The People of America's Oil and Natural Gas Indusry

Energy Tomorrow Blog

liquefied-natural-gas  lng-exports  maryland  economic-benefits  government-revenues 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted March 26, 2015

A welcome development in the larger effort to see the U.S. become a major player in the global energy marketplace: groundbreaking ceremonies this week at Maryland’s Cove Point liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility.

Gov. Larry Hogan joined other golden shovel-wielding dignitaries at Cove Point, built as an LNG import terminal but which is undergoing a $3.8 billion expansion to allow LNG export capability.

Cove Point and other proposed LNG export terminals are the key needed infrastructure for the world’s leading producer of natural gas to get its LNG to market.

Read More

energy-exports  crude-oil  trade  shale-energy  economic-benefits  fracking  renewable-fuel-standard  ethanol 

Mary Leshper

Mary Schaper
Posted March 20, 2015

Bloomberg: Two former Obama administration officials said a four-decade-old ban on oil exports limits U.S. geopolitical influence and makes it harder to get other nations to embrace free trade.

The issue of the ban “arose constantly” in negotiations with other countries, including when the U.S. sought support for sanctions on Iran’s oil production to halt its nuclear ambitions, said Carlos Pascual, a former top energy envoy at the U.S. State Department.

“It’s those kinds of restrictions that in the end affect American credibility, and in the moment when we have to put through an important policy, makes it much more difficult to negotiate,” Pascual said at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing Thursday called to build support for ending the ban in place since the 1970s Arab oil embargo.

Read More

energy-exports  us-crude-oil-production  economic-benefits  government-revenues  conocophillips  gasoline-prices 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted March 20, 2015

The case for lifting the 1970s-era ban on U.S. crude oil exports, in a nutshell: 

The ban is a relic of the past, of an era when the U.S. was producing less and less of its own oil and importing more and more of oil produced by others. Crude exports would add to global crude supplies, putting downward pressure on the cost of crude. A number of studies project that lifting the export ban would lower domestic gasoline prices. Exports would stimulate domestic production, protecting U.S. jobs and creating more in the future. Exports would strengthen U.S. economic power that underlies American global influence.

There are more reasons, more details to the affirmative export case, a number of which were aired at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing this week. In its totality, it’s a strong, strong case.

Read More

oil-and-natural-gas-development  energy-future  emissions  economic-benefits  jack-gerard 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted March 13, 2015

The language of issue activism can have drawbacks. Sound bites charged with political activism seldom set the stage for useful policy discussions.

The White House recently earned four “Pinocchios” from the Washington Post’s FactChecker for mirroring the anti-Keystone XL talk heard from those who want the U.S. to stop using oil.

Similarly, in a climate change speech at the Atlantic Council this week, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry mischaracterized America’s energy reality, calling U.S. oil and coal “outdated energy sources.” Said Kerry, “Coal and oil are only cheap ways to power a nation in the very near term.”

Not according to those who get paid to quantify U.S. energy, now and in the future. In its 2014 Annual Energy Outlook report, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) said that oil and natural gas supplied 63 percent of U.S. energy in 2012, with coal supplying another 18 percent. EIA projects that oil and natural gas will supply 61 percent of our energy in 2040, with coal holding steady at 18 percent.

Read More

energy-tax-hikes  pennsylvania  natural-gas-development  economic-benefits  fracking 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted March 6, 2015

More on the plan by new Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf to increase taxes on energy production in the commonwealth.

As lawmakers mull over Wolf’s proposal to add a 5 percent tax on the value of natural gas at the wellhead, plus 4.7 cents per thousand cubic feet of gas extracted – effectively a 7.5 percent tax, according to Cabot Oil & Gas Corp.’s George Stark – the key issue is its potential effect on future energy development in Pennsylvania.

Certainly, fundamental economics holds that if you tax something more, you’ll almost certainly get less of it. And that should give lawmakers pause.

Read More

oil-and-natural-gas-development  access  president-obama  congress  energy-policy  economic-benefits  trade  regulation 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted February 26, 2015

The president’s Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) understands the significance of the U.S. energy revolution quite well – reflected in the energy chapter of its recent 2015 Economic Report of the President.

The chapter should be widely read by policymakers, from the president and Congress on down, because it notes the role of surging domestic oil and natural gas production in the ongoing energy revolution. From there it’s possible to identify needed policies for the future.

Read More

offshore-development  oil-and-natural-gas-access  north-carolina  outer-continental-shelf  economic-benefits 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted February 17, 2015

The federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is scheduled to hold a public hearing today in Wilmington, N.C., on its draft five-year offshore oil and natural gas leasing program. According to a study by Quest Offshore Resources, developing oil and natural gas on the North Carolina outer continental shelf could bring significant benefits.

These include 55,000 jobs in the state by 2035 and nearly $4 billion in revenues for the state’s budget by 2035, with revenue sharing in place.

Read More

energy  oil-and-natural-gas-development  access  keystone-xl-pipeline  jack-gerard  economic-benefits 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted February 14, 2015

Some time ago the Keystone XL pipeline debate stopped being a discussion of energy infrastructure and whether the privately financed project was in the national interest. Thank Keystone XL’s opponents, who detached the debate from fact and scientific analysis to better serve their purposes.

Keystone XL’s most ardent foes readily acknowledged as much. They said that for them the pipeline was a symbol to be used in pursuit of political power.  As one anti-pipeline activist put it: “The goal is as much about organizing young people around a thing. But you have to have a thing.”

Symbolism over substance, politics over the greater public good? Too often that’s the way it’s played Inside The Beltway. But at some point political power needs to give way to actual power, and public policy should be grounded in our energy reality, not symbolism. It should be fact-based and consider the impacts on the daily lives of real people, not narrow ideological agendas.

Read More

keystone-xl-pipeline  congress  president-obama  economic-benefits  canadian-oil-sands  infrastructure  investment 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted February 12, 2015

In a democratic republic like ours, the legislative branch is the voice of the people. Throughout the long – too long – debate over the Keystone XL pipeline, the White House has used politics to stymie a conclusion on the matter. But no more.

House approval of a Senate bill advancing the pipeline will require President Obama to finally decide. Bipartisan majorities in both houses of the Congress of the United States have spoken. The American people, through their elected representatives, have spoken. The president should listen.

Unfortunately, the White House has signaled that he won’t, that he will veto the Keystone XL bill. It would make a mockery of post-Election 2014 assurances from the president that he would work with Congress to accomplish substantive things for the American people. Substantive things like: 42,100 jobs that the U.S. State Department says would be supported by the pipeline’s construction, $2 billion in workers’ pockets and $3.4 billion added to U.S. GDP, according to State’s report, and 830,000 barrels of oil from Canada and the U.S. Bakken region – North American oil that would strengthen U.S. energy security

All of the above and more clearly make the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline in the national interest.

Read More

offshore-development  offshore-access  oil-and-natural-gas  economic-benefits  jack-gerard  outer-continental-shelf  safe-operations 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted February 9, 2015

Let’s hope public hearings on the Obama administration’s draft offshore oil and natural gas leasing program – starting this week – help spark serious discussion of how the nation’s offshore energy reserves will be managed in the near future. Needed is greater public awareness of just how limited the administration’s approach is, reflected in a draft plan that simply doesn’t go far enough.

We say public awareness because the administration has been able to foster the perception that it favors more oil and natural gas development and energy infrastructure when, in fact, its policies have done little to support that development (did somebody mention the Keystone XL pipeline?).

In the case of offshore energy development, it’s important to move the administration toward a plan that actually increases access to reserves. The draft plan for offshore leasing for the 2017-2022 time period is less than meets the eye, offering just a single Atlantic lease sale in 2021 as part of the five-year program, which Interior Secretary Sally Jewell said could be withdrawn as the leasing plan process evolves. That’s not a balanced approach, that’s an attempt to manage the perceptions game.

Read More