Energy Tomorrow Blog
Posted June 19, 2019
Another big indication of the global impact of the U.S. energy revolution comes in the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) oil market report and its outlook for 2020, which says the United States will be responsible for virtually all of this year’s increase in oil supply. …
The fact that the U.S. is projected to fill this role is significant in terms of global market stability and the world’s security – that is, the United States as this growth supplier, versus less stable and/or less friendly regimes.
Posted September 2, 2014
Reuters reports that Washington is hearing from more allies who want the U.S. to lift its ban on crude oil exports, with South Korea and Mexico joining the European Union in pressing the case for U.S. oil. Reuters:
South Korean President Park Geun-hye told a visiting U.S. delegation of lawmakers on the House of Representatives energy committee on Aug. 11 that tapping into the gusher of ultra-light, sweet crude emerging from places like Texas and North Dakota was a priority, the lawmakers said. One of South Korea's leading refiners has opened discussions with the government in Seoul over how to encourage Washington to open the taps, three sources in South Korea with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters. Mexico is also eagerly awaiting word from the U.S. Department of Commerce on possible shipments and the EU wants U.S. oil and natural gas exports covered by a proposed trade agreement with Washington, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
Posted August 13, 2014
Ever since the Keystone XL pipeline first started clearing environmental reviews by the U.S. State Department, opponents basically have been left with arguing that State missed one thing or another in an effort to drag out the federal review. Of course, the credibility of the tactic has suffered evaporation with each successful State review, now five in all.
That’s the context for the latest bid to undercut State’s thorough analysis – an analysis that claims that State underestimated Keystone XL’s emissions impact by failing to consider that the pipeline would increase supply and drive down global prices leading to increased demand (and emissions).
The economic foundation is suspect, as Alberta University Professor Andrew Leach writes in an article for MacLean’s, here.
Jane Van Ryan
Posted October 15, 2010