Dr. Ireland explains the benefits of lifting the decades-old ban on exporting U.S. crude oil.

The Jacki Daily Show ^ | 8/19/14 | Dr Ed Ireland

[RaceBannon]

In Segment 1, Dr. Ireland explains the benefits of lifting the decades-old ban on exporting U.S. crude oil.

In Segment 2, Dr. Ireland explains the benefits of building the Keystone XL pipeline.

[RaceBannon]

The host of the Jacki Daily show has had an impressive career in energy, law, and politics.

Most recently, Jacki served as General Counsel to an engineering firm specializing in energy, national security and environmental cleanup. Previously, she served many years as legal counsel on Capitol Hill to the Chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution and the former Ranking Member of the Commercial and Administrative Law Subcommittee, advising on the oversight of federal agencies. Prior to her career in Washington, she worked as a corporate litigator, and as an Assistant Vice President for a national bank.

She entered public life at a young age, as a finalist in the Miss Teen of America pageant. She also served as the Public Relations Director for a statewide political organization.

Jacki studied Economics, Spanish, and World History at Marshall University (Society of Yeager Scholars), Oxford University in the United Kingdom, and the University of Zaragoza in Spain. She is an alumna of the Vanderbilt University Law School, where she served as the President of the law school’s Federalist Society chapter.

Jacki has an extensive network in her six overstuffed rolodexes from which the show draws its guests—including industry leaders representing all parts of the energy sector (oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear, solar, and wind), and government officials, journalists, and political insiders. Often, Jacki will know the day’s most-wanted guest and be able to secure the guest with a personal call.

Jacki is from the Ohio River Valley, where the shale runs deep. She descends from a long line of energy workers, including roughnecks, railroaders, coal miners, and nuclear energy specialists.

[Yo-Yo]

After listening to segment one, I would like to know why Dr. Ireland wasn't explaining why we should be building new refineries here in the United States that can handle the lighter "fracked" crude, instead of arguing that we should be selling it overseas and importing heavier crude that is suited to our current refineries.

[thackney]

why we should be building new refineries

We already refine more oil than we use in the US. We export the surplus refined products. There is not an refinery shortage.

Exporting the expensive light sweet while importing the cheaper heavy sour many of our refineries are already optimized to use makes the most sense.

[Yo-Yo]

You and I have had this conversation before. The "reason" for alternative energy sources such as wind and solar is to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. It makes more sense to me from a security standpoint, if not a purely economic one, to convert refineries to use the crude we produce within our borders, rather than sell it overseas and import crude we don't produce.

Yours is a 'next quarter' economic strategy, not a long term energy independence strategy.

[thackney]

We don't have nationalized refinery companies. Companies are in it to make profit. They don't shut down existing refinery units using cheap oil to build new ones that use expensive oil. Why does the government get to pick and choose who is allowed to export? Why is the industry allowed to send crude oil through a "splitter" and export both ends but the oil producer is not? We need less government in our industry. The government should not be picking winners and losers. I want a smaller government, you want more.

Do you want the government to decide who you are allowed to sell your products to?

In the long run, the american consumer benefits from lower cost with less government.

[thackney]

The "reason" for alternative energy sources such as wind and solar is to reduce our dependency on foreign oil.

False. We don't use oil to generate electrical power. The small amount of petroleum used in power generation is essentially all refineries leftovers like petroleum coke and residual oil. It cannot be used for fuel for cars and trucks. It doesn't effect the amount of oil we use.

[RaceBannon]

Different subject, however I am sure that some will ask her on that as a topic, it might just be a short answer, though

[RaceBannon]

I was field service on peak power units for a few years, gg4 and gg8 burn 1 gallon a second during operation, either diesel or jp5 , some have gone ng

[thackney]

Almost all peakers have gone to Nat Gas now. A few fuel oil burning peakers remain but compared to our total oil imports, you couldn’t see the difference in the total if they stopped.

[RaceBannon]

Plus you only get 3 hours a day running time on a twin pack or two 😊

[Yo-Yo]

We don't have nationalized refinery companies. Companies are in it to make profit. They don't shut down existing refinery units using cheap oil to build new ones that use expensive oil. Why does the government get to pick and choose who is allowed to export? Why is the industry allowed to send crude oil through a "splitter" and export both ends but the oil producer is not? We need less government in our industry. The government should not be picking winners and losers. I want a smaller government, you want more.

I lived through the 1973 and 1979 OPEC embargoes. I also lived through the Carter "windfall profits tax" as a result of the OPEC embargo. When it comes to choosing between maximum profits and greatest public good, sometimes government does need to make that call. I do not want more government, but I also don't want no government.

Do you want the government to decide who you are allowed to sell your products to?

When the product is strategic, the government already does. Can Boeing sell F-15s to Russia? Can Symantec export encryption software to China? Energy is just as strategic a product as those.

In the long run, the american consumer benefits from lower cost with less government.

Generally this is true, and the success of Fracking is an example.

Exploitation of resources are regulated because of past abuses. But in the long run, Americans would benefit more from being less dependent on foreign oil, and if that includes added expense to the oil industry in the short term, then that is nothing new. Were it left purely to the industry, we would not have the ultra-low sulfur diesel requirements that refiners get to charge so much more to produce. I don't know if ultra-low sulfur diesel is necessary so that NO_x emissions can be lowered, but I do know that left to the free market alone, emissions would not be a top priority to either manufacturers or energy producers, and refiners wouldn't have invested the billions necessary to process out sulfur from sour crudes.