ENERGYNORTHAMERICA, LLC

CLEAN ENERGY &THE GREEN ECONOMY

2010 Ordos International ForumOrdos, Inner Mongolia, China

July 20, 2010

By W. Jackson ColemanManaging Partner, EnergyNorthAmerica, LLC

I thank the sponsors – Ordos City Government and Tsinghua University – the co-sponsors – China Renewable Energy Society, US-China Cleantech Forum, and the Shen Hua Group – and the organizers – Ordos Science and Technology Bureau, Ordos Kang Ba Shi Management Committee, and Ordos Zijin Technology & Education Park Development Co., Ltd. – for organizing this international energy forum and for inviting me to participate.

China and the United States have much in common – among other similarities, we are the world’s two largest manufacturing countries and the two largest energy consuming countries. Both countries have growing economies, although because the United States has been a “developed” country for a much longer period of time China’s economy is, of necessity, growing much more rapidly than that of the United States.

Growing economies and higher standards of living require more energy. Because of the high standard of living of its people and the fact that they are spread over a large area, the United States has long been the world’s largest consumer of energy.

Energy is the lifeblood of an economy. China has a clear understanding of this fact, while a large portion of the American population seems to have lost such an understanding.

Those who fail to grasp this essential fact have, to some extent, come by it naturally. I say this because politicians in the United States – from both political parties – have failed to be honest with the American people on energy. Instead, they have caused an illusion that somehow energy will just appear whenever we want it to.

As Confucius is reputed to have said:

“If a man take no thought about what is distant, he will find sorrow near at hand.”

 Energy sources take many years to develop – they cannot simply be turned “on” like a light switch. China is clearly thinking about “what is distant”, while it is unclear what the United States is thinking about.

For decades, the American government has generally made poor choices, when it made any choices at all, regarding energy and minerals. While American manufacturing has significantly moved overseas because of many reasons, including policy neglect, international competitive pressures, and many other reasons, the energy and mining sectors have suffered for many of the same reasons.

The fact that fossil energy and mining are viewed by political “elites” with disfavor, a view driven by the acolytes of radical environmentalism, has resulted in damaging laws and regulations and general neglect. Contrary to the American government’s adverse policies toward fossil fuels and mining, the Chinese government has seen the reality that without fossil energy and mining, the Chinese economy could not be rapidly built to the level necessary to support and enrich the Chinese people.

A column on June 21, 2010, in the Washington Post by Robert J. Samuelson, entitled “Obama’s Energy Pipe Dreams”, in my view sums up the American energy situation. Mr. Samuelson begins by quoting from President Obama’s speech of June 15th regarding the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico:

“For decades, we’ve talked and talked about the need to end America’s century-long addiction to fossil fuels . . . Time and time again, the path

forward has been blocked – not only by oil industry lobbyists, but also by a lack of political courage and candor.”

Mr. Samuelson then responds by saying:

“Just once, it would be nice if a president would level with Americans on energy. Barack Obama isn’t that president. His speech the other night was . . . full of

misinformation and mythology. 

“Obama held out a gleaming vision of an America that would convert to the “clean”

energy of, presumably, wind, solar and biomass. It isn’t going to happen for

many, many decades, if ever.” I agree with Mr. Samuelson’s observation.

I know that some may think that this is a strange way to lead off a speech at a forum on “clean” energy. I respectfully disagree.

This is because, as President Obama stated, the energy debate has been marked by “a lack of political courage and candor.” Candor would tell the American people that, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), oil, coal, and natural gas supply about 85 percent of America’s energy.

Candor would inform that the EIA projects that between now and 2035 the total volumes of fossil fuels used in the United States will increase, not decrease, and that 78% of America’s energy will come from fossil fuels in 2035. As Mr. Samuelson said, “Unless we shut down the economy, we need fossil fuels.”

Similarly, the International Energy Agency (IEA) projects that by 2030 oil, gas, and coal will still provide more than 85% of China’s energy.

Given that forecast, what is the role for “clean” energy technologies in the United States? In a phrase, those technologies are “absolutely essential.”

Over the next 25 years, the U.S. population is projected to increase from just over 300 million to just under 400 million people. The number of motor vehicles is projected to increase from 231 million to 297 million. The American economy is projected to almost double in size.

Energy efficiencies such as:

more efficient light bulbs, appliances, and motor vehicles; smarter use and more efficient transmission of electric power; more energy-efficient buildings; and many other efficiency and conservation measures

will play a major role in minimizing the increase in fossil fuels that will be needed to power a growing American economy.

Further, renewable sources of energy such as wind, solar and biomass are expected to provide 11 percent of America’s energy supply in 2035, up from 5 percent in 2008. Certainly, renewable and nuclear energy sources are very important parts of America’s future energy mix, but it is also very clear that for at least the next 50 years, and possibly much longer, a majority of America’s energy supply will come from fossil fuels.

Fortunately, the concept of “clean” energy technology encompasses much more than renewable energy sources. Because the world, just as America, will continue to rely upon fossil fuels for a majority of its energy for the foreseeable future, it is critically important that “clean” energy technologies also focus on “greening” fossil fuel production and consumption rather than primarily focusing on renewable energy sources.

Let’s face it, renewable energy is “politically correct” today in America while fossil fuels are not. As the EIA projections show, however, a “clean” technology agenda focused primarily on renewable energy sources will fail to meet both the energy and the environmental needs of the American people.

Yet, expenditures by the United States government on research and development for oil, natural gas, and coal have been severely reduced while similar expenditures for renewable sources dwarf those for fossil fuels. To a degree, this is a natural swing in policy focus when political power changes, but not completely.

Even the Administration of George W. Bush failed to see that clean technology for fossil fuels gave both the American economy and environment the greatest benefit for each dollar invested.

What is the future for American government “clean” energy technology investments? No one really knows, but a few observations can be made.

First, the American people are tired of politicians who believe that there are no spending limits and who are satisfied that the amount that they don’t tax they borrow. It is clear that a large number of current members of Congress will be defeated in the “change election” that will take place this November. Incumbents who manage to survive will be greatly restrained by the mood of the electorate.

Second, with a 13 trillion dollar national debt that is rapidly rising and doesn’t even include tens of trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities such as federal civil service pensions, Medicare, and social security, major cuts in U.S. federal government spending, or increased taxes, or both will be necessary. Because the people are generally against tax increases, I predict that most deficit reduction will be in the form of spending cuts.

Third, although the almost $800 billion 2009 economic stimulus act spent approximately $40 billion on “clean” energy, the result of the 2010 elections will be that almost all of these programs will be severely cut back or eliminated.

The new Congress in 2011 must find a way to pay for the national debt, in addition to reducing and then eliminating the annual budget deficit. A compelling way to pay the debt is to monetize the value of the in-ground fossil fuels and other minerals located on public lands, both onshore and offshore, that are owned by the American people.

Although the Obama Administration has significantly cut back on fossil fuel production from public lands, for example:

the lengthy moratoria on offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and offshore Alaska,

the refusal of the Administration to follow the law and conduct commercial oil shale lease sales,

the new punitive and restrictive regulations on fossil fuel production,

and the dramatic cut-back in the leasing of conventional fossil fuels,

these policies cannot be sustained in the long-term.

As I testified before the United States Senate Judiciary Committee on June 8, 2010:

at $75/barrel of oil and $5/thousand cubic feet of natural gas,the direct value of receipts to the Treasury from producing just the conventional oil and natural gas resources:

15 billion barrels of oil reserves; 86 billion barrels of undiscovered technically recoverable oil

resources; 60 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves; 420 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered technically recoverable

natural gas resources

from offshore federal lands is approximately: $1.8 trillion in royalties and $2.7 trillion in corporate income tax receipts from producers,

for a total of $4.5 trillion.

This sum does not include any up-front sums paid to obtain the leases, nor the tax revenues derived from the jobs that will be created to directly produce these resources, nor the indirect and induced economic impacts of producing these American energy resources owned by the American people.

Additionally, it is important to note that these offshore resource numbers do not include natural gas hydrates which international public and private research has now proven will be able to be commercially produced in the near future. More than 99% of America’s 320,000 trillion cubic feet of natural gas hydrates are located in the deepwater federal offshore.

If only 1% of this resource is eventually producible, it would add 3,200 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Production of this 1% of our natural gas hydrate resources would generate:

approximately $3 trillion in royalties and about $4.5 trillion in direct corporate income taxes,

for a total of approximately $7.5 trillion. Once again, this is without revenues from direct employment or indirect and induced economic activities.

When combined with the $4.5 trillion from conventional offshore oil and gas resources, a total of $12 trillion would result from production of offshore conventional and unconventional oil and gas. This sum almost completely pays off the current national debt without raising taxes.

However, these vast resources will never pay off any of the national debt, nor create hundreds of thousands of excellent jobs, if they are not made available for leasing, drilling, and production.

Wind and solar sources of renewable energy, hybrid and plug-in hybrid motor vehicle technologies, and carbon capture and storage technologies are well-known and have a very bright future in the United States, but I will not discuss them further today.

Instead, I want to mention a few “clean” technological areas that I believe have the potential to have a major impact on the energy market in the United States and around the world. These are advanced CO2 enhanced oil recovery technologies, produced water cleanup, and advanced oil shale production technologies.

Next Generation CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) Technologies –  The April 30, 2010, Department of Energy/National Energy Technology Laboratory Report 2010/1417, entitled “Storing CO2 and Producing Domestic Crude Oil With Next Generation CO2-EOR Technology, written by Advanced Resources International, makes clear the very sizeable potential for increased oil production in the United States by sequestering CO2 in oil fields.

Large Volumes of Domestic Oil Remain “Stranded” After Traditional Primary/Secondary Oil Recovery

Technically Recoverable Resources from Applying “Next Generation” CO2 –EOR: Totals from Extrapolating Advanced Resources’ Database to National Level

Economically Recoverable Resources from Applying “Next Generation” CO2 –

EOR: National Totals at Base Case Economics*

Produced Water Cleanup & Reduced Air Emissions From Oil & Gas Fields –

Produced Water Cleanup & Reduced Air Emissions From Oil & Gas Fields –

Produced Water Cleanup & Reduced Air Emissions From Oil & Gas Fields –

Advanced Oil Shale Production Technologies –

Advanced Oil Shale Production Technologies –

Advanced Oil Shale Production Technologies –

Advanced Oil Shale Production Technologies –

Advanced Oil Shale Production Technologies –

Advanced Oil Shale Production Technologies –

Advanced Oil Shale Production Technologies –

Advanced Oil Shale Production Technologies –

More efficient and cleaner use of our existing base of energy sources is the fastest and least expensive way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

This would include advanced technologies to convert coal into natural gas and into liquid fuels.

As technology evolves, converting coal into liquid fuels will be as economic as doing the same with grasses.

As you will hear from other speakers, many environmentally beneficial products can be made from coal. China and the United States together hold 44% of the world’s coal reserves.

In closing, I am highly optimistic that the world will have plenty of energy to power growing economies if the world’s abundant natural resources, both fossil and non-fossil, are allowed to be developed.

Thank you for inviting me and I would be happy to answer any questions.

QUESTIONS?

W. Jackson “ Jack” ColemanManaging Partner, Energy North America, LLC

571-228-3225jack.coleman@energy-northamerica.com

www.energy-northamerica.com