he was involved in iran contra. he was a very prominent figure in the cia at the time. they required intelligence that and was somehow moderating that intelligence was conveniently forthcoming. >> formal -- a former capitol hill staffer writing about the white house in "the party is over," tonight on "q&a." next, energy executives discuss how transportation and infrastructure can affect energy production in the economy. from an all-day conference hosted by the u.s. chamber of commerce, this is one hour. >> thank you to all of you who are here. welcome to my panel, so that they can get set and talk to you a bit about why we are starting with the question of energy. we know that america is on the

cusp of an energy revolution. putsob energy revolution energy front and center as a way to increase the economy, drive revenues to balance the budget. we know that we need to do that with smart policy and resisting the necessary regulations. we have a lot of efforts at the chamber. our regulatory reform initiative. one thing that we do not talk about as often is the fact that we can produce a lot of energy in this country, but we have to be able to move it. moving it is going to require a lot in transportation. therating our panel today, chief economist for the american petroleum institute. bios for your speakers, i am going to assume that you're reading is done and i will share something with you that he shared with me before we started. john is a bit of a petroleum historian. he worked on a pipeline before

he, as he said, gave up a honest living to become an economist. his other choice, by the way, was meteorologist. it works out well. on the other hand, you never know who is going to be right. he comes from a family that worked on pipelines in the united states. we have a terrific panel who can talk about all aspects of the transportation system. john, without further redo, i will turn it over to you and thank you. >> i really appreciate this opportunity. this is an important topic that has been important to the oil and gas industry for a long time. i did work on a pipeline as a kid. the first major pipeline in the united states was the tidewater, running all the way into new jersey. it was developed by independent oil because basically at that point transportation meant rail. john d rockefeller have monopolies on rail transportation.

handdug this pipeline by and finished it in 1882. my brother and my father also worked on a pipeline, the alaska line, so we really have recognized how important this is for 130 years. we need to move forward with improvements,l highways, basically all of these things, because we have the energy here, and with technology and everything that has developed recently, we know we can do it create we are committed to moving forward. we just commissioned a major study. i will send you to our website that talks about what infrastructure adjustments can be made and what the benefits are, because basically we are talking about benefits on the order of one million jobs, gdp

increases of over one hundred billion dollars, revenue increases for federal governments, and a lot of really positive things, and as the secretary mentioned, we need to do this now, not later, and we are prepared as an industry to move forward on this, so we look for your help in terms of going forward. i would like to have a brief conversation with the panelists about the sector and where they think we should go, and we will start from left to right and then open it up for discussion. >> good morning. i am the executive director of the louisiana highway one coalition, which is a coalition gulfakeholders down on the coast and southeast louisiana, a little west of new orleans. and south, but

basically, it is a group of stakeholders which are seeking to secure the highway access to port,rom sean -- to a which is the busiest energy port that is servicing the deepwater gulf of mexico, and about 18% of the nation's energy at the end of the day is supported by this one coastal road that runs down onlye port, that sits at two feet above sea level. this would bethat relied on to surface -- service the billions in investment, the stakeholders said we needed to get together and form a coalition that will keep on top of our federal officials and in securing this high-priority corridor as critical energy access, so our hasition through the years

applied to various -- let me see here -- various programs of the federal government, including the projects of regional and national significance that the u.s. dot has had for several years. is no programe big enough for a highway of 300 million to a live for right now, because the grant program run by dot has approximately $500 million per year for all 50 states, so if you do the math, that is only $10 million per state. you can hardly build an intersection on the interstate for that, says states are having to come forward with clever ways to a dress their critical infrastructure needs, and in our project, we are having to thatnt a coastal road crosses the last levy in that

state that is outlined in blue up here and come down to our section which is completed in ofck, but eight miles running a two-lane highway that can withstand the 100-year hurricane impacts, a very strong highway, is going to cost $340 million, so thinking out-of-the-box, we are going to break up our project into small segments, and we are asking industry to help us out, and industry has come to the table. we are going to put a project out to bid next year, one of our segments where industry is bringing $6 million to the table, to the state, simply as a , andion to get this done that incentivize to our government to pledge $40 million. move forwardto with another segment the year

after that, and then we're going to be left with a huge segment in the middle costing $215 example so this is one of all of the projects that you know of in all 50 states. i believe the first year that the tiger program that the federal government offered had $50 billion applied for, and they only had $1.5 billion to award. had $9t recent round billion applied for, and again only $500 million to award. the need is tremendous. know, as a coalition, we are certainly going to support a larger program through the u.s. government department of transportation. specifically. projects of regional and national significance. know, it is not that the dot does not get it. they just said, look, our hands

are tied. for $10k to us and ask million or $20 million, but you have got to get the rest committed by your state, and as you know, many states are backlogged with their infrastructure needs. louisiana is $12 billion d, and it is a very competitive process, especially when you are going to and oil port. it is not a population center. so my highway project has to compete with all of the needs of new orleans or baton rouge or shreveport. it is important that the nation look at how important energy is and how that relates to our energy needs for this country, our energy sustainability, and i was encouraged that there was a provision that in the next round

of funding for the grants of regional and national significance, they are actually going to include a new criteria. aboutg them to conclude the contribution to our highway national security. we think that is an important are into ask when you looking at grant applications, but for everyone out here who has their own needs, consider going to the industries in your community. we were surprised when we went to oil and gas and said, will oilhelp, because we know and gas already pays billions in royalties to the federal and this you know, really is not their responsibility, but it is not their fault that the treasury cannot directly reinvest that back into the infrastructure that makes that possible. it is just politics and how the

system was set up. but i think we will all have to think out-of-the-box in moving forward in getting our projects and support a bigger program at the federal level that can address the national needs of our country. thanks, my name is stephen brown. i run the federal affairs office for a corporation that is an independent refining and primarilycompany, focused on the west coast. 855ave about a capacity of million barrels per day capacity. we are the largest refiner of any type in the western united states, if you count alaska and utah, which we do. i was encouraged by the title of the panel today, about being ready for revolution. dating myself, i was taken back to a jefferson volunteers," and

we are not ready for a revolution, we are. 60% is produced in north america. that is an absolutely startling statistic. and the only way to make that in times of building the american manufacturing renaissance in this country is the seamless transportation of that energy to where it needs to get to to be utilized by manufacturing centers throughout the country, so the refining isustry is complex, but it also very simple. you need to move crude product from the well head to a distribution terminal to a refinery back to a distribution terminal and eventually to all of us as consumers. it is not any more involved than that, but, of course, that simplistic treatment masks a lot

of complexity that goes on here, and what i called it is rance purgation provides an important bridge to manage the geography of production with the geography of refinery. hasgeography of production changed. we used to be dependent upon a tremendous amount of offshore, a stillun north slope. we utilize those particular sources of energy production in this country, but the shift in the last five to seven years is now not completely back to onshore. we look at fields we did not know about years ago. one in north carolina that we are familiar with. probably people are less familiar with one in allah ratto. there is one in texas, and there is something in california that those of us in the industry are all looking at with pretty big eyes and a pretty big appetite. the point is, the geography of

the production in this country has shifted, and as a result, transportation is the bridge by which that is going to get to where it needs to get to in order to be utilized. the geographyme, of refining is a little bit more distributed, but it is heavily concentrated on the u.s. gulf coast. i want to think out of about 115 or 120 existing refineries today, john, i think 43 or so are located in the u.s. gulf coast area. another 25 are on the u.s. gulf coast. we call25 are in what the midwest, and then the rest are in the rocky mountains, and onew are still holding on the east coast. the problem is that the product coming out of the production fields needs to be able to get nothese refining centers once in a while, not once a week. every single hour of every single day, 24 hours a day,

seven days a week. all of these refining o,mpanies, something called s& which stands for supply and optimization. these guys, these are all of the crude slates i have coming in here. my job is to make sure that for every refinery i have responsibility for, i am feeding that refinery a steady diet of the types of crude that that refinery is configured for to run optimally. each refinery is different. not all refineries are created equal. some are built for light sweet, some are built for heavy sour. we are investing a tremendous amount of money, hundreds of billions of dollars, to be able to manufacture and optimize different types of these crudes that we are developing constantly. at the same time, we obviously have to use a tremendous amount

of different modes of transportation to move this stuff. there are refineries relocated -- located along the coasts, and we use tankers and barges up and down the coasts and from port to port and from foreign services out. hopefully, we will get into a little jones act discussion later, and we can't talk about how that impacts here. we also used trucks. in utah, for example, there is a basin.-- there is a consistency of a candle. we are beginning to look at a project that would move by pipeline, but currently truck 25es it, out of the ace and refineries located in salt lake city. as a great example, the role that trucks play in the movement of product, whether it is crude or finish from point a or point

b, pipelines obviously play a crucial role in moving products from the dock, when a ship pulls in and unloads its oil, they have to get into the refinery, and then it has to get from the refinery back out to a distribution center, as we mentioned before, and then to a gas station. one, the lastinal and most important one, the one that has generated a lot of news, and that is rail. i would say our sectors are in a marriage of convenience right now, and it is working pretty well. like all relationships, we have our issues. we are receiving counseling daily from the federal government, but i would say this. inould say there is no one these agencies and no one within the respective set her's that is not fully cognizant of the responsibility that we have to move our product as safely as

humanly possible, as efficiently as humanly possible, as quickly as humanly possible, and because we are all united behind these three particular goals, i think the relationship is going well, and we look forward to a couple of hearings coming up in the house, next week, and i think we can do this the following week, where these issues are going to be laid out there. the each have very different responsibilities. ed's job is to make sure his guys are running the tracks and the operations, routing things of that nature. and our responsibility as shippers is to make sure this product is properly classified and that it is what it is we say it is. we have a responsibility as shippers to make sure this is moved as efficiently and as safely as possible. when it is loaded from the field

into our tank ours and when our tank ours are unloaded at refineries. were aight now, there certain number of loads, and today i believe it is close to 400,000. in 2013. you can do the math better than i've, and that is why i went to law school, he does i could not do math, but it is tremendous growth, and i think it is a real success story. industry setters are extremely committed to making this work, and i think it is not a flash in the pan phenomenon, and it is working quite well. with that, we will stop and get into some q&a. you gave my speech, but i am going to give it anyway. i wish you were sitting at the dais at the hearing next week.

the association of american railroads, primarily be freight railroads of america, and amtrak is a member, a very important member, but our emphasis is mostly on the freight side. a couple of points, number one, in our sister and brother modes, we are privately owned and privately maintained. we get the privilege of paying taxes on our right of way. 550ave invested over billion dollars of private capital back into the network. $.40 of every dollar over the last decade, last year alone $25 billion, probably the same this year, if not more, and that gives us a different result to look through as we take a look at various programs, and i think it is important to realize that we are privately owned. we are well on the way

to energy independence. my thesis is that the freight railroads are necessary towards getting towards independence, but the corollary to that thesis is that a safe, efficient, financially viable freight railroad is not enough. we need a safe, reliable, financially viable pipeline industry. viable financially towing and barge industry, and, yes, a safe and viable and reliable trucking industry. modes if we are going to reach energy independence, which begs the question. can we do it safely? safely and doing it can do it safely, but we can do better. as stephen mentioned, we think

this is a shared responsibility through and the user. if you are going to lower the risk in any area, the first thing you want to do is prevention. that is on us. it is up to the freight railroads to prevent accidents from happening, and, quite frankly, we do a pretty good job. 99.8% lastexactly year made it from origin to destination without an accidental release. we went to get to 100%, but until we get there, we need to pay attention to what secretary fox called low probability, high impact events, so we are going to continue to do anything we , and aour industry couple of weeks ago, we were asked to take a look at a couple likesrational things, beef, more track inspections, breaking issues, using a routing tool to try to determine the

movet, secure route to crude by rail. we ultimately report back in the and i think we, can step up and improve safety on the operating side, but we also then have to worry about mitigation if and when an accident does occur, and i just want to say hats off. is goingny voluntarily to phase out the legacy d.o.t. thetank car and move up to 1232 car that was adopted in 2011. again, a voluntary effort. theid not wait for regulators. we adopted a much safer tank car , and we appreciate that, and thank you for doing that. the final piece of safety is containment. last year, we trained 22,000 emergency responders around the

country, 20,000 of them in their communities, but we took thousands out to web low, colorado, where we have a training center, for some hands-on experience, and we will be ramping back up, i believe, more in 2014. a final question then is if we have the capacity. moving it safely, and if we can move what needs to be moved. inhave grown to over 400,000 2013. that number will continue to grow. but i draw the parallel. what we were able to do for the coal industry. not a whole lot of rail lines going up into wyoming. washe time the development done, we were moving over 70 unit trains. this is the same way we move crude. , and the coal that

provides the electricity. over the last decade, we made improvements for the ethanol industry. it went from the 25 thousand, 30,000 car range at the end of the 1990's up. a lot of that was new capacity meeting, -- needed. a lot of it was in rural america, and iowa, that was a big change for our shipping capabilities and shipping network, but we were able to do that, getting back to point number one, because we are privately owned, and we are there to make the investments to support our customers and our partners, so with that, thank you. of great exposition, and if you think of business cycles, the oil industry only existed because of rail in the

beginning, and it is only when pipes came in later. and then our final presentation. >> hanks, everyone, for coming, and i appreciate the opportunity to speak. we have heard some interesting comments so far about what is happening from a crude development standpoint. i represent a gas alliance, really the 21 largest independent producers of natural gas in north america, so we will talk a little bit about the supply-side of natural gas, and we have heard about crude and how that is changing the game, and then talk about natural gas and some of the ways we are starting to see natural gas and deployed in the transportation industry specifically. edittle bit about what talked about and what stephen said, with natural gas, it really has been a dramatic change in the last four or five years. what we are finding beneath our

feet in north america is really starting to revolutionize what natural gas can do, moving away from strictly industrial and manufacturing type capabilities, but also looking at transportation opportunities. what we have been able to prove last24% increase in the two years, proven reserves we can access. he had not fully recognized that, but this is what we are talking about being able to access. looking at long-term price stability, even with this spike that we have recognized, even with the new demand opportunities that we are seeing, long-term natural gas btu's, we are talking about a stable fuel that is produced domestically. great graphic, just showing how much we are looking at, how much we are utilizing natural gas to move

goods and services around the country. i think we will hear from high number of folks today. i will not try to steal too much thunder, but we will hear from a lot of folks about how they are starting to shift to natural gas to power their operations, and we will talk about some of those industries and how this works out, but when i think about where is natural gas going, what are we looking at right now, total consumption is forward-looking in 2018, and it per day, lightcf duty being the sort of holy grail, if we can figure out how to use it. but a medium-term opportunity for us to utilize natural gas is rail,t heavy-duty truck, mining type of opportunities, and i will talk a little bit about how we are seeing that happen. .eally where the opportunity is

so to give you an idea, that is not even 1/8 of what we can produce on a daily basis, so we are really not talking about a large amount of production world would've to what our members are able to produce on a daily basis and what they are finding and production. some of the companies that you might know that are making the switch, we have had companies like pepsi and frito-lay making gas.nge to natural others are testing natural gas, like for locomotives, and another has launched in the gulf andervice deep water wells, running on natural gas. ups is making large commitments to natural gas, so we are starting to see this manifest in the fleets, and the benefits are obvious from a cost savings opportunity, and what we are seeing, the fleets measure

first, and then looking at a cleaner for transportation fuel, that kind of opportunity, and i would be remiss if i did not talk a little about how this overlays with the existing quark, and many of you are moving goods and basis, where daily it is easy to create the fueling infrastructure. nearly theave infrastructure necessary to support the gulf coast as we think about these vessels that we want to run on natural gas. but it is coming, and as we think about where we are moving goods and services on a daily basis, this infrastructure is soon to follow, if there are so really, a large opportunity, and then lastly, just as i think about this, as i was asked this morning, how do exports effect of this, and i get asked this pretty regularly,

how do exports impact the price whole, and is on a surprised a couple of presenters today when i say we are still importing natural gas. there is pipeline natural gas coming into the united states. we are yet to be a net exporter of natural gas, and we will not be a net exporter of natural gas ,ntil we see facilities open up and they are approving a few more, but until we see that happen, we will not actually be a net exporter, and not until 2020 will be really be exporting any natural gas of any large, measurable volume, and that is only two about the tune of five bcf per day. just given the amount of demand we are seeing and the increase in demand we are seeing for natural gas coming did than its

low cost. i look forward to answering any questions you may have. >> thank you very much. i guess i have to put my economist hat on, i guess what happens with the price is how flat is the supply curve, and if you have a flat supply curve, you do not have much of an impact, and studies have pretty much confirmed that. what i would like to start with we have talked about -- please, i cannot guarantee i can answer, but, ask away. we have laid out what we think is important to be done, what we think the economic benefits are, and as the secretary mentioned, however, we do face challenges as we move forward. we have adopted and him -- an enormous educational outreach, informing the public about the reality of energy and what needs to be done in terms of our perspectives, and you may see

our commercials in terms of sunday morning shows, but we recognize we need to gain support across the country, so maybe some of you can comment on the types of things you think need to be done. i love your commercials. they are wonderful, so if we can start maybe with that? >> as a matter of fact, we are in the field right now, trying to figure out exactly what that message should be, because we that there is a lack of confidence in some circles about whether or not we can move this crude by rail safely. aree is a recognition we finding that america wants to be energy independent, and it has to move. it is up to us, i think, to try to get this torry out, that we are focused on safety, that we are invested in safety, and that this will be the safest year on

record after 2012 was the safest year on record. we need to figure out how to make that case, because not trainody who sees a unit of 10 cars going through their neighborhood thinks that is a good idea, and the question is, how do we communicate with the local emergency responders, with local mayors, like the mayor of chicago, governors, and others about what we are doing and work with them, so that is something we are focusing on. >> communication from a refining perspective, i think our sector has traditionally done a very poor job with explaining what we do, how we do it, and why it is important to everyone around the country completely. a lot of people have no concept of what it takes when they flip the light switch where that electricity comes from, how it gets there. ,hen they fill up their car

their gas tank, at a gas station, we did a poll, in some believe there is a reservoir of gas sitting beneath the station. on us. we should have been out there talking more proactively about the positive benefit we bring every day to american life, and it is not just the refining industry. atis the energy industry large areas without that, very little else is possible in this country. people fight wars and have fought wars over the history of mankind, and not over telecommunications, not over health care, but over energy and a country's ability to access it and use it. because without it, you will not be a country very long. one of the things we are working on is to better utilize all of our employees, regardless of where they are, as ambassadors back in the communities that they work in.

who better to articulate what it, thannd how they do the people who actually do it? so that is what we have been working on over the last couple of years. standpoint,oduction we are laser focused on safety, and really, from an educational standpoint, we cannot do enough to help get the message out there and explain exactly how we are doing. to stevens point, for a long time, we probably did not do a real good job of explaining how horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracking works and the safety behind that and the measures that are taken to reject groundwater and protect environmental issues that come well, andsurface, as we have made a concerted effort to get that message out there and help provide any sort of information that government agencies are looking for to provide any information around

methane and those sorts of things, really to make sure that we are a partner with the thernment and also with local agencies in helping them understand any of the risks or concerns that they might have as well. >> i think part of addressing it oneducating the policymakers the tremendous need this nation has with the backlog, infrastructure needs, and coming find that.ay to that has been the challenge for years. secretary fox talked about conveying that need to members of congress, committee members, and that is what we are focusing on, bringing real examples of projects and what that means for american jobs and american energy security. >> thank you very much. now i think i will open it up for questions from the floor. there are some microphones

around. if you're interested in asking can ask a you question, and please identify yourself and your question and if it is directed to an individual up here, please identify them. so we will do that if anyone is interested. >> john. >> yes. >> so i must be the official first question asker. for henri.e is you have been working for years to make sure the ports are connected to the economy. are your biggest frustrations in doing that, and if you had to distill down your challenges into a couple of recommendations for washington, what would that be? >> i think the biggest frustration is that the previous highway bills really did not recognize the need for investing

, and igy infrastructure think we are making progress on there is finally a provision that directs the u.s. awarding grants, whether it is to rail projects or whether it is to highway projects, torts, to recognize the contributions such a project makes to the country's long-term energy security, so i think we are making progress on that. i think the second major hurdle is going to be the transportation trust fund, and the fixed that it is in and how that is going to impact the 50 states is it is not addressed, and it is only going to challenge our states further in

being able to address capacity projects that are needed or , such asation projects and ine, in our case, think that there are projects like that all over the coast and this nation that need to get done. the challenge will be finding a creative way to fund them. >> do not ask me to make the third question. please, don't make me. even, you talked about how the industry has to focus on all aspects of transportation.

company'sike your voice is heard in the transportation planning process? you talkere ways that to states? there are probably many ways that you talked to railroads as private entities, but when it comes to the infrastructure of waterways, ofnd ports, how is it that you engage, and how would you like to engage and share what your needs are? let's we have a pretty robust advocacy effort at the federal, state, and local levels, so we need to probably be talking more than we do, but it is an ongoing effort, and we are getting better and better at it. something called the harbor maintenance trust funds. now, here is a dedicated trust fund that uses bringing commodities into warts go to. federally mandated -- bringing

commodities into ports go to. out that rather than having those sources of revenue loss off from port improvement, like dredging, it is rated by the appropriators. that will come as a shock to most people in this room who might have some familiarity with that, but one of the things we have been working for, both on the house side and on the senate side, how do we bring that money and keep it where it needs to go, because the army corps of engineers is literally starving to death in order to fund dredging projects. and we have a ill nearly threw conference right now that will for the first time keep that money where it needs to be and use it for the purposes, the projects that that trust fund was initially set aside for. it should not have taken us this long to get there. things work the way they do.

that is a perfect example of where the refining sector, and everybody stepped in and really worked this issue and war the other side down finally, so that is one example. the other would be the gas tax. we are very concerned about that. our caveats are that basically it has got to be transparent. it has to be at the pump, because if not, if prices go up, we are going to get blamed for it, even if we did not do it. notave to do it so we do have another harbor maintenance trust fund problem, and then there has to be something to pick up the impact on the roads, and i do not know how you do that. we do not have a position on that yet. that is something we are working on. these are all of the ways that we are beginning to engage more proactively on these issues. tax is point on the gas especially relevant, given the tremendous increases in fuel

economy savings and what that will mean in terms of taxes, and i think this is all the more important because with the reopening or the opening of the the majoral, and changes you will have in the size of ships and so on, it makes working on those ports all the more important. you had a question. >> i will try not to make this the janet one as well. i have a question for you. you talked about the shared responsibility among all the and thet providers, railcar manufacturers have been having an ongoing conversation andthe last couple or month a half, frequent conversations, so can you just elaborate on how that relationship is going and how you see that evolving into the future? >> sure. there is an ongoing, for those of you who are not aware, advanced notice and safety

administration fix up on what a new tank our standard should be for flammable liquids, and that includes crude, ethanol, and and part of that rulemaking is not only what the new standard should be but what should happen to the current fleet, and i think there is not as much disagreement over what a new standard should be. he came to and agreement in october 2011. i think the thinking has evolved. they would prefer to see a , a tank cartank car with a thermal wrap around, and then won eight of an inch of a steel jacket. we think that would make it safer both from puncture resistance standpoint and from thermal detection standpoint. i do not know that there is a lot of disagreement over that. there may be some around the

edges, but the big issue is we called for an aggressive phaseout of the d.o.t. 111's in moving ethanol and crude. that happened by happenstance to be the exact one that the ntsb used. we did not think it was really timely to get down into what that timeline should be, and number one, we do not want to get off the road energy independence. we have to move the crude. we have to move the ethanol. we are doing it safely. if, again, it would be safer he went more to a bus tank car, but we do not know what the manufacturing capacity is. what the parts availability is, and that is why the conversations are ongoing with the manufacturers, and what is the demand curve going to be? that all has to be taken into account, and i think they are doing a good job in getting all of that data, and at some point,

they will come out with a notice that i think we'll lay out both the new standard and some sort of timeline to migrate to the safer car. flaming, with a corporation. a question to you, charlie. national gas alliance, are you discussing with your methods of how to fund infrastructure in order to basically take usage of the great shale gas? >> great question, and what i would say is we have a number of members who are actively pursuing the development of infrastructure to support both the on road and off-road operation, and we have a handful of members who are in the process of converting their rigs to run, switching from diesel to natural gas, and are building

the necessary infrastructure to support that, because field gas oftentimes has to be cleaned up to the point of utilization, so before utilizing it in an engine, so, yes, we have talked, and that is the short answer, and we have a handful of members who are taking an active role, especially in texas and oklahoma . gas of the traditional producing states, building public infrastructure to support the transportation, so, yes, we absolutely continue to work with them on that. >> in the oil and gas industry, we are prepared to fund it, and we need to move forward with it, and we need to eliminate needless roadblocks. there are some who do not want any infrastructure, so we are constantly facing litigation challenges, protests, approvals that are not in place, and so on, but we are prepared to make the investments to move forward.

this is a once in a lifetime opportunity. for 40been studying this years. it started in the 1970's when we were going to run out of everything. we were shortly going to run out of everything. well, they were wrong. changes, angst to the wonderful work of people like mitchell and harold hamm, and we are prepared to make an infrastructure investment. >> yes, with a magazine. i have a couple of questions. first of all, on the crude by rail topic, what is the -- i guess in a lot of the oil production areas, one of the issues that is driving the use of rail is that there is a lack of pipeline infrastructure. what are the plans, or what is the timeframe to build out the pipelines to the current production sites, if at all,

that would supplement or take oil transporthe by rail? and secondly, on the natural gas topic, i am curious. alliancel gas, is the in favor of the tax credits that president obama mentioned the of theay as part heavy-duty fuel efficiency truck standards? my sense was that some in the gas industry would prefer that of lngdits go to buyers trucks so they can't afford them, because they are more expensive, rather than credits for the infrastructure or the providers to build fueling stations, because they feel they can build it? can start. great question. trying to pick apart. on the pipeline capacity, i

think the point should not be lost here that all of the above energy sources means all of the above for transportation modes. i do not know that those of us -- i cannot speak for the whole industry, but we do not look -- it is either/or, pipeline or rail. we think we need to do both. we are in the process of constructing pipeline projects right now. we are in the process at looking at the port of vancouver that would be a very significant situation, andl then right across the river from portland, oregon. that would bring 360,000 barrels of crude per day to the west coast. that would change the pricing paradigm, if you will, for crude pricing on the west coast, further backing out imports, and probably allowing it to go up to down to themaybe

california refineries that we have. that is not insignificant. that is pretty game changing, if that were to happen, so the industry, our industry, is moving aggressively to do what is necessary to take advantage of the production that is going on in this country, to take .dvantage of the revolution i think it was curious, yesterday, a secretary said that we should favor pipelines over railroads. i read that yesterday and kind of shook my head. first, i was pretty curious about this administration being talking favorably about pipelines, given the rumors right now, but i think that is the wrong approach. i think we need to be talking about all of the above, as was said in other comments. theo the question around president's recent comments earlier this week with regards to tax credits, and just to follow on real quickly on to

steven's, with regard to the transportation and natural gas, our members have been aggressively looking at ways to liquefy that natural gas and capture that gas that is being flared, to vilify and loaded onto train, because it is the most viable option at this point, to the speed at which we see hotlines catch up to the pace at which we are able to produce, so currently as we think, most of the natural gas coming out of those wells is being flared. we are not capturing that gas, and our members look at that as basically burning money, so we are working hard and aggressively to get in that region so we can move that natural gas out of the area, with a margin of it done by rail. credits,int of the tax we are not in favor of looking at tax credits as a way to move

this industry forward, especially from an infrastructure development standpoint. if we were to be in a certain area of the environment right now, it would go to offsetting the cost and creating a level playing field for the vehicle side of the equation. on the infrastructure standpoint, we are very much -- we have the commitments in place and the likes of michelle others in north america to develop infrastructure, provided that trucks are going to show where then we look at challenge currently is, it is still on the vehicle side, so if we can create a level playing field, opportunities that are fuel neutral, that is really what we spend our time trying to advocate and support. >> to answer the question a little bit further, this time about one year ago, if you go back and check the media, you will see that the railroads and the pipelines were each trying

to say that they were safer, and my counterpart at the american pipeline association once sat down and figured out, a game, we need both. they are safe, environmentally friendly. we are safe, environmentally friendly. if it is going to get there, we need to not be fighting each other. we need to be cooperating and get, asure that we can janet and as john put it, it does not do any good if it stays in the ground. going toare definitely be instances when rail will dominate, particularly on the east coast, where it would be more difficult to have more pipelines. there are other areas where maybe neither will work, and those are issues we have to discuss, potentials for both exports and lng, exports of crude, in terms of a potential mismatch with refineries, but

that is for another day. british embassy. stephen, you mentioned the jones act in passing, and i would just like to ask you a question on that. i was interested earlier this week to move -- read about what new jersey has and getting final , because what is available is a non-us registered vessel. just for full disclosure, we in the u.k. do not care who moves our goods around the country. you do not care who owns the infrastructure. what isally need critical for the country, so i would just like to ask, what is your view about the jones act and the industry, and in a context, what would you like to see happen? >> that we jump into the export debate with crude. we support free trade and markets, but we do not have that today. in this country.

the jones act is a major tradeent that holds free and free markets hostage, if you will. it costs more to move the same volume of product, whether it is diesel or crude from the port of houston to new york harbor than it does to the port of rotterdam. port ofe vessel at the rotterdam -- and it is not just the factor of a dollar but a factor of three or four times per dollar. shocking that you have members of congress from east coast states who oppose lifting or relaxing export bans because they are worried about the impact on gasoline prices and what their constituents will pay when they support a jones act that already imposes artificially high costs for these same products on their

consumers day in and day out and have since, i think the jones act has been around since 1920, and that was based on something actually that happened at the first section of congress knowing back to 1789, so our view is you cannot have a debate on the discussion with energy exports, particularly with crude, unless you were willing to face inconvenient truths, as our former vice president called it, with things like the jones act. if not repealed, which would be the preferred action, really seriously looked at, to see if there is not a way where we can take advantage of the energy production going on in this country and being able to move the product from point a to point b domestically in this country perhaps without subject to a jones act requirements. >> last question? >> i have got one.

paul, district department of transportation for henry. coalition, where are you in the process? have you taken advantage of streamlining, and what streamlining do you need? >> yes, we have been through the process. we have all of the permits at this point. you know, we brought in all of the environmental groups, since we are building an elevated highway over wetlands, from the fact, we were, in complemented by the secretary back then for bringing in those one, and weday looked at building our highway withe wetlands construction using cranes on temporary mounted pilings that would actually build the highway underneath them, and then those pilings could come up, and it would lower the foot rent on the

so it isnvironment, very expensive to build that way, but we certainly felt it was the right thing to do. the last thing we need in louisiana, certainly, is any more canals at this point that could bring salt water intrusion , so as a community, going through that, that public hearing process, everyone was behind utilizing that construction method. >> it is nice to have a good news story to end on. please help me think john and his panel for his discussion on energy and transportation. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] is completed, i think it puts comcast at the nexus at every major policy debate we would have. i do not see it being in the public interest. i think the fcc should block

this merger. i think that is why we have antitrust laws, to block these deals, and i think for most americans, a deal like this seems unthinkable. that it has gotten this far i think says a lot, but for me, there is really no condition that is good enough. >> transactions are frequently markets, way to shape so there are a lot of conditions that could be placed on the country's largest internet provider, be it neutrality, be it low-cost offering, perhaps a buildout to schools, for the president's connect ed initiative for american schools. there are a whole host of things that comcast agreed to a little over three years ago when it bought nbc universal, so i can see it being seriously considered at the fcc as something they would approve but with a lot of conditions.

>> the impact of a comcast-time warner merger on the communicators on c-span2. >> c-span. we bring public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings, and conferences, and offering complete gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all as a service of private industry. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. >> this week on "newsmakers," we want to welcome lorraine miller, the interim president of the naacp. here in the studio we have kevin cirilli and jesse holland. go ahead with your first question. >> thank you for having me. last week the congressional budget office released a report on the minimum wage, and they said that it would reduce total unemployment by 500,000 workers

or 0.3% by 2016. obviously the naacp has advocated for an increase in the minimum wage. what is your response to the cbo's report? >> we believe the report has some validity. if you read it little bit closer, it said it would increase employment by 900,000, a difference of 400,000 give or take. we believe emphatically that we should do whatever it takes to increase employment in our communities.