Solar Energy on the Rise

As our calendar clicks along with Summer fast approaching, soon we will be seeking respite from the blazing sun and likely our 100+ degree sweltering days. Yet, with each passing year, the sun, more specifically solar energy, is becoming a growing, positive way to help keep Americans cool during those Summer afternoons.

In fact, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), 2013 was another record year for the U.S. solar industry. There were 4,751 MW of new photovoltaic (PV) capacity installed in 2013, representing a 41 percent increase in deployment over installation levels in 2012. That’s the most installations in any year, ever. Solar accounted for almost 30 percent of all new electricity generation capacity added in 2013, up from just 10 percent in 2012, which made solar the second largest source of new electricity generating capacity behind natural gas. And as we Oklahomans know, we are blessed with significant amounts of natural gas below our Earth’s surface, accounting for as much as 10% of America’s domestic production. Likewise, we know we are similarly blessed with significant sun exposure (aka opportunity), with an almost 70% rating for sun exposure during every waking hour, according to the National Climatic Data Center.

This “% Sun” number measures the percentage of time between sunrise and sunset that sunshine reaches the ground and our measure of 68% for Oklahoma City places us above southern cities such as: Atlanta, Dallas, and even hot Houston. Our City’s sun exposure rating is actually tied with ‘sunny San Diego’ and so we have tremendous opportunity to integrate this daily, free fuel source, into our daily energy needs.

A few statistics from the SEIA that helps convey this fast-growing trend:

  • There are now over 13,000 MW of cumulative solar electric capacity operating in the U.S., enough to power more than 2.2 million average American homes.
  • There were 140,000 new solar installations in the U.S. during 2013, bringing the total to over 445,000 Photovoltaic (PV) systems operating today.
  • The utility market led the charge again with 2,847 MW of PV and 410 MW of Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) installed in 2013, including our neighboring Capitol city of Austin, Texas where they are adding utility scale solar for their customers’ benefit.
  • Year-over-year, the national average PV installed system price declined by 15% to $2.59/W in Q4, which is becoming very competitive versus traditional fuel sources of coal and natural gas.
  • The average price of a solar panel has declined by 60 percent since the beginning of 2011 and many Americans are finding affordable value

And forecasts for this year?

Close to 6,000 MW of PV are forecasted to come online throughout 2014, which represents an incredible 26% growth over 2013’s own record installation totals. 2014 will be a record year for CSP as 840 MW are expected to be commissioned by year’s end, with more and more Utilities moving towards this now affordable, clean energy option. Together, new solar electric capacity projected to be added in 2014 will generate enough clean energy to power over 1.13 million average American homes and that includes running those air conditioners throughout August when the heat (and the cost of electricity) are typically the worst of the year.

So whether you are considering adding some smaller scale solar to your own home or business, or whether you are talking with your neighbor that happens to work for the local electric Utility, please know, as The Beatles once predicted: Here Comes The Sun.

Now more than ever.

This article first appeared in the Journal Record:

The Business of Being in a Rock Band

If you were preparing to start a new business, one of your first moves would likely be to sit down with a trusted adviser and your key partners to organize and set your objectives. You might consult with a lawyer to recommend the right entity structure and draft agreements, or to help you anticipate the potential legal risks and pitfalls that you will need to avoid in the future. But, what if your startup business is a rock band that you formed in your garage and your business partners are only interested in creating music? Ignoring the business of working as a songwriter or performer in rock, country, blues, or any other genre of music could cause you to hit some very sour notes down the line.

Are you serious about creating original music and taking it on the road to share with the world? If so, it’s a good idea to start treating your band like a business so that you have a plan for resolving conflicts with other members, protecting your long-term interests, getting paid and paying your fair share of taxes.

Here are a few suggestions.

  • Start with creating a business structure and an operating agreement between band members for making management decisions, signing contracts, handling money and getting paid.
  • Don’t expect a venue owner to write you separate checks. Include terms and procedures for members to join or exit the group.
  • Decide who owns your instruments, equipment, and touring vehicle.
  • Decide which members own the rights to your band’s music and make sure that you copyright your songs.
  • Ensure that you have appropriate resources to review contracts for gigs, publishing, licensing and recording deals.

For many musicians, these issues can be headaches, but ignoring them only leads to greater problems down the road. Some bands split up before realizing their potential and others surrender their long-term profits and creative interests, never enjoying the full rewards of their success.
Let’s be honest, most musicians are built a little different, but creativity doesn’t have to be sacrificed for success. With the right planning and guidance, you can rock while you’re ready for success and avoid many of the legal problems that otherwise might start to emerge, just as your songs are climbing the charts.

Originally featured in the Journal Record.

Roth: Lack of Infrastructure Wastes Natural Gas

In Jay McInerney’s 1984 novel Bright Lights, Big City, the main character (ironically from Oklahoma) gets caught up in the hedonistic, fast-paced life in New York City. The life of parties, drugs and eventual humiliation and loss eventually forces him to escape from the dangers of these bright lights.

If you were to look upon Google Earth at a night view across America, you might be surprised to see bright lights in rural North Dakota, even brighter than Minneapolis, Oklahoma City and many other metropolitan areas. What are these bright lights? Is there danger like that depicted in the novel?

The light visible from space is the effect of massive flaring of natural gas, being discarded in the production of American oil. Is the danger worth it? You decide.

North Dakota’s oil and gas industry has experienced incredible, exponential growth recently. This pace inevitably comes with some growing pains. One serious problem facing North Dakota, and perhaps America, is the issue of natural gas flaring. Nearly 30 percent of the state’s natural gas is flared each year. Last December, North Dakota flared a staggering 36 percent of its gas.

Why is there so much flaring in North Dakota? Growth of North Dakota’s oil and gas industry has been so rapid that infrastructure has been unable to keep pace with production. The state lacks the adequate pipelines and infrastructure to get much of its gas to market. Also, oil prices are relatively high while natural gas prices are historically low, so most oil and gas producers are more concerned with oil infrastructure. Finally, North Dakota has pretty lax standards for flaring. Oil and gas producers in North Dakota can flare natural gas for one year without having to pay royalties or taxes on the gas. After a year, companies can ask for an extension if it would be difficult to connect to a gas pipeline.

Such widespread flaring has serious environmental and economic consequences. North Dakota’s flared gas releases about 6 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year, about the equivalent of three midsized coal plants. Flaring also has a serious economic impact. North Dakota energy analysts estimate that the state is flaring about $1 million worth of natural gas per day.

The amount of gas North Dakota flares is unprecedented in the U.S. Texas flares less than 1 percent of its gas. Statistics on flaring in Oklahoma are not as readily available, but the state has much better gas infrastructure. This enables companies to get gas to the market rather than flare it, thus improving their bottom line and all of our skies. Further, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission has recently taken proactive steps to modernize its rules to address flaring.

North Dakota is finally taking some steps to slow down flaring. Oil companies have set up a task force to find ways to lower the amount of flaring. The North Dakota Industrial Commission, which is responsible for regulating the oil and gas industry, recently adopted several changes aimed at reducing flaring to 5 percent by 2020. Importantly, the commission will now require all companies receiving drilling permits to have gas capture plans. The commission also made clear that it would carefully review each gas capture plan and reject those that were not viable.

It is in everyone’s best interest for us to develop our abundant natural gas resources prudently. Wasting this precious resource is no longer an option – not for landowners, oil companies, or Mother Earth.

Roth: Oil and Gas Companies Help Regulate Methane

Colorado has become the first state to regulate methane emissions from its oil and gas industry. More interestingly, it’s the first one to do so with the help of the oil and gas industry.

As most Americans know by now, natural gas is a cleaner-burning domestic resource that is helping our country reduce its industrial and power plant pollutions. It is helping in many other ways, as well. Yet, aspects of natural gas deserve some care.

Natural gas is made primarily of methane. Gas leaks can lead to methane emission. Methane is the second-most-prevalent greenhouse gas in the U.S. This is problematic because methane’s effect on climate change is more than 20 times greater than carbon dioxide. While methane has a shorter lifetime in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, it’s 84 times stronger than carbon dioxide at trapping heat in the atmosphere over the first 20 years after emission.

Colorado’s new collaborative regulation requires oil and gas companies to follow stricter methane leak detection standards. Oil and gas companies in Colorado must find and fix methane leaks from tanks and pipes. Oil and gas companies must also install leak control technology that will capture 95 percent of volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, including methane. These steps will help greatly.

It’s estimated that the new regulation will reduce more than 100,000 tons of methane each year and 90,000 tons of smog-creating VOCs. This reduction is equivalent to removing all Colorado cars and trucks from the road for a year. That’s a lot.

Notably, this regulation was supported by three of Colorado’s largest oil and gas producers – Anadarko Petroleum, Noble Energy and Encna. These companies worked with the Environmental Defense Fund to draft the rules. While acknowledging that Colorado’s new rules were strict, Noble Vice President Ted Brown said he thought the rules were smart, and that they ensure that oil and gas is developed in the safest possible way for communities and the environment.

Natural gas is a vital resource that allows us to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions by replacing coal power plants with natural gas plants. Natural gas power plants emit about half as much carbon dioxide as coal power plants, less than a third as much nitrogen oxide, and only 1 percent as much sulfur oxides as coal plants. Coal remains the single greatest cause of greenhouse gas effects and we need natural gas to help curb the negative effects.

Colorado has set an innovative example for how to practice environmental responsibility while at the same time fostering a strong oil and gas industry, showing that the two are not mutually exclusive. More states could follow Colorado’s example. Focusing on reducing methane leaks will make natural gas production more efficient and more environmentally responsible, thus increasing its already sizable environmental advantages over coal. For gas-producing states like Colorado, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas and beyond, the path seems worthwhile.

Complicated issues like methane emissions will continue to call for sensible, balanced approaches to move us toward a cleaner energy future. No country is better at facing such challenges, and the best approaches happen when industry and environmentalists work together and help lead the way.

Roth: Oklahoma’s Renewable Energy Potential

Energy has always been an essential industry to our state. Not only is Oklahoma an industry leader in oil and gas, our state is also at the forefront of the renewable-energy industry.

The primary source of renewable energy in Oklahoma is wind, as we have enjoyed continuing growth lately. Oklahoma’s wind energy sector has seen a meteoric rise most recently. In 2002, Oklahoma had virtually no installed wind power capacity. Now our state has the sixth-largest installed wind capacity in the nation, with 3,134 megawatts.

The U.S. wind industry has experienced rapid growth recently, as well. In 2012, wind power constituted 43 percent of all electricity capacity additions, passing natural gas as the leading source of new capacity despite historically low natural gas prices. The United States trails only China in installed wind capacity, with 60 gigawatts.

In addition to wind energy, our state also utilizes many of our plentiful lakes and rivers to produce hydroelectric power. In 2012, Oklahoma had 805 megawatts of installed hydroelectric capacity. Three of Oklahoma’s largest lakes, Grand Lake, Lake Eufaula, and Lake Texoma, produce electricity through hydroelectric dams. The U.S. produces about 10 percent of the world’s hydropower, with a total capacity of 78,241 megawatts.

Oklahoma is also a leading state in geothermal energy, which involves using the earth’s temperature to heat and cool buildings. Oklahoma State University’s campus is home to the International Ground Source Heat Pump Association, which is a leader in geothermal research and development. The U.S. currently leads the world in geothermal energy, with 3,386 megawatts of installed capacity. Geothermal can be used for electricity generation, but in Oklahoma its main application is for heating and cooling buildings. Most Oklahoma utility companies offer heat pump rebates to encourage the use of geothermal.

Despite Oklahoma’s growth in renewable energy, we still have tremendous untapped potential, particularly with solar energy. In 2012, Oklahoma produced about 300 kilowatts of electricity from solar photovoltaic energy, but we have the potential for much more solar production. Maps of solar resources in the U.S. show that Oklahoma has above-average potential for solar energy, especially western Oklahoma. Thus, the door is open for Oklahoma to become a leader in yet another energy sector.

Oklahoma is helping push the U.S. to the front of renewable-energy development, creating a cleaner, more sustainable future for all, while bringing jobs, secondary income to some farms and real savings to many Oklahoma families’ households.

Roth: The Costs of Carbon Pollution

With increasingly erratic weather, massive snowstorms, more than 40,000 flights canceled in January and hundreds of millions of dollars spent in response, preparation and loss of productivity, some could rightly argue that we Americans are already paying the price of carbon.

A growing movement among policymakers to address costs at the actual source of pollution is a step toward relieving America from the risk of climate-based catastrophes.

Power plants are the largest stationary source of carbon pollution in the United States, accounting for nearly a third of greenhouse gas emissions. Last year, President Barack Obama introduced his Climate Action Plan. One of its main goals is the reduction of carbon emissions, which are widely known to cause climate change and erratic, damaging weather.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently proposed a rule that would set pollution emission standards for new fossil fuel-fired electric power plants. It sets emission standards for natural gas combined-cycle units and coal-fired units. As they are currently designed, natural gas units don’t need additional technology to meet the emission standard because they burn cleaner coal.

Coal-fired units, however, would all be required to use carbon capture and storage, or CCS, technology to lower emissions. Only one coal-fired unit in the U.S. is currently using CCS. The EPA’s proposed standard for coal-fired units is 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions per megawatt-hour of electricity. A typical coal plant that doesn’t use CCS technology releases at least 1,800 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions per megawatt-hour.

The main debate centers on whether it’s feasible to require that new coal units implement CCS. The EPA argues that the technology is market-ready and feasible. Another coal unit is being built with CCS technology. The coal industry argues that implementing these proposed emission standards would effectively ban the construction of new coal plants because CCS is unproven and expensive.

The coal industry has a point that CCS is unproven. We don’t know much about the effectiveness or cost. That may be a big gamble for utility customers, as a coal unit typically has a 60-year life on your bills.

However, carbon pollution has many serious consequences. Setting a standard for power plants is an effective way to lower carbon emissions at the source. Carbon pollution leads to rising global temperatures and sea levels, disruptive weather patterns, damages to the world’s agricultural production and changes in ecosystems. It creates serious threats to public health, like increasingly frequent and severe weather disasters, heavier smog, respiratory diseases and an increased range of ticks and mosquitoes, which can carry diseases.

A problem as daunting as carbon pollution will require bold, creative action. The costs associated with the EPA’s proposed carbon emission standard are substantial. However, the costs of carbon pollution could be immeasurable.

There’s no magic method for reducing carbon emissions, but the EPA’s proposed carbon emission standard is a step that should be taken to start preserving our environment and economy for future generations. We are already beginning to pay for pollution in storm cleanups, rising insurance rates, crop failures, food prices, economic productivity and health care costs.

Some may suggest that we shouldn’t do anything to control our destinies, when emerging economies like China are reluctant to act. I ask them: When did America choose to follow, rather than lead?

Roth: Farm Bill Addresses Climate Change

The federal government has started taking some necessary steps toward addressing climate change.

Congress included some important measures in the recently passed farm bill that will help address some environmental issues. For one, the farm bill has a provision requiring farmers to meet a minimum standard of environmental protection to be qualified for federal crop insurance on sensitive land like wetlands.

Farmers who own sensitive land and want to obtain crop insurance on that land must implement an approved soil conservation plan on highly erodible land that is currently producing crops and was cropped before 1985.

Another provision in the farm bill takes program benefits away from farmers who fill or drain wetlands or expand existing drainage on farmed wetlands. All of these provisions will encourage best practices in terms of conservation and ensure that farmers are managing their land in a sustainable manner.

Another measure that President Barack Obama announced to address climate change is the establishment of seven regional climate hubs throughout the country, including one in El Reno.

The purpose of these climate hubs is to assist farmers and rural communities in responding to climate change, including drought, invasive pests, fires and floods.

These measures are important because climate change could have a severe impact on the U.S. agriculture industry, which contributes about $200 billion to the economy every year.

More extreme temperatures can prevent the growth of many crops. An unfortunate example of this occurred in 2008, when the Mississippi River flooded right before harvest. This resulted in an estimated loss of $8 billion for farmers. The government estimates that the U.S. economy lost $50 billion due to drought from 2011 to 2013, and much of the losses were from the agriculture industry.

As climate change continues, the increasing extremity of weather will have plenty of serious consequences, both environmental and economic. For example, this past January, much of the country experienced extremely cold temperatures. Several industries of the U.S. economy were negatively affected by the weather, including the U.S. auto industry, where Ford, GM and Toyota cited weather as having a negative impact on their sales. Job creation was less than anticipated in January, and many economists cited the miserable weather as a large factor.

With increasingly severe weather year after year, it has become imperative for America to start addressing climate change. The measures in the farm bill and President Obama’s establishment of climate hubs will be a nice, albeit small step forward to help farmers implement the most sustainable practices.

Continuing to implement incremental policies that address climate change will benefit farmers, the agriculture industry, the economy as a whole, and the environment. The farm bill and the establishment of climate hubs are a step in the right direction.

Roth: Canadian Ports Incentivize Energy Efficient Ships

Oh, Canada! Our neighbors to the north are creatively incentivizing their industries to be profitable and environmental. Here’s how.

Two major Canadian ports are offering financial incentives to ship owners whose vessels have low overall emission of greenhouse gases and relative energy efficiency compared to ships of similar size and type. The Canadian west coast ports are using an A-to-G rating system for greenhouse gas emission. The system was developed by RightShip and the Carbon War Room. As you might expect, vessels are rated from A, being the most efficient, to G, being the least efficient.

Port Metro Vancouver’s Eco-Action Program and Prince Rupert Port Authority’s Green Wave program are among the first in the world to offer rewards to the most efficient vessels that enter their ports.

The International Maritime Organization, or IMO, acknowledged that greenhouse gas emissions attributable to international shipping are a tricky thing, mainly because the emissions can’t necessarily be attributed to one particular country. As shipping becomes more pronounced in light of growing international trade, efforts to encourage energy efficiency can be a bit complicated.

In 2009, IMO released an assessment of the level of greenhouse gases emitted by ships internationally: 879 million tons, or about 2.7 percent, of the global man-made emissions of carbon dioxide in 2007. Efforts are underway to update this study in light of the global economic crisis in 2008, as well as the related fast pace of recovery in international trade since then.

The source? Exhaust gases, which make up the primary source of greenhouse gas emissions from ships and of carbon dioxide.

Consider this: The energy consumption of a bulk ship carrier is equal to that of 113 semi trucks, or 4,160 compact cars. Interestingly, in the United States, the American Clean Skies Foundation recently commissioned a study examined the effect of converting from diesel to natural gas in shipping.

There are obvious hurdles to achieving this objective, mainly one of infrastructure, which could be a costly investment. But, utilization of natural gas by America’s shipping industry would not only provide greater fuel flexibility, according to the American Clean Skies Foundation, but the reduction in nitric oxide and greenhouse gas emissions would be substantial.

Given the fact that natural gas is an affordable commodity and a sure bet, maybe one day the shipping industry will get a financial incentive both for being energy efficient and for using a cleaner, cheaper source of energy while helping to clean the air around the world.

Now that’s another reason why the U.S. and Canada can continue to maintain the longest-running peaceful border in the world.

I’ve had the good luck of 11 summer fishing trips to north-central Ontario and I have witnessed firsthand the magnificence that Canada is rightly working to preserve. Our national beauty is worthy of similar incentives and protections.

Roth: Toxic substances need new regulation

On Jan. 9, some residents in West Virginia near the Elk River began complaining of a strange licorice-like odor. Just 1.5 miles downstream from a water-treatment center on Elk River, a chemical called 4-methylcyclohexane methanol, or MCHM, had started leaking through a 1-inch hole in a steel storage tank. Although the investigation is in the early stages, it appears the responders to the neighbors’ call discovered the spill and alerted the unknowing operator. There are now battles over testing and efforts to determine what exactly has leaked and the possible risks to the water sources.

The chemical MCHM is utilized in coal-processing plants to help remove fine particles of coal from surrounding rock in a process commonly referred to as froth flotation. The Etowah River Terminal, where the chemical was being stored, is a liquid bulk storage distribution facility that serves the Port of Charleston, W.Va. There, Freedom Industries, which within one week of the spill filed for bankruptcy protection, operates 13 bulk tanks with a liquid storage capacity of 4 million gallons.

It is estimated that there are more than 84,000 industrial chemicals that are used in the United States and our regulators know very little about most of them. The last major congressional act passed on this subject was the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976. It is widely criticized as being ineffective. A total of 62,000 industrial chemicals, including MCHM, have been grandfathered by the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976. This means that MCHM has never been tested by federal regulators. In fact, none of those 62,000 industrial chemicals that were grandfathered have to be tested. Also, current regulations as a result of the act require little testing for new industrial compounds. This lack of regulation is now at the heart of the post-spill debate. What was leaked? What are its risks? What should the public know about its water quality?

In essence, a chemical that we know very little about just started leaking into a major source of water supply. Now, nine West Virginia counties are telling their citizens: “Don’t drink the water.” Industry reports about the chemical itself are mixed. At the very least, this has led to some confusion about how to clean up and treat folks who have been exposed to the MCHM in varying degrees of toxicity. The reality is that the public safeguards should be in place for transparency before and after such occurrences.

Perhaps Congress will lower some of its own toxicity to actually revisit a law designed to protect all of us from toxic chemicals across America. One can hope, right?

Roth: U.S. Freeze Fuels Global Warming Debate

Record-breaking cold winter temperatures for the new year have raised many questions about climate change.

As the word “selfie” became the buzzword of 2013, “polar vortex” may be the new hot phrase for 2014.

It has brought arctic chill to the continental United States and disrupted industries, cities and thousands of individual lives.

According to some climate-change researchers, global warming may be contributing to the polar vortex and actually causing the recent frigid temperatures across most of the nation.

While it seems contradictory, research argues that plunging temperatures could come from changes in the jet stream caused by climate change.

Rutgers University climate scientist Jennifer A. Francis has released a number of papers on the subject.

Her conclusions suggest that warming arctic air caused by greenhouse gas emissions has caused the jet stream to change in a way that is pushing colder air farther south.

Francis said the jet stream shift has sent frigid air across the central part of the country, and deeper into the South than normal. Alaska, meanwhile, is being hit by unusually warm conditions and California is facing record-breaking drought. Strange weather is becoming more likely because of climate change, she said.

A 2010 NASA analysis tied colder temperatures in 2009 to an event similar to a vacillating pressure system over the North Pole call Arctic Oscillation. That oscillation pushed cold air to the south.

The NASA analysis also said that despite cold snaps and other weather changes being a part of naturally occurring patterns, they are still in line with a globally warming world.

Francis said big fluctuations in the jet stream cause extreme weather conditions to hang around longer, and greenhouse gas emissions are a key factor.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology atmospheric scientist Kerry Emanuel said long-term climate change can only be seen by looking at detailed statistics.

“It’s plausible, at least for a while that a changing jet stream may cause colder winters,” she said.

A new video posted on the White House website is aimed at climate change naysayers’ claims that the polar vortex is a sign global warming doesn’t exist. John Holdren, science adviser to President Barack Obama, said no single weather event can disprove climate change.

“If you’ve been hearing that extreme cold spells like the one that we’ve been having in the United States now disprove global warming, don’t believe it,” Holdren said.

Holdren said the U.S. should expect more instances of arctic-like weather in the future as the polar vortex weakens its centralized hold due to global warming.

He also contends the Arctic is warming roughly twice as rapidly as the mid-latitude regions of the globe, such as the U.S. His conclusion is the temperature difference between the mid-latitudes and the Arctic is shrinking. Those events cause the polar vortex to become less stable, meaning there will be more frequent cold snaps headed farther south.

The administration’s group called We the Geeks recently hosted a conversation on the polar vortex and extreme weather with meteorologists, climate scientists and weather experts. Cristin Dorgelo and Brendan Kelly from the White House Office of Science and Technology Police moderated the live event.

Most scientific research finds that climate change is still real and very serious. The IPCC Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change has said it’s extremely likely that humans are the dominant cause.

Roth: Congress ends wind energy credits

On Jan. 1, subsidies for U.S. wind energy ended with Congress refusing to renew them. Perhaps they are among the many victims of an inactive Congress. It was recently rated perhaps the least-working Congress in history.

Either way, wind tax incentive aid enabled renewable-power suppliers to build clean energy across many areas of Oklahoma and in turn has made cheaper power available to Oklahoma families.

In fact, wind projects installed in Oklahoma in 2013 were actually able to bid 20-year leveled energy at prices far below the delivered cost of coal, which has usually been cheapest – at least until you add in the costs to remove coal’s many pollutants.

In one way or another, the U.S. has subsidized wind-sourced electricity since 1992 to promote the use of cleaner energy and lessen America’s dependence on the fossil fuels blamed for climate change.

Last year, billions of dollars in wind production tax credits, or PTCs, amounted to ratepayers saving 2.3 cents per kilowatt-hour, or kWh, of electricity.

Coal still leads the percentage of American electricity at 37 percent; natural gas provides 30 percent. Nuclear power provides 19 percent, with renewable energies growing to account for the rest.

More than 13 gigawatts of new wind power capacity was added last year to the U.S. grid, bringing the total to more than 60 GW, with the capacity to power more than 15 million homes each year.

An estimated 72 percent of wind turbine parts for U.S. wind farms are manufactured domestically. According to recent study by Environmental Entrepreneurs, more than 186,500 clean energy and clean transportation jobs have been announced across the country in the past two years alone.

Wind energy is now, on average, the second-cheapest U.S. energy source.

According to the Department of Energy, the average cost of natural gas from a new plant in 2018 will be 6.7 cents per kWh, compared with 8.7 cents for wind, 10 cents for coal and 11 cents for nuclear power.

Energy from offshore wind farms remains at 22 cents per kWh.

The end of the tax credit or Congress’ inability to act does not put an end to this growing industry. Wind operators whose construction began before Dec. 31, 2013, may continue to earn the federal benefit for 10 years, with only new projects being subsidy-free.

Currently 29 states have set their own renewable-energy goals thereby encouraging operators to invest in wind.

By 2020, California is expected to produce a third of its electricity from renewable sources, while Maine has a goal of 40-percent renewable energy by 2017.

According to the American Wind Energy Association, technological advances have helped drive down wind production costs by more than 40 percent in the last four years and these improvements will continue to drive down costs.

Clean energy is a smart investment that will benefit our health, economy and environment for decades to come. Our country should make sure these investments continue to provide cleaner options for our utilities, which are tasked with meeting our growing electric loads.

Roth: Resolutions for an Eco-Friendly Life

Happy New Year to all and may 2014 reveal all the promise for you that feels possible.

The age-old practice of adopting resolutions at the start of the year has no doubt led to significant improvements in peoples’ lives. Improving your health by quitting cigarettes or altering your schedule to guarantee more quality time with your children can directly and indirectly improve and extend your life and the quality of the lives of those around you.

But there’s an approach to life that is, at our core, an effort worth making every single day of the year. Call it the golden rule, or a life of purpose, but the mere intention, commitment and repeated actions to live more friendly is perhaps the greatest resolve to have. Actions, or often inactions, affect each other. With a few purposeful thoughts, we can make a huge difference for ourselves, our families and in the end for the broader family of all the earth.

Here are a few ideas to consider for an eco-friendly life.

Haste makes waste: Americans can do a lot to benefit our wallets and our environment by simply slowing down some. Almost a third of all U.S. carbon dioxide emissions come from driving. The American Public Transportation Association suggests that using public transportation saves as much as 1.4 billion gallons of gas and 1.5 million tons of carbon dioxide each year. As you know, public transportation isn’t readily available to much of Oklahoma and likewise 88 percent of all trips in America are by car, so here’s what we can resolve to do: If you drive slower, even a few miles per hour, your car uses less gas, burns less pollutants and causes less damage. We are still better off walking, riding a bike, or taking public transportation whenever possible, but even a subtle decrease in our pace can make a big difference.

Grow your own: About 35 percent of our landfills are comprised of food waste, food scraps and food-soiled packaging and containers. Americans waste about 25 percent of our food purchases, either in food that spoils or over-preparing quantities that are never consumed.

Growing your own food – or at least a portion of it – enables you to eat healthier, teach your family valuable lessons about life and appreciating its bounty, and helps you reduce your expenses and food waste. Also, please remember to bring your own grocery bags when you can, choose recycled paper over plastic and reuse your food scraps, such as meat bones in soup, veggie trimmings in broth and stock, and build an easy-to-use compost pile for the rest.

Drips matter: Every drop of water is valuable, whether we are in one of our recent droughts or not. Fixing leaky faucets and not letting the water run while brushing your teeth are obvious simple things we should all be doing. But we can also repurpose that cold water in our tubs or showers while we are waiting for the hot water to arrive. Instead of letting that water run down the drain, capture it in a pitcher to reuse for indoor and outdoor plants or even for cleaning your household floors. There are many ways to reuse water if we just resolve to recognize that every drop has a purpose.

Gavel to Gavel: Year end tax advice

My grandmother always told me you should be generous, especially during the holidays. She also said you typically get more out of giving than receiving. Such is the case with charitable donations – you might not get more out of it, but the deduction for charitable contributions gives back to you, especially during year-end tax planning.

Generally, a tax deduction is available for cash contributions to qualified charities of up to 50 percent of your adjusted gross income and for charitable gifts of appreciated property of up to 30 percent of your adjusted gross income. As you climb into higher income levels, charitable contributions can offer more value as a deduction to help reduce your tax liability. This year, Uncle Sam has decided to raise tax rates on higher-income earners; those taxpayers may realize greater savings from their charitable donations.

For example, it might be best to consider donating the shares of stock your grandmother bought you when you were born. As long as the shares have appreciated and you’ve held them for more than one year, you can deduct the current fair market value of the stock and avoid the capital gains tax you would pay if you sold the property, which has increased from 15 percent to 20 percent for higher-income taxpayers.

Additionally, for taxpayers 70½ years and older with IRA accounts, it’s likely they are required to withdraw a percentage of their IRAs annually. For taxpayers in this category, a transfer of IRA assets directly to a charity is permitted through the end of the year. No charitable deduction is allowed because a deduction was permitted when the IRA originally was funded. However, the transfer is not a taxable distribution from the IRA account, yet it fulfills the obligations of the required minimum distributions for such taxpayers.

Consider that prepaying donations that you would otherwise make next year can reduce your 2013 federal income tax bill, because your total itemized deductions will be that much higher. As my grandmother would say, with the spirit of Christmas, coupled with the charitable donation deduction, consider how making charitable donations can work in your favor as you address your year-end tax planning.

Roth: Have an Eco-Friendly Christmas

I learned a great holiday and life lesson from my grandmother Anthony, a wonderful woman who lived a generous life but who never forgot the influence of her Depression-era childhood.

Her slightly used recycled wrapping paper, which found its way around our gift packages each year, was literal more of a lasting gift to me, over the years, than the toys or socks or button-down shirts she would often share with us kids. Thankfully, not a gift that I ever give or receive happens without an inner smile and a loving memory of her kindness and conscientious spirit.

Christmas is a wonderful time of giving for so many families. The Christmas spirit becomes contagious as we all receive joy from giving gifts to others and receiving gifts ourselves. We can add to this Christmas spirit by making our holiday celebrations a bit greener and more sustainable.

There are many simple adjustments we can make to ensure that our holiday festivities are more sustainable. Besides, having a greener Christmas usually leads to saving money, so everyone wins.

There are a number of sustainable gift-wrapping methods we can use. Buying wrapping paper each year can get expensive, and we often use and throw away large amounts of it. One alternative is to wrap our gifts in festively patterned cloth and use cloth ribbons. While cloth will probably cost more up front than wrapping paper, it will save money over the long haul because unlike wrapping paper, cloth can be reused to wrap gifts for many years.

Another surprisingly attractive gift wrapping option is to use old newspapers instead of wrapping paper. This gives a second life to something we would throw away anyway, and it saves us from spending money on wrapping paper. The newspapers can be recycled after gifts are opened. This is a more sustainable approach than buying wrapping paper each year.

Instead of using incandescent Christmas light bulbs, we can upgrade to LED lights. LED lights last longer and are more efficient than traditional light bulbs, so even though they are more expensive up front, they will save money over time. LED bulbs don’t get as hot as incandescent bulbs, so they pose less of a fire hazard. For extra savings and efficiency, timers can be set up to turn the lights off late at night. Some LED lights are even solar powered, altogether eliminating the use of electricity.

There is also a green alternative to sending out Christmas cards. Instead of sending out cards, we can email e-cards to our friends and family. E-cards have exploded in popularity in recent years, and they provide more options than traditional Christmas cards because many are animated video clips rather than pictures. Not only are e-cards more environmentally friendly, they also save money by eliminating the need for stamps.

So this Christmas, let’s spread holiday cheer to a new level. Let’s have a greener, more sustainable Christmas and save ourselves some green in the process. Happy Holidays to everyone.

Roth: Nature Conservancy Protects OK Ecosystems

The Nature Conservancy has yet again had a tremendous year of conserving our state’s beautiful and diverse landscapes.

The Nature Conservancy is a nonprofit organization founded in 1951 to protect ecosystems for nature and people. With more than 1 million members, it takes a leading role in all 50 states and 33 countries, protecting ecologically important lands and waters.

The Nature Conservancy itself describes its work as addressing threats to conservation that involve climate change, fresh water, oceans, and conservation land by pursuing pragmatic solutions with a non-confrontational, collaborative approach. To date, the organization has protected more than 119 million acres of land and thousands of miles of rivers around the world.

And they are doing good things here in Oklahoma. The Nature Conservancy has a vital and ever-growing presence in Oklahoma. It has worked to preserve unique landscapes in Oklahoma since 1986. The Nature Conservancy uses a program called Conservation by Design to identify landscapes that will have the greatest long-term conservation impact, and then the organization finds ways to preserve these landscapes. The Nature Conservancy maintains 12 preserves in Oklahoma, totaling 77,000 acres.

The organization’s Oklahoma preserves include the Tallgrass Prairie Preserve, the largest protected tallgrass prairie on Earth. The Tallgrass Prairie region once spanned all the way from Texas to Minnesota. But conversion to cropland and urban sprawl whittled down this area until only 10 percent of the region remained. The Nature Conservancy entered the scene in 1989 to preserve what remained. The organization has successfully restored a fully functioning portion of the ecosystem by using about 2,500 free-range bison and a patch-burn method of prescribed burn, where about one-third of the rangeland is burned each year.

Fire plays a vital role in ecosystems, but its role has become severely out of balance. The Nature Conservancy’s prescribed burning approach is used to help restore balance and improve biodiversity. In 2013, the organization used prescribed burn on 11,490 acres in Oklahoma, the second-largest prescribed burn season since the program was established in 2000.

The J.T. Nickel Family Nature and Wildlife Preserve is another recent Oklahoma success story. The Nature Conservancy took land that had been converted into a cattle pasture and restored it to its original prairie ecosystem by planting native wildflowers. The organization uses prescribed burns to restore the conditions that historically existed.

Perhaps most importantly, the Nature Conservancy is taking a proactive approach to Oklahoma’s sensitive water situation. The organization recently launched Oklahoma’s Statewide Freshwater Conservation Program to improve the way we manage our precious water supply. The organization has led by example, putting in place aquatic monitoring plans at its five main preserves in Oklahoma.

The Nature Conservancy’s recent move to Midtown in Oklahoma City should give it a central platform to engage the public on important conservation issues facing our state. The Nature Conservancy continues to be a vital leader at conserving Oklahoma’s beautiful landscapes, ensuring that this land remains for you and me for years to come.

Roth: LNG Export Opportunity

The global demand for liquefied natural gas continues to grow, and the United States is in prime position to become a leading LNG exporter.

Countries that lack a domestic natural gas supply must turn to LNG for their energy needs. Natural gas must be liquefied before it can be exported without pipelines. Once liquefied, LNG is shipped in tankers to the countries that purchase it. Several Asian countries, including Japan and South Korea, rely heavily on imported LNG. Japan and South Korea are the world’s largest LNG importers.

While the game-changing shale revolution in the U.S. has dramatically increased domestic natural gas production and made our natural gas extremely affordable, this is not the case throughout much of the world. In 2012, natural gas was $2.76 per million British thermal units in the U.S., compared to $11 per mmbtu in Europe and about $15 per mmbtu in Japan and South Korea.

The U.S. has a tremendous opportunity to capitalize on the worldwide demand for natural gas by increasing our capacity to export LNG. Currently, Japan receives much of its LNG from countries like Qatar, but this trend is starting to change. Both Japan and South Korea have recently made deals to purchase gas from American LNG terminals. In some cases, the two countries have offered to help cover the development costs for expensive LNG terminals.

Likewise, Australia and Canada are building more LNG terminals to increase export capacity. This seems like an expensive proposition for them, but when you look at the enormous price margins at play you realize they will recapture their capital investments very quickly.

Increasing our LNG exports would allow the U.S. to share its abundant, affordable natural gas with the rest of the world. It would add jobs to our economy. For example, Exxon Mobil is planning on building an LNG plant and terminal in Alaska that would employ 3,500 to 5,000 people. America could have the world’s largest LNG export capacity if all of the currently proposed U.S. LNG terminals were completed.

Although increasing LNG exports would provide many benefits to the U.S., doing so is a somewhat complicated process. For one thing, LNG export facilities must receive government approval before they contract to send LNG to non-free-trade countries. This can be problematic since South Korea is the only major LNG importer that has a free-trade agreement with the U.S.

However, the Obama administration has allowed four LNG terminals to export to non-free-trade countries, suggesting that this difficulty can be overcome. Another potential concern is that a dramatic increase in LNG exports could cause domestic gas prices to increase somewhat. Finally, LNG terminals are extremely expensive, so this can be an obstacle to increasing export capacity. But as mentioned, two countries, Japan and South Korea, have already offered to cover some of the development costs of LNG terminals, suggesting that the market will take care of cost concerns.

Even though increasing LNG export capacity will be a complicated process, the many benefits outweigh the few drawbacks. Sharing our abundant and affordable natural gas with the world will boost the U.S. economy while providing other countries with more affordable, clean energy, a win-win for all involved.

Gavel to Gavel: Wearable Tech and Privacy

Tom Wolfe is a trial attorney and commercial litigator whose practice is focused on complex business cases including product liability, oil and gas, mass tort and class action defense. Tom is also the president and managing partner at Phillips Murrah.

By Tom Wolfe, Published Nov 14, 2013 in The Journal Record monthly legal column, Gavel to Gavel.

Privacy and progress


We should have seen it coming. Maxwell Smart’s shoe phone heralded a future explosion of ubiquitous, wearable technologies.

Today, the landscape includes a growing assortment of inseparable, life-enhancing devices designed to help communicate, monitor, measure, and maintain our very existence. We’re more connected and better monitored than ever before, but at what risk to an individual’s privacy? Are our laws keeping pace with the enhanced capabilities of evolving technologies or are they holding back progress?

Generally, your rights and expectations of privacy are determined by your location. You have no expectation of privacy while standing in the middle of Disney World, but you have an extremely high expectation of privacy in the shower. Voluntarily putting oneself in public spaces generally defeats an expectation of privacy. The question remains as to whether putting yourself in a public space means you consent to being recorded, monitored or advertised to.

Some emerging wearable technologies are designed to appear like glasses, bracelets, watches or other unobtrusive accessories with the ability to record your activities or the world around you. One day you’re shopping down the vegetable aisle, the next you’re on a website called People of Walmart because you forgot you were wearing your favorite pair of leopard tights with a neon green sweat shirt. While being caught in that outfit may be embarrassing, your concern would be justifiably higher if you realized a stranger was recording video or taking pictures of your children.

On the more sinister side, as physicians use wireless versions of internal insulin pumps and pacemakers, security researchers are concerned about possible cyberattacks on such implanted medical devices, so much so that former Vice President Dick Cheney took note.

What’s the expectation of supplying adequate security on these implants by the manufacturer? The good news is companies are already offering cybersecurity for medical devices, ranging from wireless frequency jammers for your pacemaker to ultrasound devices that determine where and when a malicious actor attempts to access your implant. The Food and Drug Adminis­tration is pushing medical device companies to increase security on their products.

At its current pace, technology seems to develop with the central idea that users want to record and share everything. This development doesn’t bode well for individual privacy.

Roth: What Determines Electricity Prices?

Electricity prices generally reflect the costs to build, finance, maintain, manage, and operate power plants and the complex system of power transmission and distribution lines called the grid.

Electricity prices change constantly – literally every five minutes. A multitude of factors affect prices, some slightly, some dramatically. Some factors have a short-term effect. Others are long lasting.

Weather conditions, natural disasters, and consumer demand influence electricity prices every day. Legislation, regulatory changes, generation efficiency, and electricity grid and infrastructure costs affect prices on a long-term basis.

Major weather events like Rita and Katrina in the 2005 hurricane season produced destructive storms, causing major price volatility.

When an earthquake and tsunami hit Japan in 2011, a nuclear meltdown occurred at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station. This resulted in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s review of the ability of domestic nuclear reactors to withstand natural disasters. Subsequently, several nuclear facilities were taken off-line, and some new nuclear projects were abandoned at a substantial economic loss to facility owners and local communities.

Disasters are felt on a political and governmental level, too. Democrats and Republicans often disagree about re­sponses to disasters, such as the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. This causes delay and additional costs to consumers. A bipartisan approach is needed to implement a national energy plan.

Trillions of dollars must be invested nationally in the next few decades to upgrade the current infrastructure to a modernized, fully interactive smart grid. As utilities are required to rebuild transmission systems to ensure reliable delivery of electricity to homes and businesses, consumers will see delivery costs rise to cover these expenditures.

Commodity investors and speculators have had a large influence on electricity pricing.

While federal stimulus funds have been issued to some utilities for upgrades, most utilities will increase delivery tariff rates to cover costs.

The environmental consequences of coal mining, gas drilling, and power plant emissions affect electricity prices. In February 2012, the Nuclear Regula­tory Commission approved two new nuclear power reactors for the first time since the partial meltdown at Penn­syl­vania’s Three Mile Island plant in 1979.

Green or renewable generation, including solar, wind, and hydro, continues to grow slowly. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has cracked down on air pollution, imposing strict limits on environmental emissions from coal-burning plants, which generate most of our nation’s electricity.

Lower electricity prices also have slowed implementation of renewable generation. The costs of installing a green system remain high compared to traditional electricity.

The 2011-2012 winter season was exceptionally mild. Demand decreased for electricity to heat homes and businesses. Lower demand pushed prices down.

When winter weather causes an increase in heating demand, electricity prices increase. During peak summer times, the grid system can become overwhelmed by consumer demand. This causes electricity prices to climb and be volatile.

Electricity prices are affected most by the amount of consumer usage, and the time of day and season that electrons are consumed. Electricity prices are highest during times of peak demand in the late afternoon, and lowest overnight when demand drops.

Prices vary by locality due to the availability of power plants and fuels, local fuel costs, and pricing regulation and structures. Oklahoma consumers, with production fuel sources like natural gas and wind in abundance, have benefited from those factors.

Roth: How Natural Gas is Priced

Natural gas prices are no longer based just on its use for heating. With about 25 percent of the United States’ electricity coming from plants burning natural gas, it has become a larger part of our nation’s energy use. Although not yet used widely, some predict that it is also destined to be a large part of our transportation energy in the future.

Even with more uses, natural gas prices are historically low. Compared on an energy-equivalent basis, natural gas is cheap relative to other energy sources like heating oil and gasoline.

Today, huge new supplies of gas are coming on-line, thanks to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, which are tapping huge resources and lowering prices.

Since the beginning of the 2008 financial crisis, the stock values of gas production companies and gas pipeline companies have fallen. The path of future natural gas prices will influence the cost of electricity, especially in the Northeast.

Still the major use of natural gas is for heating, and supply and demand are mismatched for that purpose. Demand is highest in winter, typically exceeding supply during the heating months in the Northeast and Midwest. In the summer months, demand is lower than supply, making it cheaper in the winter and more expensive in the summer.

The unpredictable demand for gas means that gas has to be stored – often waiting until the price is right to sell.

Natural gas must be moved from its source to where it can be used or stored, requiring numerous pipelines. The U.S. has more than 300,000 miles of pipeline, yet it doesn’t go everywhere. Building and maintaining underground gas pipelines is expensive, and the companies that own them charge gas producers for usage.

Extreme weather can also affect gas prices. The very warm 2011-2012 winter in the Northeast led to lower demand for gas to heat homes, leaving record-high storage inventories and lower prices.

With more gas-fired electricity generators, summer weather that is hotter than expected can lead to more gas demand from air conditioners and depleted inventories for the winter and higher prices. A hot summer followed by a cold winter can produce a price spike. More volatile weather means more volatile gas prices.

The number of new wells being drilled and those in active production fluctuate. Some producers face pressure to sell gas even at prices they don’t like to make debt service payments on the money they borrowed to drill the wells.

The U.S. also imports gas from Canada and Mexico via international pipelines or shipped in special tankers, called liquefied natural gas, or LNG.

Trading and speculation of natural gas futures, derivatives, and investment funds also can affect the price of gas.

All the variables in supply and demand – including unpredictable weather, resistance to fracturing, and energy consumers adjusting their behavior to benefit from lower natural gas prices – make it complicated and difficult to predict future gas prices. But people are doing it every day, winning and losing, and so it goes.

Courts Eye Employer “Look Policies” for Civil Rights Violations

By Catherine Campbell

“Look Policies” – policies intended to promote the company brand by recruiting and requiring employees that fit specific cultural or physical characteristics or restricting clothing accessories – are currently a hot topic at the EEOC. The agency and others have, in recent years, challenged companies that institute such policies on civil rights grounds. Though not generally considered outright illegal, employers may apply “Look Policies” in a way that violates applicants’ and employees’ civil rights.

Looks-conscious, clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch has had several high profile problems with its look policy. For instance, in 2005, Abercrombie agreed to a six-year consent decree and paid $40 million dollars to a class of minority – including African Americans, Latinos and women – job applicants and employees for its alleged failure to hire, promote, and retain minorities because they did not fit Abercrombie’s “All-American look.”

Several years later, Abercrombie again sparked EEOC interest when it refused to hire several Muslim women who wore hijabs for religious reasons. In one case, a California federal district court determined that Abercrombie violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by refusing to hire a Muslim job applicant because she wore a hijab. EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., Case No. 10-cv-03911-EJD (N.D. Cal. Sept. 3, 2013). When the court agreed that Abercrombie had failed to accommodate the applicant’s sincerely-held religious beliefs, Abercrombie, in September 2013, ultimately agreed to settle.

In another case, however, the Tenth Circuit reversed a jury verdict for a female, Muslim job applicant who was not hired because she wore a hijab. EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., No. 11-5110 (10th Cir. Oct. 1, 2013). The court agreed that while Abercrombie was required to accommodate a job applicant’s (or employee’s) sincerely-held religious beliefs, because the applicant never informed Abercrombie prior to its hiring decision that she needed an accommodation due to her religious beliefs, applicant could not establish a prima facie discrimination claim. According to the court, a plaintiff must act for religious, not cultural, reasons and his or her religious beliefs must place him or her in the position of “choos[ing] between their religious convictions and their job.” Slip Op. at 25.

Important for employers, at least in the Tenth Circuit, an employer cannot be liable for failure to accommodate a religious belief unless the applicant or employee explicitly tells the employer of the conflict and seeks an accommodation. Id. at 31. That is, an employer has no duty to glean from the circumstances that an accommodation may be necessary and begin a dialog. The dissent argued that the majority rule was too inflexible, because under the facts of the case, it allowed Abercrombie to escape censure. Although Abercrombie obviously knew that the applicant wore a head scarf, it never told her that wearing a hijab conflicted with its look policy, and the applicant was not aware that the hijab conflicted with the look policy. Dissent at 2. The dissent advocated for a “common sense exception to the usual rule” when an employer “has knowledge of a credible potential conflict.” Id. at 10, 1.

Of course, some corporate look policies do not raise issues. For example, a policy that requires certain clothing for safety reasons – say one that bans loose-fitting clothing worn around machinery – is generally permissible. On the other hand, an employer cannot restrict an employee’s protected rights merely because his or her co-workers are uncomfortable with a particular item of clothing. And, what about a policy that prohibits staff from wearing jewelry, but an applicant must wear a medical alert bracelet? Applying the policy could result in American’s with Disabilities Act liability. A savvy employer may well determine that a conservative approach is a better one. Although delving into a job applicant’s or employee’s religious beliefs or other protected characteristics is verboten according to the EEOC, the common sense approach advocated by the Tenth Circuit dissent may be advisable.

And what is an acceptable accommodation? A case filed against Walt Disney Corporation in 2012 may help answer that question. Imane Boudlal, a Muslim woman began working as a hostess at Storyteller’s Café, a Disney-owned facility. After working two years, Ms. Boudlal requested permission to wear hijab at work due to her religious beliefs. Disney denied the request as a violation of its “look policy,” but offered to either reassign her to a position which did not require interaction with the public or require her to wear a hat to cover the hijab. Ms. Boudlal refused the offered accommodations claiming that Disney was impermissibly attempting to stifle her “Muslim-ness”. The case is currently in litigation.

Roth: How are gas prices determined?

According to AAA, since January, retail gas prices have dropped at the fastest rate in nearly a year.

Currently, the national average price for a gallon of regular gas is $3.35. In parts of Oklahoma City, it is $2.87. AAA said the national average could drop another 25 to 30 cents per gallon by year’s end.

What really drives gas prices? The general rule, according to the Energy Information Administration, is that about two-thirds of the cost of gas at the pump is determined by crude oil cost. The remainder includes retail costs, federal and state taxes, refining costs, profits, distribution and marketing.

To turn crude into gasoline and sell it at the pump, oil must be refined, shipped and loaded into trucks for delivery to stations, where it is purchased for public resale. Long shipping routes, more refining, and remote station locations contribute to higher prices.

In 2004 the average price for crude oil was $37 per barrel. Crude was 47 percent of the price of regular gasoline. Today, crude is $111 per barrel and is two-thirds of the price we pay.

Worldwide demand has increased dramatically, particularly in China, India and Brazil – three countries with a combined population of 2.7 billion.

In summer 2010, gas prices were about $2.80. An unstable supply caused prices to rise when revolutions swept the Middle East. During Libya’s civil war its oil production fell more than 50 percent.

U.S. crude for December delivery fell 94 cents per barrel to $96.86, its lowest settlement since July 1. Brent crude, often considered a broader indicator of global oil prices, lost $2.17, ending the day at $107.80 per barrel, its lowest settlement price since Aug. 8.

The result is a buildup in oil supply in the U.S. Meanwhile, demand for gasoline remains flat, partially a reflection of the stagnant economy.

Analysts said the downtrend in retail gasoline prices will continue with reduced demand, increased U.S. production of oil and increased refining capacity.

U.S. refiners have an ample supply of domestic and Canadian crude, allowing them to make more gasoline. The U.S. met 87 percent of its own energy needs in the first six months of 2013, the highest rate since 1986.

The result is a buildup in oil supply in the U.S. Meanwhile, demand for gasoline remains flat, partially a reflection of the stagnant economy.

New technology makes a difference. Some suggest that fracking can do for oil and gasoline prices what it has been doing for natural gas prices. Vehicles now get considerably better gas mileage.

Inflation and taxes account for the biggest relative increases in the price of gasoline. The nationwide average tax on gasoline is 49.5 cents per gallon, up 0.1 cpg since July 2013. The federal tax on gasoline is 18.4 cpg. The average state gasoline excise tax is 21.4, up 0.5 cpg from July 2013.

It is expected that per individual there will be less fuel consumption, but more people will be consuming worldwide. These changes will affect pump prices.

Nationally, retail prices have fallen 25 cents since the end of August, as the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season was looking like the first in almost two decades without a major storm disrupting Gulf Coast production.

The common belief is that the price of gasoline is solely determined by the supply and demand of crude. Those are the major factors, but other components will continue to influence pricing.

Roth: Governor’s Energy Conference a Success

Gov. Mary Fallin’s third-annual energy conference successfully exhibited Oklahoma’s key role in the nation’s current energy renaissance. More than 500 guests attended the conference at Tulsa’s Cox Business Center and I witnessed firsthand the well-represented industries and people from across the energy spectrum.

Speakers at the conference included industry leaders such as C. Michael Ming, general manager at the new Oil & Gas Technology Center GE Global Research building in Oklahoma City; Michael Skelly, president of Clean Line Energy Partners; Michael Teague, Oklahoma secretary of energy and environment; Gary Demasi, Google director of operations for data center location strategy and energy; and Merl Lindstrom, vice president of technology at Phillips 66.

The conference also included two panel discussions. The first panel discussion included the presidents of Oklahoma State University and Oklahoma City University, Burns Hargis and Robert Henry respectively, and covered the topic of educating a new generation of energy leaders. The second panel discussion featured several of Tulsa’s energy leaders, including Mayor Dewey Bartlett’s welcome.

Demasi talked about Google’s important partnership with Oklahoma. Google has invested $700 million in its data center in Pryor – one of only nine Google data centers in the world. The company’s partnership with Oklahoma has led to $369 million in economic activity, and Google has contracted for 390 megawatts of wind energy in the region. Google recently acquired a former Gatorade manufacturing facility in Pryor. The tech giant shared its plans to continue expanding its renewable-energy portfolio and continue its important partnership with Oklahoma.

The keynote speaker at the conference was North Dakota Gov. Jack Dalrymple. Dalrymple spoke about North Dakota’s role in the domestic energy renaissance, particularly the oil-rich Bakken boom. He noted that despite the current energy boom, even more progress can be achieved by industry-leading states like North Dakota and Oklahoma, which have demonstrated regulatory approaches that find a healthy balance between energy production and the environment. He also noted the significant benefits the industries’ production means to their economy and their state budget.

Fallin spoke at the conference, advocating for continued investment in the Oklahoma energy industry. Fallin suggested that Oklahoma’s energy plan can provide a national blueprint for growth and reminded us that the state’s energy plan supports a broad range of energy initiatives, including hydraulic fracturing for natural gas production, energy efficiencies where possible, compressed natural gas vehicles, and development of solar and wind power. Fallin said Oklahoma energy companies have played an important role in making the United States more energy-independent, calling Oklahoma the best place in the world for energy investments.

The conference showcased just how important Oklahoma’s role is in the current energy renaissance. While Oklahoma has long been a leader in oil and natural gas production, the conference also demonstrated that Oklahoma is increasingly becoming an industry leader in wind energy development. Fallin’s all-of-the-above energy approach enables Oklahoma to reap the benefits of industry giants like Continental Resources, Oneok and Google, which will continue to bring tremendous economic benefits to our state. Fallin’s energy conference demonstrated that Oklahoma is on the right track and will continue to be on the cutting edge of the U.S. energy industry. The job was well-done, again.

Roth: U.S. Leads Europe in Natural Gas Production

European Union lawmakers recently voted to force energy companies to carry out in-depth environmental audits before they initiate hydraulic fracturing to recover natural gas, oil and liquids from shale rock.

The result is a setback for the shale gas industry in Europe, where many citizens are more concerned about the environmental effects than the benefits from energy production. It leaves Europe far behind the United States in developing recovery and production techniques.

The U.S. has widely embraced shale gas production, leading to a fall in domestic gas prices and making it possible to achieve energy independence in oil and gas by 2035, according to the International Energy Agency. It’s transforming our economy.

The 27-nation European Union has been slower to explore the possibilities. Policymakers from the EU are positioned to decide by the end of the year whether strict regulation is required.

Opponents of shale gas exploration in Europe say existing environmental law is inadequate for the potential risks of hydraulic fracturing (fracking). France has already banned the technique and others are considering following this move.

Pro-shale gas advocates insist that shale gas provides lower energy costs, can curb greenhouse emissions and could provide a more indigenous source of energy.

According to a recent report by investment bank Credit Suisse, after a decade or more of shale development in the U.S., the country is still in the early innings of growth. There are tens of billions more dollars expected for infrastructure and development. The renaissance in industrial development and manufacturing will continue to benefit.

This isn’t the case for the U.K. and the majority of the Europe Union, which largely relies on Russia for its gas supply. Not surprisingly, Russia has raised a lot of purported concerns about hydraulic fracturing. This is obviously designed to help maintain Russia’s dominance over Europe’s gas supply.

Despite a less positive outlook for Europe’s shale exploration, there could be additional opportunities for oil and gas producers, as well as oil service subsectors, in countries such as Argentina and China.

The Credit Suisse reported that U.S. crude’s effect on global oil prices is still muted. Increased U.S. production has coincided with global supply interruptions and Middle East/North African instability. The report added that a significantly weaker oil price is not an imminent prospect.

Natural gas is being substituted for other fuels, particularly coal, in electricity generation, resulting in lower greenhouse gas emissions from utilities. The use of natural gas in the transportation sector is currently negligible but is projected to increase in the U.S. with investments in refueling infrastructure and natural gas vehicle technologies. Petrochemical and other manufacturing industries have responded to lower natural gas prices by investing in domestically located manufacturing projects.

According to “The Shale Revolution II” report, strong drilling activity and continued technological progress should lead to significant oil production growth in key regions such as the Permian Basin, the Eagle Ford, Bakken and Niobrara Wattenberg shale fields, in west Texas, south Texas, North Dakota/Montana and Colorado, respectively.

The good news for Oklahoma, and America, is that while we are safely maximizing our domestic energy and transitioning our economy toward lower-carbon fuel sources, other parts of the world will lag behind and lose their competitiveness.

That’s good for America and American jobs.

Gavel to Gavel: Halloween Laws

Halloween is often perceived as the day when all laws of space and time are suspended. This ancient belief dating back some 2,000 years ago remains strong. Our steadfast judicial system even bends the rules a little when it comes to Halloween madness.

Ask the Louisiana woman who was unable to recover for damages after she broke her leg running away from Jason and his chainsaw. The court held the haunted house had no duty to protect her.

Louisiana’s not alone. Oklahoma prohibits a person from wearing a mask, hood, or covering that would conceal their identity for the purpose of intimidation or harassment – unless you are at a masquerade party or performing a Halloween prank. Similar laws can be found in numerous other states, including Louisiana, Virginia, Georgia, West Virginia, Michigan, Florida and South Carolina.

But the law doesn’t always let things slide on Halloween. An Arkansas court, citing numerous other jurisdictions as support, held that a state, in exercising its police power, may constitutionally ban all fortune-telling. It’s rumored that North Carolina passed a local ordinance in the 1970s banning the distribution of Halloween candy containing poisonous chemicals, razor blades, or shards of broken glass.

Oh, and a friendly piece of advice: Make sure to go out of your way to smile and wave at your neighbor, or you may end up seeing a personalized homemade tombstone like this, which was the focus of a Florida lawsuit for emotional distress: “At 48, she had no mate, no date, it’s no debate, she looks 88, she met her fate, in a crate, now we celebrate!”

If you’re beginning to panic because you believe it’s too late to make nice with the neighbors, have no fear. An Illinois court found that a policeman’s removal of this homemade tombstone didn’t violate the owner’s First or Fourth Amendment rights: “Old Man Crimp was a gimp who couldn’t hear. Sliced his wife from ear to ear, she died … he was fried. Now they’re together again side by side!”

One last piece of advice for Halloween lovers: If you’re lucky enough to attend jury duty on this magical holiday, don’t forget your favorite costume! A Massachusetts judge recently allowed jurors to wear costumes to court on Halloween.

Roth: Environmentalism is a Christian ideal

I have often been struck by the divide between the environmental community and everyone else. It seems we so often try to separate everyone into distinguishable categories: left or right. Then we cusp these debates with religion, economics, and a distaste for that Obama guy, and we forget that indeed our faith first calls us to be stewards of this place we call home. It is not a conservative issue vs. a liberal issue, or a Republicans vs. Democrats. Nor is it a Christian vs. non-Christian issue.

Indeed, according to Psalms 24:1: “The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof.” In fact, the Bible depicts that God made a covenant with the earth and all of the species within it. Consider Genesis 9:12-13, where it read that “God said to Noah and to his sons with him: ‘I now establish my covenant with you and your descendants after you and with every living creature that was with you – the birds, the livestock, and all the wild animals, all those that come out of the ark with you – every living creature on earth.”

So, in fact, we all are called to be good stewards of the earth – and I love it when I see so-called Cool Congregations, an effort for greater sustainability from participating congregations, like my own home church Mayflower Congregational UCC. This higher calling is working to make a difference, preserving our world and promoting environmental stewardship, church to church.

Consider the fact that the National Council of Churches, which is comprised of Protestant and Orthodox denominations, has been working to lobby for national and international action on climate change.

Consider the fact that an organization called Christians Caring for Creation is actually suing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services for failing to protect endangered species.

The Evangelical Environmental network is comprised of evangelical churches that believe that the body of Christ should be an example of what God’s people can do in the world to solve some of the great challenges of our time.

Our politics might divide us. Our disagreements about tax policies and the Second Amendment might make your blood boil. But, as a nation, and indeed the world, we are working to do something that no one has ever done before. That is, live in a world, where by mid-century 9 billion people will be its inhabitants. If that doesn’t sound crowded, or likely to stress our ecosystems, I would encourage you to move three more people into your home today and see how that goes. Change is coming. It’s going to require action.

This means we will have to do more with the food, land, water and other limited resources that we have. We will need to be smarter about the energies we produce and consume and probably tackle issues of parity and disparity across the globe. We need to do more with what God gave us, all of us. We must do so while working to avoid the most dangerous consequences of climate change, population growth and the ongoing, tragic destruction of our natural environment.

In the words of my favorite Scripture, Micah 6:8, which asks all of us: “What does the Lord require of you?”

The answers: prayer and action.

Roth: Georgia Tea Party Teams Up with Sierra Club

While tea party-backed members of Congress and the Republican Party might be at odds over health care, the federal budget, the debt ceiling and a whole host of other things, crazier things have happened.

In Georgia, members of the Tea Party Patriots and the Sierra Club are joining forces to promote renewable energy. I’ve always thought green tea was healthy.

The Tea Party Patriots group in Georgia is suggesting that conservation is in fact a conservative principle. So, they have joined forces with the Sierra Club and formed the Green Tea Coalition.

The Tea Party Patriots’ position is that consumers of power ought to have more choices in the electricity marketplace. And, more importantly, they ought to be able to place solar panels on their own homes and get access to cleaner electricity more affordably. In addition to being good stewards of the environment, according to the Tea Party Patriots, this is a fundamentally conservative ideal.

In other words, allowing energy to compete on a level playing field, according to the Tea Party Patriots, is a fundamental cornerstone of liberty. And so, what some narrow thinkers may call an unholy alliance has been born – one where conservation, promoting renewable energy and conservative energy principles are actually just good old-fashioned American principles. Seems like common green sense to me.

There is no mistaking that in the free market, where forms of energy are allowed to compete, more and more renewable sources of power are beginning to have a competitive advantage. Today, in Oklahoma, wind power is at its most competitive price opportunity thanks to the visionary leadership of Oklahoma’s industry leaders and some good public policy nudges from leaders like Gov. Mary Fallin and former Gov. Brad Henry and Secretary of Energy Mike Ming.

Additionally, cleaner-burning, affordable natural gas has begun to displace coal in power generation over the past decade. Since 2005, coal use in the power sector has declined 25 percent, while natural gas has increased by 62 percent. This reality has been responsible for some of the cleanest air Americans have enjoyed in a decade. Not to mention, it has helped encourage and spur innovation and competitiveness in the renewable marketplace, as natural gas’ power flexibility is a partner to wind energy, while slow, cumbersome coal plants are not.

Today’s reality is that common-sense energy use and policies that look to the market for the most cost-effective and environmentally sound solution are not ideals or platforms that belong to any one political party or any one side’s viewpoint. Instead, it makes as much sense for all of us, as a good old cup of green tea.

Legal Alert: New EEOC and OCRE Rules for Oklahoma

By Lauren Symcox Voth

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) isn’t the only game in town. The Oklahoma Office of Civil Rights Enforcement (“OCRE”), a division of the Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office has been investigating complaints of discrimination for over a year now. Formerly known as the Oklahoma Human Rights Commission (“OHRC”), the OCRE was created through the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act in July 2012 to investigate and enforce state anti-discrimination laws relating to employment, housing and public accommodations. Before July 1, 2012, generally employers had to have at least 15 employees to fall under federal anti-discrimination laws; and employees claiming employment discrimination could file a charge of discrimination in employment with the EEOC or the OHRC and the charge was considered dually filed. Post July 1, Oklahoma employers with 1 or more employees are covered by the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act, charges are no longer dually filed, and the agencies’ enforcement and investigations are separate.

Keys to the EEOC and OCRE in Oklahoma:

  1. The OCRE enforces and investigates employment discrimination claims under the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act including, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, and age.
  2. The EEOC investigates and enforces Federal statutes related to employment discrimination including race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, disability, age, and genetics.
  3. The Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act covers all employers with one or more employees.
  4. Most Federal anti-discrimination statutes cover employers with 15 or more employees, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act covers employers with 20 or more employees, and the Equal Pay Act covers virtually all employers.
  5. No dual filing. An employee must file with both agencies to preserve their state and federal claims.
  6. Individuals have 180 days to file a charge of discrimination with the OCRE.
  7. Individuals have 300 days to file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC.
  8. Employers must file separate responses to charges filed with the EEOC and OCRE – but make sure the responses are consistent! Employers are responsible for participating in the investigation process for both the EEOC and OCRE.
  9. The EEOC and OCRE have agreed to share information in related investigations.

If you have questions about the EEOC, OCRE, a charge of discrimination, or if you are a covered employer, consult an attorney.

The “Bring Your Own Device” Boon Comes at the Expense of Security. How Can You Protect Your Business?

By Cody Cooper

Bring your own device policies in the workplace aren’t novel. Companies have experimented and implemented policies requiring employees to use their own personal phones, computers and tablets in the scope of their employment rather than the employer providing these devices. There are certainly benefits to companies that offer the flexibility of “bringing your own device.” Companies can reduce or avoid large hardware costs. Employees enjoy the freedom to choose and use the technologies they already love compared to juggling a Blackberry for work and an iPhone for friends and family. Additionally, by using a personal device, employees tend to be “connected” and available more than with an employer-provided device.

Now, while you may think, “you mean I can require to employees to bring their own electronic devices and never have to worry about the costs and resources for maintaining or upgrading those devices? SIGN ME UP!” Not so fast. While there are certainly benefits to BYOD policies, there are also potential pitfalls.

Who owns the information on the phone?

Particularly where a company’s value is primarily driven from the information it creates and maintains, BYOD policies can prove dangerous. Oklahoma law protects information that is considered to be “trade secret,” being information that derives independent value and where there are reasonable efforts to keep it secret. Examples are customer lists or business research (think geological surveys showing potential oil reserves). Although Oklahoma law protects this sort of information from theft, enforcing an employer’s rights can prove time-consuming and costly and sometimes even unsuccessful. While an employer could confiscate and completely erase a company-owned phone in the event an employee is fired, the same may present potential legal issues if it is the employee’s personal phone and contains their personal information.

You can’t fire me, I quit!

By allowing employees to bring their own device and then use that device for work, employers are now placing potentially incredibly sensitive information in the hands of its employees. As any employer knows, employees are sometimes prone to change their mind and seek employment elsewhere or need to be let go for whatever reason. This presents an incredible risk depending on the employer’s line of business and the employee’s role. Particularly where sensitive email information is frequently shared or contacts are vital (i.e. sales centric businesses) the potential for data misappropriation is high.

There are now a number of programs for cellphones, tablets and personal computers (laptops or desktops) that create what is essentially a biodome of employer information residing within a secure environment on the user’s computer, while restricting the user from copying information or other potential acts of abuse. This could be the saving grace for companies that are particularly sensitive to data loss.

Increasing the e-discovery pie

E-discovery is growing at an exponential rate and as employers rely more and more on computers and computer systems, it will continue to do so. In a lawsuit, parties are generally entitled to discovery any information that is relevant to the suit. Having employees use personal devices will require employers to collect, preserve and review the information on the devices for relevant information in the event of a lawsuit. This further broadens the scope of discoverable information and increases the costs of these efforts for the employer.

The effects of BYOD are still being realized

These are just two of the major concerns of BYOD policies, but there are more. Privacy rights of an employee can obviously come into play with the use of personal devices at work as well as acceptable use and non-use of the devices both at work and away. Even with the potential downsides, BYOD policies can be an excellent tool for business looking to shed the cost and burden of maintaining personal devices for their employees. It is important to consult with an attorney in drafting an effective BYOD policy to ensure that the individual needs of your business are taken into consideration along with the ever-changing laws. First look introspectively to determine how much you value your information and ask what the cost of releasing some of the control of that information is worth to you. Then, if you think the potential risks are outweighed by the benefits, say goodbye to all those BlackBerrys you’ll never buy again!

Bringing Crowdfunding to Corporate America – Securities and Exchange Commission Weighs Regulations.

By Joshua Edwards

Over the last few years a number of crowdfunding websites have popped up providing individuals and small businesses, in other countries, the opportunity to raise money for new projects or ventures in exchange for equity interests in the venture. But what exactly is crowdfunding? The idea is to use the internet and social media to take advantage of easy access to potential investors or donors, allowing an individual or startup to raise capital through small amounts of investments or donations from a large number of individuals.

Because of existing restrictions in U.S. securities laws, however, current crowdfunding campaigns in the U.S. primarily involve contributions by interested individuals, often in exchange for a perk or reward, but do not result in the donor or “backer” receiving any kind of ownership interest in the business.

Equity or investment crowdfunding, which would allow start-ups and entrepreneurs to sell shares or membership interests in their companies to small unaccredited investors as a means of raising capital, is stuck in a kind of regulatory holding pattern. On April 5, 2012, President Obama signed the JOBS Act into law creating an exemption to the securities registration requirements that permits the sale of securities via crowdfunding, pending the issuance of regulations by the Securities and Exchange Commission. While the JOBS Act technically required the SEC to issue the regulations no later than January 1, 2013, the SEC has yet to propose rules and it appears doubtful that any will be issued and effective before the end of the year.

While we await the SEC’s issuance of regulations implementing the crowdfunding exemption, the JOBS Act does lay out some of the basics:

  • The aggregate amount of securities sold by the issuer may not exceed $1 million in any 12-month period.
  • Additionally, the aggregate amount sold to any single investor by an issuer during the 12-month period preceding the date of the investment may not exceed:
    • The greater of $2,000 or 5% of the annual income or net worth of such investor, if either the annual income or the net worth of the investor is less than $100,000; or
    • 10% of annual income or net worth of such investor, not to exceed a maximum aggregate amount sold of $100,000, if either the annual income or net worth of the investor is equal to or more than $100,000.
  • Transactions must be made through a “funding portal” or a registered broker. Several additional requirements will apply to companies raising money under the crowdfunding exemption, which requirements will be more fully developed in the SEC rules. Funding portals will also be subject to additional regulations to be implemented by the SEC.
  • Securities sold under the crowdfunding exemption may not be sold again or transferred by the investor for one year unless the securities are being resold back to the issuer, sold to an accredited investor, sold as part of an offering registered with the SEC, transferred to a family member of the investor, or transfered in connection with the death or divorce of the investor.

Unlike the donation or reward-based crowdfunding currently being seen on sites like Kickstarter and Indiegogo, equity crowdfunding will give startups the ability to trade an equity interest in the company in exchange for an investment from an individual investor, and will allow the individual investor to obtain a percentage of ownership in the startup. Such equity crowdfunding has the potential to expand the pool of investors and capital available to startups beyond the traditional avenues currently in place, thus fostering increased entrepreneurial activity. However, we’ll have to continue to wait on the SEC to see if regulatory restrictions will allow equity crowdfunding to get off the ground in the U.S.


Roth: Military Utilizes Renewable Energy

The Department of Defense has for a long time recognized the power of renewable energy.

In fact, our military has invested heavily in renewable energy, not just because it makes economic sense, but because it makes national security sense.

Energy security indeed is national security. As a result, the military has led the charge in the United States and the world by finding ways to reduce its fuel consumption and invest heavily in technologies that increase fuel economies for our ships, planes and tanks.

Renewable technologies have even been deployed on the battlefield. The U.S. Army has provided its troops with solar battery packs that help them provide power at campsites and remote locations at a fraction of the cost of other dirty mobile generation. But perhaps most interestingly, these portable solar panels are lighter than other mobile power sources, giving the military the flexibility and agility that is needed on the battlefield. It is a lot easier to pack up a foldable solar panel than it is to load up a heavy diesel generator.

And this past week, the U.S. Army announced that 17 companies will be eligible to receive orders for wind energy, under an umbrella contract that is valued at $7 billion. The Pentagon announced that companies like Dominion Energy, Acciona and Duke Energy are eligible for the projects. Many of the companies on the list have wind development projects in Oklahoma.

Oklahoma is the home to four bases: Altus Air Force Base, Tinker AFB, Vance AFB and Fort Still. Obviously, these strategic military assets are also large consumers of power and play vibrant roles not only in protecting our country, but also in providing tremendous economic value to our communities and state. Importantly, all of these bases have also been phenomenal stewards and reputable members of the cities and towns where they are located. And now, the U.S. Army is again demonstrating its commitment to clean power.

This major announcement by the U.S. Army is a perfect example of two of Oklahoma’s greatest resources coming together to change the energy game. Indeed, the price environment and economic attributes of wind energy have never been better.

Amiss all of the bitter partisan bickering about how to reduce government spending, it seems our military has once again led the way – by looking to the market and taking advantage of renewable technology. It is compelling that the greatest military in the world has come to recognize the benefits of wind power. Perhaps there is a little something our policymakers can learn from the military. Always bet on America – American-made energy.