Rebane's Ruminations
November 2011
S M T W T F S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

NetOilExporterIt isn’t clear whether we should laugh or cry.  But here we are, for the first time since 1949 we will be a net exporter of petroleum products this year.  The accompanying figure filched from the WSJ shows that exports started increasing during Bush2’s reign (recall Bush2 was an oilman).  Unfortunately, our exports are exceeding our imports because our economy has tanked, and is still mired in the mud (more here).

We used to use about 25M bbl/day; now it’s closer to 20M bbl/day.  Today we still import about 9M bbl/day.  Five years ago our becoming a net exporter was unthinkable.  Now we export the equivalent of about 9M bbl/day because the developing world is fuel hungry, and bidding up prices enough to make sense to send it there instead of consuming it here.  Meanwhile, we are wound up tightly in our underwear still trying to figure out an energy policy while the delay continues to kill and deny jobs, and at the same time substituting polluting ‘green’ energies that make no economic sense whatsoever.

It brings a tear to me eye to think about Obama sabotaging the Keystone XL pipeline project from Canada to Texas refineries which are the most modern and efficient in the world.  To think about all the corn that is going into engine-corroding biofuels that reduce no one’s carbon footprint, and only raise food prices here and among the poor of the world.  To contemplate all the Chevy Volts driven by propagandized dolts.  Now there is a piece of work.  In actuality it is a coal-driven car that gets no more range from its iffy battery than did the Roberts electric car more than a century ago.

No one dares contemplate the number of coal-fired electricity generating plants we have to build if the government forces us into those IEDs – yes, these Inadvertent Explosive Devices are bursting into flames and GM has now recommended that they not be driven until it can figure out why they spontaneously combust.  The under-educated greenies have apparently overlooked the total pollution and cost budgets required to field any significant number of ‘clean energy’ vehicles.  ‘Clean’ ain’t cleaner, and it most certainly is not cheaper.

So here we are, anticipating an economy on its butt for the remainder of the decade that will make us a net energy exporter for the first time in 62 years.  I keep wondering whether all this occurs by accident or does someone in Washington really know what’s going on.  Oh yes, I forgot that we do have the Department of Energy – what was I thinking?

Meanwhile, we are still trying to ram manmade global warming down the country’s throat.  An enterprise that is now shown corrupt from every angle you care to look at it.  (More here, and also see NC2012 for a fuller and ongoing account of this national trail of tears.)

Posted in , ,

16 responses to “US Net Exporter of Oil Again”

  1. Russ Steele Avatar

    In examining Japan’s economic development, it was discovered that there is a connection between economic growth and the use of fossil fuels.
    Fossil fuels (oil, coal, gas) are low-entropy natural resources which seem to be indispensable for our economic prosperity. This paper investigates the relationship between fossil fuel consumption and economic growth in Japan, using a multivariate model of fossil fuels, non-fossil energy, labor and GDP. Using the Johansen cointegration technique, the empirical results indicate that there is a long-run relationship among the variables. Then using vector error correction model, the study reveals unidirectional causality running from fossil fuels to GDP. It implies that decline in fossil fuel consumption may hamper economic growth. On the other hand, non-fossil energy use does not appear to have positive effects on economic growth.
    The decline in US use of oil indicatea that our economy is also declining. For California, which is switching to non-fossil energy, there is no similar connection. As we switch to renewable, we will not see any corresponding economic growth.

    Like

  2. Dixon Cruickshank Avatar
    Dixon Cruickshank

    Just think how much we could sell if we even tried – keep in mind the worldwide boost to the economy’s of the world with lower energy prices – oil and gas

    Like

  3. Greg Goodknight Avatar
    Greg Goodknight

    George, I don’t see natural gas or coal in the mix… somehow, seeing a comprehensive list of BTUs of every fuel consumed, imported and exported would seem more informative.

    Like

  4. George Rebane Avatar

    Agreed GregG. Our exports contain “9M bbl/day equivalents” which includes coal and gas. The rough BTUs of total domestic energy produced come to oil 41%, coal 25%, gas 21%. I’m not sure that we export the fossil components in the same (pro rata) proportions. Although, since the recent discoveries of ‘mega gas fields’ we have totally flipped from plans to build huge LNG receiving terminals to LNG production plants at export terminals.

    Like

  5. Russ Steele Avatar

    Here are some insights on the oil and gas, plus global warming by Newt before Congress.
    http://youtu.be/TEOXI88lSw8

    Like

  6. Russ Steele Avatar

    Another thought. Why is it that the Democrats are trying to shut down the one industry that is creating jobs and wealth in the nation?

    Like

  7. bill tozer Avatar
    bill tozer

    Russ, because they are Democrats. Stupid is what stupid does.

    Like

  8. Russ Steele Avatar

    IBD report this morning on how EPA is attemtping to strangle oil and ga production and kill more jobs, to solve another non-existing problem.
    New Energy: The latest salvo in the administration’s war on energy may be new rules and permits to regulate a process to get oil and gas from porous rock, sacrificing jobs and economic growth while under review
    .
    There are a few areas of the U.S. that are booming. Two of these are in North Dakota and Pennsylvania, states that sit atop two massive shale rock formations, the Bakken and the Marcellus.
    Extraction of oil and natural gas from these formations have created jobs and economic growth in the midst of a stagnant and parched economy.
    The oil and gas is extracted from this porous rock by a process called hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking.”
    ooo
    In January, state regulators in places like North Dakota and Pennsylvania must write new rules for hydraulic fracturing and the fluids used in the process.
    These rules are to be based on an EPA guidance document that is under review by the Office of Management and Budget. The document will tell states how to comply with and issue permits in compliance with the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
    Keep in mind that even EPA director Lisa Jackson could provide no evidence of groundwater contamination due to fracking. She recently recently told a House Oversight Committee hearing that, despite anecdotal evidence, “I’m not aware of any proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water.”
    “This 60-year-old technique has been responsible for 7 billion barrels of oil and 600 trillion cubic feet of natural gas,” according to Sen. James Inhofe, ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee. “In hydraulic fracturing’s 60-year-history, there has not been a single documented case of contamination.”

    It really is not about water contamination, it is about shutting down cheap fossil fuel to make alternative energy more cost effective. It is about killing jobs before they become and embarrassment to the President, who supports alternative energy, which is not producing any jobs.

    Like

  9. Steve Wynn Avatar
    Steve Wynn

    Maybe it’s because of all of the problems that Fracking has caused……
    Stupid is continuing when there are serious issues for people such as having safe drinking water

    Like

  10. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Fracking is done thousands of feet below the water table.

    Like

  11. George Rebane Avatar

    ToddJ – that little fact does not play well when debating the issue with liberals, please find a more acceptable one.

    Like

  12. Mikey McD Avatar

    Did I already mention the economic boom taking place in the Dakota’s thanks to energy extraction from mother earth?
    At the intersection of what price of gold/oz and unemployment rate ‘requires’ us to open the Idaho Maryland mine?

    Like

  13. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    You are right George, hmmm, let me see, oh! They place a casing down the hole past the water table? How about that?

    Like

  14. George Rebane Avatar

    ToddJ – that might work, casings have not blown very often. But then again, you’re depending on reason and logic.

    Like

  15. Dixon Cruickshank Avatar
    Dixon Cruickshank

    You two should know that never works – I loved your buddy Waxmans quote today about Keystone ” At a time when we should be moving away from fossiel fuels towards cleaner fuels this just makes no snese” – thats pretty close
    Talk about the party of NO
    As far as the EPA and Guberment in general as soon as they find out the people are having fun doing something or succeeding in making money at something – it must be shutdown, can’t have that.
    If fracking had not been publicized after the giant finds everything would still be fine – “The whale that surfaces is soon harpooned”, Stewart Graff, Stewart-James Securities.

    Like

Leave a comment