Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby Graeme » Fri 11 Apr 2014, 19:09:33

Suddenly US oil exports are about to be a factor in geopolitics

Last year, the US allowed the export of about 200,000 barrels a day to Canada—not a large volume. But now, Canada’s Enbridge has obtained US permission to re-export Canadian crude oil to Europe through the US (via the Gulf of Mexico). That flow seems likely to begin this month. And when you add up exports of US crude to Canada, Mexico and the Far East, the US could be shipping 800,000 barrels a day—mostly to Europe and Asia—by the end of the year, predicts Citi’s Ed Morse.
+
For the past year or so, geopolitical disruptions–wars and uprisings mostly–have counter-balanced rising supply and kept prices high. But now the supply seems to be taking control. “The re-exports are going to add a significant downward pressure to the global oil price,” the Price Group’s Phil Flynn told Quartz. “This is going to be a big deal and I am sure it is going to be a major topic on conversation in the markets in the very near future.”
+
But that’s not all. When you toss in US sales of oil products such as gasoline and diesel you reach some 4.5 million barrels a day of US crude oil and petroleum product exports by the end of 2014, Morse says (see chart below). These refined products don’t directly affect the price of crude oil, but their rising exports demonstrate the growing role of US supply on the global market.


Image

It’s part of an all-but-unnoticed US supply surge that could start to shake up geopolitical power. The countries most vulnerable are those that rely on exports of high-priced oil, including Russia, Venezuela and some Persian Gulf nations. The oil price they require to balance their state budgets by and large exceeds $110 a barrel, putting them in a world of trouble should oil prices plunge below $100 a barrel—which is what analysts such as Morse predict they will do.


quartz
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sat 12 Apr 2014, 13:56:15

"These refined products don’t directly affect the price of crude oil, but their rising exports demonstrate the growing role of US supply on the global market." No it doesn't represent a "growing role of US supply" if you consider the source of the oil being refined. It would if the supply of the oil to make those exported products was from the US. The supply is coming from Canada, Mexico et al. The US has become the refining slut for a lot of the world. We couldn't supply the world with one gallon of product without the oil imports from OTHER COUNTRIES. The US doesn't have ultimate control of the supply chain. That remains in the hands of the oil exporters where it has always been.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Tue 15 Apr 2014, 13:12:10

The oil export “ban” that really isn’t a ban

Reuters - Phillips 66 joined a long list of companies exporting U.S. oil to Canada after it secured a license to do so last year. The Houston-based company does not own a refinery in Canada, unlike other exporters like Valero Energy, which sends U.S. oil to its Quebec refinery. The United States does not allow exports of its own oil, but makes exceptions such as barrels going to Canada and re-exports of foreign oil. Nonetheless, the U.S. Department of Commerce has issued 43 licenses over the last six months allowing companies to export U.S. oil for use by Canadian refineries. CEO Greg Garland said company Phillips 66 plans to build a condensate splitter at its 247,000 barrels-per-day Sweeny refinery in Texas, which will allow it to process condensates into fuel components that can be exported. Last week, Enbridge Inc became the first company to confirm plans to re-export Canadian oil from the United States followed by Valero Energy.

{Remember what they do with those “splitters”: a very light processing that cheaply turns oil into a refined product for which there is no export ban. I’m starting to get the impression that much of the PR being tossed out regarding removing the oil export ban is to distract folks from the fact that a lot of US production is being exported under the guise of “products”.}

And there's this bit of misdirection. NuStar isn't expanding capabilities just based on the hope of lifting the oil export ban: they are gearing up to export "refined products". Reuters - The port of Corpus Christi, Texas, is undergoing its biggest expansion in years as energy companies hurriedly add docks so they can ship more crude to other U.S. ports - and perhaps one day to foreign locales as well. Pipeline company NuStar Energy LP has added a third ship dock, doubling its loading capacity to 400,000 barrels per day at the port, which is near the Eagle Ford formation in south Texas, one of the most productive oil fields in the world. The addition, which went into operation in mid-February and was shown to the media on Thursday, means NuStar's operation can handle Panamax-class vessels, which can carry 350,000 to 500,000 barrels, at loading rates of up to 30,000 barrels per hour.

NuStar can now jump into the global crude game if the decades-old U.S. ban on crude exports is lifted. Many oil producers favor repealing the ban now that domestic oil output has surged to a 25-year high. "Everyone's always worried about supply going down and so you keep the reserves," he said. "But you've got to give the producers incentive to produce. You ought to let them export." "Crude is such a political thing," he said with a sigh.

In February 2012, shipments at the Corpus Christi port approached just 4,000 barrels per day, according to port data. That rose to 319,694 bpd in February 2013 and 345,632 bpd two months ago, largely because of shipments to refining centers in Houston and Louisiana, the data showed. In the interim, pipelines started up to move crude from the Eagle Ford oil patch to those markets, as well as to Corpus Christi.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby Graeme » Thu 29 May 2014, 19:37:33

IHS report highlights benefits of lifting US oil export ban

Ending the US ban on crude oil exports could raise the country’s production by more than 1m barrels a day, according to IHS, a consultancy.

In a study released on Thursday morning, IHS argued that allowing exports would improve the fit between crude production and refining capacity in the US, and narrow the price differential between US oil benchmarks and their internationally traded counterparts, helping production companies to expand their output by an average of 1.2m b/d during 2016-30.

The consultancy also suggested that allowing crude exports would create or support almost 1m jobs by 2018, and have a modest downward effect on US retail petrol prices.

Daniel Yergin, IHS vice-chairman, said the export ban first introduced in 1975 had made sense only to support the US oil price controls of the 1970s, but had been redundant for decades since those controls were abolished in 1981.

He added that the near-total ban on US crude exports was threatening to create “gridlock” in the industry, because the shale revolution had led to a growing mismatch between booming production of light sweet (low sulphur) oil, and the refining capacity configured to process that crude most effectively.


FT
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby Graeme » Thu 23 Jul 2015, 17:11:26

Lift the ban, cook the climate

It’s not often environmental organizations and the American Petroleum Institute (API) agree. But, when it comes to the crude oil export ban, we begin from a remarkably similar starting point: removing the longstanding ban would result in increased oil drilling in the United States.

Recent analysis from Oil Change International has shown that removing the ban would result in increased oil drilling on the order of 476,000 barrels per day (bpd) by 2020, similar to API’s own estimate of 500,000 bpd. But the agreements start and end there. For API and its members, ever-increasing oil production and the profits that come with it seems to always be the goal, come hell or high water. For us at Oil Change International, protection of our communities and our climate is paramount. No bump in quarterly earnings for an oil company should ever take precedence over the imperative to tackle the greatest crisis in generations.

U.S. oil producers want an end to the export ban in order to gain access to international markets, which would raise the price they receive for their crude oil. Their rationale is obvious: they seek to increase their profits. The industry claims that eliminating the ban will also result in benefits to the consumer. They hail potential gas prices reductions that could come from lifting the ban, while ignoring the fact that the few cents per gallon potential decrease looks remarkably unimpressive when placed in the context of a highly volatile global market.


While the crude oil export ban is not a climate policy, lifting it would hinder, not help, progress towards the goal of climate protection. As the president has said in his climate test for the Keystone XL pipeline, if a project or policy exacerbates the problem of greenhouse gas emissions, it should be rejected. Given the conditions of the current global oil market and Saudi Arabia and OPEC’s recent policy of focusing on maintaining market share rather than maintaining price, additional U.S. oil production will almost certainly lead to an increase in global oil on the market and thus an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. Eliminating the export ban will harm the climate by incentivizing the extraction of more oil that should otherwise be left in the ground, and by stimulating oil demand by raising oil supply.


thehill
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 23 Jul 2015, 17:57:09

Recent analysis from Oil Change International has shown that removing the ban would result in increased oil drilling on the order of 476,000 barrels per day (bpd) by 2020, similar to API’s own estimate of 500,000 bpd". And why would that happen: "...which would raise the price they receive for their crude oil.". An extremely poor assumption IMHO. First, there is no US oil export ban: according to the EIA just last April the US was exporting oil at the rate of 214 million bbls per year. Second US oil is already priced in the global market to a fair degree: it's already competing with about 1 BILLION BBLS of foreign oil that is imported into the US and refined with all the products exported overseas. An obvious those products made from 1 BILLION BBLS OF OIL are priced in the global market.

But as has just been proven drilling in the US is fully dependent upon the price of oil. Exactly how would selling US oil overseas (which we are doing big time today) going to raise the price of oil? Export more US oil and the global has more oil to buy. But reduce the amount of oil going to domestic refiners and they adjust by importing an equal amount of foreign crude because they have a strong foreign market for their products.

The "US ban on oil exports" is one of the most misleading spin floating around the MSM these days IMHO.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby Graeme » Thu 23 Jul 2015, 18:30:08

Yes you are a bit more humble than many of your colleagues but in this case you are wrong:

Senate panel to vote on lifting oil export ban

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources will meet within the next two weeks to consider lifting the 40-year-old ban on exporting crude oil.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said her panel will vote before the August recess, scheduled to start Aug. 7, on a bill that includes oil exports and state revenue sharing for offshore oil and natural gas drilling.

“[Offshore] revenue sharing and oil exports are very keen priorities of mine,” Murkowski told reporters Thursday. "I do a have a bill, it’s a consolidated bill, and it’s my intention that bill will move through the committee markup process before we adjourn for the August break.”

Murkowski has long advocated lifting the oil export ban, arguing that it is outdated and that ending it would help the nation’s economy and reduce the power of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC.

She introduced a bill in May along with Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) and nine other senators to open the United States’ oil market to the world.

Oil producers, amid historically low domestic prices, have endorsed the idea, which would open a much larger market for their product.

But oil refiners, along with some Democrats, environmentalists and labor groups, argue that ending the ban would increase domestic energy prices and spur more demand for oil.

For those reasons, Murkowski left oil exports out of the broad energy bill she introduced Wednesday with Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), the panel’s top Democrat, who is waiting for more research on the issue before taking a formal position on it.

The oil export legislation will be combined with three bills to increase the amount of money states get from offshore drilling in federal waters on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts and around Alaska.


thehill
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 23 Jul 2015, 20:27:04

Graeme - If you disagree please be a little more specific: wrong about what??? The US isn't exporting oil at the rate of 214 million bbls of oil per year? So you have evidence the EIA is full of sh*t? Please share. And if you add crude oil exports with refined products the US, as of last April according to the same EIA, was exporting 1.8 BILLION BBLS PER YEAR! So tell us again how the US isn't exporting a huge amount of petroleum.

And as far as "...ending the ban would increase domestic energy prices and spur more demand for oil." Do you even bother to study the crap you cut and paste: so they say increasing oil prices will increase the price of refined product and that increase in prices will drive demand up????

Read it again and tell us if you truly buy that twisted logic. And for Dog's sake don't answer with more cut and paste crapolla. Use your own f*cking voice for a change. LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby Graeme » Thu 23 Jul 2015, 21:58:50

Now you are becoming rude. Read the first sentence again, and the third to last sentence. Those statements contradict what you said previously. There is an export crude ban. There are bills being considered to change this. And if it does happen, domestic energy prices will increase. Why do I have to spell out this stuff? Is this typical FF industry spin?
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby Pops » Wed 09 Dec 2015, 19:22:39

“It clearly is an item that Sen. McConnell and Republicans are salivating over,” Durbin said of repealing the crude oil export ban. “It would be a windfall to the industry. We don’t know how much some have estimated -- $20, $30 billion a year in profits if they are allowed to do this.”
...

What once seemed impossible is now very real. If lifted, the move would be seen as one of the biggest policy changes for U.S. energy in modern history. It would flood the world market with American oil -- a big win for the industry -- and likely cause the country to lose some ground in its quest to become energy independent. Oil prices are expected to rise, probably along with those fickle gas prices, but the recent squeeze on production felt all the way down to the worker in the oil field would scale back.

As it stands, Congress is closing in on a massive year-end deal with the crude oil export ban at its center. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said Wednesday morning there are three packages being discussed now. "You have omnibus, extenders and this whole question of whether or not you would lift the oil export ban,” he said.

Republicans are eager to lift the embargo. In hasty negotiations over a large omnibus spending bill and robust tax extenders package -- meant to permanently renew tax breaks that wed GOP business priorities with Democrats' priorities for working families -- crude oil exports may hitch a ride if Democrats can be convinced.

Wyden added that lifting the export ban has been a “big focus” of the ongoing discussions. And as Congress faces limited time, crude exports are playing a much larger role than ever anticipated.
...
Durbin also noted the impact lifting the ban would have on refineries, which have benefited from the embargo. In order for a majority of crude, a rudimentary form of oil, to be exported, it currently must go through refineries to be turned into gasoline, diesel and other refined fuels. Refiners like San Antonio-based Valero oppose a repeal, saying it would lead to higher prices at home for consumers. Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) is reportedly crafting a measure that would protect Northeastern refiners from the losses they’d have to swallow if the ban were lifted.

On top of renewal of the Land Water Conservation fund, Durbin said he’s “heard a long list of things” Democrats would want in exchange.
“There have been suggestions that there are things that the oil industry, if they’re going to make all this money, that they should be willing to help us pay for in this country,” Durbin said, indicating a lift in fossil fuel subsidies could be another idea floating around.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why ... f=politics
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19626
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Wed 09 Dec 2015, 21:01:30

According to the EIA last Sept the US was exporting CRUDE OIL and petroleum products at the rate of 1.78 BILLION BBLS PER YEAR. And just 10 years ago during Sept 2005 the yearly rate was only 311 MILLION BBLS. And what about CRUDE OIL alone: the high point in 2015 was last April when the US was exporting CRUDE OIL at the rate of 211 MILLION BBLS PER YEAR. Yes: that's just CRUDE OIL...not refined products. And just 3 years ago in April 2012 the annual export rate was only 15 MILLION BBLS OF CRUDE OIL per year. Any oil company can export any oil they produce in the US to any country they wish if they get a waiver from the govt. The US once exported a bit of CRUDE OIL to Switzerland not that long ago. I've have not seen a report of even one such request not being granted. BTW with respect to Canada (where most of our CRUDE OIL EXPORTS go) such waivers are not required: Congress passed a law years ago that permits unrestricted CRUDE OIL EXPORTS to Canada. IOW ExxonMobil could export every bbl of CRUDE OIL they produce in the US to Canada and doesn't even need to ask the govt for permission to do so. Ohh...and BTW the entire 1 BILLION BBLS OF CANADIAN OIL imported into the US every year can be exported to any country on the planet and they don't even need to ask the US govt for permission: oil from foreign sources have never been subject to a "ban". And the govt made it easier recently: companies had to jump thru a lot of hoops if the Canadian oil imports got mingled in pipelines with domestically produced oil. Now the govt isn't that concerned about it anymore.

So no matter how much it pisses some folks off I'll keep asking the same question: what f*cking CRUDE OIL EXPORT BAN are they talking about? LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby Pops » Thu 10 Dec 2015, 12:02:32

Because restricting a market restricts price?
Good for drillers, bad for refiners and US consumers, unless you expect refiners to suck up the increased price.

Buried in the latest government analysis on lifting the crude-oil export ban is a piece of data that shows why ending the limits will be a heavy lift: It would cut refiners’ profits by $22 billion a year.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... export-ban

Here are crude exports, total and Canada. Obviously 99% goes to Canada and probably most is turned around and sent right back in diluted tar.
Image
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19626
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 10 Dec 2015, 14:35:49

Pops – Latest number from EIA: US oil exports to Canada as of Sept 15: 356,000 bbls/day. Just a rough guess but they say about 25% of the oil sands production imported into the US is light oil. That would mean around 750,000 bbls/day. So US exports of light oil might all be going to Alberta. But it isn’t because some is being shipped to eastern Canadian refiners to blend with their heavy oil imports. But given the fungiability of oil I don’t think that distinction has any practical importance: whether the Canadians are using US oil to blend or refine they are still importing an UNRESTRICTED volume of US production.

But as you point out the US oil exports (150 – 200 million bbls/year) aren’t the 800# gorilla in the room. It’s the 1.6 BILLION BBLS of refinery products we are exporting per year as of 15 Sept. Completely unrestricted product exports. Exports that are a huge profit center for the refineries in our country. And every bbl of oil exported from the US is one less bbl the refiners have access to. So it never was a question of US oil exports being taken away from our consumers: they don’t consume oil…they consume refinery products. And those US refineries are putting out 4,349,316,000 bbls of product per year as of 15 Sept. IOW about 37% of all the refinery products produced in the US (from domestic and imported oil) is exported. If we didn’t export that 200 million bbls/year we would have an extra 4.5% of refinery products available in the US.

So here’s the other important question: since the Canadians are currently able to import all the US oil they want with no restrictions exactly who does the “lift the oil export ban” crowd expect to buy that US oil? Not Mexico…they would still be a net oil exporter to the US. China or EU countries? China gets most of the oil it buys from the ME and there’s no shortage there. Likewise for the EU. Seems like the only way a US oil producer could sell any additional oil to any country is to take market share away from their current suppliers. No problem: all a US producer has to do is offer their production for less than the price current suppliers are getting along with a deduct for any additional transport costs might be incurred.

But as I pointed out companies regularly get exemptions to the oil “export ban”. As of 15 Sept, in addition to Canada, our oil is being exported to Italy, the Netherlands, Singapore and Switzerland. But how much is going to those non-Canadian importers of US oil: 13%. So since the Canadian have unrestricted access to US oil and have the lowest transport cost of any other country they are buying 87% of all the available oil exports. So again a simple question: if any company can sell as much of their oil to Canada as they want without a permit from the US govt why isn’t every US oil producer selling all of the oil they want to export to the Canadians? Not sure why countries like the Netherlands or Switzerland are importing US oil. But we do have some very unique oils in this country with very special properties that create very special refined products. At one time oil from a field in S Texas was being transported by truck and sold at a high premium to a refinery in Arkansas because it was used to create a very special lubricant.

It would be interesting to see if they officially lifted the so called oil export ban and just see how much, if by any meaning amount, additional oil is exported. Imagine after all the political bullsh*t going on in DC if there were no significant amount of addition oil exported if there were suddenly no “ban”.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 10 Dec 2015, 15:00:51

And if interested the top 6 importers of US refinery products from top to bottom: Mexico, Canada, Netherlands, China, Columbia and Japan. They account for about half of all the US refinery exports...about 30 BILLION GALLONS PER YEAR.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby Pops » Wed 16 Dec 2015, 14:00:34

Lawmakers have agreed to lift the four-decade-old ban on crude oil exports as part of a spending and tax package announced by congressional leadership on Tuesday night, according to a GOP lawmaker.

In exchange, Republicans agreed to extend a series of expired or expiring renewable energy tax breaks. Both the wind production tax credit and the solar investment tax credit won five-year extensions in the tax and spending package unveiled on Tuesday, the GOP lawmaker said.

Lifting the crude oil ban was a key goal for Republicans, who have said American oil producers should have expanded access to the international market at a time of low prices and new competition from Iranian oil.
Democrats have long proposed trading the renewable energy credits for crude oil exports, though until recently there was little movement on getting an exports-tax credit package to the Senate floor.

But Republicans were aggressive in pushing to including the crude oil bill in the end-of-the-year tax overhaul and spending bills. Democrats worked to tie exports to renewables in the package, with Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) saying Tuesday morning that Republicans were weighing a Democratic offer to accept either both provisions or neither of them.

Export supporters say the possibly of Iranian oil hitting the global market as sanctions are lifted on the country would hurt American producers. Ending the export ban, a policy instituted to respond to the OPEC oil embargo in the 1970s, would help level the playing field, they said.

The White House has opposed lifting the export ban on its own, saying the Commerce Department already has the right to approve exports on a limited basis.

Even so, officials didn’t rule out this week some type of compromise on the matter, implying they supported bringing renewable energy credits into the mix.

“We oppose legislation that would lift the ban on the exporting of American crude oil,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday.

“But we certainly do want to see Congress — and hopefully they will in the context of this budget agreement — make the kinds of investments in renewable and clean energy that are good for our economy and have the potential to create good American middle-class jobs down the line.”

Green groups have opposed lifting the ban at all, warning about the impact it would have on the use of fossil fuels around the world.

Bill McKibben, the co-founder of the climate change group 350.org, called lifting the ban hypocritical in light of the climate agreement leaders reached in Paris this weekend.

“Doing it the week after the solemn and pious talk about saving the planet is not like some parent who smoked dope in the ‘70s warning their daughter about drugs — it’s like a parent who is currently high warning their daughter about drugs,” he wrote in an op-ed for The Hill. “You might as well hold the launch party for your vegetarian cookbook at a steakhouse.”

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-enviro ... -renewable


In a move considered unthinkable even a few months ago, congressional leaders have agreed to lift the nation’s 40-year-old ban on oil exports, a historic action that reflects political and economic shifts driven by a boom in U.S. oil drilling.

The measure allowing oil exports is at the center of a deal congressional leaders announced early Wednesday on spending and tax legislation. Both the House and Senate still must pass it and President Barack Obama must sign it into law.

The deal would lift the ban, a priority for Republicans and the oil industry, and at the same time adopt environmental and renewable measures that Democrats sought. These include extending and then phasing down wind and solar-tax credits; reauthorizing for three years a conservation fund; and excluding any measures that block major Obama administration environmental regulations.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/congression ... 1450242995
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19626
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Wed 16 Dec 2015, 23:35:24

And once again the FACTS as reported by US govt agencies: There is no US oil export ban. Last Nov the US was exporting CRUDE OIL at the rate of 200 million bbls per year. Oil has been exported to EU and S American countries thanks to EXEMPTIONS granted by the feds. Exemption requests that have never been denied. But the vast majority of US oil exports go to Canada. And guess what: companies don’t even have to request an exemption… long ago congress passed law allowing UNRESTRICTED oil exports to Canada. Yes: Canada, thanks to a congressional law, is free to import as much US oil as any company here wants to sell them.

And guess what else almost no one else knows: under certain conditions the US govt is already authorized to export some of our SPR oil reserves to Canada

And even that 200 million bbl per year of OIL EXPORTS pales in comparison to the 1 BILLION BBLS of EXPORTED refinery products made from US oil every year. So a simple question: what’s the practical difference between exporting 1 billion bbls of US oil per year and exporting the refinery products made from 1 billion bbls of US oil per year?

Amazing what FACTS one can learn on govt websites compared to what folks think they're learning from the MSM. LOL.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby Plantagenet » Thu 17 Dec 2015, 17:48:21

The 2015 budget omnibus bill includes language to repeal the crude oil export ban. Congress has voted to pass the bill and it looks like O is going to sign it.

Seeing as how the US is actually a huge IMPORTER of oil, its hard to see what this change will do, except possibly cause US oil prices to rise to parity with Brent prices.
250 million thousand people have died of covid---Joe Biden
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama

-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 25379
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 18 Dec 2015, 01:36:59

"The 2015 budget omnibus bill includes language to repeal the crude oil export ban". Just like the bill (that's still in effect today) the congress passed and the POTUS signed years ago allowing unlimited exports of US oil to Canada...by far the largest US oil importer. And the same govt had passed regulations some time ago that allows UNLIMITED EXPORT of production from any shale play if companies run it first thru a cheap stabilizer in the field. After doing so the same relatively unchanged bbls can be exported since they are now classified as "refinery products".
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting The US Crude Export Ban

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 18 Dec 2015, 12:43:09

"The 2015 budget omnibus bill includes language to repeal the crude oil export ban". Just like the bill (that's still in effect today) the congress passed and the POTUS signed years ago allowing unlimited exports of US oil to Canada...by far the largest US oil importer. And the same govt had passed regulations some time ago that allows UNLIMITED EXPORT of production from any shale play if companies run it first thru a cheap stabilizer in the field. After doing so the same relatively unchanged bbls can be exported since they are now classified as "refinery products".
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests