Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What's the purpose of this campaign?

We all know that high energy prices hurt Oregon families and cost the community good paying jobs. Looking to the future, Oregon needs to have a diverse portfolio of energy choices to support long term economic growth and ease family budgets. We are in the "All of the Above" camp when it comes to expanding options for energy production.

Unfortunately, too often sensible energy solutions are blocked by extremists. In Oregon, some greens even oppose developing relatively clean energy sources such as geothermal, wave, hydro, natural gas, and wind.

Some radical members of the "green" movement are damaging the name of environmentalism, harming Oregon’s economy, and helping keep energy prices high by opposing alternative clean energy projects mainstream groups have been championing for decades. These fringe groups hold the untenable position of both insisting on reducing fossil fuel use to reduce “green house gas” emission and opposing viable alternative energy solutions that do just that. If neither fossil fuels nor cleaner alternative energy, how do they propose we maintain our current living standards?

Or is that what they’re trying to end?

Lights on Oregon lists just a few of the examples of radical fringe groups opposing widely popular alternative energy solutions long supported by many environmentalists: geothermal, hydro, natural gas, wave, and wind power. These small groups are dictating the energy policy for the whole state, both preventing the jobs and investments these new projects would bring to Oregon and preventing increased energy supply that could bring energy prices down.

What role should exist for oil, coal, and other fossil fuels?

The US economy runs on fossil fuels. They account for about 86 percent of our energy consumption. Renewables, including wind, solar, geothermal, biomass and hydro, make up seven percent, with nuclear making up the rest. That mix will surely change as technology develops and the relative cost of each energy source changes, but what will be the best mix in the future? We don't know, and neither do the politicians who represent us. We rely heavily on fossil fuels because they provide the most energy at the lowest price, enabling us to spend more of our income on something besides energy bills.

To ensure energy prices do not become artificially high and erode our prosperity, our elected officials should follow an "all of the above" energy strategy. That is, they should free our entrepreneurs to explore and develop all possible energy solutions by minimizing governmental barriers. It's a win-win situation.

As entrepreneurs profit from their new inventions, consumers will benefit from new, more cost-effective, energy, and the virtuous circle of American prosperity will continue. The alternative—our elected officials picking winners and losers and getting in the way of select energy sources—will mean higher energy bills for everyone.

Have a question? Email Us!