IECA ind enrg cons am
<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">INDUSTRIAL ENERGY CONSUMERS OF AMERICA</font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">===
</font><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font><div class="field field-name-field-date field-type-datetime field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="date-display-single" content="2017-06-04T00:00:00-07:00">June 4, 2017</span></font></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Lee Fang</font></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-source field-type-link-field field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://theintercept.com/2017/06/04/paris-accord-trump-lobby-ceo-withdraw/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">The Intercept</a></font></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"> <p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The
chief executives of Dow Chemical and Corning Inc., among other business
leaders, were portrayed in the media as environmental <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2017/06/01/ceos-make-final-pleas-to-trump-to-stay-in-paris-climate-agreement/?utm_term=.740027c1d01c" target="blank">champions</a> for opposing President Donald Trump’s move on Thursday to <a href="https://theintercept.com/2017/06/01/will-trumps-slow-mo-walkaway-world-in-flames-behind-him-finally-provoke-consequences-for-planetary-arson/" target="blank">withdraw</a> from the Paris climate agreement.</font>
<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Andrew N. Liveris, the chief executive of Dow, said in an initial statement that he was “<a href="http://www.mlive.com/news/saginaw/index.ssf/2017/06/dow_disappointed_in_trumps_dec.html" target="blank">disappointed</a>” with Trump’s decision. “Leaders don’t leave tables,” he later <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/02/dow-chemical-ceo-on-trump-climate-choice-leaders-dont-leave-tables.html" target="blank">said</a>, “Leaders stay.” In May, Liveris and Corning chief Wendell Weeks were among the <a href="http://bteam.org/announcements/30-major-ceos-call-on-trump-stay-in-paris/" target="_blank">signatories</a> to
an open letter in the Wall Street Journal in to “express our strong
support for the U.S. remaining in the Paris Climate Agreement.”</font>
<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Yet both companies back one of the few business groups to openly
lobby the Trump administration in support of withdrawing from the plan.</font>
<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The Industrial Energy Consumers of America</b>, a trade group that
lobbies on behalf of industry, petitioned the administration to consider
ditching the Paris accord. The membership packet for the group <a href="https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Wk40wsy5-MQJ:www.ieca-us.com/wp-content/uploads/IECA-Marketing-Packet_2015.pdf+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" target="_blank">lists</a> Dow and Corning as members</font></span>
<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“IECA fails to see the benefit of the Paris Climate Accord,” the group wrote in an April 24 <a href="https://www.eenews.net/assets/2017/04/26/document_daily_03.pdf" target="blank">letter</a> to G. David Banks, an environmental official in White House. The following month, IECA wrote another <a href="http://www.ieca-us.com/wp-content/uploads/05.15.17_Letter-to-Trump-Paris-Accord-1.pdf" target="blank">letter</a>,
this time directly to Trump, again blasting the accord for raising “the
prospects for loss of competitiveness and jobs” in energy-intensive
industries.</font>
<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Dow, Corning, and the IECA did not provide a comment when contacted
on Friday.<b> IECA members also include Koch Industries, Weyerhauser
Company, MillerCoors, Olin Corporation, and Alcoa, among others.</b></font>
<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">After Trumps withdrawal from the accord on Thursday, IECA <a href="http://www.ieca-us.com/wp-content/uploads/06.02.17_Paris-Climate-Accord-Press-Release-1.pdf" target="_blank">released</a> a
statement applauding the move. “The U.S. should never be a party to a
global or bilateral agreement that does not provide a level playing
field for manufacturing,” the statement read.</font></p>
</div></div></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">--
off bs
</font>
<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">–</font><div style="left: 307.798px; top: 457.6px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.868007);">The </div><div style="left: 339.796px; top: 457.6px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.901982);">Industrial Energy Consumers of America</div><div style="left: 637.6px; top: 457.6px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.831016);">’s (IECA) </div><div style="left: 702.791px; top: 457.6px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.885182);">President Paul Cicio </div><div style="left: 150px; top: 479.809px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.931607);">issued the following statement today </div><div style="left: 431.207px; top: 479.809px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.928929);">after President Trump announced his intention to </div><div style="left: 150px; top: 502.202px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.923964);">withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord.</div><div style="left: 150px; top: 546.987px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.897);">“The U.S. should never be</div><div style="left: 342.795px; top: 546.987px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.921834);"> a party to </div><div style="left: 423.185px; top: 546.987px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.922107);">a global or bilateral agreement that does not provide a level </div><div style="left: 149.982px; top: 569.38px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.920208);">playing field for manufacturing. The manufacturing sector has </div><div style="left: 614.177px; top: 569.38px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.915032);">a significant</div><div style="left: 702.975px; top: 569.38px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.923988);"> incentive to reduce </div><div style="left: 149.963px; top: 591.773px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.91305);">energy consumption and GHG emissions, it is called global competition. Global competition is </div><div style="left: 149.963px; top: 614.166px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.944358);">relen</div><div style="left: 188.566px; top: 614.166px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.905479);">tless and requires energy</div><div style="left: 375.768px; top: 614.166px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.932499);">-intensive trade</div><div style="left: 493.16px; top: 614.166px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.894013);">-exposed (EITE) industries to reduce energy </div><div style="left: 149.945px; top: 636.558px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.940917);">consumption to be competitive</div><div style="left: 383.938px; top: 636.558px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.899184);"> – or we cease to exist.</div><div style="left: 552.923px; top: 636.558px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.9387);">” </div><div style="left: 149.926px; top: 681.344px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.89446);">“The U.S. manufacturing sector’s GHG emissions are</div><div style="left: 539.123px; top: 681.344px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.905881);"> already</div><div style="left: 598.518px; top: 681.344px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.912652);"> 26 percent below 1973 levels</div><div style="left: 820.717px; top: 681.344px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.8881);"> and </div><div style="left: 149.908px; top: 703.553px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.933545);">the industrial sector </div><div style="left: 303.714px; top: 703.553px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.898192);">is the only sector whose GHG emissions are below 1973 levels.</div><div style="left: 770.4px; top: 702.0999999999998px; font-size: 11.6px; font-family: sans-serif;">1</div><div style="left: 776.2px; top: 703.6px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.842483);"> The U.S. </div><div style="left: 149.993px; top: 725.993px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.91547);">manufacturing sector’s GHG intensity is only 22 percent of China’s manufacturing sector.</div><div style="left: 811.1967999999999px; top: 725.9927999999999px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif;">”</div><div style="left: 819.5999999999999px; top: 724.4999999999998px; font-size: 11.6px; font-family: sans-serif;">2</div><div style="left: 149.991px; top: 770.786px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.909633);">“As </div><div style="left: 179.799px; top: 770.786px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.77292);">EITE </div><div style="left: 215.201px; top: 770.786px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.913715);">manufacturing companies, a level playing field is essential for</div><div style="left: 671.594px; top: 770.786px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.929012);"> our ability to invest and </div><div style="left: 149.991px; top: 793.178px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.899989);">create jobs in the U.S.</div><div style="left: 312.997px; top: 793.178px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.908138);"> If this does not occur, industrial GHG leakage will shift both GHG </div><div style="left: 149.991px; top: 815.571px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.889847);">emissions </div><div style="left: 227.4px; top: 815.571px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.901661);">and high paying </div><div style="left: 349.006px; top: 815.571px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.949976);">middle</div><div style="left: 400.599px; top: 815.571px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.848276);">-class</div><div style="left: 441.19px; top: 815.571px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.890019);"> jobs </div><div style="left: 480.382px; top: 815.571px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.97517);">to </div><div style="left: 500.382px; top: 815.571px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.959471);">other </div><div style="left: 545.591px; top: 815.571px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.960865);">countr</div><div style="left: 594.793px; top: 815.571px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.87475);">ies</div><div style="left: 615.401px; top: 815.571px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.909241);">, which accomplishes nothing </div><div style="left: 149.991px; top: 837.964px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.94751);">environmentally</div><div style="left: 272.186px; top: 837.964px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.906754);">.” </div><div style="left: 149.991px; top: 882.75px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.954928);">“We welcome the opportunity to work</div><div style="left: 438.798px; top: 882.75px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.923239);"> with the Trump Administration and Congress to </div><div style="left: 801.793px; top: 882.75px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.93275);">remov</div><div style="left: 849.798px; top: 882.75px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.870254);">e </div><div style="left: 149.991px; top: 905.142px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.937945);">regulatory </div><div style="left: 231.595px; top: 905.142px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.920845);">barriers </div><div style="left: 293.787px; top: 905.142px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.931114);">which </div><div style="left: 342.382px; top: 905.142px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.943041);">impair our ability to reduc</div><div style="left: 536.189px; top: 905.142px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.833912);">e GHG</div><div style="left: 583.974px; top: 905.142px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.89338);"> emissions, such as new source review </div><div style="left: 149.973px; top: 927.351px; font-size: 18.4px; font-family: sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.79416);">(NSR</div>)<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">cq Aside from higher transportation and heating bills, rising energy costs are expected to trigger price hikes for travel, shipping and petrochemical by-products such as nylon, plastics and fertilizer. “The price of natural gas has had a significant negative impact on manufacturers that compete globally,” says Paul Cicio, executive director of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA). For example, he says, about 80 percent of the cost of making plastics is the cost of ingredients, including natural gas. <em>(continued below)</em></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">--
</font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">2009</span>06170004
</font><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><h1 style="margin: 0px 0px 0.2em; padding: 0px; line-height: 28.6px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Industrial Energy Consumers Of America Launches Misleading Ad About Cap-And-Trade</font></h1><div class="post-pub-info" style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">June 17, 2009 12:20 pm ET</font></div><div class="post-summary-newformat" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 16.003px;"><p class="post-summary-intro-newformat" style="margin: 0px 0px 1.3em; padding: 0px; line-height: 19.5px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The Industrial Energy Consumers of America recently launched a radio ad campaign targeting the</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> American Clean Energy and Security Act</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. Rather than earnestly informing listeners about the proposed bill, the IECA relies of false statistics and debunked talking points to further muddy the waters surrounding this complex issue.</span></font></p><div class="post-video center" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center;"><div class="clear" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; clear: both;"><div class="post-full" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; clear: both;"><h3 style="text-align: left; line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">Industrial Energy Consumers Of America: Wrong On The Economic Impact Of Investing In Clean Energy</strong></font></h3><blockquote style="line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 20px 20px; padding: 10px 15px 10px 10px; border-width: 1px; border-style: solid; border-color: rgb(230, 236, 242); -moz-border-top-colors: none; -moz-border-right-colors: none; -moz-border-bottom-colors: none; -moz-border-left-colors: none; border-image: initial; background-color: rgb(250, 251, 253);"><p style="text-align: left; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 19.5px; margin-bottom: 0px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">IECA Ad Claim: </strong>"We're in a deep and painful recession. Local businesses in Michigan are struggling to survive, and we're losing more jobs each day. Instead of focusing on real economic priorities, many in Congress want to pass an $845 billion global warming tax." [IECA Ad airing in Michigan, accessed 6/17/09]</font></p></blockquote><p style="text-align: left; line-height: 19.5px; margin: 0px 0px 1.3em; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;"><em style="font-weight: inherit;">FACT</em>: Investment In Clean Energy Technology Creates FOUR TIMES As Many Jobs As An Investment In Oil & Gas. </strong>According to the Center for American Progress: "Spending $100 billion within the domestic oil industry would create only about 542,000 jobs in the United States. A green infrastructure investment program would create nearly four times more jobs than spending the same amount of money on oil energy resources. And again, spending on oil offers no benefits in transitioning the U.S. economy toward a low-carbon future, while perpetuating the economic and national security vulnerabilities by continuing to rely on oil for the lifeblood of our economy." [Center for American Progress, "Green Recovery," <a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanprogress.org%2Fissues%2F2008%2F09%2Fpdf%2Fgreen_recovery.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">September 2008</a>]</font></p><ul class="unIndentedList" style="line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 5px 15px 20px; padding: 0px; clear: both; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">Michigan Alone Would Gain More Than 60,000 Jobs From Increased Investment In Clean Energy. </strong>According to the Center for American Progress, Michigan would gain 61,394 jobs from its share in a $100 billion Green Recovery program. [Center for American Progress, "Green Recovery,"<a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanprogress.org%2Fissues%2F2008%2F09%2Fpdf%2Fgreen_recovery.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">September 2008</a>]</font></li></ul><p style="text-align: left; line-height: 19.5px; margin: 0px 0px 1.3em; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;"><em style="font-weight: inherit;">FACT</em>: Every State In The U.S. Stands To Gain Jobs From An Investment In Renewable Energy. </strong>According to the Center for American Progress, "each state is now poised to gain substantial benefits through our economic recovery program to promote green investments in both the private and public sectors. Regardless of a state's topography or climate, major opportunities for green investments exist now and will grow with time. These investments, in turn, will become a powerful engine of job creation as the United States advances toward building a low-carbon economy." [Center for American Progress, "Green Recovery," <a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanprogress.org%2Fissues%2F2008%2F09%2Fpdf%2Fgreen_recovery.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">September 2008</a>]</font></p><h3 style="text-align: left; line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">Industrial Energy Consumers Of America: Wrong On The Economic Impact Of Investing In Clean Energy</strong></font></h3><blockquote style="line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 20px 20px; padding: 10px 15px 10px 10px; border-width: 1px; border-style: solid; border-color: rgb(230, 236, 242); -moz-border-top-colors: none; -moz-border-right-colors: none; -moz-border-bottom-colors: none; -moz-border-left-colors: none; border-image: initial; background-color: rgb(250, 251, 253);"><p style="text-align: left; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 19.5px; margin-bottom: 0px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">IECA Ad Claim: </strong>"Experts agree that such a program will lead to millions of additional job losses, cost the average family up to $4,300 per year by 2012, and dramatically increase the cost of electricity and gasoline." [IECA Ad airing in Michigan, accessed 6/17/09]</font></p></blockquote><p style="text-align: left; line-height: 19.5px; margin: 0px 0px 1.3em; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">Even Before Markup, The EPA Estimated Cap-And-Trade Bill Would Cost Less Than $150 Annually. </strong>According to the <em style="font-weight: inherit;">Wall Street Journal: </em>"The Environmental Protection Agency presented its analysis of the Waxman-Markey bill on Tuesday and said <strong style="font-style: inherit;">the contentious plan would cost households less than $150 a year. </strong>That's a far cry from some of the dueling price tags that have been bandied about." [<em style="font-weight: inherit;">Wall Street Journal</em>, <a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.wsj.com%2Fenvironmentalcapital%2F2009%2F04%2F21%2Fclimate-change-bill-will-cost-just-pennies-a-day-epa-says%2F" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">4/21/09</a>; emphasis added]</font></p><ul class="unIndentedList" style="line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 5px 15px 20px; padding: 0px; clear: both; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">EPA: Markup Changes In Bill Decrease "The Impact On Household Energy Bills." </strong>According to an EPA report: "<em style="font-weight: inherit;">The change in early-year cap levels lowers allowance prices slightly. </em>In the draft bill, the year-2020 emissions cap for covered sources was set at 20% below the year-2005 level. In H.R. 2454, the year-2020 cap is changed to 17% below the year-2005 level. (The 2012, 2030, and 2050 targets remain the same.) That relaxation of the cap, by itself, will lower allowance prices by 3%. Accordingly, that single change will lower the cost of the legislation for households, in part by lowering the impact on household energy bills." [EPA, accessed <a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.epa.gov%2Fclimatechange%2Feconomics%2Fpdfs%2FEPAMemoonHR2454.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">5/27/09</a>; emphasis and parentheses original]</font></li></ul><p style="text-align: left; line-height: 19.5px; margin: 0px 0px 1.3em; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">By 2025, A Clean Energy Standard Would Save $95 Billion On Energy & Gas Bills. </strong>According to the Center for American Progress: "A national renewable electricity standard, a key piece of the clean energy legislation currently before Congress, would save households and businesses in every state billions of dollars in electricity and natural gas bills... The numbers come from the Union of Concerned Scientists, who earlier this year analyzed a renewable electricity standard that would aim to have 25 percent of our electricity come from renewable sources by 2025. They found that this standard would save families and businesses $95 billion in electricity and natural gas bills through 2030 and spur new investments and hundreds of thousands of new clean-energy jobs." [Center for American Progress,<a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanprogress.org%2Fissues%2F2009%2F05%2Fpdf%2Ffurnas_cleanenergyelecbills.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">5/19/09</a>]</font></p><h3 style="text-align: left; line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">Industrial Energy Consumers Of America: Wrong On Jobs</strong></font></h3><blockquote style="line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 20px 20px; padding: 10px 15px 10px 10px; border-width: 1px; border-style: solid; border-color: rgb(230, 236, 242); -moz-border-top-colors: none; -moz-border-right-colors: none; -moz-border-bottom-colors: none; -moz-border-left-colors: none; border-image: initial; background-color: rgb(250, 251, 253);"><p style="text-align: left; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 19.5px; margin-bottom: 0px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">IECA Ad Claim: </strong>"More U.S. manufacturing jobs shipped overseas to countries like China and India. We're told we need to make sacrifices, but Michigan workers and families will end up paying the consequences." [IECA Ad airing in Michigan, accessed 6/17/09]</font></p></blockquote><p style="text-align: left; line-height: 19.5px; margin: 0px 0px 1.3em; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;"><em style="font-weight: inherit;">FACT:</em> Investment In Renewable Energy Has Already Salvaged Many Manufacturing Facilities In Michigan And Across The Country. </strong>Across America, factories and plants abandoned by the old economy have been re-tooled and re-opened to satisfy the growing demand for new energy technologies. For instance, once hopeless manufacturing plants in Pennsylvania, Iowa, <strong style="font-style: inherit;">and Michigan</strong>have re-energized their communities by creating jobs and leading the charge toward a new energy future. [Bloomberg, <a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bloomberg.com%2Fapps%2Fnews%3Fpid%3D20601087%26sid%3DakjbUdlowd9c%26refer%3Dhome" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">4/2/09</a>; <em style="font-weight: inherit;">Star Tribune</em>, <a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.startribune.com%2Fpolitics%2F43414237.html" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">4/22/09</a>; <em style="font-weight: inherit;">Grand Rapids Press</em>, <a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.mlive.com%2Fgrpress%2F2008%2F03%2Fgov_jennifer_granholm_tours_un.html" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">3/6/08</a>; emphasis added]</font></p><p style="text-align: left; line-height: 19.5px; margin: 0px 0px 1.3em; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;"><em style="font-weight: inherit;">FACT:</em> China Is Investing SIX TIMES As Much As America In New Energy Technologies, Amounting To $12.6 Million Every HOUR. </strong>According to the Center for American Progress: "China's leaders are investing $12.6 million every hour to green their economy... This massive stimulus plan will spend over 3 percent of China's 2008 gross domestic product annually in 2009 and 2010 on green investments-more than six times America's green stimulus spending as a percentage of our respective economies. This is about $12.6 million every hour over the next two years." [Center for American Progress, <a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanprogress.org%2Fissues%2F2009%2F04%2Fglobal_competition.html" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">4/20/09</a>]</font></p><h3 style="text-align: left; line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">What Is The Industrial Energy Consumers Of America?</strong></font></h3><blockquote style="line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 20px 20px; padding: 10px 15px 10px 10px; border-width: 1px; border-style: solid; border-color: rgb(230, 236, 242); -moz-border-top-colors: none; -moz-border-right-colors: none; -moz-border-bottom-colors: none; -moz-border-left-colors: none; border-image: initial; background-color: rgb(250, 251, 253);"><p style="text-align: left; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 19.5px; margin-bottom: 0px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">IECA Ad: </strong>"Paid for by the Industrial Energy Consumers of America." [IECA Ad airing in Michigan, accessed 6/17/09]</font></p></blockquote><p style="text-align: left; line-height: 19.5px; margin: 0px 0px 1.3em; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;">Members Of The Industrial Energy Consumers of America Include:</strong></font></p><ul style="line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 5px 15px 20px; padding: 0px; clear: both; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" type="disc"><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Abbott Laboratories</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Air Products and Chemicals</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">BASF Corporation</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Dow Corning Corporation</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Eastman Chemical Company</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Evonik Degussa Corporation</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">FMC Corporation</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">PPG Industries</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rain CII Carbon, LLC</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">SSAB North American</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">LyondellBasell Industries</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Nucor</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ormet</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rohm and Haas (Dow Chemical)</font></li><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Westlake Chemical Corporation</font></li></ul><p style="text-align: left; line-height: 19.5px; margin: 0px 0px 1.3em; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[Industrial Energy Consumers of America, accessed <a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieca-us.com%2Fmembers.html" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">5/4/09</a>]</font></p><p style="text-align: left; line-height: 19.5px; margin: 0px 0px 1.3em; padding: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Paul Cicio, President Of IECA, Met With Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force.</strong><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> As reported by the</span><em style="font-weight: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Washington Post</em><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, "Vice President Cheney's energy task force had a busy spring in 2001. While drafting a national energy policy, the group, chaired by Cheney, met with approximately 300 groups and individuals." Paul Cicio's meeting occurred on March 7, 2001. [</span><em style="font-weight: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Washington Post</em><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, accessed </span><a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-srv%2Fpolitics%2Fdocuments%2Fcheney_energy_task_force.html" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">6/17/09</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">]</span></font></p><ul class="unIndentedList" style="line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 5px 15px 20px; padding: 0px; clear: both; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Under The Bush-Cheney Energy Plan, Average Household Energy Costs Rose Over $1,100.</strong><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">According to a report conducted by the Center for American Progress: "Former President George W. Bush's energy policies, which today's conservatives would continue, plowed billions of dollars of subsidies into dirty energy while neglecting clean energy reform. What effect did this have on American families? Spiraling gasoline and electricity prices, a nation more dependent on oil and coal, and more pollution than ever before. Bush oversaw a lackluster economic expansion even before the Bush recession of December 2007. Over this period, </font><strong style="font-style: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">the typical annual American household expenditure on electricity rose more than $170, and the typical annual American expenditure on gasoline rose more than $960</strong><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> (in 2007 dollars). Note that the gasoline price increases listed here </font><em style="font-weight: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">do not </em><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">include the unprecedented $147 per barrel of oil and $4.11 gasoline prices that occurred in the summer of 2008. [Center for American Progress, "The Bill From Bush's Broken Energy System," </font><a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanprogress.org%2Fissues%2F2009%2F04%2Fpdf%2FBushsBrokenEnergySystem.pdf" title="http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/04/pdf/BushsBrokenEnergySystem.pdf" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">April 2009</a><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">; emphasis added]</font></font></li></ul><ul class="unIndentedList" style="line-height: 16.003px; margin: 0px 5px 15px 20px; padding: 0px; clear: both; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="text-align: left; margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; list-style: disc; line-height: 18.2px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong style="font-style: inherit;"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Under The Bush-Cheney Energy Plan, U.S. Became More Dependent On Imported Oil From OPEC Countries</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. </span></strong><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">According to the Energy Information Administration, U.S. petroleum imports from OPEC countries increased from an average of 168,157 in 2001 to 181,729 in 2008. [Energy Information Administration, accessed </span><a href="http://politicalcorrection.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Ftonto.eia.doe.gov%2Fdnav%2Fpet%2Fhist%2Fmttimxx1m.htm" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">6/10/09</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">]</span></font></li></ul><div style="text-align: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="line-height: 18.2px;">=</span></font></div><div><div class="post-list-item" style="margin: 0px; padding: 20px 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-color: rgb(213, 220, 226); border-bottom-style: dotted; line-height: 16.003px; text-align: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p class="post-list-item-date" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; line-height: 15.47px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">June 17, 2009 12:20 pm ET filed under Fact Check</font></p><h2 style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 19.8055px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/200906170004" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">Industrial Energy Consumers Of America Launches Misleading Ad About Cap-And-Trade</a></font></h2><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 16.926px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Industrial Energy Consumers of America recently launched a radio ad campaign targeting the American Clean Energy and Security Act. Rather than earnestly informing listeners about the proposed bill, the IECA relies of false statistics and debunked talking points to further muddy the waters surrounding this complex issue.</font></p><p class="post-list-item-links" style="margin: 20px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 16.926px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/200906170004" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">Continue reading</a></font></p></div><div class="post-list-item" style="margin: 0px; padding: 20px 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-color: rgb(213, 220, 226); border-bottom-style: dotted; line-height: 16.003px; text-align: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p class="post-list-item-date" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; line-height: 15.47px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">May 29, 2009 5:13 pm ET filed under Fact Check</font></p><h2 style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 19.8055px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/200905290008" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">Head Of Industrial Energy Consumers Of America Falsely Claims ACES "Assures Continued Loss Of Manufacturing Jobs"</a></font></h2><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 16.926px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">On May 29, 2009, Paul Cicio, head of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA), wrote a column in Roll Call falsely claiming that the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) "assures continued loss of manufacturing jobs." In the same article, Cicio makes <b>false claims about the bill's impact on the industry,</b> the participation in emission reduction by other countries, and his organization's motives.</font></p><p class="post-list-item-links" style="margin: 20px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 16.926px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/200905290008" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">Continue reading</a></font></p></div><div class="post-list-item" style="margin: 0px; padding: 20px 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-color: rgb(213, 220, 226); border-bottom-style: dotted; line-height: 16.003px; text-align: left;"><p class="post-list-item-date" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; line-height: 15.47px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">May 05, 2009 9:48 am ET filed under Fact Check</font></p><h2 style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 19.8055px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/200905050001" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">American Energy Solutions Group's National Energy Summit: Another Excuse for the GOP to Flack for the Oil Industry</a></font></h2><p style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 16.926px;"><font style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);" size="4" face="Times New Roman">At a time when congress should be focused on finding tomorrow's energy sources, Republicans are literally inviting the oil industry to Capitol Hill so they can lobby for the status quo. Every single witness showcased at the GOP's National Energy Summit has strong ties to Big Oil.</font></p><p class="post-list-item-links" style="margin: 20px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 16.926px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/200905050001" style="text-decoration: none; outline: medium none; font-weight: bold;">Continue reading</a></font></p></div></div><div style="text-align: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="line-height: 18.2px;">==</span></font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>