Posts
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Roustabouts.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Feb 6, roustabout training courses
Are there any Roustabout training courses in the united states???? Would it really help your chances of landing employment??? If so what certifications do these companies recognize?? Any suggestions who offers this courses??
Mar 17, floorhand/pitwatcher
by mariusz
(Poland Wroclaw)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Employment.
Feb 15, emergency specialist and rig
by simerjit singh nannar
(mohali,punjab,India)
contact details:dr.simerjit singh nannar
mobile no.09855845144.09417522530.
email:sim_bhav@rediffmail.com
Feb 2, looking for a job as aroustabout in offshore rigg
by sreejith
(trissur,kerala,india)
Feb 15, 6th generation drillship experienced 2nd engineer
by Kuznetsov Volodymyr
(Odessa, Ukraine)
There is an experience on DP2, DP3 6th gen. drillship "Saipem12000". There are all nesessary certifications and unlimited license of 2nd engineer.
How can I apply for above mentioned position?
Friday, March 30, 2012
Feb 2, ROUSTABOUT WANTED
by eric
(italy-rome)
I already got my opito certicate for roustabout and still loocking for the job.
can someone can direct me in some hiring drilling company in uk or in italy?
thanks
Jan 25, Derrickman job wanted
by Ahsan
(Pakistan)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Rig Derrickmen.
Mar 1, Painting & Scaffolding
by Preston Almeida
(India)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Employment.
Mar 7, roughnek and floorhand
by lawrence portelli
(malta)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Roughnecks.
Mar 7, I am Chef cook off shore
by Elias Hadid
(Lebanon)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Catering and Cooking.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Feb 2, Applying for Derrickman Offshore position
by Cedomir Klaric
(Split-Croatia)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Rig Derrickmen.
Feb 9, i am a communications equipment specialist
by David
(Durant ok, USA)
Thank you,
David Potter
dapot67@yahoo.com
Mar 23, Any open positions for a Purser / HR Administrator?
by Henryk Kadzewicz
(Gdynia, Poland)
please let me know on gevalia60@interia.pl
NO SUCH JOB!
Feb 15, Roustabout
by Anthony Adjei
(Ghana-West Africa)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Employment.
Feb 2, I Understand that....
by Orlando Sellers Jr
(Gulfport Ms)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Employment.
Mar 17, Offshore platform cook
Hello I am 37 with 7 yrs experience in the offshore
Industry , qualified for 17 yrs.. I am currently seeking
Work and am available now with all certificates..
Ph 0429776635
Email danseabrooke@yahoo.com.au
Industry , qualified for 17 yrs.. I am currently seeking
Work and am available now with all certificates..
Ph 0429776635
Email danseabrooke@yahoo.com.au
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Rig Catering.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Mar 23, store keeper
by periyasamy saravanan
(india. tamilnadu.)
• Stock Inventory and Maintenance
• Spare code Request
• Material Request
• Material Distribution
• Material Outgoing Manifest
• Material Receiving and locating
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Rig Warehousemen.
Feb 25, cook on supply boat
by Tony Jennion
(Peregian Springs Qld 4573 Aus.)
GO TALK TO THE MUA, WITHOUT THAT YOU GO NO PLACE
Feb 9, mechanic/fitter
by matthew rees
(norwich norfolk uk)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Employment.
Feb 25, wasted time
by dr,vagode
(mumbai)
when i completed my medicine back in the 90s there were a few doctors who said that offshore companies pay so much compared to what a hospital will pay.I was truly happy and got into this rig medic business and wasted so many years that today I regret and looking back feel that I should have started a clinic,done a pg in MS,MD and gone up in life.
I will like to advise doctors especially MBBS qualified this job is for people like compounders,who have fake degrees or who are qualified in HOMEOPATHIC,UNNANI OR SIDDHA medicine as they do not have any other future.Mar 17, A+Offshore platform cook
by Daniel seabrooke
(danseabrooke@yahoo.com.au)
Industry , qualified for 17 yrs.. I am currently seeking
Work and am available now with all certificates..
Ph 0429776635
Email danseabrooke@yahoo.com.au
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Rig Catering.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Mar 1, Chef or cook job wanted
by Leroy Lopes
(Cape Cod USA)
Hello to all the rigs out there..I have been working as a chef for the last 25 yrs and running kitchens for the last 15. I want my next and last job to be on a rig..All I hear is how many jobs are out there and what great pay..I have given my hard earned money to one of the sites that send out my resume to 1300 companies,then for shits and giggles i gave them another $19 to send it out again..Haha the joke is so far on me..All I,m saying its time for these companies to put up or shut up..All I,m asking is for someone to open a door and I will show you what I can do..You will not be dissappointed.. Leroy
Mar 3, Rig Materials Coordinator
by Victor Gabriel Ganescu
(Romania)
Over 12 years experience in Materials Management, Materials Controlling. Comfortable in working in a highly computerized environment, SAP user in MM module. Career started from a storekeeper and has risen to experienced material (parts) coordinator level by implementation and practice of proper Supply Chain principles and Material Control Procedures. Maintaining inventory levels within established guidelines. Monitoring material deliveries against ROS (Requested on site) dates, identifying potential shortages (Back orders) and ensuring that corrective action is taken by the relevant department. Monitor that delivered materials and equipment are in compliance with documentation Purchase Orders, Requisitions and issued Materials at the warehouse and their further delivery to sites. Keeping track of all incoming and outgoing materials, Monitoring back load materials to stock. Very safety conscious and ensuring cleanliness and proper housekeeping of warehouse area. Ability to work with diverse groups of people.
Mar 23, Camp boss on offshore / land rigs
by oswald
(Goa, India)
Mar 14, Rig Mechanic job wanted!
by Brian Paine
(Copperas Cove, Texas, USA)
I do not have all the required offshore safety certificates or medical certificates. I do have a valid passport and I am ready to go to work. I do not have any former offshore experience but I am adept with tools and machinery having worked in the military for the last 16 years as a electronic/mechanical mechanic. I have worked on and operated equipment in weight limits of 72 tons and below. I have extensive knowledge of hydraulics, electronics, power distribution, air brakes, power trains, crane operations, and forklifts. I have good safety ethics. I have never missed a day of work due to my own negligence and I am currently up to date on posted OSHA guidelines. I have compeleted 3 semester hours of college majoring in diesel mechanics at Central Texas College. during my time in the military I have been put into situations that required me to either work as a team or risk the lost of life. I believe having this type of training has developed me into the perfect team player. If anyone out there looking for someone who can get the job done, then I am the one.
brianpaine73@yahoo.com
Mar 7, Radio operator job wanted
by Joel Danielson
(Mesa Az)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Rig Radio Operators.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Jan 25, I NEED A JOB AS A CAMPBOSS IN OIL RIG OR VESSELS
by idongesit thompson
(nigeria)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Rig Catering.
Feb 9, How can I apply to your company as kitchen helper
by ramiro tumbaga
(lt6 blk 3citi homes subd. manuyo uno las pinas philippines)
Im a seaman for more than ten years and I worked as a messman on the ship and im still here on teekay shipping Company, I want to try to work to your Company . I know how make bread and cake too and i can coom the breakfast as well coz here in the shuttle tanker were the messman cook and prepare the breakfast for the offficers and crew.
I can work a long period of time if u you will give me a chance to work in your company.thank you very much Sir ill wait your call or answer my mail ..
Feb 9, Radio operator
by Modesto Joao
(Luanda-Angola)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Employment.
Mar 3, Floor hand derrick hand
by Jeremy pugh
(Mississippi)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Employment.
Jan 25, 3rd Engineer on Oil/Gas Rig (Drillship)
by Oleksandr
(Kherson,Ukraine)
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Jan 25, I do not know where i am fitted for this kind of job
by Hipolito C. Kintanar
(Philippines)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Employment.
Mar 7, supply vessel
by Bill
(Ohio)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Employment.
Friday, March 23, 2012
‘Markets Moved By Expectations’
Opponents of increased domestic production of oil and natural gas like to point out that oil is a world-wide market – which it is – then immediately try to support their case by looking only at U.S. production. These folks jumped on an AP report this week that sought to prove that U.S. production has no bearing on prices. Here’s the key paragraph:
So now that we’ve determined there is a correlation “between oil that comes out of U.S. wells and the price at the pump,” the question becomes amounts. Earlier in the same AP piece the reporter acknowledges that:
Yes, we can:
Gulf of Mexico – We can restore exploration and development in the Gulf to pre-2010 levels. Right now the Energy Information Administration projects federal Gulf production will be down 21 percent this year from 2010. Production dropped from 1.55 million barrels per day in 2010 to 1.32 mb/d in 2011 and is estimated to be 1.23 mb/d this year. If Gulf production reached the 1.76 mb/d that EIA in 2010 projected for this year, that would be an additional 400,000 barrels per day over 2011.Keystone XL pipeline – Construction of the full Keystone XL would bring upwards of 800,000 additional barrels of oil per day from neighbor and ally Canada.Federal Lands – We can reverse the current downward trajectory in production on federal lands while opening up new areas in Alaska and offshore. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge alone is estimated to hold 1 million barrels per day – domestic supply that would be affecting global markets right now if it hadn’t been blocked for more than a decade by opponents who dismissed ANWR because it would take seven to 10 years to come online. In all, the U.S. is believed to have 200 billion barrels of oil that’s technically recoverable but not counted with our “proven reserves.”
The point is supply matters. “Markets are moved by expectations,” correctly says API Executive Vice President Marty Durbin. The White House says otherwise, but the United States has ample resources of its own and stable resources from Canada to affect that global oil balance mentioned above. But it will take political leadership that’s both honest and bold, that you can affect global markets in more ways than just cutting demand, as the president seems to believe. It will take more than simply saying, as the president did Thursday in Cushing, Okla., that “we’re drilling all over the place,” when the facts say otherwise. API President and CEO Jack Gerard, from earlier this week:
"Politicians can’t do much to affect gasoline prices the market for oil is global. Allowing increased drilling in the U.S. would contribute only small amounts of oil to world supply, not nearly enough to affect prices. The Associated Press conducted a statistical analysis of 36 years of monthly inflation-adjusted gasoline prices and U.S. domestic oil production and found no statistical correlation between oil that comes out of U.S. wells and the price at the pump."Again:
“… no statistical correlation between how much oil comes out of U.S. wells and the price at the pump.”Let’s take this from the top. The U.S. is the world’s third-largest producer of crude oil, providing 11.16 percent of the supply in 2010. Now ask yourself, if zero barrels came out of U.S. wells, would that affect the price of crude oil? Even the most determined anti-oil advocate would have a hard time saying that the loss of 11.16 percent of the world’s oil production wouldn’t mean anything to the global market. Is this an absurd example? Yes. But sometimes an absurd premise requires a little absurdity in response, and the idea that the U.S. has no impact on oil prices is an absurd premise.
So now that we’ve determined there is a correlation “between oil that comes out of U.S. wells and the price at the pump,” the question becomes amounts. Earlier in the same AP piece the reporter acknowledges that:
"Oil prices have been high in recent months because global oil demand is expected to reach a record this year as the developing nations of Asia, Latin America and the Middle East increase their need for oil. There have also been minor supply disruptions in South Sudan, Syria and Nigeria. And oil prices have been pushed higher by traders worried that nuclear tensions with Iran could lead to more dramatic supply disruptions."The Washington Post adds all this up:
"The international oil market has tightened … because a series of crises has shaved oil production or boosted demand worldwide. Together they add up to a difference of about 1 million barrels a day in the global oil balance."The Wall Street Journal’s take [subscription required]:
"Global spare oil production capacity is running 'ridiculously thin' at less than 2% of demand, potentially offsetting the impact on overheating oil prices of any further increases in supplies, said Paul Horsnell, head of commodities research at Barclays. Perceptions in the market that the volume of spare capacity, or the amount of production that can be brought onstream within 30 days, has almost completely dwindled could even push oil prices higher if additional supplies are released on to the market, he added. The 2% figure represents around 1.6 million barrels a day to 1.7 million barrels a day. 'Below 5% it starts getting a little tight because there's no slack for anything to go wrong. I think the general theme right across the oil industry is that it is running very hot indeed at the moment,' Horsnell said."OK, so the current spare global capacity, which Horsnell indicates is key to crude’s global price, is something like 1 million to 1.7 million barrels per day. The question: Can the U.S. do anything with North Americans sources to increase that?
Yes, we can:
Gulf of Mexico – We can restore exploration and development in the Gulf to pre-2010 levels. Right now the Energy Information Administration projects federal Gulf production will be down 21 percent this year from 2010. Production dropped from 1.55 million barrels per day in 2010 to 1.32 mb/d in 2011 and is estimated to be 1.23 mb/d this year. If Gulf production reached the 1.76 mb/d that EIA in 2010 projected for this year, that would be an additional 400,000 barrels per day over 2011.Keystone XL pipeline – Construction of the full Keystone XL would bring upwards of 800,000 additional barrels of oil per day from neighbor and ally Canada.Federal Lands – We can reverse the current downward trajectory in production on federal lands while opening up new areas in Alaska and offshore. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge alone is estimated to hold 1 million barrels per day – domestic supply that would be affecting global markets right now if it hadn’t been blocked for more than a decade by opponents who dismissed ANWR because it would take seven to 10 years to come online. In all, the U.S. is believed to have 200 billion barrels of oil that’s technically recoverable but not counted with our “proven reserves.”
The point is supply matters. “Markets are moved by expectations,” correctly says API Executive Vice President Marty Durbin. The White House says otherwise, but the United States has ample resources of its own and stable resources from Canada to affect that global oil balance mentioned above. But it will take political leadership that’s both honest and bold, that you can affect global markets in more ways than just cutting demand, as the president seems to believe. It will take more than simply saying, as the president did Thursday in Cushing, Okla., that “we’re drilling all over the place,” when the facts say otherwise. API President and CEO Jack Gerard, from earlier this week:
“Sending a clear message to people who buy and sell crude oil that the United States is committed to reasserting itself as one of the world’s major oil producers would immediately put downward pressure on gasoline and other fuel prices.”View the original article here
EPA Needs to Fix Air Emissions Proposal
Howard Feldman, API director of scientific and regulatory affairs, spoke with reporters today about proposed rules for oil and natural gas air emissions. This is what he had to say.
EPA's proposed rules for the oil and natural gas sector, which address sources of air emissions including those associated with hydraulic fracturing, are due to be finalized in the first week of April. The rules are important because they would over time affect hundreds of thousands of natural gas development operations.
A new study conducted by Advanced Resources International, which we are releasing today projects the rules as proposed would significantly slowdown drilling, resulting in less oil and natural gas production, lower royalties to the federal government, and lower tax payments to state governments.
Unless EPA makes changes to the proposal, the study found that between the time these rules are implemented and 2015:
Overall drilling for natural gas using hydraulic fracturing would be reduced by up to 52%, reducing drilling by as much as 21,400 wells;Natural gas production from hydraulically fractured wells would decline by up to 11% compared to what would otherwise have been developed;Oil production from hydraulically fractured wells would decline by up to 37% compared to what would have otherwise been developed;The federal government would not collect up to 8.5 billion dollars in royalties due to reduced drilling and production;State governments would not collect up to 2.3 billion dollars in severance taxes due to reduced drilling and production.This analysis does not even attempt to estimate the lost jobs and decline in other economic benefits that would result from reduced drilling and reduced oil and gas supply services.
As we suggested in our comments on the proposal, EPA must make changes to this rule and allow for reduced emissions while not impeding the massive job creation and economic revitalization that we’ve seen in states like North Dakota and Pennsylvania due to the shale boom.
First, reduced emission completions requirements should be less prescriptive and limited to circumstances that are cost-effective and technically feasible. A one-size-fits-all approach will not work.
EPA should also allow more time to implement the requirements once they are final. The equipment prescribed to conduct reduced emission well completions will simply not be available in time to comply with the current final rule schedule.
Manufacturers and industry need two to three years to design, manufacture and certify a sufficient number of control devices and train personnel.
We also think the system of notifications, monitoring, recordkeeping, performance testing and reporting requirements for compliance assurance must be simplified. Taken as a whole, these requirements would be overly burdensome for the small and/or temporary facilities that EPA is regulating. They would waste time and resources for the industry and EPA.
The benefits of shale energy development are indisputable. Nationwide, shale gas development was supporting 600,000 jobs in 2010, according to a December IHS-Global Insight report. Natural gas prices have fallen by half from their level three years ago. That is benefiting families that heat their homes with natural gas, as well as businesses and consumers that buy their electricity from utilities that generate it with natural gas.
Low natural gas prices are also benefiting chemical manufacturers and other businesses that use natural gas as a raw material, and that is encouraging businesses to locate new facilities in America rather than overseas.
The president has called for his administration to reign in burdensome regulations. At a time when the government is desperate for revenue, and America’s gasoline prices are high, applying overly burdensome regulations would be bad public policy and could place an even bigger burden on Americans in the form of higher energy costs.
EPA can fix these rules so they reduce emissions yet are still compatible with oil and natural gas development that creates jobs, government revenue and improves our energy security. We ask them to keep these recommendations in mind as they finalize the rule.
The President’s Energy Statements: Myth and Fact
Fact-checking the president’s energy rhetoric: See API’s new point-by-point look at some of the energy assertions the president has made in his State of the Union address and other public statements. For example:
President: “I’m directing my administration to open more than 75 percent of our potential offshore oil and gas reserves.”
Fact: The administration is defining the status quo as progress. The resources identified are restricted to areas in the Gulf of Mexico and the Alaska OCS that have already been leased and where the industry is already active. In fact, the administration’s latest plan for offshore development scales back on the previous plan by removing the Eastern Gulf of Mexico and areas in the Atlantic. The 75 percent number is deceiving because it includes only the areas we have already explored.
More on that, here.
Here’s another one from the myth/fact guide, on U.S. oil reserves:
President: “But with only 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves, oil isn’t enough.”
Fact: This is wrong. The U.S. is home to three times the amount of reserves as Saudi Arabia. The “2 percent” number is misleading at best. “Reserves” is a technical term that refers to oil that drilling has proven to be available. According to a recent report by the Congressional Research Service, our “recoverable” conventional oil resources are nearly six times that. And our unconventional oil resources are close to six times larger than our conventional oil resources.
Nevertheless, the administration and opponents of domestic energy development continued to use the misleading “2 percent” number. Companies believe in the long-term potential of U.S. oil development. That’s why they are willing to invest many billions of dollars in new projects here at home.
More on reserves, here.
Other items in the guide include setting the record straight on current domestic oil and natural gas production, imports, natural gas development, the genesis of hydraulic fracturing and the administration’s energy tax hike proposals. Worth a read.
Energy Myths and Facts
Crude Prices and the Pump
API Chief Economist John Felmy, discussing gasoline prices and other issues in a conference call with reporters on Tuesday:
“By far, the single biggest factor in today’s higher gasoline prices is the rising cost of crude oil. It has driven virtually all of the rise in gasoline prices. Crude oil prices are up because of supply and demand. World demand for crude is increasing as the economies of the world begin to recover, and the world’s excess oil production capacity is shrinking. Buyers of crude oil also are clearly concerned about the instability of major oil producing nations in North Africa and the Middle East.”
Felmy described how the price of a gallon of gasoline is dominated by two factors: the cost of the crude oil used to make it and taxes levied on each gallon by government:
“The price of crude is the biggest factor behind rising gasoline prices because it is the biggest cost component in making gasoline. When crude is at $100 for a standard 42-gallon barrel – a little below where it is now – a refiner pays almost $2.40 for each gallon of that crude to make a gallon of gasoline. The next biggest component is taxes. They now average almost 49 cents a gallon, including federal, state and local taxes. Together, crude costs and taxes account for over $3.00 – or about 84 percent – of what people are paying at the pump today.”
Felmy called suggestions that refinery production levels and exports of refined products are affecting U.S. pump prices a “misleading distraction.” Felmy:
“U.S. refineries are pulling out all the stops to supply U.S. markets. They produced more gasoline last year than any year in history. … As for exports of gasoline, this is a red herring. Exports are not causing gasoline prices to rise. Less than one-sixth of product exports have been gasoline, and only a tiny amount of this was the reformulated gasoline used in larger metropolitan areas.”
These exports are good for America, Felmy said:
“U.S. refiners produce fuels primarily for American markets and always have. Moreover, to the extent we export any products, that puts downward pressure on prices of the products we import. Exports also mean jobs for Americans, including good paying U.S. refinery jobs, and a lower trade deficit.”
The challenge is for Washington to adopt energy policies that will benefit consumers. Felmy said the Keystone XL pipeline should be given the go-ahead, and the administration should ease access to U.S. oil and natural gas resources.
“The administration has not stepped up to the plate on any of this. It has consistently held back more oil and natural gas development, especially on federally controlled lands and offshore areas. It has said no to the Keystone XL pipeline. All of this has weakened our energy security and contributed to higher prices. … We think most Americans understand that producing at home more oil and natural gas would create jobs, enhance energy security, increase revenue to government and help consumers.”
On a related note, API President and CEO Jack Gerard talked to Fox Business about energy policy and gasoline prices. Check the video below:
Thursday, March 22, 2012
A Natural Solution for Oil Seepage
The LA Times had an article yesterday on the effect of oil naturally bubbling up off the coast of California:
"Oil seeping from the ocean floor off Santa Barbara is taking a toll on seabirds that are turning up by the dozens along the Southern California coastline coated in crude oil and tar. The naturally occurring oil bubbles up and afflicts birds every winter, but wildlife rescuers in recent weeks have seen an unusual influx of oiled seabirds stranded on the shore as far south as Orange County…Scientists believe the murre population is growing and expanding south, putting the football-sized birds at greater risk of diving into waters slicked by Southern California's oil leaks, the most significant of which are found in the Santa Barbara Channel near Coal Oil Point, where thousands of gallons of oil seep into the ocean each day...The hypothermic, malnourished birds lose energy fast. So they either die offshore or, in an act of desperation, plant themselves on the beach."
An unfortunate situation, but one with a remedy, as Christopher Helman points out:
"What’s entirely missing from the story is any hint of how this bird killing could be stopped. The solution is simple: allow drilling off the coast. Stick a few wells into that shallow reservoir and within a few years enough oil would be safely recovered that it would no longer leak out to kill birds. I guess that’s such a political non starter in California that the reporter doesn’t even bother mentioning it…Occidental Petroleum has for decades produced oil from a handful of wells in Los Angeles harbor. California should be smart about this and open up the seepage area to drilling…"
Energy Works in Virginia
For the state of Virginia, the oil and natural gas industry currently means:
More than 128,000 statewide jobs provided or supported – with an average salary of $57,281 for non-gas station oil and natural gas employees.$6.5 billion contributed to state labor income.$11.6 billion contributed to the state’s economy.With sensible energy development and sound tax policies, here’s what the oil and natural gas industry could mean to Virginia:
3,606 additional jobs created by 201516,401 additional jobs created by 2020An average of $77.7 million of new, additional revenue generated by the industry directly to the state every year through 2030. That’s enough to cover more than half of Virginia’s general fund contribution for the University of Virginia every year, without using additional taxpayer dollars.Energy works in Virginia, with the men and women of the oil and natural gas industry playing a critical role in that state’s economy. See more, here.
Mar 7, supply vessel
by Bill
(Ohio)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Oil Rig Employment.
Taking the President’s Energy Rhetoric to Task
The more the president talks about energy, the more heat he creates for himself. Here’s the Washington Post’s Fact Checker, weighing his rhetoric about the U.S. consuming 20 percent of the world’s oil while having just 2 percent of its proven reserves:
“ … this is a good example of what we call ‘non sequitur facts’ — two bits of information that actually bear little relationship to each other. The president is trying to make the case that the world has finite oil resources, and the United States — the world’s biggest oil consumer — needs to use less oil in the future. But using ‘oil reserves’ as a key metric gives an incomplete picture of U.S. oil resources.”
The Fact Checker points out that “proven reserves” is a specific term. The oil must have been discovered, confirmed by drilling and be economically recoverable – the latter dependent on the global price of crude.
But guess what? Proven reserves figures change as we drill new wells, discover more oil, hard-to-get oil becomes economically viable and new technologies come on line. That’s how the U.S. could produce something like 200 billion barrels since 1990 – even though its proven reserves peaked at 40 billion barrels in 1970. That’s how, even though U.S. production and consumption will grow, projected proven preserves in 2035 will be 30 percent greater than at the end of 2010 (U.S. Lower 48).
Here’s what the president isn’t telling Americans: There’s approximately 200 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable American oil that isn’t counted with “proven reserves” – or mentioned in his speeches, a fairly gaping fact omission that’s deliberately misleading.
More Fact Checker:
“Measuring the U.S. consumption against its proven oil reserves makes little sense. Europe, with the exception of Russia, Kazakhstan and Norway, has virtually no oil reserves. Japan, a major consumer, has zero. China’s oil reserves are about half the size of the United States. In fact, in the relative scheme of things, the United States is relatively blessed with proven oil reserves — and, given the U.S. technological advantage, also with potentially large resources of oil yet to be tapped. … (I)n the context of higher gas prices — which is how the president often uses these figures now — it just is not logical to compare consumption to ‘proven oil reserves.’ This is a lowball figure that does not begin to describe the oil known to be within the U.S. borders.”
The United States is energy rich, not energy deficient, as the president makes it sound at a time when U.S. consumers are taking a beating. America has options. There’s oil in remote Alaska, off both coasts and on federal lands. With the right policies and leadership the U.S. could see 100 percent of its liquid fuel needs met domestically and from Canada by 2024.
Meanwhile, columnist Charles Krauthammer picks up on a key bit of illogic in the president’s recent energy riff – that decreasing U.S. demand for crude oil affects global prices but increasing U.S. crude supplies doesn’t. Krauthammer:
“‘The American people aren’t stupid,’ Obama said (Feb. 23), mocking ‘Drill, baby, drill.’ The ‘only solution,’ he averred in yet another major energy speech last week, is that ‘we start using less — that lowers the demand, prices come down.’ Yet five paragraphs later he claimed that regardless of ‘how much oil we produce at home … that’s not going to set the price of gas worldwide.’ So: Decreasing U.S. demand will lower oil prices, but increasing U.S. supply will not? This is ridiculous. Either both do or neither does.”
Krauthammer is spot on here. Given the fact that crude oil accounts for 76 percent of the price Americans pay at the pump, the crude supply is the biggest factor in the energy equation. Decreased crude oil demand at one end of the equation can have an effect, but so can increased crude supply at the other. The president is for the first part but in denial on the second. Sen. Chuck Schumer certainly gets the importance of supply, renewing his call for Saudi Arabia to commit to make up for any lost Iranian production.
Supply matters, and the U.S. can affect supplies – even if the president won’t say it. API President and CEO Jack Gerard, speaking at a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing earlier this month:
“A strategy that confidently deploys resources here at home will send a clear message to global markets that the United States is serious about affecting supply. To the American people it will say help’s on the way.”
Energy Works in Arizona
For the state of Arizona, the oil and natural gas industry currently means:
Nearly 86,000 total jobs provided or supported statewide – with an average salary of $54,052 for non-gas station oil and natural gas employees.$4 billion contributed to labor income.$7.6 billion contributed to the state’s economy.With sensible energy development and sound tax policies, here’s what the oil and natural gas industry could mean to Arizona:
682 additional jobs created by 2015.1,443 additional jobs by 2020.Energy works in Arizona, with the men and women of the oil and natural gas industry playing a critical role in that state’s economy. See more, here.
Oil & Gas Development on Federal Lands and Waters
The White House had a post up last week with some numbers on production of oil and natural gas on America’s public lands and offshore waters. They want the facts to “speak for themselves,” so let’s chart their numbers over the past six years:
The White House says:
"We know that production levels will fluctuate from year-to-year based on market conditions and industry decisions."
Of course the same is true for private lands where production levels are up.
"It also reflects the fact that the nation battled a major oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010."
An interesting point, given that 2010 production is the peak for oil. And it doesn’t explain the projected declines this year and next:
"Still, the overall trends show a clear picture of rising domestic production."
True if you include private lands, but on Federal? Let’s look at the last three years part of their dataset.
Not sure “rising” means what they think it means.
Throwing Down An Energy Challenge
Let’s talk about a fundamental difference of opinion on the key energy issue of the day.
We say crude oil supply matters – in the context of global-market pricing, which affects fuel prices because the cost of crude accounts for 76 percent of what Americans are paying at the pump. More supply alters the energy equation, exerting downward pressure on crude prices. Energy Economics 101.
The president seems to disagree, saying there’s no “silver bullet,” while suggesting there’s not much that can be done to affect global markets and offer hope to beleaguered consumers. At the same time he tacitly acknowledges market forces work – but only from the side of the equation that reduces demand through efficiency and other measures.
We’re all for greater efficiency, but the president is ignoring the effect on markets of increasing demand. Or is he, because even as he scoffs at the notion of greater development of domestic oil and natural gas resources, there are conversations with the Saudis about increasing their production, talk of releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and pledges to Brazil that we’ll be customers for their offshore oil when it comes on line – all implying that, yes, supply matters.
Here’s one thing that’s absolutely clear. America’s oil and natural gas companies have a positive, pro-development, pro-jobs strategy to produce more energy right here at home. They believe America has energy options, not unending limitations, and they’re ready to accept the challenge of producing more oil and gas. API President and CEO Jack Gerard during a conference call with reporters this week:
“Despite what you may hear, we are an energy-rich nation, the world’s third-largest producer of oil. We have vast resources that we have not even begun to explore. And by safely developing our own resources of oil and natural gas, we can send a strong signal to the markets that America will control its energy future.”
Here’s what Gerard is talking about:
Changing policies that are limiting offshore energy development to less than 15 percent of available federal areas.Returning the Gulf of Mexico to pre-2010 production levels.Reversing the downward trend of leasing and permitting on federal lands (so that public areas can match production on state and private lands in places like North Dakota and Pennsylvania).Approving the full Keystone XL pipeline, to bring upwards of 800,000 barrels per day of Canadian oil sands crude to U.S. refiners.Curb government’s enthusiasm for new regulatory layers on the development of the country’s ample shale resources.Shelving punitive proposals to raise taxes on a few oil and natural gas companies.Each of the above would acknowledge what the government’s own data shows, that oil and natural gas are mainstays of this country’s energy present and future – rejecting an off-oil strategy that’s rooted in unreality.
Gerard:
“Sending a clear message to people who buy and sell crude oil that the United States is committed to reasserting itself as one of the world’s major oil producers would immediately put downward pressure on gasoline and other fuel prices.”
Gerard called out the administration on its energy claims:
“The administration says it’s already doing a good enough job promoting oil and natural gas development. Check the numbers, it says. We did, and they show oil and natural gas production on federal lands and waters has lagged behind development on private and state lands.”
And issued a challenge:
“Our industry would not be urging the administration to open the door to more development unless it was prepared to walk through that door, unless it envisioned investing its own capital in more projects that could produce more supply and jobs, just like the development that’s already occurring. … We once again urge the administration to act to promote more domestic resources of oil and natural gas. … If the administration will do these things, our companies will produce more American oil and gas.”
Additional resource: Talking energy with Fox News.
Energy Works in Ohio
For the state of Ohio, the oil and natural gas industry currently means:
More than 230,800 statewide jobs provided or supported – with an average salary of $68,256 for non-gas station oil and natural gas employees.$11.4 billion contributed to state labor income.$22.7 billion contributed to the state’s economy.With sensible energy development and sound tax policies, here’s what the oil and natural gas industry could mean to Ohio:
13,144 additional jobs created by 201515,840 additional jobs created by 2020Energy works in Ohio, with the men and women of the oil and natural gas industry playing a critical role in that state’s economy. See more, here.
Energy Works in North Dakota
For the state of North Dakota, the oil and natural gas industry currently means:
Nearly 37,000 statewide jobs provided or supported – with an average salary of $71,678 for non-gas station oil and natural gas employees.$1.8 billion contributed to state labor income.$3.8 billion contributed to the state’s economy.With sensible energy development and sound tax policies, here’s what the oil and natural gas industry could mean to North Dakota:
13,144 additional jobs created by 2015.15,840 additional jobs created by 2020.An average of $54 million of new, additional revenue generated by the industry to the state every year through 2030. That’s enough to cover more than one-third of North Dakota’s general fund contribution to the University of North Dakota budget every year, without using additional taxpayer dollars.Energy works in North Dakota, with the men and women of the oil and natural gas industry playing a critical role in that state’s economy. See more, here.
Forestalling a ‘Regulatory Avalanche’
John Felmy, API’s chief economist, talked to reporters this week about a looming federal “regulatory avalanche” that could impact the production of oil and natural gas from shale – and reduce the president’s State of the Union call for increased domestic production to hot air:
“On the one hand we have President Obama saying he supports natural gas development. … Within weeks of making this statement, the administration has done just the opposite, announcing several plans to further constrain development, reducing opportunities to produce our domestic supply of oil and natural gas and create and support these American jobs. We have reached a point where our industry’s efforts to produce the natural gas the president says he wants are being overwhelmed by an avalanche of acronyms. EPA, DOE, DOI, USDA, DOD, DOT, SEC, HHS – eight federal agencies in all – are looking at hydraulic fracturing.”
Felmy said the chilling effect on decision-making and investment isn’t dependent on concrete regulatory proposals:
“Some of these investigations or studies have no specific timeline, yet information continues to be shared with the press about how further studies and stricter regulation are being prepared. All this adds to a state of uncertainty and generates fear for which there is no evidence.”
Fear = potential delay, which has a tangible effect on energy development and job creation. Felmy:
“Every day that goes by that we don’t develop this resource is another day that someone doesn’t get a job.”
A couple of other takes on the Felmy briefing:
Oil & Gas Journal:
“This is a prospective regulatory avalanche. Right now, there’s no transparency or indication of prospective outcomes,” Felmy continued. “If they don’t coordinate and aren’t transparent, the results could be negative for American energy.” Felmy said API has no quantitative estimate of possible economic consequences because so many federal departments and agencies have entered the federal oil and gas regulatory picture. “We don’t know the actual inner workings, only that all these agencies are involved,” he said. “Some have had regulatory coverage for a long time. Others haven’t. Are they coordinated? Do they have timelines? That’s our main concern.”
The Oklahoman:
“We are calling on Congress to halt the administration drive toward over-regulation of hydraulic fracturing and commercial oil and natural gas production,” he said. Felmy said the industry is ready to work with the administration to ensure the U.S. becomes more energy self-sufficient as safely as possible."
Energy Works in Minnesota
For the state of Minnesota, the oil and natural gas industry currently means:
More than 117,000 jobs – with an average salary of more than $67,000 for non-gas station oil and natural gas employees.$5.8 billion contributed to labor income.$11.1 billion contributed to the economy.With sensible energy development and sound tax policies, here’s what the oil and gas industry could mean to Minnesota:
796 additional jobs created by 2015.1,675 additional jobs created by 2020, supported by oil and gas industry operations in the state.Energy works in Minnesota, with the men and women of the oil and natural gas industry playing a critical role in that state’s economy. See more, here.
The President’s ‘Anti-Stimulus’
From the president’s remarks during Monday’s rollout of his 2013 budget:
“The last thing we need is for Washington to stand in the way of America's comeback.”
The president is 100 percent right – and he can put his words into action by dropping his politically motivated obstruction of the Keystone XL pipeline.
The Keystone XL is the largest shovel-ready infrastructure project available to help spur the economic revival everyone wants. The $7 billion, privately financed pipeline would create 20,000 U.S. jobs during its construction phase and up to 500,000 U.S. jobs by 2035 as a big part of a comprehensive strategy to fully utilize Canada’s oil sands resources. Energy to run our economy and jobs. But we need Washington to get out of the way.
President Obama:
“We need to … [end] the subsidies for oil companies … The budget that we’re releasing today is a reflection of shared responsibility. … I want everybody here to go out there and do great. I want you to make loads of money if you can. That’s wonderful. And we expect people to earn it -- study hard, work hard for it. So we don’t envy the wealthy. But we do expect everybody to do their fair share …”
Unfortunately, the president’s budget would place Washington squarely in the path of America’s economic comeback by increasing taxes on the country’s energy companies by $41 billion over 10 years.
Although the oil and natural gas industry is its own stimulus, contributing $476 billion to the economy in 2010 and projected by Strategic Energy & Economic Research’s Michael Lynch to spend $145 billion this year on drilling and completing new wells in the U.S., the president would saddle the industry with new taxes – hampering its ability to develop new energy sources and create new jobs.
Instead of standing in the way of the economic lift the industry could provide by threatening tax increases, the president should consider policies that could allow the industry to create 1 million new jobs in just seven years and increase revenue to the government by $127 billion by 2020 – three times the amount his tax hike would raise.
API President and CEO Jack Gerard:
“Increasing our taxes would push oil and natural gas investment overseas and diminish job-creation and economic activity here at home. After a handful of years, we would see less domestic energy production – particularly of natural gas – more imports, fewer new jobs, and, eventually, depressed tax, royalty and other revenues. Frankly, the administration should be trying to replicate the success America’s oil and natural gas industry has had in creating jobs and growing the economy primarily through development on private and state lands. The evidence clearly shows that what we’re doing is working. If the industry’s job-creating investments are a stimulus for the nation, then what the administration is proposing is an anti-stimulus.”
One more point on taxes: The president is wrong about subsidies. The oil and natural gas industry doesn’t receive targeted subsidies from Washington. More on that here.
As for shared responsibility, the fact is America’s oil and natural gas companies pay $86 million every day to the U.S. Treasury in rents, royalties and income taxes. They pay their fair share and more than any other sector:
As Gerard noted to reporters Monday during a conference call, Apple is one of the country’s most profitable corporations, but no one is talking about singling it out for a tax hike – nor should they. That would be punishing the success the president says he favors.
“We want to lock arms with the president,” Gerard said. But it will take policies that help increase domestic oil and natural gas production and the American jobs that go with it “instead of penalizing the best job creator in the country.”
Yes, Supply Matters
U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer is worried about the impact of the potential loss of Iranian oil on the global crude market. Reuters reports:
The United States should do more to encourage Saudi Arabia to boost its oil production to make up for lost Iranian oil, Senator Charles Schumer said on Sunday, urging renewed diplomacy as a way to ease the run-up in oil prices. … A public promise from Saudi Arabia, the world's top oil exporter, to pump oil at its full capacity would calm oil markets as well as gasoline prices, Schumer, the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate, said in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Without saying so directly, Schumer’s point is that, yeah, supply matters. Global markets respond positively and negatively to ups and downs in supply – hence Schumer’s push for the Saudis to boost output.
He’s not alone. The administration believes in the power of supply, too. That’s why it released oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve last year during the Libyan crisis. There’s talk of another SPR release now, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar says.
It would be great if the United States had its own oil supply options, if America could reach a point where our supply and our energy future were more secure. How about a future where we don’t have to ask others to boost their production, where we’re not presenting ourselves as eager customers for others’ oil – as the president did last year in Brazil:
“We want to work with you. We want to help with technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely, and when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers.”
Wait! We do have supply options. They start with building the Keystone XL pipeline and strengthening the energy relationship we have with our friend and neighbor Canada. We can increase access to federal lands, onshore and offshore, and get permitting in the Gulf of Mexico back to where it was a couple of years ago. We can continue developing biofuels and other energy technologies.
Put them all together and we could see 100 percent of our liquid fuel needs met domestically and from Canada. Not 50 years from now or 25. By 2024. And research says we’ll see new jobs, economic growth and increased revenues to government along the way.
But it starts with ending the drill-anywhere-but-here mindset that is keeping our resources on the shelf and the United States beholden to global energy politics.
It includes rejecting the view that 1 million barrels of oil per day from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) is irrelevant because it won’t come online for 10 years – which has helped block ANWR development for more than a decade.
It means discarding the false premise that the United States lacks the resources to exercise greater control over the supply equation.
‘Poisoned’ Politics, the Keystone XL and the National Interest
AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
New York Times op-ed columnist Joe Nocera’s piece on the “poisoned” politics of the Keystone XL pipeline decision is a must read. Better get to it right away, before some of the folks posting comments to Nocera’s column descend on the Gray Lady with pitchforks and battle axes, demanding that the article be pulled down. Nocera:
Surely, though, what the Keystone decision really represents is the way our poisoned politics damages the country. Environmental concerns notwithstanding, America will be using oil — and lots of it — for the foreseeable future. It is the fundamental means by which we transport ourselves, whether by air, car or truck.
Nocera’s point about oil (and natural gas) is spot on. According to the Energy Information Administration, oil and gas will supply most of our energy past 2030. More Nocera:
And here is Canada, a staunch American ally that has historically sold us virtually all of its crude exports. Over the past two decades, energy companies have invested tens of billions of dollars in the tar sands, so much so that Canada now ranks No. 3 in estimated oil reserves. Along with the natural gas that can now be extracted thanks to hydraulic fracturing — which, of course, all right-thinking environmentalists also oppose — the oil from the Canadian tar sands ought to be viewed as a great gift that has been handed to North America. These two relatively new sources of fossil fuels offer America its first real chance in decades to become, if not energy self-sufficient, at least energy secure, no longer beholden to OPEC. Yet these gifts have been transformed, like everything else, into political footballs.
Next Nocera focuses on the Keystone XL’s opponents:
As it turns out, the environmental movement doesn’t just want to shut down Keystone. Its real goal, as I discovered when I spoke recently to Michael Brune, the executive director of the Sierra Club, is much bigger. “The effort to stop Keystone is part of a broader effort to stop the expansion of the tar sands,” Brune said. “It is based on choking off the ability to find markets for tar sands oil.” This is a ludicrous goal. If it were to succeed, it would be deeply damaging to the national interest of both Canada and the United States. But it has no chance of succeeding. Energy is the single most important industry in Canada. Three-quarters of the Canadian public agree with the Harper government’s diversification strategy. China’s “thirst” for oil is hardly going to be deterred by the Sierra Club. And the Harper government views the continued development of the tar sands as a national strategic priority.
Back to Nocera’s first point. The politics of obstructing the Keystone XL – as well as the underlying opposition to a stronger energy relationship with Canada that fully utilizes its oil sands – is hurting the United States. The toll is in lost jobs and in an energy future that’s less secure, because the oil will come from less stable parts of the world.
Canada, Nocera’s writes, at least knows where its national interests lie. Unfortunately, under current policy, the United States doesn’t. Here’s former Obama National Security Advisor Gen. James Jones, talking a couple months ago about the Keystone XL impasse:
"If we get to the point where we cannot bring ourselves to do what is in our national interest, then we are clearly in a period of decline, in terms of our global leadership and our ability to compete.”
It’s what worries Joe Nocera. It’s what should worry us all.
Feb 2, Applying for Derrickman Offshore position
by Cedomir Klaric
(Split-Croatia)
Click here to post comments.
Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How?
Simply click here to return to Rig Derrickmen.
Hydraulic Fracturing and Regulation
Shale oil and natural gas development in the United States has been a clear economic success story during a time when successes have been few. Our industry has been producing energy, jobs and revenue at a strong clip. And yet we’ve only begun to realize the benefits of energy from shale.
The industry is committed to producing this energy safely and responsibly, and in addition to strong industry standards, there are appropriate federal and state regulations in place for oil and natural gas operations, including those that employ hydraulic fracturing. And many state rules have recently been strengthened.
So it is a concern that there are now 10 separate federal government agencies looking to study and potentially add new and unnecessary layers of regulations on hydraulic fracturing, the technology on which 70 percent of future gas wells depend.
Unnecessary layers of federal regulation could increase costs and delays for operators, which could harm new projects, sacrificing thousands of new jobs and depriving government of billions in revenue.
We are strongly encouraging policymakers and elected officials to keep shale energy development moving forward. So during this election year, we will encourage voters to learn more about energy and about the candidates’ positions on energy policies, and to make energy a ballot box decision in 2012.
The benefits of shale energy development are indisputable.
Just yesterday, a new study in Ohio said development of the Utica Shale could mean 65,000 new jobs in the next two years.In Pennsylvania, development of the Marcellus Shale created 72,000 new jobs from late 2009 to early 2011. In North Dakota, shale development helped drive down unemployment in the state to the lowest level in the nation, helped produce a state budget surplus of $1 billion, and elevated North Dakota to the nation’s fourth largest oil producer. In Arkansas, shale development has boosted state revenue by more than $1.5 billion over the last few years. Houston is the first metropolitan area in the United States to regain all of the jobs lost during the recession, an analysis by the Texas Workforce Commission has concluded. Many of the new jobs likely relate to the oil and natural gas industry and to shale development.A study by former Census officials of U.S. household income in nine geographic regions between 2007 and 2010 found it increasing only in the four-state oil patch region: Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma and Arkansas – all centers of shale energy development.Nationwide, shale gas development was supporting 600,000 jobs in 2010, according to a December IHS-Global Insight report.Also, natural gas prices have fallen by half from their level three years ago. That is benefiting families that heat their homes with natural gas, as well as businesses and consumers that buy their electricity from utilities that generate it with natural gas. Low natural gas prices are also benefiting chemical manufacturers and other businesses that use natural gas a raw material, and they are encouraging businesses to locate new facilities in America rather than overseas. Dow Chemical, for example, plans to reopen an ethylene production plant near Hahnville, Louisiana, this year and build another one on the Gulf coast by 2017. It also plans to build a new propylene plant in Texas by 2015.And there is every reason to believe we could see more of all of these benefits in the future. The IHS-Global Insight study estimates that the shale gas industry alone could support 1.6 million jobs by 2035, driven by capital investment approaching $2 trillion.
Finally, an analysis from PricewaterhouseCoopers concludes that shale gas development – and more affordable natural gas supplies – could support about one million U.S. manufacturing jobs in 2025.
To realize the full extent of this promise, therefore, we must be thoughtful about any changes to an already robust regulatory structure for hydraulic fracturing. We don’t need unnecessary or duplicative rules from multiple federal agencies.
The administration has been advocating more oil and natural gas development. It has also called for streamlining regulations. We believe they could do much to achieve both objectives by taking a critical look at what its various agencies are proposing to do on hydraulic fracturing and shale energy development.
The direction they’re headed in won’t be conducive to the development of energy we know our nation will need and the production of which could provide tremendous additional benefits to our economy. The administration needs to reconsider the wisdom of adding unnecessary layers of federal regulation on this truly game-changing opportunity. A significant change of course is needed.
We Are the American People, Mr. President
Let’s talk about a fundamental difference of opinion on the key energy issue of the day.
We say crude oil supply matters – in the context of global-market pricing, which affects fuel prices because the cost of crude accounts for 76 percent of what Americans are paying at the pump. More supply alters the energy equation, exerting downward pressure on crude prices. Energy Economics 101.
The president seems to disagree, saying there’s no “silver bullet,” while suggesting there’s not much that can be done to affect global markets and offer hope to beleaguered consumers. At the same time he tacitly acknowledges market forces work – but only from the side of the equation that reduces demand through efficiency and other measures.
We’re all for greater efficiency, but the president is igno... more »
As the president hits the road to talk about energy, he should first listen to what the American people are saying, reflected in two new polls this week.
Start with a Harris Interactive survey that shows 76 percent of voters believe increasing taxes on oil and natural gas companies could cost them more at the fuel pump. For a president who continues to talk about hiking taxes on energy companies that should be a big red flag.
Americans who’re getting slammed by higher fuel costs appear to sense that increasing energy taxes would drive up energy producers’ costs, which – as the Congressional Research Service found last year – could decrease exploration, development and production while elevating prices.
Other details from the Harris poll of 1,009 respondents:
The more the president talks about energy, the more heat he creates for himself. Here’s the Washington Post’s Fact Checker, weighing his rhetoric about the U.S. consuming 20 percent of the world’s oil while having just 2 percent of its proven reserves:
“ … this is a good example of what we call ‘non sequitur facts’ — two bits of information that actually bear little relationship to each other. The president is trying to make the case that the world has finite oil resources, and the United States — the world’s biggest oil consumer — needs to use less oil in the future. But using ‘oil reserves’ as a key metric gives an incomplete picture of U.S. oil resources.”
The Fact Checker points out that “proven reserves” is a specific term. The oil must have been discovered, confirmed by dri... more »
The White House had a post up last week with some numbers on production of oil and natural gas on America’s public lands and offshore waters. They want the facts to “speak for themselves,” so let’s chart their numbers over the past six years:
The White House says:
"We know that production levels will fluctuate from year-to-year based on market conditions and industry decisions."
Of course the same is true for private lands where production levels are up.
"It also reflects the fact that the nation battled a major oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010."
An interesting point, given that 2010 production is the peak for oil. And it doesn’t explain the projected declines this year and next:
"Still, the overall trends show a clear picture of rising domestic produc... more »
Yesterday President Obama gave a campaign speech centered around energy policy. In it he said:
“There’s a problem with a strategy that only relies on drilling and that is, America uses more than 20 percent of the world’s oil. If we drilled every square inch of this country -- so we went to your house and we went to the National Mall and we put up those rigs everywhere -- we’d still have only 2 percent of the world’s known oil reserves. Let’s say we miss something -- maybe it’s 3 percent instead of two. We’re using 20; we have two. Now, you don’t need to be getting an excellent education at Prince George’s Community College to know that we’ve got a math problem here. I help out Sasha occasionally with her math homework and I know that if you’ve got two and you’ve got 20, there’... more »
The Folly of Anti-Trade Thinking
In his State of the Union message last month, President Obama staked out the administration’s position on trade, citing new deals with a number of countries around the world and the quest for new trade opportunities:
“We’re also making it easier for American businesses to sell products all over the world. Two years ago, I set a goal of doubling U.S. exports over five years. With the bipartisan trade agreements we signed into law, we’re on track to meet that goal ahead of schedule. And soon, there will be millions of new customers for American goods in Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. … I will go anywhere in the world to open new markets for American products.”
Some in Congress apparently didn’t get the memo about new markets for American products. There’s an effort afoot to restrict exports of U.S. liquefied natural gas – including a bill that would compel the Interior Department to issue drilling leases for public lands only to those who would keep the gas in the United States and another that would block the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission from approving LNG export terminals through 2025. While the legislative prospects for both are uncertain, they suggest a misunderstanding of trade and the global marketplace.
Energy Secretary Stephen Chu gets it, refusing to be drawn into the “keep in America” wave during a congressional hearing this week:
“Certainly, we don't want to see natural gas prices rise dramatically, [but] there's a flip side we have to consider that it does create American jobs, and if prices are kept moderate it does bring money to United States.”
Besides being poor economics, such restrictions send the wrong message to the entrepreneurs and risk-takers who drive much of the economic growth in this country – specifically that the value of their enterprise could be arbitrarily undermined. Energy, Technology, & Policy blogger Lex Hochner:
“We should also consider the individuals and companies that pioneered the technological revolution that unlocked all of this shale gas in the first place. They have accomplished nothing short of a natural revolution. Why? Because they believed that a free market price awaited their product. It is a dangerous signal to send hard-working and creative business leaders that the government may at any time step in to destroy the value of their work product.”
Just for argument’s sake, let’s suppose the same thinking was applied to other U.S. exports. For example, what if U.S. agricultural products were restricted to this country, what would that mean? Answer: Lots of unhappy farmers and a gut-punch to the U.S. balance of trade ledger, which in 2011 tallied more than $137 billion in agricultural exports.
Like other marketable commodities, natural gas shouldn’t be artificially and arbitrarily walled off from potential buyers. U.S. grain exports equal jobs and income for American farmers. Likewise, natural gas exports would support American energy jobs and boost the country’s trade balance – even as greater production (enabled by the potential for export) would provide more revenue to governments.
Center for Offshore Safety Names Director, Former Shell Chief Scientist
The naming of Charlie Williams as the first executive director of the new Center for Offshore Safety marks an important milestone in America's efforts to safely and responsibly develop its vast offshore energy resources.
Williams leads the center after 40 years with Shell, where most recently he was the company's chief scientist for well engineering and production technology. His work included developing high-pressure, high-temperature wells and specializing in drilling and completion equipment for extreme environments, such as deepwater exploration and development. Williams was introduced Wednesday:
"We have assembled the best and the brightest minds to help ensure we develop America's vast resources in the safest manner possible. Our top priority is to develop practices and programs that will help operators perform at their very best in implementing safety and environmental management systems."
The center's governing board includes operators, drilling contractors, service and supply contractors and trade association representatives. The center will help deepwater operators implement advanced safety and environmental oversight management systems, an audit checklist and third-party review systems so operators can measure the effectiveness of those systems against standards developed by API and its members. Williams:
"The role of the (center) is to provide a forum for industry to come together and focus on developing programs, sponsoring activities and sharing good practices aimed at continually learning from and improving industry's safety performance."
Williams said the center faces start-up challenges common to most new organizations, including building a staff and prioritizing its efforts:
"Another unique challenge is finalizing all the audit tools, training auditors, and verifying auditors. This is a very large new effort and one of the first things the center must address. Although our top goal is a forum supporting continuous learning and improvement of Safety and Environmental Management Systems, auditing of SEMS is both a center and regulatory requirement."
Key to the center is connecting industry efforts to improve safe and responsible offshore operations with the American public. Williams:
"We are committed to communicating with the public and communities regarding the programs and goals of the center. The industry is fully committed to producing oil and gas safely and responsibly. The creation of the center, the dedication of resources to it, and the broad participation of industry in the center clearly demonstrates this commitment. The center also demonstrates an enhanced commitment by industry in creating a 100 percent safety focused forum for coming together, learning, and continuously improving safety and environmental management systems and enhancing safety culture."
API President and CEO Jack Gerard welcomed Williams' selection:
"Safe, responsible development of our offshore oil and natural gas is critical for U.S. energy security, and it provides U.S. families and businesses with affordable and reliable energy for our future."
Learn more about the Center, its governance and information on how to become a member at www.centerforoffshoresafety.org.
Energy Works in Colorado
Here’s what the oil and natural gas industry currently means to the state of Colorado:
$20.5 billion contributed to the economy.$10.2 billion contributed to labor income.More than 161,000 jobs provided or supported by the industry – with an average salary for non-gas station oil and natural gas employees of nearly $98,000.Sound good? This is better – with smart energy development and the right tax policies, the industry could mean this for Colorado:
An additional 61,131 jobs created by 2015 and 88,283 by 2020.An average of $233 million in new, additional revenue for the state, generated by the industry every year through 2030.That’s enough to pay for the state’s general fund contribution to the operating budgets of 12 of 22 departments every year – without using additional taxpayer dollars.
Energy works in Colorado, with the men and women of the oil and natural gas industry playing critical roles. See more, here.
Life in the Barnett Shale: Energy, Jobs, Growth
Local businessman Tim Osborn says that when he was a schoolboy growing up in North Texas, his hometown probably didn’t have more than 250 people. Today the area is vibrant, with 10 times that number living there. Work is plentiful, housing is booming and there’s room to grow – thanks to the oil and natural gas industry and the energy-rich Barnett Shale.
The area about 30 miles north of Dallas is thriving with oil and natural gas development in the Barnett Shale providing the magnet for other kinds businesses and industries. “The reason it has grown is the oil and gas business,” says Osborn, president of CBA Automation, an electrical and instrumentation contractor. “We have other industries moving here because this is a prospering area.”
Others are doing well, too. Check out this video detailing the oil and natural gas industry’s positive impacts on life in North Texas:
Here’s a slideshow that also helps capture the way of life in the Barnett Shale:
Survey Says, Misinformation on Energy, Keystone XL
Politico reports (subscription required) this week on a new poll that shows a political edge for the president on energy and jobs – based on a memo from pollster/strategist Geoffrey Garin and Hart Research Associates colleague Allan Rivlin. Key points:
On addressing domestic energy, respondents trust President Obama over congressional Republicans 48 percent to 38 percentOn the Keystone XL pipeline, of respondents who said they hadn’t heard the arguments, 43 percent said the president was wrong to reject the pipeline while 32 percent agreed with him. Among independents, the split was 39 percent disagreeing with the president, 34 percent supporting.Of respondents who said they had heard both sides of the pipeline argument, the president was supported by 47 percent, opposed by 36 percent.Most interesting is the opinion shift represented by points two and three above. Politico:
The best way to get voters to back Obama’s decision: “Involve the risk of a toxic oil spill over an aquifer that provides fresh water and water for farming to one-third of the United States — a concern that is compounded by questions about TransCanada’s safety record and the number of spills that have occurred in the first year of the Keystone One pipeline,” according to the memo.
Politico again:
Garin and Rivlin also argue that there is a “sharp decline in the salience of the proponents’ case” for the pipeline regarding how it impacts U.S. energy security “as voters learn the likelihood of the refined oil being shipped off for export.”
And:
The memo also argues there is “significant mistrust of both the oil industry and the Republicans in Congress,” and their arguments for the pipeline are undermined when voters are informed that the claims of jobs tied to the project “are grossly exaggerated.”
This is not to suggest that Garin conducted a push poll, in which respondents were nudged toward a particular outcome with information, but to say that it’s clear how some are trying to frame the debate over energy and the president’s policies with misinformation. So let’s look at the facts:
Spills – The United States has thousands of miles of pipelines delivering crude oil and refined products. The spill rate has fallen nearly 60 percent since 2001 to less than one per 1,000 miles of pipeline. Pipelines already cross the Ogallala aquifer, a point of concern in the Keystone XL debate that Nebraska research hydrogeologist Jim Goeke discusses in detail here.
TransCanada’s safety record – Keystone XL builder TransCanada currently operates the Keystone pipeline that passes through Nebraska (and the Ogallala aquifer). The company says the pipeline itself hasn’t suffered any leaks. A dozen recorded spills have come from pumping stations and 10 of the 12 measured between 5 and 10 gallons, the company says. The Keystone XL would feature state-of-the-art materials and computerized monitoring that would let the company locate and isolate potential problems within minutes.
Exports – We’ve written about this here and here. The exports argument, whether lobbed by a sitting congressman or activists, shows how little some know about U.S. refining, the global market and balance of trade. Basically, more than 90 percent of the on-road transportation fuel refined in the United States is for use in the United States. The remaining less than 10 percent consists primarily of heavier products that aren’t in high demand here. As for markets and trade, the export of refined U.S. petroleum products helps preserve well-paying U.S. refining jobs and improves the country’s trade balance as we buy crude and then sell higher-value refined products.
Jobs – TransCanada details the 20,000 U.S. jobs the Keystone XL would create during its construction phase, here. The Canadian Energy Research Institute says up to 500,000 U.S. jobs could be created by 2035 through full development of Canada’s oil sands, which includes the Keystone XL’s construction. Working Americans know the value of these jobs. Check this video of Laborers’ International Union of North America General President Terry O’Sullivan talking about the job potential of the Keystone XL.
Oil Supply – Yes We Can
Opponents of increased domestic oil production like to portray the U.S. as being helpless in the face of worldwide events. This argument sometimes takes this form:
… with only 2% of the world’s oil reserves, we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices – not when consume 20% of the world’s oil.
Which we dealt with here, and sometimes like this:
…oil prices are dictated by the vast world market, of which U.S. production is just a small fraction.
or this:
This notion that a politician can wave a magic wand and impact the 90-million-barrel-a-day global oil market is preposterous…
While it is good to see supply and demand being mentioned when discussing oil, the U.S. is hardly a feeble little victim unable to affect the market.
In 2010, according to the EIA, the world produced about 87 million barrels of oil today, with 22 countries producing over a million barrels a day. Let’s look at the top producers:
So even if you consider 11.16% to be a “small fraction” it is also happens to be the third-largest fraction. We are a major-player in the market and our decisions can have an impact. As the Washington Post put it:
Because oil products are so essential to companies and motorists, incremental changes in the supply-and-demand balance have a relatively large effect on prices.
And right now the market is tight:
…because a series of crises has shaved oil production or boosted demand worldwide. Together they add up to a difference of about 1 million barrels a day in the global oil balance.
So to make an impact the U.S. doesn’t need to supply the entire market, but do our part to fill the gap, but instead the market sees projections that Gulf of Mexico production on Federal areas will be down 530,000 barrels a day this year.
The market sees 87% of our offshore acreage off-limits, it sees see Federal permits lagging in the areas we are allowed to develop in, both offshore and onshore. It sees a million barrels a day from ANWR sitting on the sidelines, and it sees the U.S. blocking upwards of 800,000 barrels a day from Canada.
The market sees that the U.S. could secure 100% of its liquid fuel needs by 2024.
And the market sees us taking a pass.
So when you hear folks say that we are helpless on the supply side and have to rely solely on reducing demand tell them that you want a true all-of-the-above energy strategy with both increased production AND increased efficiency. Otherwise the portrait of the U.S. as being rudderless in a stormy energy sea may prove to be self-fulfilling prophecy.
To the President’s Ear on Energy
As the president hits the road to talk about energy, he should first listen to what the American people are saying, reflected in two new polls this week.
Start with a Harris Interactive survey that shows 76 percent of voters believe increasing taxes on oil and natural gas companies could cost them more at the fuel pump. For a president who continues to talk about hiking taxes on energy companies that should be a big red flag.
Americans who’re getting slammed by higher fuel costs appear to sense that increasing energy taxes would drive up energy producers’ costs, which – as the Congressional Research Service found last year – could decrease exploration, development and production while elevating prices.
Other details from the Harris poll of 1,009 respondents:
81 percent believe more U.S. oil and natural gas development could reduce gasoline prices.90 percent believe a pro-energy development strategy could lead to more U.S. jobs.84 percent believe increasing domestic oil and gas production could enhance our energy security.64 percent believe some in Washington are intentionally delaying domestic oil and natural gas development, potentially hurting the economy and leading to higher consumer energy costs.Clearly, those are slam-dunk numbers on energy policies the president and his administration have been talking about a lot – while keeping 87 percent of America’s offshore areas off limits, while overseeing declines in Gulf of Mexico production and while presiding over a downward trajectory in leasing and permitting on federal lands.
Then there’s the Pew Research Center’s latest findings, that as fuel prices rise, so does Americans’ support for more oil and natural gas production:
“… support for allowing more offshore oil and gas drilling in U.S. waters, which plummeted during the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, has recovered to pre-spill levels. Nearly two-thirds (65%) favor allowing increased offshore drilling, up from 57% a year ago and 44% in June 2010, during the Gulf spill.”
That last stat is worth underscoring. While Americans’ support for a variety of energy policies – from improved fuel efficiency to more federal support for mass transit systems – is pretty much where it has been, public support for more offshore oil and natural gas drilling has increased significantly. Pew finds that twice as many Americans (65 percent) support increased offshore drilling as those who oppose more drilling (31 percent).
Again, the Pew poll suggests growing numbers of Americans believe that increasing domestic supplies of oil and natural gas can put downward pressure on the price of crude oil, which accounts for 76 percent of the cost of what they pay at the pump. So, while the president continues to talk as though little can be done about fuel prices, U.S. consumers who’re being punished at the pump aren’t buying it.
A couple of other tidbits from Pew:
Of American voters who know something about hydraulic fracturing and energy from shale, 52 percent are in favor compared to 35 percent opposed. Among independents, support is actually a little stronger than the overall number, 54 percent to 35 percent.Awareness of fracking and producing natural gas from shale is mixed, but Pew found that 63 percent of those surveyed had heard something about the process.One more note about Pew’s survey. The poll finding that Pew chose to highlight in its public announcement – Americans’ top energy priority – stems from a glaringly false choice foisted on the 1,503 sampled adults who were forced to choose one top priority between alternative sources (wind, solar, hydrogen technology) and expanded oil, natural gas and coal production. Those aren’t mutually exclusive options.
We commend the 5 percent of respondents who selected “both” even though the Pew folks didn’t offer it as a choice, as well as the 4 percent who didn’t know or refused to answer – perhaps, like us, frustrated that some continue to pit energy sources against each other when the truth is America needs all energy options to build a secure future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)