Why no president has slowed the U.S. oil boom

The Washington Post ^ | August 16, 2024 at 6:00 a.m. EDT | Maxine Joselow

[E. Pluribus Unum]

As he campaigned for president in 2020, Joe Biden made a bold promise at a New Hampshire town hall, adding repetition for emphasis: “No more drilling on federal lands. Period. Period. Period. Period.”

The Biden administration has now outpaced the Trump administration in approving permits for drilling on public lands, and the United States is producing more oil than any country ever has. The unplanned fossil fuel boom reflects an uncomfortable truth for Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris: It is difficult for any president to stop the spigot of U.S. oil production, a leading driver of both the economy and climate change.

“If you were to show someone who came from Mars the line of U.S. oil and gas production over the last 15 years, they probably would not be able to tell whether a Republican or Democrat was in the White House,” said Jason Bordoff, founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University.

Oil drilling continues to be a core issue in Donald Trump’s quest to retake the White House. Trump and his supporters argue that Biden and Harris have waged “a war on energy.” The former president has pledged to “drill, baby, drill” and to restore America’s “energy dominance.”

The reality is the United States is already dominant. The country is expected to produce 13.2 million barrels of oil per day on average this year — millions of barrels more than Saudi Arabia or Russia.

America's crude oil output has increased under Democratic and Republican administrations

U.S. crude oil production, in million barrels per day

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Yet Biden has struggled to significantly wean the U.S. economy from fossil fuels because of legal obligations, political challenges and market demand, according to interviews with a dozen current and former administration officials, energy analysts, climate activists and others who have worked closely with the White House.

The end of "fossil" fuels is the end of food.

[WayneH]

Then, why are we still importing oil?

[ridesthemiles]

ARE WE REFILLING THE STRATEGIC RESERVES????

[Responsibility2nd]

What is this (bleep)? Has the Compost forgotten the severe damage Biden did when he canceled the Keystone pipeline?

AI:

 

President Joe Biden's decision to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline had several significant effects:

1. Job Losses and Economic Impact: The cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline resulted in the loss of thousands of potential jobs. The U.S. Department of Energy reported that the project would have created between 16,000 and 59,000 jobs and had a positive economic impact of between $3.4 billion and $9.6 billion. The project labor agreement with four labor unions promised 42,000 American jobs and $2 billion in total wages.
2. Energy Independence and Security: Critics argue that canceling the pipeline moved the U.S. further away from energy independence and could have contributed to higher gas prices. The pipeline was expected to transport 830,000 barrels of crude oil daily from Canada to the U.S., which could have supported energy security.
3. Environmental and Climate Considerations: The decision was celebrated by climate activists as a victory for environmental protection and climate change mitigation. The pipeline was seen as a significant contributor to fossil fuel consumption and carbon emissions. The cancellation aligned with Biden's commitment to addressing climate change and transitioning to a clean energy economy.
4. International Relations: The decision strained U.S.-Canada relations, as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressed disappointment. The Canadian province of Alberta had invested over $1 billion in the project, hoping for economic benefits from increased oil sands development.
5. Regulatory and Political Implications: The cancellation was part of a broader strategy by the Biden administration to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and increase regulatory scrutiny on energy projects. This move was criticized by Republican lawmakers and some industry representatives as part of an "anti-energy agenda".

[crusty old prospector]

“No more drilling on federal lands. Period. Period. Period. Period.”

Boy, was that a big windy.

[crusty old prospector]

Cuz we use more than we produce.

[Fledermaus]

We can produce all the energy we need and export the excess.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Then, why are we still importing oil?

Because oil is a fungible commodity and, depending on market conditions, a portion will always be imported and a portion will always be exported.

The oil producers will sell to whoever offers them the best price.

The refiners will buy from whoever offers them the best price.

Sometimes that domestically, sometimes its not. It's called arbitrage.

[rktman]

Nope.

[buwaya]

The US also exports oil, and refined products.

net-net the US is an oil exporter, not an importer.

The US is a big country. In some cases it makes sense to import oil because it is locally more convenient. For instance oil from Canada. Also in some cases the US is better equipped to refine a given type of oil than some other countries and so can get it a bit cheaper - the case with Venezuelan heavy oil.

[buwaya]

“Cuz we use more than we produce.”

No longer the case.

[alloysteel]

One president DID significantly slow the oil boom. By suppressing the production of oil within the United States, and artificially pushing up the world price of petroleum, there may have been more oil produced, but at a significantly higher price, skewing the demand/supply price point, because oil DEMAND was increasing faster throughout the world faster than supply to fill it. It is a delicate balancing act, to manage the price point on anything, high enough to make a decent rate of return to the producer, yet not so high as to suppress demand. As the price drops in response to slowing consumption, the production is encouraged to resume levels to meet the new wave of consumption.

But for this to work, a stable currency is vital. If the purchasing value of each individual unit of currency is falling, this also leads to a skewed price point.

[Blood of Tyrants]

And why is it $100/barrel?

[Round Earther]

“And why is it $100/barrel?”

If you are paying $100 a barrel, you are getting ripped off.

[Alas Babylon!]

Maybe Joe should have got one of those tampons from Walz’s Minnesota high schools to help with all those periods!

[T Ruth]

Why the Washington Post Has No Credibility

[E. Pluribus Unum]

That’s why I posted the article under the topic “Humor.”

[buwaya]

In spite of stupidity like the Keystone shutdown, the US petroleum (and gas) industries have constantly improved their technology.

The ability to produce more out of marginal fields has overcome the idiocies of the government, at least in terms of total production.

Keystone transports Canadian oil. The Keystone pipeline system itself is in production, most of it for over a decade. The cancelled project was Keystone XL, which was to be a capacity expansion using another route. The Keystone system has in part since worked around the political problems through capacity expansions on its old routes.

Capitalism has a way to route around bad government policy. The solutions are not as cheap (for everyone) as they should be with better policies, but life goes on.

[buwaya]

Brent crude (the benchmark price) is 78.37 today.

[buwaya]

This is true. Oil prices have been affected by global (not just US) inflation.