating an incentive to purchase these cars. I don’tlike the idea of creating a phony market via cap-and-tax legislation though. Incentives should makeeconomic sense. The latest projections in biofuelmandates (under cap-and-tax) are unrealistic - theyincrease the cost of food by redirecting food productsto energy - it’s like heating your house in winter byburning furniture in the wood stove and thenwondering why you are sitting on the floor. If you aregetting biofuel from waste, that’s great. Or, if you canproduce methane from landfill trash, that’s good too.But any incentives need to be realistic and rational.

BD: You want American energy independence. What isthe best way of achieving that goal?

I have a list of constructive reforms on my website:www.energyfreedomcenter.org. They include:

but I would be remiss not to ask: Are you going to tryto reclaim your old Senate seat?

GA: Yes, I have reactivated my federal election PAC.And in numerous conversations, business leaders,conservative activists, grassroots Virginians and othershave encouraged me to run again. My answer is“perhaps.” This year I’m focused on helping commonsense conservatives win in November.

I’ve done fundraisers for Congressmen Wittman,Goodlatte, and Wolf already. Events are lined up forFimian, Murray, Griffith, Hurt, Rigell and others. Wehave five competitive races in VA and helping winthose seats is my priority. I’m also traveling to providesupport in key races in other states, like Rob Portmanin Ohio and Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania. Marco Rubioin Florida is another one I want to help. I’ve talkedwith him about that.

BD: Thank you for joining us, Governor Allen.

� Embrace common sense conservation, operational practices, teleworking, more efficient equipment, systems, surface treatments and building designs to save money and waste less energy.� Support native clean coal technology for

generating affordable electricity while providing hundreds of thousands of American jobs.� Enhance and develop the proven technology of

coal-to-liquid fuels or coal synfuels.� Empower coastal States by allowing them to

take initiatives to safely explore the energy resources off their coasts.� Remove outdated regulatory barriers to building

the next generation of nuclear power plants.

BD: I notice on georgeallen.com that you aremaintaining an active federal PAC and have beenspeaking all over the Commonwealth. Now, Senator,you must be getting this question everywhere you go,

Bearing Drift contributor,“DCH” interviewed GeorgeAllen for this article.Governor Allen has recentlyauthored a book: “WhatWashington Can Learn fromthe World of Sports.”

We have five competitive races in VA and helping win those seats is my priority.


The BP Oil Spill has changed theoffshore drilling debate in Virginia

Also, interview with Rep. Bob Goodlatte,Republican, Virginia’s 6th District

By J.R. Hoeft

Photo: U.S. Coast Guard

BearingDrift.com /

The great domestic drilling debate began in 2008 withover $4 per gallon gasoline. It included Speaker of theHouse Nancy Pelosi literally turning out the lights onRepublicans who insisted on staying in Congressduring the recess to debate “Drill now. Pay less!”However, the civil disobedience had an effect and thetwo decade long moratorium on offshore drilling wasallowed to expire.

The debate continued in 2009 when then part-timeGovernor and full-time DNC chair Tim Kaine wroteSecretary of the Interior Ken Salazar saying movementahead on “Lease Sale 220” off the coast of Virginiacould be delayed. This move was promptly seizedupon by Republican candidate for Governor BobMcDonnell who requested the three Democraticcandidates join him in signing a letter to the secretaryindicating Kaine was a lame duck and didn’t representthe full interests of the Commonwealth. Theydeclined while McDonnell led – perhaps helping vaulthim into the Governor’s Office.

McDonnell promised throughout the campaign and inhis State of the Commonwealth Address that offshoredrilling would be a hallmark of his administration.

State Senator Frank Wagner and Delegates Chris Stolleand Ron Villanueva of Virginia Beach, joined byBarbara Comstock of Northern Virginia, and CharlesPoindexter from Western Virginia led the charge inthe General Assembly on behalf of the governor tofinally permit, at the state level, drilling off the coastand dedicate any state taxes collected from the oiland natural gas industry go to transportation and“green energy” development. McDonnell signedthe bill.

Simultaneously, in Congress, Rep. Bob Goodlatte waspreparing a bill to allow states to collect tax revenuefrom offshore drilling, with support from Virginia’s U.S.

Senators Jim Webb and Mark Warner and Louisiana’sMary Landrieu. Of course, not all Senators jumpedonboard the bipartisan wagon.

Landlocked Democrats in New Mexico, West Virginiaand North Dakota stated:

“The fiscal consequences of such a loss would bedevastating, particularly given the enormous demandson the federal Treasury and our need to reduce thedeficit,” wrote Sens. Rockefeller, Bingaman andDorgan. “There is no justification for using thesesignificant national resources to provide benefits onlyfor a few coastal states and their citizens. Rather, theymust be available for the important public needs of allAmericans.”




Despite the brewing debate over Federalism, Virginiawas rewarded by the Obama administration when itannounced that Virginia would be able to moveforward with the sale of leases in 2011.

“Given our energy needs, in order to sustain economicgrowth and produce jobs and keep our businessescompetitive, we’re going to need to harnesstraditional sources of fuel even as we ramp upproduction of new sources of renewable, homegrownenergy,” Obama said. “So today we’re announcing theexpansion of offshore oil and gas exploration — but inways that balance the need to harness domesticenergy resources and the need to protect America’snatural resources.”

Then, on Apr. 20, 2010, an explosion rocked theDeepwater Horizon/BP Oil Rig in the Gulf of Mexico –and it has changed the entire complexion of thedebate.

About a month after the disaster, the president putthe brakes on Virginia’s plans:

“After reading the report’s recommendations withSecretary Salazar and other members of myadministration, we’re going to be ordering thefollowing actions,” the president said. “First, we willsuspend the planned exploration of two locations offthe coast of Alaska. Second, we will cancel thepending lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico and theproposed lease sale off the coast of Virginia. Third, wewill continue the existing moratorium and suspend theissuance of new permits to drill new deepwater wellsfor six months. And four, we will suspend action on 33deepwater exploratory wells currently being drilled inthe Gulf of Mexico.”

So much for a “need to harness traditional sources offuel.”

The president’s actions immediately prompted areaction from McDonnell.

“I understand the decision the President has madetoday. While I respect his decision, and the need fordelay and investigation, I do not believe outrightcancellation was the only alternative given the factthat this sale was not due to occur until two yearsfrom now, and actual drilling would likely take placeyears after that,” said McDonnell.

At this point it is not clear what actions the governoris taking to convince the president to change his mind,but special interest groups and CongressionalDemocrats are not taking any chances.

In June, environmental groups staged demonstrationsand filed formal comments on the Department ofInterior’s five year drilling plan from 2012-2017(which Virginia does remain part of). And, Democratsfrom nearby coastal states to the north are urging thepresident to not reverse course in Virginia but keepthe offshore off limits. U.S. Senators RobertMenendez, Frank Lautenberg, Benjamin Cardin andBarbara Mikulski, from New Jersey and Marylandrespectively, said that a military report showed“significant areas within the planned lease sale wouldinterfere with military operations and exercises.”

The BP Oil SpillContinued from Page 17


BearingDrift.com /

However, the McDonnell administration rejoinedthese Senators by saying, “We are confident thatoffshore energy production and the United Statesmilitary can coexist in Virginia without any disruptionor unwanted intrusion upon either.”

According to a study by ICF International, Lease Sale220 has the possibility of adding more than half abillion barrels of oil and more than 2.5 trillion cubicfeet of natural gas, and the same study says thatdrilling could generate nearly $19.5 billion in revenuesto federal, state and local governments.

But the new assault by the president and theDemocratically-controlled Congress on offshoreenergy is not just limited to Virginia.

The president’s new moratorium on drilling has beenexpanded to all offshore areas, including the gulfcoast where deepwater rigs remain idle and energyproduction remains dormant.

According to the American Petroleum Institute, 80percent of the oil and 45 percent of the natural gasproduced in the Gulf come from deepwater areas, andthe 20 most prolific producing blocks in the Gulf arelocated in deepwater. Yet the moratorium prevents those rigs from being used.

“It is unnecessary and shortsighted to shut down amajor part of the nation's energy lifeline whileworking to enhance offshore safety. The newmoratorium threatens enormous harm to the nationand to the Gulf region. It places the jobs of tens ofthousands of workers in serious and immediatejeopardy and promises a substantial reduction indomestic energy production,” said API Presidentand CEO Jack Gerard.




A study conducted by the International Association ofDrilling Contractors stated that 68 percent ofcongressional districts in the U.S. (296 of 435) arehome to offshore employees. While a majority ofthese districts are concentrated in the Gulf, severalare outside the region and not traditionally associatedwith the industry – including districts in Virginia.Virginia currently supports over 143,000 jobs relatedto oil and natural gas, which brings $12 billion to ourstate GDP (or 3.1% of our wealth). Therefore, theadministration’s decision regarding drilling has had adirect impact on jobs and energy nationwide.

And, from Congress, U.S. Senate Democrats haveincluded in their energy proposal an increase inrefinery taxes from 8 cents per barrel to 45 cents perbarrel – an action directly counter to the desires ofthe American people and in Virginia.

In a recently released poll by Harris Interactive fromJuly 15-18, 59% of Virginians oppose raising taxes onthe oil and natural gas industry. The poll, alsoconducted in nine other states, shows opposition totax increases at 64%.

“Voters know raising taxes on an industry thatprovides most of their energy and supports more than9.2 million jobs would hurt them and damage theeconomy,” said Gerard. “Raising taxes doesn’t addresstheir major concern, which is putting people back towork. The fact that the proposals are being pushedunder the guise of addressing the oil spill in the Gulfdoesn’t make them any better. With 15 million peopleout of work, now is not the time to be imposing moretaxes.”

� The proposed Virginia lease area, located about 50 miles from shore, may hold 130 million barrels of oil and 1.14 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, based on Interior Department estimates.

� Virginia legislation calls for 80% of future offshore royalties and revenues to transportation and the remaining 20% to the Virginia Coastal Energy Research Consortium, which researches and develops renewable energy solutions.

� Offshore development could create 1,900 jobs for the state and generate nearly $19.5 billion in revenues to federal, state, and local governments, according to a study by ICF International.

� Gov. McDonnell believes offshore development will bring about capital investment of about $8 billion and yield roughly $644 million in direct and indirect payroll.

� Currently, the oil and natural gas industry supports over 143,000 jobs in the Commonwealth of Virginia. These jobs add $12 billion to Virginia’s gross state product, or 3.1% of its wealth.

In a recently released poll by Harris Interactivefrom July 15-18, 59% of Virginians opposeraising taxes on the oil and natural gas industry.The poll, also conducted in nine other states,shows opposition to tax increases at 64%.Photo: U.S. Coast Guard

BearingDrift.com /

With this as the backdrop, Bearing Drift had theopportunity to sit down with one of Virginia’s keyleaders in this debate, Rep. Bob Goodlatte.

BD: How do you feel about the administrationscurrent moratorium?

BG: I think it’s a big mistake. I think the court rulingwas the correct one.

When you have a car crash, a plane crash, you don’tshut down the entire system – you figure out whatchanges need to be made as you move forward.

I think that we’ve learned a lot from this disaster –and the president is right to look into this to find outwhat changes need to be made – but if you halt theprocess, you’re going to devastate the economy of thegulf coast. 120,000 jobs could be lost as a result ofthis, which is absolutely destroying that area.

The use of big rigs that are engaged in the drilling –they can’t stick around and wait while the presidentcontemplates the next step – they’re moving off toplaces where there is demand for their services. And,the net result of that is that there will be moreimported oil. Therefore, the risk of oil spills fromtankers, bringing oil into the country from foreignwaters is a countervailing risk that we’ve got toconsider.

There are some good measures being taken to improvethe inspection and safety operation on these drill rigs.And there are some requirements that are done inother countries that could be incorporated in the U.S.For example one is to require a parallel well to be dugto go all the way down to where the oil is, but it wouldgo down to well under the bed rock so that if you havea disaster, like the one we have now, instead of waitingtwo or three months to intercept that well with a newhole that’s being drilled now – in fact two are beingdrilled – you could intercept it within a matter of daysby simply continuing that parallel drill hole that somecountries require.

I think that we’ve learned a lot from thisdisaster – and the president is right to look intothis to find out what changes need to be made– but if you halt the process, you’re going todevastate the economy of the gulf coast.BD: Do you think it’s wise to be drilling closer to shoreas opposed to just deepwater?

BG: Sure, there’s no question that technology is thereand the risks are lower to be able to drill offshore verysafely. We’ve drilled thousands of holes in the Gulf ofMexico and this is the first one that’s been a seriousproblem. I think we have learned considerably fromthis accident in order to prevent another one fromdoing the same kind of damage.

This accident has been grossly mismanaged by thegovernment and by BP.

I don’t think we let BP off the hook. In fact, I don’tthink the taxpayers should spend one dime onclean-up or on the economic loss that’s been sufferedby businesses on the Gulf Coast as a result of this –that’s BP’s responsibility. But the governmentdefinitely has responsibility to supervise this process.




The government should not shut off drilling and sortof go back to the drawing board in order to come backlater on – that’s going to have a devastating impact onthe economy of the Gulf Coast region and a negativeimpact on the entire effort by the U.S. to move awayfrom foreign oil – it’s going to push us toward itinstead.

BD: Do you think MMS failed in its oversight of BP?

BG: I think there’s definitely evidence of that and Ithink there’s evidence of great negligence on the partof BP. But I also think the response by the governmentin the aftermath has been really atrocious.

BD: Will the president reverse his opinion on the haltto allow Virginia to lease drilling rights? What willhappen with revenue sharing for states from drillingoffshore?

BG: First of all, I hope he does change course. I dobelieve that given the near-term need that we have inthis country – looking for increased oil production –that we should be looking onshore and offshore forgreater domestic oil production. We will come back tothat at some point in time. Obviously we need tomake sure that the people are assured that coursesthat might be pursued off the Virginia coast willinclude precautions that would prevent this type ofdisaster from happening off the Virginia coast. But,as I said, I think we have already learned a number ofthings that could be done to prevent that fromhappening.

Secondly, I believe that when we do go forward, weneed to continue to pursue the idea that those statesthat are affected by drilling will share in the revenuesthat the government receives from these leases.However, my legislation will be delayed until we seewhat the final outcome of the BP oil spill is and what


BearingDrift.com /

BD: With tarballs not being fingerprinted to the actualBP oil spill, are you concerned that other wells mightbe leaking and that same thing might happen inVirginia?

BG: I think that there has always been the presence ofoil that comes ashore at different places everywherein the world – particularly places where there are oilrich deposits because there is natural seepage.

kind of information can be deployed by this industryto make sure that this kind of thing doesn’t happenagain.

There are places in the world where a considerableamount of oil comes up just from natural venting fromunder the sea. I’m not aware of any significantreporting that would point towards another major oilwell leakage that was occurring before this majorevent – I think it’s unlikely that there is such a thingoccurring now.

BD: Do you think that because we are seeing reportsof tarballs now, vice any other time prior to the spill isjust because people are on the lookout for it?

BG: Sure – and people should be on the lookout for it.



Unlocking Southside Virginia’s Geologic TreasureThe largest untapped uranium deposit in the United States offers economic promise forSouthside Virginia and energy independence for America. By Ray Ganthner

Traveling through Southside Virginia it is hard toimagine that this was once a bustling hub of industry.This region once boasted one of the highest per capitaincomes in the entire country. Unfortunately,battered by decades of factory closings and declines inthe once robust tobacco-driven agricultural economythe region has fallen on hard times.

It is impossible to escape signs of economic distressthat have descended on the region. Abandoned,decaying factories abound; shuttered store frontsdominate the empty shells of the once prosperoustown and city centers; blighted neighborhoods anddeserted shopping centers have become the signaturemarks of suburban life here.

The list of plant closings is long over the last threedecades – Dan River Mills, Corning, TECHMA, StanleyFurniture, to name a few.

Danville, the region’s city-center, has been hit thehardest by the collapse of the textile and furnituremanufacturing industries. Nearly one in every sixadults in Danville is out of work. Danville’sunemployment rate – 14% in May – is twice as high asVirginia’s 7% overall rate. Surrounding Danville,Pittsylvania County’s unemployment rate standsslightly better at 11%. In Henry County to the west,more than 14% of workers are unemployed, and inHalifax County to the east, 12% are out of a job.

To make matters worse, those who are employedcontinue to earn chronically low salaries and wages.The average Pittsylvania County worker earns justslightly more than half the average income earned byworkers in the rest of the state.

Decades of economic decline have left an indelibleimprint on nearly every facet of life here. Funding forpublic schools declined with the disappearance of theindustrial tax base. Property taxes increase year afteryear to close the gap, adding a further burden tostruggling farmers and unemployed homeowners.Residents often bemoan the “brain drain” that isdepriving the region of its most talented, highly skilled,college-educated natives who have been forced toleave Southside in search of a viable economic futureElsewhere.

Amidst all this economic turmoil there is a glimmer ofhope that could help the resurgence of the region.The convergence of a global nuclear energy renaissance;the movement for American energy independence anda geologic treasure have put Southside on thedoorstep of economic revitalization.

Geologic Treasure: The Coles Hill Uranium Deposit

In one of the most improbable, yet fortuitous geologicdiscoveries of modern times, a geologist travelingthrough Pittsylvania County in 1979 stumbled uponthe largest undeveloped uranium deposit in theUnited States and the seventh largest such deposit inthe world.

The deposit was found at the peak of the nuclearboom of the 1970s. Yet in an unexpected turn ofevents, its discovery preceded the Three Mile Islandaccident that precipitated the scale down of thenuclear industry in the United States during the mid1980’s. In the aftermath of Three Mile Island, demandfor new nuclear reactors and thus uranium in the U.S.plummeted, and development of the Coles Hill depositwas deferred.

BearingDrift.com /

Since 1785, Coles Hill hasbeen home to six generationsof the Coles family. The Colesfamily home was builtjust after the War of 1812.For the Coles family,historic preservation andenvironmental stewardshipare a way of life.

Geologic Treasure: The Coles Hill Uranium Deposit

In one of the most improbable, yet fortuitous geologicdiscoveries of modern times, a geologist travelingthrough Pittsylvania County in 1979 stumbled uponthe largest undeveloped uranium deposit in theUnited States and the seventh largest such deposit inthe world.

The deposit was found at the peak of the nuclearboom of the 1970s. Yet in an unexpected turn ofevents, its discovery preceded the Three Mile Islandaccident that precipitated the scale down of thenuclear industry in the United States during the mid1980’s. In the aftermath of Three Mile Island,demand for new nuclear reactors and thus uranium inthe U.S. plummeted, and development of the ColesHill deposit was deferred.

The Coles Hill cattle farm in Pittsylvania County sits atop thelargest untapped uranium deposit in the United States and the7th largest in the world. It contains enough uranium to fuelVirginia’s current nuclear demand for more than 65 years.

In 1982 the Virginia General Assembly placed a defacto moratorium on uranium mining until thenecessary regulations and permitting were developed.Subsequent studies were undertaken of the uraniumissue, and in 1984 a study by the Virginia Coal andEnergy Commission’s Uranium Administrative Groupdetermined that the deposit could be mined safelywithout adversely impacting the local environment orpublic health. However, seeing no economic benefitfrom mining Coles Hill after the fall of uranium prices,their recommendations were never promulgatedinto law.

The original company that first discovered the depositallowed its leases on the land to expire, and thepromise of this mother lode of nuclear energy was allbut forgotten. That is until a worldwide nuclear energyrenaissance unfolded over the past few years,renewing hopes of tapping into its enormous reservoirof uranium--the foundation source of cleannuclear energy.



Unlocking Southside Virginia’s Geologic TreasureContinued from Page 25

The Coles Hill cattle farm in Pittsylvania County

In 2007, the Coles and Bowen families – the owners ofthe land on which the deposit is found – along with afew dozen local investors formed the company VirginiaUranium Inc. to mine and mill the Coles Hill deposit.

With interest in the development of Coles Hill renewedand its economic viability restored, the UraniumMining Subcommittee of the Virginia Coal and EnergyCommission has initiated two studies to assess thesocioeconomic impact and the impact on public healthand the environment. The National Academy ofSciences, the nation’s most respected institution forscientific and technological research, is conducting thehealth and environmental study and will issue its finalreport and recommendations to the General Assemblyin December 2011. The socioeconomic study has yetto begin; however, the Uranium Mining Subcommitteeis close to selecting an independent research institutionto perform the study. The final report of the socio-economic study is also expected by December 2011.

Once the results of both studies come in, the GeneralAssembly will consider whether to lift the moratoriumand promulgate the necessary regulations to allow thedevelopment of Coles Hill.

The Coles Hill deposit spans across 200 acres of the3,000-acre Coles Hill cattle farm and reaches depthsof 1,500 feet. The deposit contains roughly 119 millionpounds of uranium, enough to fuel Virginia’s currentnuclear energy demand for more than 65 years orAmerica’s total nuclear demand for more than 2 years.The entire deposit is estimated to be worth between$7 - $10 billion and promises a desperately neededeconomic boom for the entire region – in terms ofjobs, local tax revenue and large-scale economicdevelopment. Many residents and public officialsbelieve it could be the catalyst for a long-awaitedeconomic turnaround of Southside.

An economic scoping study released by Lyntek Inc. InJune spelled out just how significant the economicimpact could be on the region. The project will create250-350 temporary jobs during the first twelve monthconstruction phase and sustain 300-350 permanent jobsthrough the 35-year duration of the operation. Theaverage worker would bring in an annual incomesomewhere between $50,000 and $70,000, significantlyhigher than the median income of Pittsylvania Countyworkers today.

Developing Coles Hill will also contribute millions ofdollars to overstrained Pittsylvania County coffers andhelp relieve the tax burden on local property owners.The Lyntek scoping study forecasts an annual $20-$30million direct windfall for the local economy from thepurchase of goods and services from local companiessuch as heavy equipment and machine parts suppliers.And, through the multiplier effect that invariablyaccompanies major industrial development, Coles Hillwould stimulate an additional $120-$180 million ineconomic activity each year.

Today, renewed hopes for the development of ColesHill are propelled by the nuclear revival sweepingacross the U.S. and the rest of the globe.

BearingDrift.com /

Nuclear Renaissance

Growing concerns over climate change and actions bygovernments to curtail carbon emissions have givenrise to a nuclear renaissance across the globe. Whilethe renaissance is still in its early stages and will takedecades to fully materialize, there is no mistaking thatthe U.S. and the rest of the world stand on the cusp ofa vast expansion of nuclear energy as a source ofElectricity.

Like wind or solar energy, nuclear energy producesvirtually zero carbon emissions. Yet, it is significantlyless expensive, far more efficient and far less land-useintensive than these often touted renewable sources.In terms of fuel efficiency, nuclear far outstrips itsmain base-load competitors, coal and natural gas. Oneounce of refined uranium generates as much electricityas one ton of coal or 17,000 thousand cubic feet ofnatural gas.

The U.S. Department of Energy predicts that nucleargeneration will increase by 20% over the next twodecades, while the International Energy Agency

forecasts a 300% increase worldwide over the next40 years.

The world is expected to build 180 new reactors in thenext decade, including 35 in China. Great Britainrecently announced plans to double its nuclear outputand generate 35-40% of its electricity from nuclear by2030. India, Japan and South Korea are all undertakingsimilar expansions of nuclear generation andtechnology in their countries.

This vast increase of nuclear energy will require acommensurate increase in the global demand foruranium. Experts already predict at least a fourfoldincrease in demand for uranium over the next 30 years.The major producers of the world – Russia, Kazakhstan,Namibia, Canada, Niger, China and Australia – areramping up production to seize their share of the newmarket. With America’s expansion of nuclear energyon the horizon, if the U.S. does not bolster our domesticproduction of uranium, we will become increasinglydependent on these dominant foreign producers.




Energy Independence

The Achilles heel ofAmerica’s nuclearrenaissance and thereason why Coles Hillcould play such a vital roleis America’s currentoverwhelming reliance onforeign sources ofuranium.

The U.S. currently imports86% of our uranium fromforeign countries,including one-third fromRussia. For two decades,America’s reliance onRussia has served analtruistic and strategicpurpose – U.S. Utilitiespurchase civilian nuclear fuel down-blended fromdecommissioned Soviet-era nuclear weapons.However, beginning in 2013 when the so-calledMegatons-to-Megawatts treaty expires, Americanutilities will purchase our entire Russian supply fromRussia’s state-run uranium mining companyTechsnabexport.

America’s reliance on foreign state-owned energycompanies poses a serious risk to the stability andsecurity of America’s energy supply. In the past,Russia has used its control of vital energy resourcesas leverage to pursue Russian strategic interests. Mostrecently, the Russian state-run natural gas exportcompany shut off gas supply lines to Eastern Europe inthe middle of the harsh winter of 2008, leavingmillions of Eastern Europeans without heat orelectricity for nearly a month.

The OPEC oil embargo of the 1970s also comes tomind as a cautionary tale against overreliance onimports from state-run energy producers.

Recent moves by the Russian government to expandits uranium holdings in foreign countries such asKazakhstan, Namibia, China and Canada, as well asefforts to ramp up their own domestic production,give added urgency for the need to reduce ourdependence on foreign supplies.

There is no doubt that Russia is undertaking anaggressive expansion of its global uranium holdings tostrengthen its influence around the globe in pursuingits strategic interests.

BearingDrift.com /

Over the last six months, the Kremlin – through itsstate-owned nuclear company Rosatom – has beenbusy consolidating its control of uranium operationsin many countries from which the U.S. purchases oursupply. In February, Russian security officials muscledout the head of Kazakhstan’s state-run nuclearcompany to clear the way for Russian control ofseveral uranium development projects in thatcountry. The U.S. imports roughly 7% of our uraniumfrom Kazakhstan.

Then, in late May, the Russians strong-armed theNamibian President into abrogating agreements withan Australian uranium company for the rights to mineseveral major uranium deposits there. Rosatomquickly signed agreements with the Namibiangovernment to wrest control over these deposits andannounced plans to invest more than $1 billion intotheir expansion. The U.S. imports another 7% of oururanium from Namibia.

Russia’s whirlwind global uranium tour most recentlylanded in Canada when in early June Rosatom boughta controlling stake in one of Canada’s largest uraniumcompanies, Uranium One. The U.S. imports roughly18% of our uranium from Canada.

Yet despite all of the economic and energy benefitsthat are propelling the nuclear renaissance, the globalmovement still encounters some resistance andobstacles that must be overcome before it can fullycome to fruition. The development of Coles Hill iscertainly no exception.

Safety, the Environment and the Road Ahead

Like any heavy industrial development project, ColesHill is confronting concerns from some local residentsand public officials about the impact of uraniummining on the environment, public health, and workersafety. Most of the concern centers around worries thatthe development of Coles Hill will repeat the legacy ofuranium mining in Navajo communities of the 1950sand 1960s, which is a black mark on an otherwise safeand environmentally sound industry.

There is no doubt that the primitive methods ofuranium extraction used on Navajo lands fifty yearsago left behind a regrettable legacy of environmentaldamage and public health risks. However, comparingthe safety record of an industry from 50 years ago withmodern safety standards seems like a stretch. After all,in the 1950s and 1960s, automobiles did not have seat

belts, air bags, anti-lock breaks or crash-resistant frames. They also did not havecatalytic converters to remove toxicemissions and yielded abysmal fuelefficiency that would make today’s worstguzzlers look good by comparison. Sincethe 1950s, both industries have madeenormous strides that have dramaticallyimproved safety and reducedenvironmental impact.




In the 1950s and 1960s, the uranium industry waslargely unregulated by the federal government andoperated under conditions almost equivalent to thoseof the Wild West of the late 19th century. Today, theindustry is the most heavily regulated in the U.S. It isoverseen by a veritable alphabet soup of federalregulatory agencies, including the EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA), Nuclear RegulatoryCommission (NRC), Occupational Health and SafetyAdministration (OSHA) and the Mine Safety andHealth Administration (MSHA), to name a few. Theseagencies have a record of stringent enforcement ofthe most rigorous standards for worker safety andthe protection of air and water from radioactiveContamination.

Numerous studies conducted by John Boice Jr.,scientific director of the International EpidemiologyInstitute, in New Mexico, Colorado and Texas foundvirtually no difference in the prevalence and mortalityrate of cancer between residents of mining and non-mining communities.

All of the rudimentary, unsafe practices thatcontributed to illnesses and environmental damageamong Navajo workers and communities 50 years agohave long since been prohibited and are strictlymonitored by federal regulators. Miners no longersmoke cigarettes in the mines – a practice that wasperhaps the number one contributor to illnessesamong Navajo workers. Advanced ventilationsystems – nonexistent 50 years ago – have virtuallyeliminated the risk of worker exposure to radioactiveradon gas.

The most significant improvement in terms of reducingrisks to the health of residents surrounding uraniumoperations has been the introduction of modern storagesystems for mine tailings, the waste material leftoveronce uranium has been extracted from the ore. It wasextremely common in Navajo communities for workers,their families and other local residents to use tailingsand other waste rocks to build adobe brick homes andfor other construction purposes. The tailings were alsoimproperly stored in exposed, makeshift structures thatallowed material to easily escape and contaminate localdrinking water supplies. The EPA and NRC havecompletely eradicated these egregious practices andnow monitor the storage of tailings in advanced,impenetrable containment structures built to withstandthe most severe weather events – including floods,tornadoes and hurricanes.

The Bessines-area of France, where uranium mining occurredsafely for almost 50 years, has remarkably similar population,climate, hydrological and geographic features to Pittsylvania

County. It set an international standard for the safe extractionof uranium and the environmentally responsible storage of

mine tailings.

BearingDrift.com /

For years the French – who lead the world in theproduction of nuclear energy – have mined andmilled uranium deposits in areas with remarkablysimilar population, climate, hydrological andgeographic characteristics to Pittsylvania Countywithout any adverse impacts on public health or theenvironment. French operations in Bessines,Ecarpiere and Lodeve are global models for the safeextraction of uranium and the proper, environment-ally responsible storage of mine tailings. They are alsoexcellent examples of how former open pit andunderground mines can be fully restored to theiroriginal environmental contours and preserve theunblemished beauty of landscapes.

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study willundoubtedly leave no stone unturned in its study ofthe environmental and public health impacts ofuranium mining in Virginia. If the NAS determines thaturanium can be safely mined and milled in Virginiawithout harming public health or the environment, thenthe General Assembly should heed its recommendationsand allow the development of Coles Hill. The GeneralAssembly should pay close attention to the mostexemplary safety models and other best practicesidentified by the study in crafting Virginia’s regulatoryand permitting structure. In the meantime, the residentsof Virginia can continue to educate themselves on thecosts and benefits of developing our uranium resourcesand encourage our public officials to do the same.

The economic revitalization of an entire region and theenergy security of our country are at stake. We needto make decisions based on facts and analysis and noton abstract fear of obsolete practices. The results ofthe studies should identify these facts, and theCommonwealth leadership can act accordingly.

The Bessines uranium mine in the Limousin region of Franceoperated from 1948-1995. Since then, it has been fully reclaimedand restored to its original environmental contours. It is aninternational model for the environmentally consciousreclamation of former mining sites.

Ray Ganthner serves as Chairmanof the Virginia Energy Independence Alliance.


Could the “Golden Leaf” Be America’sGolden Ticket to Energy Independence?

By Jason W. Johnson

There is an herb called uppowoc, which sowsitself. In the West Indies it has several names,according to the different places where it growsand is used, but the Spaniards generally call ittobacco. … [I]ts use not only preserves the body,but if there are any obstructions it breaks themup. By this means the natives keep in excellenthealth, without many of the grievous diseaseswhich often afflict us in England. …We havefound many rare and wonderful proofs of theuppowoc's virtues, which would themselvesrequire a volume to relate. —Thomas Hariot, A Briefe and True Report

of the New Found Land of Virginia¸1588Known as “uppowoc” to the aboriginal Algonkians ofTidewater Virginia, tobacco has grown in theCommonwealth for centuries. However, it was notuntil 1614 when John Rolfe introduced both a milder,South American variety of the plant and a newmethod for curing the harvested leaves thatcommercial tobacco cultivation started in the Virginiacolony. Tobacco became the principal cash crop in theChesapeake region and throughout the upper south asglobal demand grew. By the 18th Century, it was notunthinkable for tobacco leaves to be exchanged likecurrency in the Old Dominion. “King Tobacco’s”reign over Virginia’s economy would last almost 400years before the aggressive anti-smoking campaignsof the 1990s and the Fair and Equitable TobaccoReform Act of 2004 (i.e. “the tobacco buy-out”)relegated tobacco to niche-crop status. Today,however, with the use of tobacco products waning,researchers at both the Thomas Jefferson Universityand the University of Central Florida are discovering

another “virtue” of tobacco—one that Thomas Hariotcould have never envisioned in 1588—and that could,eventually, facilitate the end of America’s dependenceon foreign energy sources.

When the renewable energy movement started gainingtraction during the 2000 presidential campaign, ethanolappeared to be the panacea for the nation’s energyneeds: as a plant, corn, unlike nonrenewable petroleum,can be reproduced—easily—when the quantitydiminishes. As an organic (in the carbon-based sense)compound, ethanol would create minimal air pollution.Since corn can be grown throughout the United States,Americans do not have to worry about being at themercy of potentially hostile nations for our energyneeds; additionally, the money paid for ethanol isunlikely to be used to sponsor terrorist activities—something that is less certain with Middle Eastern oil.Additionally, there is the political benefit to ethanol:

BearingDrift.com /

much of the corn used to make this ethanol is grownin Iowa, home of one of the nation’s first presidentialcaucuses. For politicians in the early post-9/11 era,all of these were attractive inducements to employfederal policy to promote ethanol use.

Today, however, several shortcomings of ethanol havebecome difficult to ignore: ethanol can damagecombustible engines. Burning ethanol in a combust-ible engine also produces more formaldehyde thangas, resulting in the emission of almost 2.14 timesmore ozone in its exhaust. Furthermore, ethanolrequires almost as much energy to produce as it issupposed to generate. Between the farm that pro-duces the corn and the facility that transforms thecorn into biofuel, “…only about two of every tengallons of ethanol actually represent renewableenergy.” From the consumer perspective, ethanolproduction removes significant quantities of corn fromthe market, affecting humanitarian shipments abroadand food pricesat home.

1

1 Michael D. Lemonick, “Fuel from Tobacco?” 23 February 2010

The quest for a biofuel that is safe for the environ-ment, promotes American energy independence andhas minimal impact on the food supply has ledresearchers to a number of plants, ranging fromswitchgrass to sugar cane, but some of the mostpromising research centers on Virginia’s “goldenweed.” In order for ethanol to become fuel, it mustferment, but since the starch in corn must become asugar known as cellulose before it can ferment, theaddition of a fermenting agent, enzymes like yeast, isnecessary. The higher the starch content of a product,the more of the enzyme will be necessary to producecellulose. The primary source of the enzymes used toproduce cellulose is fungi, but this can become expens-ive and the cost has deterred the development of otherbiofuels. Researchers at the University of Central

Florida (UCF) believe they have found a cheaper andeasier method for producing these enzymes: geneticbiofuels. Researchers at the University of CentralFlorida (UCF) believe they have found a cheaper andeasier method for producing these enzymes: geneticmodification of tobacco. By “…snip[ing] enzyme-producing genes from fungi and insert[ing] up to10,000 copies of them into the genomes of tobaccoplants—which are much easier to grow than fungi andcan in principle produce several crops of enzyme-richplants every year” could significantly lower the cost ofproducing the necessary enzymes thereby opening thedoor to the development of biofuel from agriculturalwastes, like corn stalk and fruit peels.


http://www.climatecentral.org/breaking/news/ fuel_from_tobacco


The “Golden Leaf”Continued from Page 33

Meanwhile in Philadelphia, researchers at the ThomasJefferson University have uncovered yet another wayin which tobacco can assist in the development ofbiofuels. An enzyme called diacylglycerolacyltransferase assists in the production of lipids,which store oil. By modifying tobacco leaves to over-produce this diacylglycerol acyltransferase, AssistantProfessor Vyacheslav Andrianov and Dr. NikolaiBorisjuk found that the tobacco leaves retained asmuch oil as was ordinarily sent to the tobacco seed,ultimately yielding a “…two to three times increase intotal oil content in leaves.” This abundance of oilcould then be harvested to provide the base forbiofuels, like biodiesel.

2

2 Anna Austin, “Tobacco Studied as Biofuel Feedstock,” 19 January 2010

From a theoretical perspective, the research intotobacco’s use as a biofuel feedstock is fascinating: aplant that was once widely grown throughout Virginiacould become a relatively inexpensive source ofenzymes to produce biofuel from many agriculturalbyproducts that are thrown away today or it can alsoproduce large quantities of oil that can then be usedto produce biofuel. From a practical standpoint,though, is it viable? The researchers are anxious toremind the public that their research is ongoing andthat it could be years before tobacco-based biofuelsare available for use. Assuming that the researchattains its promise, would farmers be willing toembrace a crop they have been abandoning for almosta decade?

Thanks in no small part to the corn subsidies, corncultivation increased when the ethanol craze began.If history repeats itself and if subsidies are offered fortobacco, cultivation of that crop might see acomparable increase. That is assuming two majorpreconditions: first, the federal government subsidizesfarmers to grow tobacco. Considering the recenthistory of the relationship between the federalgovernment and tobacco farmers, that seems unlikelyespecially in view of the fact that the federalgovernment has been paying farmers to transition awayfrom tobacco cultivation since 2005. Second, evenwith modern farm machinery, tobacco cultivationremains difficult, time-intensive work. Would farmerswho have grown used to less labor-intensive crops bewilling to return to the almost year-round work thattobacco requires?

From a theoretical perspective, the researchinto tobacco’s use as a biofuel feedstock isfascinating: a plant that was once widelygrown throughout Virginia could become arelatively inexpensive source of enzymes toproduce biofuel from many agriculturalbyproducts that are thrown away today or itcan also produce large quantities of oil thatcan then be used to produce biofuel.

http://www.biomassmagazine.com/ article.jsp?article_id=3416

BearingDrift.com /

P.W. Morgan, Jr. maintains the Morgan family farm inBedford County. Tobacco was grown on the Morganfarm for generations until the Fair and EquitableTobacco Reform Act of 2004 was signed into law.Since then, P.W. Morgan has been diversifying hiscrops, replacing tobacco with pumpkins that he andhis family sell to visitors and to area stores. He wouldbe reluctant to begin growing tobacco again: “Therewould have to be significantly more profit in it thanwhat was there before,” he said. Morgan stated thattobacco farmers have long endured two, expensiveproblems: irregular rainfall during the growing seasonnecessitating irrigation and a chronic labor shortage.Both irrigating the plants and paying laborers enoughto want to help ultimately cost the tobacco farmers somuch that breaking even becomes difficult. Morgansaid that these are both issues that must be addressedbefore he and, I suspect, many other former tobaccofarmers would again consider cultivating tobacco.

Many Virginians lament the disappearance of thestate’s bucolic scenery. Some counties attempt toassist the existing farmers by offering special realestate tax rates for farmers and by vigorous zoningordinances that make some areas off-limits tocommercial and/or industrial development. Suchremedies may—or may not—help farmers remain inbusiness, but they are treating the symptoms ratherthan the disease. The real reason many farmers areleaving the business is that the cost (both monetaryand opportunity costs) of farming does not alwaysequal the benefits they receive. If tobacco byproductsbecome a critical component of biofuel and if theyare profitable, some farmers might find that theyhave an incentive to stay on the farm. Ultimately,the research into tobacco is promising, as are thepossibilities that this once-reviled plant will both helpAmerica wean itself from foreign sources of oil andreinvigorate Virginia agriculture, however it may beyears before we know for sure if the “golden weed”is America’s golden ticket to energy independence.


“Cap and Trade” Politics in the Ninth By Greg Habeeb

June 26th, 2009, the House of Representatives passedthe American Clean Energy and Security Act, alsoknown as “Cap and Trade”. One of the key authors ofthe bill was the Fighting Ninth's own Congressman,Rick Boucher (D-Abingdon).

Cap and Trade legislation essentially sets a cut-offpoint, or “cap,” for businesses, factories and utilitieson CO2 emissions. The cap indirectly limits the use oncoal, oil, and natural gas on the economy. Thosecompanies that produce less CO2 than permitted bytheir allowances could sell, or “trade,” the rest tothose that do not. Gradually the cut–off point wouldbe brought down, demanding larger cuts in coal-powered plant emissions and ultimately phasing outthe use of coal or any other carbon-based fuel.

Independent analysis of Cap and Trade legislationpredicts that electricity rates could increase by 90percent after adjusting for inflation, and raise anaverage family's annual energy bill by almost $1,200.

Many insiders were shocked when Boucher voted for,and helped craft, the Cap & Trade bill that wouldseemingly cripple the economy of his own coalproducing district. The Ninth is a rural mountainousdistrict. Much of the manufacturing base hasdisappeared since NAFTA, and it currently suffers fromsome of the highest unemployment in the state. Coalis the region’s dominant industry, and it would behard to justify voting for legislation that woulddiscourage coal’s use for energy.

At the time, Boucher defended his vote as necessaryto protect coal and claimed Cap & Trade “would onlymodestly affect electricity rates.” The vote wasextremely close, 219-212, with 8 Republicans votingyes and 44 Democrats voting no. Just four “yea” votesswitching to “nay” would have stopped the bill’spassage.

Largely because of his vote on Cap and Trade, Bouchernow faces the most formidable opponent of hispolitical career in Virginia House Majority LeaderMorgan Griffith.

Speaking of Boucher’s capitulation to the liberal wingof his party on Cap and Trade, Griffith said that hefirmly believes Boucher could have fought the legisla-tion if he were a more aggressive fighter for his district.“What good is he [Boucher] to the people of SouthwestVirginia if, after 28 years in office, he doesn’t evenhave four friends on the Hill that he could persuade tovote against this job killing energy tax?”

By voting against coal in a coal-producing district,Boucher seems to think he is still in a safe seat.However, recent history shows the historicallyDemocratic district trending Republican.

BearingDrift.com /

In the 2008 presidential election, the Ninth handilywent for Sen. John McCain with 59 percent of the vote,mainly due to Obama's perceived opposition to coal.In a 2008 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle,then-candidate Barack Obama discussed the economicimplications of Cap and Trade stating, "If somebodywants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it'sjust that it will bankrupt them because they're goingto be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gasthat's being emitted."

Just last year, Bob McDonnell won the Ninth by alandslide with 66 percent of the vote. This year,Griffith is putting up Boucher’s stiffing challenge since1984. As the Majority Leader in Virginia’s House ofDelegates whose District has included portions of theNinth District for his entire career, Griffith has anexisting political base and name recognition that veryfew challengers have to draw from.

Griffith’s message for most of the campaign hasfocused on stopping Cap and Trade, while Boucherstaunchly defends his vote across the district.

RealClearPolitics.com currently rates VA-9 as a“Toss-Up.” Regardless of who comes out the victor inthe Ninth on Election Day, Cap and Trade is thedefining issue of 2010.

Largely because of his vote on Cap andTrade, Boucher now faces the mostformidable opponent of his politicalcareer in Virginia House Majority LeaderMorgan Griffith.

Photo by Kaleigh Hall


Virginia in Pictures:A Taste of CharlottesvilleBy Krystle D. Weeks and James Gabele

The University of Virginia

"We fondly hope that the instruction which may flow from this institution,kindly cherished, by advancing the minds of our youth with the growingscience of the times, and elevating the views of our citizens generally tothe practice of the social duties and the functions of self-government, mayensure to our country the reputation, the safety and prosperity, and all theother blessings which experience proves to result from the cultivation andimprovement of the general mind."

--Thomas Jefferson: Virginia Board of Visitors Minutes, 1821.Downtown Mall, CharlottesvillePhotos on this page by James Gabele

BearingDrift.com /

Blenheim Vineyards, Charlottesville, Va.

They say "Virginia is for Lovers," butI believe the true motto should be"Virginia's Beauty Inspires All." During a recent trip toCharlottesville, I was impressedby the beauty of the rolling hills,the Blue Ridge Mountains in thebackground, and the lush greenerythroughout the area.Charlottesville is quitepicturesque. With cozy eateries toMr. Jefferson's University,the area has much to offerin history and charm.

Krystle D. Weeks

Photos on this page by Krystle D. WeeksContinued on Page 40


A Taste of Charlottesville, continued

Barboursville was constructedbetween 1814-1822 for ThomasJefferson's friend James Barbour.Destroyed by fire on Christmas Day,1884, it is the only building inOrange County known to bedesigned by Jefferson. Today it isthe home of Barboursville Vineyards.

Barboursville Ruins, Barboursville, Virginia,Photos on this page by James Gabele

BearingDrift.com /

First Colony Winery, Charlottesville Route 29, Madison County

Ash Lawn-Highland, Charlottesville

Photos on this page by Krystle D. Weeks


What’s the point?A friendly debate on

political issues of the day.

On February 19, 2009 Rick Santelli unleashed a nowfamous rant commonly referred to as the “shoutheard ‘round the world.” In his frustrations hedenounced the never ending cycle of massive federalspending and half jokingly called for a Chicago TeaParty reminiscent to the famous Boston Tea Party soinstrumental in the American Revolution. At thatmoment a movement was born that evolved almostovernight to a conservative stand for limitedgovernment, reduced federal spending, and lowtaxes. Embraced by the right and loathed by the left,the Tea Party has become a major factor in publicpolicy relating specifically to influencing campaignsand elected officials.

With local and national Tea Party organizationssprouting up almost on a daily basis there is somemajor debate on whether it has become anideological movement or if it is simply an apparatussimilar to a political party. Is the Tea Party’s best rolea purely ideological opposition to government or asa “Third Force” movement to realign the politicaldebate?On one hand Tea Party organizations areheavily influenced by conservative groups likeFreedomWorks which aids the argument forapparatus. On the other hand many conservativesdo not consider themselves part of the Tea Party buthold the same values, politics, and wholeheartedlysupport their efforts, which aids the argument forideological movement.

This debate is between Bearing Drift contributors AlanMoore and Shaun Kenney.

AM: “While I certainly agree that national Tea Partyorganizations such as the Tea Party Patriots and localgroups such as the Hampton Roads Tea Party arelegitimate organizations, I feel that the Tea Party as awhole has blended with the conservative movementto form a new ideological foray into politics. Eventhough the Tea Party has rapidly grown since itsinception, it is still in an infancy stage with incrediblepotential for growth and its future is relativelyunknown. If it is simply an political “Third Force”organization then it will eventually spur into a thirdparty. If it is a movement then it will remain aninfluential voting bloc and rubber stamp for trulyconservative candidates.

“I do not believe that the Tea Party is simply definedby organizational capacity because, in my view, it doesnot resemble a third party structure. There are nocandidates for elected office who identify themselvesas a member of the Tea Party as a replacement forRepublican, Democrat, or Independent and thereseems to be little interest in that direction. Just as thereare no ‘Conservative Party’ candidates in the UnitedStates, I argue that the Tea Party is slowly becoming apolitical movement similar in stature (not necessarilyin ideology) to the populist movement of the latenineteenth century, the progressive movement of theearly twentieth century, the civil rights movement inthe middle of the twentieth century, and the conserv-ative movement under President Ronald Reagan.”

SK: “And look at how those movements turned out!Populism is an utter wreck. Progressives who longco-opted the Republican Party have finally been shownthe door and found a more receptive calling within theconfines of the Democratic Party. Even conservativeshave been at one another’s throats since the modernAmerican movement began in 1964!

BearingDrift.com /

“The real crux is whether or not the Tea Party Move-ment (TPM) needs to take their new found strengthand take it to the next level – controlling thenomination process for one of the major parties. Idisagree with some commentators that the TPMneeds to sharpen its ideology – the train wreck thatwas the libertarian movement in the 1970’s should beavoided at all costs.

“The idea that the TPM should sit the sidelines andmerely be critical of the process is the same sort ofpolitical laziness (a strong word, but there it is) thatenabled the current crop of establishmentRepublicans to domineer the election process for thelast 30 years. The only way the TPM is going to besuccessful bringing Virginia and America backto constitutional principles is to be smarter thanoutrage, and start plotting ways to take back thenomination method for a major party. For theRepublicans, that means replacing the leadership atthe local and district committee level.

AM: “I noticed you didn't mention the civil rightsmovement! Perhaps we would both agree that hasdone more to change this country for the better thanany other movement. Real, effective, and beneficialchange is possible in this country!

“The TPM is working to force elected officials to bebeholden to the will of the people. While this doesn'tseem like a novel concept, up until now most electedofficials often anger their constituency but still end upwinning reelection. This November may be the strawthat breaks the camels back, ending the complacencyof the electorate in the United States. If Tea Partycandidates win some big elections then that will be amajor sign that times are changing. Making theargument that winning elections is important for theTPM to progress is something in which we both agree,however I believe cementing it as an ideology will

ultimately decide more elections and influence morepolicy than a 'Third Force' would. Organizations gothrough highs and lows and any efficient politicalmachine can win an election. It is more important thatvoters go to the polls voting with their values, ratherthan who ran the best campaign. Real victory can befound not in controlling the Republican Party, but inchanging the whole dynamic of the political landscape,giving voters the option to vote for conservatives ormoderate conservatives, by wiping liberalismcompletely out of the political spectrum.”


Photo: The Megaphone

Kenney: The only way the TPM is going to be successful bringing Virginia andAmerica back to constitutional principles is to be smarter than outrage, and start

plotting ways to take back the nomination method for a major party.


What’s the PointContinued from Page 43

SK: “The civil rights movement wasn’t an -ism,though. It too hasn’t been totally realized, and nevertried to identify itself through what it was for (becauseit never had to). Civil rights does know what it isagainst, and it is those man-made institutions thatprevent the realization and respect of the individualthey seek to point out and eradicate. Nothing more --it’s brilliantly simple.

“Cementing the ideology of the TPM is the absolutelast, worst possible thing that could happen to it.Think of what the movement consists of right now --libertarians, conservatives, constitutionalists,independents, veterans, soccer moms, etc. Look atthe self-appointed “champions” of the movementsuch as Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney,Rick Santelli, Glenn Beck, and so forth. Agreement onwhat they are for isn’t quite going to be a simple act,and could ruinously split the movement much as thelibertarian movement split in the 1970s.

“Let’s keep in mind one thing first and foremost. Inorder to affect change politically, one must be able tocompete in a political arena. The only way to do thisis by participation in the process... which requiresorganization. Simply sharpening sticks doesn’t domuch unless you’re going to use that fine point.”

AM: “Cementing the ideology is exactly what needs tohappen but it doesn’t need to be anything more thanbroad, albeit important, generalizations. Let’s startwith limited government, decreased federal spending,reducing the federal deficit, individual rights, and afight against collectivization. Don’t forget that thefounding fathers were a coalition of some very diversepolitical opinions, much more so than what the TPMconsists of. They agreed that taxation withoutrepresentation was wrong and they were capable ofself-government, but after that disagreements ranrampant on how exactly this fragile and radical ideacalled ‘freedom’ would actually work. I believe that

Photo: Chicks on the Right

Photo: OregonCatalyst.com

BearingDrift.com /

organization similar to a political party would bringabout the disaster you warn against much quickerthan what I propose. Don’t forget the last third partymovement that had any teeth was under the guidanceof Ross Perot. After splintering the vote ad effectivelygiving the 1992 election to Bill Clinton, they thenfaded into history. The last thing conservatives wantand need is a fractured base that gives elections toLiberals.”

SK: “Of course, no one is arguing the TPM should turninto a third party. But what the Founding Fathersequally realized is that no revolution, political orotherwise, survives long without organization.

“At the end of the day, without finding a way to builda coalition and promote candidates, all the rallies andideology in the world won’t elect a soul. It comesdown to recruitment, the ability to raise funds, thewillingness to donate to a candidate, run program,carry primaries and ultimately carry the fight to theestablishment.

“Overcooking the ideology is a terrible idea -- one weshould be sensitive to avoid. Let’s march with thearmy we have and start taking back the nominationmethod!”

AM: “The more the TPM organizes the more callsthere will be for a third party, it’s inevitable. And whatyou just described sounds exactly like a partystructure to me. Candidates need to be heldaccountable to their constituency. The TPM, in myopinion, can do more than just political organizing. Ithas the ability to change the hearts and minds of theso-called ‘moderates,’ or perhaps better described asthe ‘disinterested.’ I admit my position is the moreidealist, but the Obama presidency has awakened aconservative voice in this country. Let’s strike whilethe iron is hot and move the electorate towards the

right in the hopes of not just winning this Novemberand defeating Obama in 2012, but winning electionsin the years to come and giving the government backto the people.”

Photo: The Average American

Moore: Let’s start with limited government,decreased federal spending, reducing the federal

deficit, individual rights, and a fight against collectivization.

The Final WardSnarkery and Cartoons from Ward Smythe & Friends.

Meanwhile, back at the White House...

“I will not rest until I find the real spillers.”

Quick Quip:Hey, Obama! Suing Arizona over illegal immigrationis like suing Louisiana for having a polluted shore.If you solved the problem, states wouldn't have to.Brian Kirwin, Bearing Drift

http://bearingdrift.com/2010/07/06/obama-sues-arizona-over-illegal-immigration/

Now available at Red Store Virginia.

Virginia Politics on Demand

http://bearingdrift.com/category/multimedia/podcasts/

bearingdrift.com

Slaying Leviathan: The Moral Case for Tax Reform

http://www.amazon.com/dp/159797417X?tag=leslcarb-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=159797417X&adid=0ES1GR1DN73VNBKK9TYQ&

Virginia Politics On Demand - August 2010

Documents

Transcript of Virginia Politics On Demand - August 2010