Energy Tomorrow Blog
Posted July 25, 2018
Tariffs and quotas on imported steel and other products appear to be moving from a debate in Washington to Americans’ dinner tables, as farmers and others in the human food chain voice concern that a trade war – tariffs and retaliatory measures by other countries – is impacting food costs.
Posted July 25, 2018
While the administration’s goal of enhancing the economy is laudable — as is their continued promise to promote U.S. energy dominance— their latest action to deny exclusions from tariffs under Section 232 on imported steel used in certain parts of natural gas and oil industry operations is a misguided decision that could impact American energy production as well as American jobs and consumers.
Posted July 19, 2018
The Trump administration’s rejection of Plains All American’s request for an exclusion to the administration’s tariffs on imported steel – which the company planned for a pipeline out of the Permian Basin, the nation’s most dynamic oilfield – illustrates the head-on collision between trade policies and energy goals.
Caught in the middle: American consumers and U.S. energy security.
Posted July 16, 2018
Tariffs and quotas on imported steel imposed by the Trump administration are self-inflicted potholes on the path to the administration’s goal of U.S. “energy dominance.”They’re bad for American energy, which uses steel throughout its operations and delivery networks. They’re bad for American manufacturing, they’re bad for American consumers, and they’re bad for America.
Posted June 20, 2018
Two charts pretty well capture the what’s at stake for U.S. energy – specifically exports of domestic crude oil – in an intensifying trade standoff between the United States and China.According to U.S. Energy Information Administration figures, this is a very big deal. Big as in U.S. crude oil exports to China accounted for about one-fifth of all U.S. oil exports in 2017 – growing from basically nothing in 2013 to 81.6 million barrels last year.
Posted June 13, 2018
The U.S. Energy Department’s latest study on the economic impacts of exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) reaches a by-now familiar top-line conclusion: Exporting U.S. LNG is good for the economy, and those benefits will outweigh domestic cost impacts.
We say familiar, because this is the fifth DOE study on LNG exports – and the fifth to describe broad, positive economic impacts for the United States from shipping natural gas to friends and allies overseas – which should end claims that LNG exports could harm American consumers.Certainly, no one can say the issue hasn’t been thoroughly analyzed – not after five government studies and two commissioned by our industry (see here and here).
Posted June 6, 2018
For months, ISO New England CEO Gordon van Welie has had a consistent message: insufficient natural gas infrastructure continues to put the region’s customers at risk of service interruptions during periods of peak demand that often coincide with extreme weather conditions.
Posted June 1, 2018
The decision by the Trump administration to impose tariffs on imported steel, including key allies Canada, Mexico and the European Union, is the wrong direction for U.S. energy policy. While the full effect of these tariffs on steel-intensive business—and the U.S. economy—remains to be seen, the impacts will ripple through the natural gas and oil industry, compromising energy production and posing a threat to America’s national security.
Posted May 8, 2018
There’s no denying that North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has been very good for U.S. energy over the years. Yet, whether we will be able to say the same about NAFTA 2.0 years down the road is an open question.
That’s because the Trump administration has signaled a key NAFTA provision safeguarding U.S. energy investments in Canada and Mexico shouldn’t be included in a revised agreement. It’s an outcome that would be a significant setback for our energy and security interests.
Posted May 3, 2018
More on NAFTA – the North American Free Trade Agreement – which U.S., Canadian and Mexican negotiators are working to modernize.
Critically important to U.S. interests in any NAFTA 2.0 is keeping investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) protections in the deal so that American investments and American property are protected against unfair treatment by host nation governments. ISDS is fundamental to this, which supports continuing U.S. investment in natural gas and oil projects outside this country. That, in turn, is fundamental to U.S. energy and national security. A couple of new videos underscore those points.