The People of America's Oil and Natural Gas Indusry

Energy Tomorrow Blog

crude-oil-exports  earnings  oil-and-natural-gas-development  investments  taxes  economic-growth  jobs 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted October 9, 2015

We’re still more than a year from the next presidential election, but already we’re hearing attacks on energy company earnings, rhetoric calibrated for the sole purpose of riling up the party base. It’s bad political theater that misleads the American public to score political points, distracting from a substantive debate on the right energy path for the country. This has come up most recently in the debate over lifting the 1970s-era ban on U.S. crude oil exports -- which was advanced with bipartisan U.S. House passage of a bill ending the export ban.

Yesterday, we looked at problems with the White House’s opposition to lifting the ban. Goodness knows, export opponents on Capitol Hill have their own faulty reasons. We’ve covered most of these before, including consumer impactsnational security and the oil imports vs. exports muddle.

Some of the biggest confusion comes from those who find it convenient to flay the oil and natural gas industry. Certainly, running around and repeating “Big Oil” over and over again plays well with people who don’t like fossil fuels and/or progress in general. Unfortunately, in their rush to attack those who supply products that the American people actually want and demand – products that power our economy and modern way of life – it’s the American people who take the hit.


Read More

crude-oil-exports  economic-growth  jobs  white-house  ghg-mitigation-technologies  oil-and-natural-gas-development 

Kyle Isakower

Kyle Isakower
Posted October 8, 2015

These things are true:

  • The U.S. gets the majority of its energy from oil and natural gas, and is projected to continue to do so for decades.
  • Since 2005 U.S. production of natural gas is up 43 percent.
  • Since 2008 U.S. production of crude oil is up 88 percent.
  • U.S. air quality continues to improve, with concentrations of carbon monoxide down 60 percent, ozone down 18 percent, lead 87 percent, nitrogen dioxide 43 percent, particulate matter 35 percent and sulfur dioxide 62 percent since 2000.
  • The federal U.S. budget deficit for FY2015 was $435 billion.
  • The U.S. trade deficit rose in August as exports hit a three-year low.
  • Since 2008 our working age population has grown by over 16 million, while employment is up 8.5 million, leaving the U.S. at odds with trends in other countries.
  • U.S. poverty and wages are stagnant, and it is getting harder for people to move beyond a minimum-wage job.
  • Americans' trust in the federal government's ability to handle domestic problems has reached a new low.

These things are true, and thus, when presented with bipartisan legislation to reduce consumer fuel costs and the trade deficit while increasing U.S. investment, domestic crude oil production, GDP and government revenues and creating good paying jobs – all via U.S. crude oil exports – the White House obviously had no choice but to … threaten to veto it.


Read More

crude-oil-exports  crude-oil-production  economic-growth  jobs 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted October 7, 2015

The U.S. House has an important vote scheduled for Friday on legislation that would lift the 1970s-era ban on domestic crude oil exports. It’s an historic chance for U.S. policymakers to affirm that America’s energy picture is fundamentally and dramatically improved from where it was four decades ago – thanks to surging domestic production that has made the United States the world’s No. 1 producer of oil and natural gas.

It boils down to this: A vote for the bill would be a vote for U.S. jobseconomic growthtrade benefits  and strengthened American security. It would be a vote for U.S. consumers and American global competitiveness. It would be a vote for America’s friends abroad, who see U.S. energy as a global supply diversifier and stabilizer. As one ally said earlier this year, with U.S. oil exports the “world itself will be a … safer place.”

Read More

crude-oil-exports  domestic-oil-production  economic-growth  jobs  energy-security 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted October 7, 2015

The U.S. House has an important vote scheduled for Friday on legislation that would lift the 1970s-era ban on domestic crude oil exports. It’s an historic chance for U.S. policymakers to affirm that America’s energy picture is fundamentally and dramatically improved from where it was four decades ago – thanks to surging domestic production that has made the United States the world’s No. 1 producer of oil and natural gas.

It boils down to this: A vote for the bill would be a vote for U.S. jobs, economic growth, trade benefits  and strengthened American security. It would be a vote for U.S. consumers and American global competitiveness. It would be a vote for America’s friends abroad, who see U.S. energy as a global supply diversifier and stabilizer. As one ally said earlier this year, with U.S. oil exports the “world itself will be a … safer place.”

Read More

analysis  oil-and-natural-gas-production  hydraulic-fracturing  economic-growth  energy-security  energy-exports  jobs  ethanol 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted September 30, 2015

America’s energy revolution means … a United States that’s more energy self-sufficient – less dependent on others, more secure in the world and better positioned to help friends abroad; economic growth and job creation – and with the right policy choices, a golden opportunity to secure American prosperity well into the future; and a stronger U.S. trading posture that, with energy exports, could benefit consumers

Let’s look at some charts that illustrate this American energy renaissance – which is based on the surge in domestic production that has accompanied the growth of safe, advanced hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling since the mid-2000s.

Read More

analysis  investments  oil-and-natural-gas-development  economic-growth  taxes  environment  access 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted September 29, 2015

U.S. oil and natural gas companies continue to lead in investing in the domestic economy, with five companies among the Progressive Policy Institute’s top 25 in 2014 U.S. capital expenditures

ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Occidental Petroleum and Hess lead an energy production/mining sector that invested $43.6 billion in 2014, closely following the $48.7 invested by telecom/cable.

That’s great news for the U.S. economy which, as the PPI report details, needs investment to expand. PPI calls the top 25 its “investment heroes” because “their capital spending is helping to raise productivity and wages across the economy.” 

Read More

analysis  access  oil-and-natural-gas-development  federal-leases  economic-growth  energy-security  jobs 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted September 25, 2015

The Washington Post reports that a coalition of environmental activists wants the Obama administration to stop new federal leasing for oil and natural gas development. Notwithstanding the broad energy, economic and security benefits produced by America’s energy revolution, the opportunity to secure America’s future and significant air quality progress, their position is simple: Keep it in the ground.

The position also is extreme, anti-progress and anti-modern – though hardly surprising. There’s a small but loud element that has little interest in safe and responsible energy development or in constant improvement of operational and environmental safety. Rather, it opposes development altogether. Their recent push is the latest sign of an agenda that would put America in retreat economically and in the world.

What’s surprising is that these activists actually concede that Americans want oil and natural gas. They acknowledge consumer demand for oil and gas – affordable, reliable and portable fuels that make life less harsh, healthier and more prosperous – but they want government to choke off that demand by cutting supply.

Read More

analysis  energy-exports  crude-oil  economic-growth  american-petroleum-institute  gasoline-prices 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted September 9, 2015

API has a pair of new ads that drive home the economic and national security reasons for lifting America’s 1970s-era ban on exporting domestic crude oil

Here’s the national security spotClick here for the ad that underscores the job and economic reasons for lifting the ban. 

The television and online campaign launched this week in a dozen states – including Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Virginia – and the District of Columbia. The campaign is part of a broader push emphasizing the importance of updating U.S. energy policies to reflect America’s rise as a global energy superpower.

Read More

analysis  energy-exports  crude-oil  economic-growth  domestic-oil-production  gasoline-prices  jack-gerard 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted August 14, 2015

We’ve put up a number of posts recently that argue for lifting the United States’ decades-old ban on exporting domestic crude oil – citing sound economic, trade and security reasons. Underlying them all is this: As an energy superpower, America will see more benefits here at home, be more secure and help make the world safer if U.S. crude is allowed to trade freely in the global marketplace.

Now, there is a compelling, market reason for urgency in ending the export ban – a self-sanctioning relic of the 1970s that hinders U.S. global competitiveness while impeding domestic energy development and economic growth. That would be the impacts on global crude markets if/when Iran resumes exporting oil under the proposed nuclear agreement the White House is advancing.

Read More

analysis  energy-exports  crude-oil  economic-growth  gasoline-prices 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted August 12, 2015

Add MIT professor and former CIA director John Deutch to the bipartisan list of those calling for an end to the ban on U.S. crude oil exports.

Deutch, a National Petroleum Council member who served in a number of posts during the Carter, Clinton and Obama administrations, argues in the Wall Street Journal that exporting domestic crude would grow U.S. jobs and increase American influence in world oil markets. Deutch writes:

The bottom line is that the U.S. has the potential to export large amounts of oil and refined products.

Read More