“It doesn’t take an advanced legal mind to interpret what Congress meant in the Deep Water Royalty Relief Act – it’s right there in black and white. Unfortunately, now that this case has officially come to a close, it will likely be used by those who oppose responsible energy development as a cudgel to beat Congress into passing bad legislation that would otherwise have no legitimate place in the energy debate.

“Make no mistake. Oil and gas revenues from federal lands and waters contributed more than $23 billion dollars to the Treasury in 2008 – making this the single largest revenue raiser after federal income tax receipts. And with scarcely three percent of the outer continental shelf currently leased for energy exploration, it’s fair to say we haven’t even scratched the surface of what could be a multi-trillion-dollar resource.

“Today’s court ruling represents a clear victory for the rule of law, and an unambiguous rebuke to those in the administration who believe they have the unilateral power to make law, instead of the faithful obligation to enforce it.”

Note: According to an economic analysis commissioned by the American Energy Alliance, robust offshore energy exploration and production would generate $8 trillion in additional economic output (GDP); $2.2 trillion in total tax receipts; 1.2 million new, well-paying jobs annually across the country; and $70 billion in additional wages each year.

For additional information, please contact Patrick Creighton, 202-621-2947, or Laura Henderson, 202-621-2951.

#####

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 16, 2009
Contact:
Patrick Creighton, 202.870.0850
Laura Henderson, 202.621.2951

IER: Rahall Bill a Continuation of Failed Energy Policies From Washington

‘Energy’ hearing to focus on extending de facto offshore energy production ban,

New bill will increase foreign energy dependence

Washington, DC – Prior to part one of a two-day hearing on H.R. 3534, The Consolidated Land, Energy, and Aquatic Resources (CLEAR) Act of 2009, Thomas J. Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research (IER), a free market energy think tank, issued this statement:

“It’s been over a year since Washington responded to the will of the American people and finally put to rest restrictions on responsible offshore energy exploration. While this action was long overdue, and was certainly a positive first step toward restoring proper balance in our national energy policy, unfortunately, one year later, it seems as though last year’s actions were merely a gesture.

“In fact, legislation like the CLEAR Act would actually move our nation further away from being able to safely and effectively develop our offshore energy resources, adding even more red tape, costs, and burdensome regulations to the safe practice of producing energy offshore. The creation of new bureaucracies to manage leasing at the Interior Department – which is called for in Mr. Rahall’s bill – is a direct attempt to ensure that a de facto ban on much of America’s energy remains intact. The American people do not want more government – they want more of the energy that is rightfully theirs.

“And while China invests in oil sands projects in Canada, and Russia, Brazil, Venezuela, and Cuba continue to expand energy production offshore, America – the country that discovered oil 150 years ago – remains on the sidelines. The rest of the world gets it, and the American people understand that increasing energy production here at home will create jobs, help stabilize energy prices and drive down imports. And yet, our leaders stand in the way of securing energy and mineral resources at every turn, putting special interests who oppose the energy the fuels our economy in front of the interests of the American people.”

More from IER:

Interactive Dashboard: Where’s our offshore energy production?

Fact Sheet: Offshore Energy Exploration: Myth vs. Fact

Press Release: China, Russia, Cuba, Brazil Advance Robust, Supply-Focused Energy Policy

Blog:Two Energy Futures

The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.

####

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 18, 2009
CONTACT:
Laura Henderson (202) 621-2951

We Hate to Say We Told You So….

Canadian Energy Industry to Target Asian Trade, Avoid New U.S. Regulations

WASHINGTON, D.C. – In response to a Globe and Mail report that indicated that Canadian energy producers will increasingly look to Asia to sell their energy resources thanks to President Obama’s proposed new and costly regulations and taxes, IER President Thomas J. Pyle released the following statement:

“The Obama administration knows that Canada’s energy resources are among the most significant in the world, and with a population one-tenth the size of the United States, our neighbors to the north have always been ready and willing to share.  In spite of that knowledge, the administration developed and proposed plans that will force Canada’s energy producers to send their products to Asia to avoid America’s regulatory and tax-related mess.

“If President Obama won’t let us import oil and natural gas from Canada, he will force us to buy higher-priced energy from highly unstable and largely unfriendly nations in the Middle East.  The Obama administration may understand this reality and it may be concerned, but it is not fighting to keep Americans’ access to Canada’s affordable, reliable, and abundant energy resources intact.  We hope the administration will take notice and see that their proposals have serious and detrimental consequences.”

Note: The Globe and Mail quoted the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers president David Collyer as saying, “We see potential constraints to access to the U.S. market…the only realistic option, as an alternative to the U.S. in the near term, would be exports off the West Coast to the Far East.”

More from IER on domestic energy policy:

• IER Study: Low Carbon Fuel Standards: Recipes for Higher Gasoline Prices and More Middle East Oil
• Primer on Oil Shale: What is it? How much do we have? How do we produce it?
• Press Release: Embrace Canadian Energy
• IER Study: Green Jobs: Fact or Fiction?

The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.

#####

www.InstituteforEnergyResearch.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
March 13, 2009
CONTACT:
Laura Henderson (202) 621-2951

Cap and Trade: All Pain, No Gain for Consumers, Economy, Environment

WASHINGTON, D.C. – On the heels of two hearings in the House today on how an economy-wide cap and trade program might affect working-class American families, Institute for Energy Research (IER) released an analysis that demonstrates that lawmakers’ concerns about the financial burden cap and trade would impose on their constituents are well founded.

“Cap and trade has two goals: increase energy costs and reduce carbon dioxide emissions,” said IER President Thomas J. Pyle. “IER’s analysis clearly shows that cap and trade goes one for two—it is as historically ineffective at reducing carbon dioxide emissions as it is historically adept at raising gas prices and electricity bills. With our economy in free fall and millions of Americans out of work, the idea that lawmakers would enact an unnecessary policy to harm families’ budgets is as irresponsible as it is illogical.”

The analysis shows that cap and trade:

· Is designed to increase the price of 85 percent of the energy we use;

· Didn’t reduce emissions in Europe, home of the world’s only full-scale carbon dioxide cap and trade policy;

· Targets low-income earners;

· Unfairly targets rural economies; and,

· Penalizes domestic and friendly trade partners’ energy resources in favor of Middle East oil.

More from IER on carbon regulation:

· IER Study: Carbon Taxes Reduce Economic Growth & Achieve No Environmental Improvement

· Blog Posting: The Dangers of a “Carbon Fed”

· Press Release: Obama Attempts to Sneak Biggest Tax Increase in History into Budget

· IER Study: Green Jobs: Fact or Fiction?

The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.

#####

www.InstituteforEnergyResearch.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 25, 2009
CONTACT:
Laura Henderson (202) 621-2951

IER: Interior Decision on Oil Shale Locks Away American Energy Resource Larger than Total Reserves of Middle East

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Institute for Energy Research (IER) president Thomas J. Pyle issued the following statement today after the Interior Department announced its plans to withdraw from consideration acreage in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming where research and development of a small portion of our nation’s homegrown oil shale reserves had previously been scheduled to take place:

“Earlier this week, Secretary Salazar suggested America’s massive and homegrown reserves of oil shale held ‘great potential.’ Unfortunately, the Interior Department’s decision today may help ensure that potential never becomes reality – in the process, locking-away an American energy resource larger than the total reserves of the entire Middle East.

“At a time of great economic uncertainty, with millions of Americans out of work and state budgets stretched beyond their breaking point, responsible development of America’s abundant shale resources could be a way out of our current condition, and a way back to a better one. The Interior Department’s announcement today effectively forecloses that opportunity.”

NOTE: In a story posted Sunday by the Salt Lake (City, Utah) Tribune, reporter Thomas Burr quoted Secretary Salazar as saying to a group of western governors gathered in Washington that oil shale had “great potential.”

More from IER on the potential and promise of America’s massive reserves of oil shale:

• Fact Sheet: Canadian Shale Resources a Critical Part of America’s Regional Energy Security

• IER Oil Shale Primer: What Is It? How Much Do We Have? What Can Be Done to Develop It?

• Nov. ’08: IER Applauds BLM on Final Rule for Shale Development

The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.

#####

www.InstituteforEnergyResearch.org

Fact: The Minerals Management Service (MMS) estimates that the OCS contains 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. These estimates are likely very conservative, as bans on offshore leasing have made it illegal to explore and determine how much more energy is available. In other words, this is just the tip of the iceberg­—history has proven that when people are allowed to look for energy, they generally find it.  The best way to stop them from finding it is to stop them from looking for it.

Myth: Offshore energy development would do nothing to lower prices because it would take too long for the energy resources to make it into the market.

Fact: Economists have long disputed the notion that offshore energy development would not affect consumer prices. Both economic theory and now empirical evidence demonstrate that government policies promising future oil production lead to immediate price relief. IER economist Robert Murphy made this point on a TV interview on June 26, 2008,[1] while Martin Feldstein made the point in a Wall Street Journal op-ed on July 1, 2008.

Further, while there may be areas along the Atlantic coast without the significant build-out of infrastructure needed to facilitate quick energy production, other currently unexplored areas do have that infrastructure in place, such as the eastern Gulf of Mexico. No serious observer has ever suggested that it would take anywhere close to ten years to access those energy resources and deliver them to American consumers.  Furthermore, in places like California, where an infrastructure is already in place and the local community supports offshore exploration, those resources could be available in a significantly shorter period of time.

Myth: Offshore energy production is dangerous and harmful to the environment.

Fact: Offshore energy production is safe and environmentally sound.  In the last 50 years, the oil and gas industry has developed innovative technologies and exploration methods that are efficient, pose little threat to the environment, and keep workers safe.  The industry has taken additional precautions to prepare for any type of unwanted incident.

Some of those technologies include:

• Advanced 3-D seismic and 4-D time imaging technologies: enable offshore operators to locate oil and gas resources far more accurately to necessitate less drilling and allow greater resource recovery.[2]

• Storm chokes: placed on all offshore wells to detect damage to surface valves and shut down production during an emergency.[3]

• Blowout preventers: continuously monitor the subsurface and subsea-bed conditions to prepare for unexpected changes in well pressure.[4]

• Waste product reuse technology: transforms drill cuttings, a waste product of rock pieces and drilling fluids produced when drilling a well, into raw material for bricks, roads, and even rebuilding Louisiana’s wetlands.[5]

These technologies and practices are yielding results:

• According to the U.S. Department of Interior data, offshore operators produced 7 billion barrels of oil from 1985 to 2001 with a spill rate of only .001 percent.[6]

• In 2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita destroyed 115 Gulf of Mexico oil and gas platforms and damaged 535 pipeline segments, but there were no major oil spills attributed to either storm.[7]

Myth: Offshore oil and gas production is the number one contributor to oil in our oceans.

Fact: Less than 1 percent of all oil found in the North American marine environment comes from offshore oil and gas development.[8] According to the National Academy of Sciences, the majority—60 percent—is the result of natural seeps through the ocean floor.[9] In many places it is higher. For example, all of the tar on the beaches of Santa Barbara is from natural seeps.[10] Moreover, these seeps are reduced when the oil is produced and transported to shore, where it can be put to use as energy for America.[11]

Oil seeps—underwater cracks in the Earth’s crust—release more than 60 percent of the petroleum entering North American waters and over 45 percent of the petroleum in waters around the globe.[12] Natural seepage of crude oil from geologic formations below the seafloor is estimated to exceed 47,000,000 gallons in North American waters and 180,000,000 gallons globally every year.[13]

Myth: Oil companies are sitting on 68 million acres of untapped leases and don’t need access to new areas.

Fact: Lease agreements already contain federal requirements that require oil companies to use leased land in a timely manner. The 1992 Comprehensive Energy Policy Act requires energy companies to comply with lease provisions and explore expeditiously or risk forfeiture of the lease.  Energy companies cannot “stockpile” leases (even those found to contain no oil or gas) to drive prices up.  What’s more, historical data show only one discovery results from every 60 leases granted to energy companies.

Companies are not “sitting” on the leases they now have.  Technology has allowed companies to increase their production on leased acreage.

The Hard Facts:

• 97 percent of Federal offshore areas are not leased.

• 94 percent of Federal onshore areas are not leased.

[2] U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, Environmental Benefits of Advanced Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Technology, October 1999, p. 28. http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/oilgas/publications/environ_benefits/env_benefits.pdf

[3] Id. at 41.

[4] Id.

[5] See id. at 54.

[6] SAFE Commends Movement Toward Lifting Ban on Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Production, http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS223711+18-Jun-2008+PRN20080618, June 18, 2008.

[7] Id.

[8] See National Research Council, Oil in the Sea III: Inputs, Fates, and Effects: Report in Brief, http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/oil_in_the_sea_final.pdf.

[9] National Research Council, Oil in the Sea III: Inputs, Fates, and Effects, p. 2 (2003).

[10] See Kolpack 77 and Harman 198  R. L. Kolpack, Relationship of migratin of natural seep material to oceanography of Santa Barbara Channel, California Offshore Gas, Oil, and Tar Seeps, Staff Report, California State Lands Commission p. 226-55 (1977); B. Hartman & D. Hammond, The use of carbon and sulfurisotopes as correlation parameters tor the source identilication of beach tar in the southern California borderland, 45 Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 309 (1981).

[11] Stop Oil Seeps California, http://www.soscalifornia.org/presentation-bbsw/ze.html.

[12] Id. at 2.

[13] Id.

The study results are similar to past US experience. Congress enacted a windfall profits tax on domestic oil producers in 1980 expecting to generate tax revenues. The Congressional Research Service[ii] found that, instead, domestic crude oil production was reduced by 1.2 to 8.0 percent and foreign oil imports were increased by 3 to 13 percent.

While there is no specific windfall profits tax proposal currently being considered by Congress, such a tax was part of President Obama’s campaign platform. When crude oil prices dropped last fall, President Obama’s aides changed course and indicated that with oil prices below $80 a barrel would not be considered for a windfall profits tax. However, whether a windfall profits tax or some other similar tax or combination of taxes is instituted on the oil and gas industry, the impact on US jobs, the economy, and foreign imports of oil and natural gas would be similar.

Other study results are:

• A decline in natural gas production of 9 to 13 percent, 1.6 to 2.4 trillion cubic feet, between 2020 and 2030. More natural gas imports would result, increasing 14-55 percent, or 0.5 to 1.2 trillion cubic feet, during this period.
• A reduction in refinery output of 2 to 4 percent, or 410 to 660 thousand barrels per day, during the 2010 to 2030 period. The reduction in domestic refinery output could partially be offset by increasing foreign imports of petroleum products by 15 to 21 percent, or 230 to 430 million barrels per day, during the 2010 to 2030 period.
• A reduction in household consumption between $20 to 42 billion by 2030.
• A decline in domestic investment by the oil and gas industry between 20 and 25 percent by 2030.

[i]“Energy and Economic Impacts of a Proposed Windfall Profits Tax on Producers of Oil and Refined Products in the United States “, CRA International, February 2009, http://www.api.org/Newsroom/upload/CRA_WPT_Study_1_30_2009.pdf

[ii] Lazzari, Salvatore, “The Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax of the 1980s: Implications for Current Energy Policy”, Congressional Research Service, CRS Report for Congress, March 9, 2006

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 4, 2009
CONTACT:
Laura Henderson (202) 621-2951

IER: Closing Utah Leases Bad Omen for American Energy Production

Washington, DC – Institute for Energy Research (IER) president Thomas J. Pyle today issued the following statement in advance of the Secretary of Interior’s expected announcement that he will withdrawal 77 areas in Utah that were offered and leased for exploration in 2008.

“This action signals the beginning of the Administration’s plan to disregard the voices of millions of Americans who want to utilize our vast domestic energy resources. Rather than allow Americans to increase our domestic exploration–which leads to less reliance on unstable foreign regimes, more American jobs, and increased revenue for the government—the Obama Administration’s actions will lead to job losses, government revenue losses, and higher energy costs for consumers.”

Secretary Salazar is expected to announce that the Department is withdrawing the leases to execute a broader environmental review of the proposed leases today at 2:30 p.m.

The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.

#####

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 3, 2009
CONTACT:
Brian Kennedy (202) 346-8826
Chris Tucker (202) 346-8825

IER Launches Online Effort Encouraging Americans to Say “Yes We Can” to New Offshore Energy

IER Urges American Energy Consumers to Register Their Comments on Interior Department’s Historic New Five-Year Energy Plan

Washington, D.C. – The Institute for Energy Research (IER) today encouraged American energy consumers to speak up and make their support known for a new five-year energy plan released last month that would generate millions of new jobs, billions in new revenue, and lessen America’s reliance on foreign suppliers for its energy.

The plan, organized by the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Minerals Management Service, envisions the future exploration of 31 lease sales in 12 planning areas offshore, the first time in more than 25 years that many of these energy-rich tracts have been considered. IER is currently in the process of gathering public comments on the plan, which can be submitted here.

IER president Thomas J. Pyle released the following statement:

“Unlike many of the make-work jobs the economic stimulus plan purports to create, greater domestic energy production creates real jobs. I can think of no better or more immediate way to invigorate this nation’s economy than to responsibly develop our abundant, domestic, taxpayer-owned energy resources. Opening the OCS, which lawmakers have kept off-limits for decades, could create 160,000 new jobs and generate $1.7 trillion in local, state, and federal tax revenues—just the kind of economic infusion our nation needs right now.

“OCS leasing gives the private sector the opportunity to spend its own money to find and produce energy, rather than the Washington model that spends taxpayer dollars to create jobs, support them, and ultimately make energy more expensive for all Americans. Increased access to domestic energy will create long-term jobs, lower energy prices, and generate hundreds of billions of dollars in royalties and taxes for government coffers. Less than four percent of the government’s lands are currently leased for energy. The move to offshore exploration is long overdue.”

IER’s most recent education and outreach campaign netted more than 30,000 comments in support of unlocking additional areas offshore for energy exploration and development. MMS’s current plan was prepared using input from that effort.

More from IER on the extraordinary energy/revenue/job potential of producing more energy here at home:

• We were the change! Offshore energy development moves forward

• New Offshore Plan First Step to Putting U.S. on Path to Economic, Energy Security

• IER Letter to President-elect Obama: Americans Say No to New Energy Bans

• Fact Sheet: The Real OCS: Supplies, Bans, and Natural Seeps

The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.

#####

www.InstituteforEnergyResearch.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 28, 2009
CONTACT:
Brian Kennedy (202) 346-8826
Chris Tucker (202) 346-8825

IER Economic Stimulus Plan Would Create Millions of New Jobs, Strengthen U.S. Energy Security

Institute Urges President Obama to Adopt Historic Change
in Energy Policy

Washington, DC – Institute for Energy Research (IER) today released an economic stimulus plan that would encourage private investment, foster job creation, and provide American consumers with access to vast, proven, affordable, and domestically available energy resources.  IER’s plan outlines a cost-effective way to open these enormous taxpayer-owned resources for responsible energy production that would create American jobs, stimulate the economy, and provide new energy supplies for the future, all at no cost to the taxpayer.

IER’s plan asks first that lawmakers do no harm and commit to:

• Defend jobs and investments against expensive, job-killing climate regulations;

• Halt EPA’s attempt to use the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon dioxide;

• Renounce plans to bankrupt coal companies;

• Denounce spending billions of taxpayer dollars on subsidies on products that could potentially double power costs;

And second, create historic change in federal energy policy by:

• Returning money spent on energy subsidies to taxpayers;

• Streamlining regulations to produce energy from American resources on American lands and coastal waters;

• Providing coastal states with 50 percent of revenue from offshore and onshore energy leasing;

• Supporting exploration and energy production in ANWR;

• Expediting construction of the Alaska natural gas pipeline;

• Allowing exploration and experimentation necessary to explore alternative energy sources, such as domestic oil shale and methane hydrates;

• Limiting frivolous lawsuits that thwart responsible energy development;

• Removing regulatory red-tape and repeal punitive laws that make it difficult  to build and expand refineries;

• Removing regulatory barriers to allow construction of the next generation of nuclear power plants; and

• Resolving issues surrounding the Yucca Mountain Repository for spent nuclear fuel.

More details on IER’s Economic Stimulus Plan can be found here:

• IER’s Bold Economic Stimulus Plan: A Roadmap to Improving the Economy and Creating Jobs, All at No Cost to the Taxpayer

• Green Jobs: Fact or Fiction?

• Job Mirage: Obama “Green Jobs” Plan Requires Expanding Government Payroll with 600K Bureaucrats

• Green Jobs: Robbing Peter to Subsidize Paul

• It Takes a Lot of Government Green to Create a Green Job

• “Stealth Stimulus” Shouldn’t Fly Under Congress’ Radar

The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.

#####

www.InstituteforEnergyResearch.org