Energy Tomorrow Blog
Energy Policies and Potential Impacts on Household Budgets
consumers consumer products affordable energy policy white house
Dean Foreman
Posted February 16, 2021
Most people get riled up when energy costs rise, especially prices at the pump. It’s understandable; energy represented 6.5% of household expenditures in 2019, per the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Expenditure Survey. Yet, as we’ll see, energy policy choices can affect far more than just what you pay for a gallon of gasoline or your monthly electricity bill.
For example, imagine how you would feel if you learned that U.S. energy policies materially raised the cost of houses and vehicles, in addition to the fuel they require, the costs of which have been on the rise. Those two together plus energy represent more than half of a typical household’s expenditures.
Higher energy costs are a distinct possibility with the Biden administration’s decision to halt new federal natural gas and oil leasing, potentially reducing domestic production, as well as possible moves on the regulatory front and other actions that could limit drilling or hydraulic fracturing. These could put upward pressure on energy costs that then would ripple across various sectors since virtually everything has an energy component.
When Energy Policy is at Odds with Policy Goals
president policy anwr conservation jobs federal leases
Mark Green
Posted January 28, 2021
We’ve talked about the potential harm to economic recovery and U.S. energy security in the Biden administration’s early, misguided policy actions – killing the Keystone XL pipeline and halting new natural gas and oil leasing on federal lands and waters, the apparent first step toward banning federal development altogether.
Taking a closer look at the flurry of executive orders from the White House, the president’s energy actions also run counter to his own objectives, including these three:
Advancing “Made in America” concepts; conservation and environmental protection and improving the U.S. government’s relationships with Native Americans.
Administration’s Leasing Approach is a ‘Step Backwards’ on U.S. Energy
us energy security federal leases white house policy
Mark Green
Posted January 27, 2021
As the Biden administration takes the first step toward a complete ban on federal natural gas and oil development – including the offshore that accounted for more than one-fifth of U.S. oil production in 2019 – turning America’s energy strength into weakness by launching a new era of increased dependence on foreign oil, let’s see how out of step the approach is with the American people.
From polling of voters last summer in key battleground and other states: 93% said it’s important the U.S. produce enough energy to avoid being reliant on foreign oil; 90% said it’s important to create access to domestic energy; 69% said safe domestic natural gas and oil production makes the U.S. less reliant on foreign energy and has increased U.S. security. (Just 16% disagreed.)
All three viewpoints sharply contrast with where the Biden administration appears to be going with its announced halt on natural gas and oil leasing on federal lands and waters – which many believe will become a full ban on federal development.
Put simply, the White House is advancing an import-more-oil policy – one that would discard the hard-earned security, economic and environmental gains from a decade and a half of domestic energy resurgence.
Election’s Dynamics Point to Policies That Sustain U.S. Energy Leadership
election president policy us energy security
Mark Green
Posted December 3, 2020
Post-election analysis says that the U.S. electorate is mostly moderate and expects moderate, sensible policy positions – an important point as Team Biden assembles and a new Congress prepares to convene.
There’s this from veteran Democratic pollster Mark Penn in the Wall Street Journal: The nation is largely moderate, practical and driven by common sense over ideology. … The message from the voters is that we are not divided into two extreme camps. Rather, they are more centrist in nature and outlook, and that a president who governs too far to the right or left is likely to be left behind in the next election.
And Daily Beast columnist Matt Lewis: If Biden wants to keep his winning streak alive, he will keep running the same winning play that got him this far: He will run right down the middle.
On energy, right down the middle, practical and common sense is best for the country’s energy security, economy and environmental protection. This acknowledges the primary role the U.S. energy revolution – made possible by safe, modern hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling technologies – has played in fundamentally changing the trajectory for U.S. security, global energy leadership, economic growth and emissions reduction.
Driving the Wrong Direction in California
california electric vehicles policy consumers
Mark Green
Posted September 24, 2020
Four observations about California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s executive order requiring that by 2035 all new cars sold in the state must be zero-emission vehicles – as well as his push for halting fracking in the state:
1. The governor's executive order could seriously impact middle-class Californians.
2. Seriously, a zero-emissions mandate in a state that has struggled to keep the lights on?
3. There's rhetoric and there's reality.
4. State natural gas and oil production is being targeted.
Ban on New Federal Development Would Risk U.S. Security, Jobs, Environment
federal lands offshore oil production policy jobs emission reductions
Mark Green
Posted September 9, 2020
Four questions for proponents of policies that would effectively end new natural gas and oil development on federal lands and waters:
Where will the oil come from that won’t be produced here at home because of such a policy?
Where will nearly 1 million Americans find new work after this policy costs them their jobs?
What will Americans do without because of higher energy costs resulting from the policy?
How will the U.S. continue making environmental progress if increased coal use caused by the policy raises carbon dioxide emissions?
These and other questions are prompted by a new analysis projecting the effects of halting new natural gas and oil on federal lands and waters -- prepared for API by OnLocation with the U.S. Energy Information Administration's National Energy Modeling System, which EIA uses to produce its Annual Energy Outlook.
New Polling Shows Americans’ Strong Belief in the Value of U.S. Natural Gas and Oil
poll energy development energy policy election
Mark Green
Posted August 20, 2020
Additional Energy Tariffs Could Harm U.S., Consumers
Mark Green
Posted September 10, 2019
Natural gas and oil, the bellwether of the U.S. economy, continue to be the collateral damage in the administration’s trade war with China – frustratingly ironic given the White House’s stated goal of bolstering American energy.
Important parts for offshore natural gas and oil drilling and production, as well as critical parts and accessories for energy projects are among products imported from China that will be subject to a 30% tariff as of Oct. 1 – an increase from the current 25% tariff.
Higher costs for these needed components could increase the cost of production and, ultimately, energy costs to U.S. consumers.
New Modeling Shows Impacts of Trade Policy Gone Awry
policy trade oil and natural gas
Jessica Lutz
Posted February 20, 2019
Earlier this month we talked about the unforced error of the administration’s tariff and quota policies that hamstring the economy, detailing the findings of recent report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Now, new modeling has reviewed those suspicions in the context of the energy trade, and the indications are clear: The escalating trade wars could significantly limit the U.S. energy revolution and the benefits to Americans that it would otherwise bring.
The recent report, part of BP’s annual “Outlook,” a macro-look at the global energy system over the next 30 years, models a number of different scenarios including one in which global trade disputes persist and worsen. The results of this “less globalization” scenario indicate that the continuation of these policies would slow global GDP growth by 6 percent and energy demand growth by 4 percent in 2040. To make matters worse, the effect could be intensified in countries and regions most exposed to foreign trade – like the U.S.
Sustaining U.S. Energy Through Right Policies
oil and natural gas production policy colorado
Mark Green
Posted July 31, 2018
U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry makes a number of important points about domestic natural gas and oil production, hydraulic fracturing and U.S. energy exports in a piece for CNBC. These include: The United States is shedding dependence on imported energy; U.S. energy exports are helping friends and allies overseas; and natural gas is helping the U.S. lead in cutting greenhouse gas emissions.