Ending Obama Agenda of Energy Starvation: The Impact on US Jobs, Government Revenue, and Energy Production
The images below are taken from a report released last week by Wood MacKenzie, looking at the impact of relaxing just a few of President Obama's anti-energy policies (h/t Powerlineblog). Imagine if all of Obama's devastating policies of energy starvation were revoked. The resulting growth of jobs, revenues, and energy production would be astounding.
Growth of jobs directly involved in energy production, transport, and sales, would be just the beginning. Each new energy job would stimulate the creation of supporting jobs in services, housing, infrastructure, etc. And so it goes: growth breeds growth.
Job Creation Under Relaxation of Obama Rules Wood Mackenzie’s analysis found that U.S. policies which encourage the development of new and existing resources could, by 2030, increase domestic oil and natural gas production by over 10 million boed, support an additional 1.4 million jobs, and raise over $800 billion of cumulative additional government revenue.
_quoted_in_Powerlineblog
Enhancement of Government Revenues Under Relaxation of Obama Anti-Energy Rules The report assumes that the following changes would be made to existing Obama policies in order to allow energy and economic recovery to occur:
Increased Energy Production Due to Relaxation of Just a Few of Obama's Energy Starvation Rules
The improvements projected in the Wood MacKenzie report (PDF) are based largely on the revocation of Obama's de facto offshore oil moratorium, the approval of pipelines from Canada through the US for oil sands transport, and a cleaner and more streamlined set of regulations overseeing shale oil & gas production. The report also assumed an opening of currently blocked oil & gas resources in the Arctic and in the US mountain states, for development, and a reduction of duplication of bureaucratic environmental regulations.
In reality, according to Al Fin energy analysts, a more rational pro-energy policy would improve North American jobs, government revenues, and energy production far more quickly and to higher levels than the Wood Mackenzie report suggests. The reason our analysts are so confident is that potential for development of massive coal and kerogen deposits were not closely considered. Nor was the potential for development of advanced nuclear energy technologies for both uranium and thorium cycle reactors carefully considered.
Abundant energy opens the doors to other industries and commerce, which means more jobs and more revenues even in areas far removed from direct energy production or sales. The converse is true: energy starvation reduces jobs and revenues not only in the energy-related industries, but in society as a whole. And that is where the US stands under President Obama's policies.
Energy starvation -- shutting down reliable energy in favour of unreliable forms of energy such as big wind and solar -- is never a smart policy. It is a strongly ideological policy promoted by green faux environmental activists, with the unspoken aim of whittling away at the industry and commerce which support advanced economies. Economies which fall under the curse of energy-starvation policies slowly succumb to worsening economic conditions.
Growth of jobs directly involved in energy production, transport, and sales, would be just the beginning. Each new energy job would stimulate the creation of supporting jobs in services, housing, infrastructure, etc. And so it goes: growth breeds growth.
_quoted_in_Powerlineblog
• Opening of Federal areas that are currently “off limits” to exploration and development
• Commencement of leasing, drilling and development activity in currently closed regions. Regions to be opened include: Eastern Gulf of Mexico, portions of the Rocky Mountains, Atlantic OCS, Pacific OCS, Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) – 1002 Area, National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska (NPRA) and Alaska offshore
• Lifting of drilling moratorium in New York State
• Commencement of drilling and development of Marcellus shale in New York State
• Increased rate of permitting in the offshore Gulf of Mexico
• Allows for a return to pre-Moratorium exploration and development activity
• Approval of the Keystone XL and other future Canada to U.S. oil pipelines
• Facilitates additional Canadian oil sands development, thereby increasing the demand for U.S. supplied equipment and infrastructure
• Regulation of shale resources remains predominately at the State level
• Environmental regulation of shale gas and tight oil plays are not duplicative or unduly burdensome. Permitting levels are at sufficient rates to develop resources in a timely manner _quoted_in_Powerlineblog
The improvements projected in the Wood MacKenzie report (PDF) are based largely on the revocation of Obama's de facto offshore oil moratorium, the approval of pipelines from Canada through the US for oil sands transport, and a cleaner and more streamlined set of regulations overseeing shale oil & gas production. The report also assumed an opening of currently blocked oil & gas resources in the Arctic and in the US mountain states, for development, and a reduction of duplication of bureaucratic environmental regulations.
In reality, according to Al Fin energy analysts, a more rational pro-energy policy would improve North American jobs, government revenues, and energy production far more quickly and to higher levels than the Wood Mackenzie report suggests. The reason our analysts are so confident is that potential for development of massive coal and kerogen deposits were not closely considered. Nor was the potential for development of advanced nuclear energy technologies for both uranium and thorium cycle reactors carefully considered.
Abundant energy opens the doors to other industries and commerce, which means more jobs and more revenues even in areas far removed from direct energy production or sales. The converse is true: energy starvation reduces jobs and revenues not only in the energy-related industries, but in society as a whole. And that is where the US stands under President Obama's policies.
Energy starvation -- shutting down reliable energy in favour of unreliable forms of energy such as big wind and solar -- is never a smart policy. It is a strongly ideological policy promoted by green faux environmental activists, with the unspoken aim of whittling away at the industry and commerce which support advanced economies. Economies which fall under the curse of energy-starvation policies slowly succumb to worsening economic conditions.
Labels: energy starvation
posted by al fin at
12:34 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home