Guest Post by David Middleton
During his State of the Union Address, President Obama had a few things to say about energy snd I have a few replies.
Pres. Obama: We buy… less foreign oil than we have in 20 [years].
Wrong!!! We buy more “foreign oil” now than we did 20 years ago.
Pres. Obama: We produce more oil at home than we have in 15 years.
What do you mean by “we”? You don’t produce any oil.
See that decline in Federal Gulf of Mexico production from ~1.7 MMbbl/d to ~1.4 MMbbl/d since early 2010?
You actually did build that.
Pres. Obama: That’s why my administration will keep cutting red tape and speeding up new oil and gas permits.
Drilling permits that once took 30 days to be approved now take more than 180 days. Even relatively simple things like the approval of development plan (DOCD) revisions are sometimes drawn out to nearly 300 days. As of a year ago, the average delays for independent oil companies are currently 1.4 years on the shelf and almost 2 years in deepwater:
Between the “permitorium” and high product prices, many of the best, most capable drilling rigs have been moved overseas. Once we manage to get permits approved, the delays in obtaining a rig can be almost as long as the permit delays were. In this “dynamic regulatory environment,” wells can’t be drilled quickly enough to compensate for decline rates, much less to increase production. This is why the production rate in the Gulf of Mexico is still 300,000 bbl/d lower than it was prior to Macondo. The only red tape you have cut, is red tape that your maladministration created.
Pres. Obama: So tonight, I propose we use some of our oil and gas revenues to fund an Energy Security Trust that will drive new research and technology to shift our cars and trucks off oil for good.
What do you mean by “our oil and gas revenues”? You don’t generate any oil and gas revenue. The Federal gov’t does generate some revenue from the private sector development of Federal mineral leases.
Federal mineral revenues for FY 2012 were HALF of what they were in FY 2008!
The decline in Federal mineral revenues is really ironic considering the fact that the US Navy can’t afford to deploy a second aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf due to a lack of revenue. The reason for maintaining a strong naval presence in the region is the free flow of oil at market prices (the Carter Doctrine). The Navy only expects to “save several hundred million dollars” by not delaying the deployment of CVN 75 USS Harry S Truman. The royalty payments from the missing 300,000 bbl/d of production could have been as much as $1.8 billion and have more than covered the cost of the deployment.
What’s even more ironic? We’re importing 50% more from the Persian Gulf than just three years ago!
The actions of this administration have both increased our need to maintain freedom of navigation in the Persian Gulf and reduced our means to do so.
Sources:
U.S. Energy Information Administration, U.S. Imports by Country of Origin
U.S. Energy Information Administration, Crude Oil Production
Quest Offshore Resources, Inc. The State of the Offshore U.S. Oil and Gas Industry, December 2011
Office of Natural Resource Revenue, Statistical Information
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ouch! Is energy drink good for sinuses? 🙂
Thank you for your research. The BS last night out of Washington was stunning I wonder when Americans are ever going to wake up to what is happening in their country. Your assessment regarding the energy industry is only the tip of (according to some other BS’rs the disappearing) iceberg.
Thanks. Interesting data. I’d add that all that gas being flared in N Dakota, because there isn’t a pipeline to ship it, makes the USA look like the developing world 50 years ago.
I don’t come to this site for politics.
It’s particularly irritating to see posts like this when the beneficiaries of the argument are the oil industry, because other people will use this to “prove” links between sceptics and the oil industry.
Is the man not the leading producer of snake-oil in the US of A?
What I find disturbing is the source of the President’s misinformation. Does he ask for information or an interpretation of data that supports his agenda? If he does not, what adviser or bureaucrat at what level substitutes misleading numbers for actual facts? How far down the hierarchy does this process go? Isn’t it inappropriate to feed the President of the United States false information? Maybe “distributing” isn’t the best word – scary is better.
another F word comes to mind…FRAUD. pollies need to be held accountable for their CAGW excesses:
14 Feb: UK Daily Mail: Hugo Duncan/Tim Shipman: King blames rising inflation on ‘own goals’ by ministers: Governor attacks green taxes and university fees
Sir Mervyn said squeeze on living standards will last for another three years
The Governor of the Bank of England warned that the unprecedented squeeze on living standards will last for a further three years as prices rise and wages stagnate.
But, in a coded attack on ministers, he said much of the pain was ‘self-inflicted’ because it stemmed from big increases in energy bills and tuition fees.
‘Whether it’s on financing education, green policies or other policies, what they have done is push up prices and that clearly makes our job in the short-run more difficult,’ Sir Mervyn said.
The average household energy bill is now more than £1,300 a year and has risen nearly 25 per cent since early 2011, with suppliers blaming green levies imposed by the Government…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2278368/King-blames-rising-inflation-goals-ministers-Governor-attacks-green-taxes-university-fees.html
It always amuses me when government departments leave the recycled paper logo on presentations when they move them to the web.
I always like my web pages displayed on 100% recyclable pixels.
So God Made A Liberal…
http://youtu.be/EUzMPlQb2G4
So the Village Notice Board can also be used for those who use the whetstone of statistics to grind their political ax.
Yawn
What a load of pedantic nonsense much of this article is! It could have been an interesting article if David Middleton stuck to the facts, like in the section where he pointed out the problems the US government has created with red tape. However it is simply ridiculous to criticise Obama’s use of the word “we” when he is obviously referring to the American people, not himself and his pals.
How on earth do you expect a head of state to speak? I am sure that Middleton would have had no objection to Obama using the word “we” if he had been espousing right-wing policies.
“…to shift our cars and trucks off oil for good.”
Off oil and onto coal. Right.
Check out the wiki article on coal emissions (which lists CO2 as a pollutant):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil-fuel_power_station
Coal emits three more sulfur dioxide than petroleum and twice the nitrous oxide, and I think we’re all pretty much agreed that SO2 and NO are serious pollutants.
He won’t bother about the truth, as long as enough voters believe the lies.
So the notice board on the village green can also be used by those who grind their political ax on the whetstone of statistics?
Yawn
Well said Sir.
Pres. Obama is positively the worst president the US has ever had backed up by the worst administration and advisors. (John Holdren for instance)
“Nothing I’m proposing tonight should increase our deficit by a single dime,” Obama, Feb 12th, 2013.
The US ran trillion dollar+ annual deficits for the past four years (the past four years are the highest in history). Isn’t it comforting to know that the US will stick with trillion dollar deficits but steer bravely and steadfastly away from one trillion dollar and 10 cents annual deficit!
“The dime stops here”
It is disingenuous to place emphasis on “not increasing the deficit” when the nation is actually hemmorrhaging!
Nice little post David! Can we expect a deeper analysis of some of the information provided? For instance, I’m a very strong advocate for reducing US dependence on foreign oil, particularly from the mid-east. However, our recent reduction in imports isn’t really a positive sign. It isn’t coincidental that the recent reduction has occurred with our recent economic decline.
And, because of the alarmists dense misunderstanding about our reliance on oil and their strange preoccupation with whirlygigs and suncatchers, we can never overstate the fact that all the windmills and solar panels in country have absolutely nothing to do with decreasing our dependence on oil. They are not related.
For those whining about the political aspect of the post, Zero is teh one who brought out the intentional deception. Climate science, energy policy, and politics are impossible to separate if one is to have an open and honest discussion of such. It is altogether right and proper, in a free society, to correct our leaders when they are wrong. It is even more imperative to point out intentional deception. Although, one can make a case that Zero is ignorant and simply parroting what someone told him, so “intentional” could be questioned.
@Almah Geddon
The recycled symbol is mine. It’s a bit of subtle humor. The background is called “recycled paper.” I pasted the EIA and ONRR images into PowerPoint, annotated them and saved them as PNG’s.
AndyL says:
February 13, 2013 at 11:32 pm
I don’t come to this site for politics.
It’s particularly irritating to see posts like this when the beneficiaries of the argument are the oil industry, because other people will use this to “prove” links between sceptics and the oil industry.
Why did you come to this site?
Roy says:
February 14, 2013 at 1:38 am
How on earth do you expect a head of state to speak?
Some facts, occasionally, perhaps.
Roy says:
February 14, 2013 at 1:38 am
What a load of pedantic nonsense much of this article is!…….How on earth do you expect a head of state to speak?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I expect the leader of my country to at least have the courage of his convictions. He gets up in front of the world and tries to take credit for increased domestic oil production when we see him obstructing it. We see him try to take credit for the decrease in oil imports, but, he doesn’t honestly tell the people why. David was spot on by correcting that mis-articulation. Zero has worked to thwart oil production. I expect my head of state to be honest about his actions and advocacy.
The tone of this post is a little childish.
“You don’t produce any oil.” Really?
Wow. China will be drilling in the golf of Mexico. Maybe they will get a low interest loan from the U.S. then Obama can exclaim “we’ll be your best consumer”.
I liked the artical too,but….I agree about the”We” thing.
As I read I thought,why is the writer tossing a wooden
shoe into it.Is he trying to destroy it?Maybe I’m too harsh.
…..Just sayin <]"?!
Alfred
Thats article Sorry
Alfred