The People of America's Oil and Natural Gas Indusry

Energy Tomorrow Blog

state-of-the-union  oil-sands  natural-gas  keystone-xl  hydraulic-fracturing  energy-policy  energy  access 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted January 25, 2012

There were lots of energy mentions in the president’s State of the Union speech, and we appreciate every one of them because they likely will stimulate increased discussion of energy issues in our country. In that way we join the president in trying to make more Americans aware of the country’s stake in energy  – in terms of jobs, economic growth and security.

We agree with a number of things the president said. Indeed, the men and women of America’s oil and natural gas companies already have been working in many of the areas mentioned by the president. And they’re willing to do more.

Read More

policy  oil-sands  natural-gas  keystone-xl  energy 

Kyle Isakower

Kyle Isakower
Posted January 19, 2012

As befitting a day when, for the president, political interest trumped the national interest, he opened his 2012 campaign advertising with a commercial touting – wait for it – his energy accomplishments. And they say irony is dead. The commercial links to a webpage trumpeting the president “Boosting Domestic Energy Production.”

While it is great that the president recognizes Americans’ overwhelming support for increased domestic oil and natural gas production, any gains made in the past few years have happened not because of the president’s policies, but in spite of them. Consider this: The area of energy production the president has the most control over is drilling on federal lands.  In a study we released yesterday, this is what boosting domestic energy production looks like in the Western states:

Read More

permits  oil-sands  offshore-resources  offshore-drilling  keystone-xl  energy-policy  access 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted January 19, 2012

In announcing his rejection of the Keystone XL permit, President Obama said:

"This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project and protect the American people. I'm disappointed that Republicans in Congress forced this decision, but it does not change my Administration’s commitment to American-made energy that creates jobs and reduces our dependence on oil."

Read More

oil-sands  keystone-xl  access 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted January 18, 2012

As the above relates to President Obama’s decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, the answer is clear: politics.

Even though the only question the president had to answer was whether the 1,700-mile project is in the national interest, he settled on a different calculus – re-election politics.

Jobs and energy security…or politics? He chose politics, while continuing to offer, as he did yesterday, that he’s for “American-made energy that creates jobs."

Yet, in his rejection of the Keystone XL the president is rejecting jobs – 20,000 of them in the pipeline’s construction phase and up to a half-million more over time, as the Keystone XL would play a major part in full utilization of Canada’s oil sands.

Read More

oil-sands  keystone-xl  access 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted January 18, 2012

I just read the best argument for the Keystone XL pipeline this morning:

“… the addition of crude oil pipeline capacity between Canada and the United States will advance a number of strategic interests of the United States. These included increasing the diversity of available supplies among the United States’ worldwide crude oil sources in a time of considerable political tension in other major oil producing countries and regions; shortening the transportation pathway for crude oil supplies; and increasing crude oil supplies from a major non-Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries producer.

Read More

canadian-oil-sands  oil-sands  reclamation  tailing-ponds 

Mark Green

Mark Green
Posted January 3, 2012

From a post on the Climate Progress website (cross-posted on Grist), on the environmental effects of Canadian oil sands production:

“Extraction of Alberta's energy-intensive tar sands has expanded steadily in recent years, with about 232 square miles now exposed by mining operations. Tar-sands production is expected to double over the next decade, which could mean the destruction of 740,000 acres of boreal forest …”

The post includes photo comparisons – purportedly depicting the before and after of oil sands development. It looks/sounds dreadful. One commenter to the site writes, “What a beautiful country it was …”

Read More