Posted June 21, 2018
Last week, we wrote about the many benefits to opening up a small portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to natural gas and oil development – especially job creation, economic growth and long-term U.S. energy security. But there’s another benefit that warrants attention, and that’s the direct, measured improvements in the lives of Alaskans living in areas where energy development is occurring.
Posted June 15, 2018
We’ve talked at length about the many benefits to opening up a small portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to natural gas and oil development. There can be little doubt about ANWR’s importance to the United States’ long-term energy security.
The point is underscored in a new report from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), analyzing the potential impact of natural gas and oil development in the coastal plain of ANWR. The results reiterate what we’ve been saying all along – ANWR’s energy potential is incredibly large, and is a key part of a long-term U.S. energy vision.
Posted November 8, 2016
With a series of public hearings on proposed federal rules for offshore seismic testing scheduled to begin this week, let’s take a look at the basics on the safe technologies and procedures used to survey for oil and natural gas reserves. These are key as the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) conducts hearings in New Orleans (Nov. 9), Gulfport, Miss. (Nov. 10), Fort Walton Beach, Fla. (Nov. 14), Mobile, Ala. (Nov. 15) and Houston (Nov. 17).
Posted June 30, 2015
Wood Mackenzie’s study comparing the effects of pro-development energy policies with those of regulatory-constrained energy policies is really not much of a comparison at all. Pro-development policies would boost U.S. domestic energy supplies and job creation while benefiting American households, the study found. Pro-development policies also would add to economic growth and generate increased revenues for government. Let’s look at those today.
Posted October 9, 2014
Getting a handle on the size of America’s petroleum reserves and their energy potential can be a brain-bender because of the different ways resources are defined and the different ways resource estimates are used.
Example: A Bloomberg piece this week suggests there’s something afoot when producers talk about a resource estimate that’s different from the one they’re required to report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), as part of the agency’s oversight of the investing sector. Not at all. Two different concepts, two separate uses
Posted March 15, 2013
Opponents of a free market for natural gas have been trumpetinga new study which purports to show that LNG exports would be an economic negative for the United States. This flies in the face of analysis done by the Department of Energy, The Brookings Institute, ICF International and others which showed that to boost economic activity open markets are the way to go. So we took a look at the study to figure out why their conclusions are not consistent with other industry or government projections. We found some serious biases and inconsistent assumptions added up to a fatally flawed report. Here are a few specifics.
The employment impact analysis is flawed because it assumes no incremental natural gas production.
Posted June 13, 2012