US consumers oppose new energy rule, says lobby group

CEA concerned rule will drive up costs in already difficult market for energy producers, causing reduction in production

Consumers

David Holt, president of CEA

More than 38,000 U.S. consumers are speaking out in support of robust energy production, says the Consumer Energy Alliance, whose members have submitted letters to the Bureau of Land Management ahead of the April 22 deadline for comments on the proposed Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation rule, commonly called the “Venting and Flaring” rule.

The letters are focused on how efforts to explore and produce America’s energy resources will be negatively affected by the proposed rule, which would have significant unintended consequences on local economies, small businesses, school districts, state budgets, and more, according to a press release from the Alliance.

“American consumers have once again shown their support for commonsense energy policies and have demonstrated their deep concern with a proposal that would drive up costs, duplicate existing rules, and provide little benefit to taxpayers or the environment,” says David Holt, president of Alliance.

consumersThe Alliance is concerned that the rule would drive up costs in an already difficult market for energy producers, causing a reduction in energy production, and as a result, a drop in job creation, economic growth, energy security, tax receipts, school funding, and taxpayer royalties.

“CEA, our 270 corporate members and 400,000 individual advocates from every sector of the U.S. economy strongly value the contributions that domestic energy production has had for our nation’s consumers,” said Holt.

“CEA has long advocated for expanded access to responsible energy production as a means to grow our economy and lower energy prices. We urge the BLM to listen to the more than 38,640 consumers and numerous companies and organizations that have joined CEA in calling on the federal government to withdraw the proposed rule.”

Posted in: Energy Politics

Post a Comment