Will in fact restrict their ability to be Energy Independent , i mean i think its economic folly and i will tell you one of the things that i say repeatedly and we need to always remind ourselves of this, we are not alone in this business. I get criticized, not criticize but i get teased because i found the little canadians who dont take this the wrong way but if you look at north america whether its offshore mexico or the shale that could be produced in mexico now that they are going to do constitutional revisions and the ability to do work in mexico when you look at whats happening in canada when we talk about Energy Independence and think we have to be talking about north american Energy Independence because certainly as relates to north dakota and canada or a lot of what we do is all crossborder. So we believe what happened tonight field when we sell co2 from the gasification plant literally the largest sequestration project in the country we sell co2 thats basically ejected in the
That is two miles down and our water reserves and groundwater. We certainly believe our history of regulation in north dakota, not always perfect but we are well well aware but those challenges are and continue to build out the inspectors continued to make sure those wells are protecting the groundwater that we have. A lot of people would want to, the question implies that there is a huge Environmental Impact as a result of domestic drilling activity. A very short last question for me. Bill bill lacy legislation bill lacy legislation on the president s desk this year and will he sign at . I am hopeful the answer to both of those questions is yes. Addicting at . Why not . I predict yes. They can call me hopelessly optimistic. Senator, thank you very much. Thank you. Its been fun. [applause] i just had my hip replaced and is like the first day with big girl shoes so i need a little help. Thank you senator heitkamp. I would like to welcome the honorable ed markey. Senator markey is served
Policies in the u. S. This is about an hour. Here we go, folks. Im dave cook from the Christian Science monitor. Our guest today is interior secretary sally jewell. This is her first visit with our group. We appreciate very much her making time in her schedule for this. Our guest was born in london, grew up in washington state, and earned a degree in Mechanical Engineering from the university of washington. Right after graduation, she and her husband warren, a fellow engineer, started their career at mobil oil, then moved to commercial banking. She worked for 19 years. She joined the board of rei in 1996, became chief operating officer in 2000, and was named ceo in 2005. During her tenure at the company, rei tripled in size. She was sworn in as the 51st interior secretary in april of 2013, and thus ended the biographical portion of the program. Now on to breakfast mechanics. As always, were on the record here. Please, no live blogging or tweeting. In short, no filing of any kind while
The kept going back to wages are going to decrease if you become right to work, youll hurt the worker. We said, no, thats not true at all. We showed that wages increase at a higher rate when youre in a right to work state. The other thing we ran into was, Companies Want to move to right to work states because they want to pay people less. So that was interesting. So they were saying that, you know, Site Selectors, we know who they are, what they do, this is one of almost their standard questions is, are you a right to work state, are you not. And theres plenty of companies who have moved to states that they have specifically said were going here because this is a key component to it. So what we did is, we said businesses dont go to right to work states because they want to pay less, because again, the statistics dont back that up. Companies go to right to work states because theres more flexibility in the workplace, and because their workers can be more efficient. And again, we brought
Yes . Hi, russell, a law student. My question is to the government official. The issue is about conflict of law and the situation where some Tech Companies may find themselves when they have to comply with a foreign law to hand over data, but that would bring them into conflict with u. S. Laws that basically would make them liable for breaking u. S. Laws. How do you do this where Tech Companies are doing business globally and have to comply with multiple standards and laws . How does the doj address this iss issue, or what are your views . Its a really good question, and its a question companies are facing more and more every day. I guess the point i would make generally on that issue is thats much broader than really encryption or even going dark. Our companies today face those choice of law conflicts when theyre operating in a foreign jurisdiction. And so the Companies Work tlou those issues. Sometimes they have to do something specific to a company. It will depend on the specific la