Phil Gingrey: “I have a number of concerns with the amendment offered by my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Texas, my…”

“I have a number of concerns with the amendment offered by my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Texas, my colleague on the Science Committee. Unfortunately, I do not believe that this amendment does anything to alleviate the Draconian problems presented to us by section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Even if this amendment passes, Americans will still not be able to increase the supply of fuels from alternative sources derived from resources available in the United States. Oil shale, with its estimated 1.5 trillion barrels of petroleum in rock, would remain trapped there in our southwestern States, I think five States have a lot of this oil shale that's there for the taking. We, furthermore, will not be able to use clean carbon captured coal-to-liquid fuel. So the amendment intends to create an exception under section 526 for generally available fuel not predominantly produced from a nonconventional petroleum source, and NASA, under the amendment, will still be able to purchase Canadian fuels that do have traces of oil sands, as the gentleman says, that may create more of a carbon footprint than completely conventional fuel.”