Posted on 12/31/2014 6:30:57 AM PST by thackney
...The two measures are clearest signs yet that the administration is ready to allow more of the booming U.S. shale oil production to be sold overseas,....
Output of very light oil has been especially strong, leading to a glut that threatens to overwhelm domestic demand. The constraints helped fuel bumper profits for refiners such as Valero Energy Corp and PBF Energy Inc, but angered drillers such as Hess Corp that say they were selling at a discount....
The steps on Tuesday were "certainly not designed to add or detract from what can be exported. We are trying to make the boundary line clearer," said the official.
In its FAQ, which the agency has been working on for most of this year, the BIS confirmed or clarified a number of nuanced issues related to the rules, including:
* Confirmation that lease condensate processed through a distillation tower is considered a petroleum product, and therefore can be exported without constraint.
* Clarification of what constitutes "distillation" for export, including the fact that pressure reduction alone, and flash drums with so-called heater-treaters or separators, would not be sufficient to qualify oil for overseas sales.
* A reminder that most petroleum products may be "exported to most of the world without a license," a message seen by many analysts as blessing the process of self-certification.
* And clarification that "a minimum amount of mixing" between exportable foreign crude and restricted domestic crude may be allowed, a note likely making it easier to ship Canadian crude through U.S. pipelines and ports.
(For the FAQ, see: http://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/policy-guidance/faqs)
...Domestic pressure has also grown. Several lawmakers in the House of Representatives and Senate have said that unless energy companies can export oil to Asia and Europe, the drilling boom will eventually choke on its own output.
(Excerpt) Read more at rigzone.com ...
No changes made, only further clarification that exporting raw condensate, like raw crude oil, is still banned. Simple flash separation or the like is not enough processing for export, just like crude oil, just like before.
Once the condensate goes through a distillation column, where the condensate is heated to vapor and separated, it is considered a product. Just like crude oil, just like before.
No changes have been made.
But I guess it is tough to get an article published if it doesn't sound like news is being made.
The Case for Allowing U.S. Crude Oil Exports ...
http://www.cfr.org/oil/case-allowing-us-crude-oil-exports/p31005
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is for it.
Much of the country’s rapidly growing production of light crude oil, including lease condensates (i.e., ultra-light oil), comes from either areas where refiners are not interested in or able to process it, given that many U.S. refineries are configured to run lower-quality crude oil, or in parts of the country with inadequate transportation infrastructure. With few viable domestic buyers, producers are forced to choose between leaving oil in the ground and pumping it at depressed prices. These artificially low prices slow additional U.S. crude oil production.
Exxon CEO Says Lifting Crude Export Ban Would Create US Jobs
http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=135275
October 02, 2014
Scrapping a decades-old ban on U.S. crude oil exports would spur job creation and boost energy security by encouraging new investment that lifts production, Exxon Mobil Corp’s chief executive said on Thursday. - See more at: http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=135275#sthash.JnQhwzMC.dpuf
Exactly. We need EPA restrictions loosened on building new refineries to produce domestic petroleum products for profitable export.
Do you understand we already refine more than we use ourselves? We have surplus refinery capacity, we already export the surplus.
Do we have more refining capacity for DOMESTIC crude than we use? If so, why are we choking on the over supply of crude?
US refineries spent Billions of dollars to upgrade to use the lowest cost oil, that also contains the highest energy content, heavy oil.
Then our shale takes off and most of our increases in oil production are light to ultra-light oil.
Now you want to force refineries to spend Billions more dollars, to use a more expensive fuel with a lower BTU value?
Why not just let the market work? Instead of having the government trying to manipulate the market and always staying behind the curve?
I like the idea of importing cheap oil, because our refineries are more modern, while exporting expensive oil to others with less complex refineries. We keep more jobs in the US and we stay competitive in the market, for both refining and oil production.
The condensate described in this article, doesn’t typically contain significant quantities of hydrocarbons that can even be used for most transpiration fuels. It is too light; the hydrocarbon molecules are too small.
Adam Smith's invisible hand has a firm grip on them.
I’m not for forcing anything except the EPA from imposing excessive restrictions that impede building new refining/processing/transporting facilities/pipelines for domestic crude oil and nat gas production, consumption and export. However, repealing the export ban on domestic crude is a tall order. There would have to be some sweeteners for key Rat senators to sign-on to a veto-proof bill to the White House. Those sweeteners could hopefully involve opening federal controlled land in their states to drilling (read jobs).
However, repealing the export ban on domestic crude is a tall order.
I do not agree. It would mean more jobs and investment in the US on that alone.
Exxon CEO says lifting crude export ban would create U.S. jobs
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/02/exxon-ceo-exports-idUSL2N0RX21120141002
The Exxon-Mobil CEO Is Right Here; The Crude Oil Export Ban Should End
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2014/10/05/the-exxon-mobil-ceo-is-right-here-the-crude-oil-export-ban-should-end/
Texas congressman introduces bill to end export ban
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2014/12/09/texas-congressman-introduces-bill-to-end-export-ban/
“In response to the GAO’s recommendation, the Energy Department said a broader, long-range review of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is needed, rather than a study focused only on the size of the emergency stockpile.”
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2014/10/23/senator-time-to-rethink-our-emergency-oil-stockpile/
Of course it would mean more jobs but any number of three letter Fed Govt Agencies will stop at nothing to stonewall any attempt to repeal the ban on domestic crude exports. That’s why I say a veto-proof, strong bi-partisan bill to repeal must be crafted to pass the Senate and shove_it up 0bama’s youknowwhat.
I suspect, Democrat Moniz is more concerned with the possible spending available from selling more oil out of the SPR.
When the SPR was first created with the 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act, The US was importing ~4 million barrels a day. Today we import over 7 million bpd. I do not see reasoning to reduce it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.