Energy Tomorrow Blog
America’s Energy ‘Inflection Point’
oil and natural gas production texas policy us energy security economic growth
Mark Green
Posted June 29, 2021
During a speech to the Houston Economics Club last week, API President and CEO Mike Sommers talked about the United States reaching an “inflection point” in terms of its energy and economic future. Choices made today could have impact far into the future.
As the world’s leading producer of the world’s leading energy – natural gas and oil – the U.S. can choose the market-based approach that over the past decade led to abundant domestic energy, supporting economic growth, reducing reliance on foreign oil and building greater security.
The other choice is the apparent approach of the Biden administration to curtail domestic production of natural gas and oil, swapping their reliability and affordability for aspirational fuels that could take the U.S. back to a period of energy uncertainty.
Q&A: Transparency and Standardization in ESG Reporting
Environment ESG climate change policy
Mark Green
Posted June 24, 2021
As an integral of its Climate Action Framework, API has developed a template of core greenhouse gas (GHG) indicators to guide individual natural gas and oil companies in their climate-related reporting. The template will help standardize reporting on a base set of specific indicators. Companies that use the template will do so in 2022 to report 2021 data. In the Q&A below, Dr. Aaron Padilla, API manager of climate and ESG policy, explains what the template is, how it was developed and its role in industry’s efforts to address the risks of climate change.
Nation's Need for Secure, Accessible Energy at Stake in Policy Debate
us energy security domestic production pipelines policy
Dean Foreman
Posted June 10, 2021
Throughout the 2021 economic recovery, API’s data have demonstrated the intertwined relationship between the nation’s recovering economy and affordable, reliable energy. Leading economic indicators have continued to rise, and along with them so has oil demand – even as domestic oil drilling and supply have fallen.
According to the current Bloomberg consensus of economic forecasters, U.S. real GDP growth could average 6.6% in 2021 compared with 2020 -- its strongest expansion since 1984, when the real price of West Texas Intermediate crude oil was just over $70 per barrel. Coincidentally, recent oil prices have been at similar levels, and the key question now is whether we have the energy supply to support such a torrid pace of growth.
In that context, actions by the Biden administration that negatively impact or could impact domestic oil and natural gas production appear detached from the nation’s critical need for secure, accessible energy.
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