The left’s latest fossil fuel obstruction tactic, by
Merrill Matthews, 11/18/18, The Hill.
The U.S. economy is growing, in part
because of a booming energy industry. Yet, not everyone is pleased and some are
looking for and finding ways to throttle fossil fuel production.
U.S. crude oil production is growing by
leaps and bounds, topping out at 11.7 million barrels per day in November —
about twice what it was in 2010, according to the U.S. Energy Information
Administration (EIA).
And the International Energy Agency (IEA) projects the U.S. will account for
about 75 percent of the growth in global oil production over the next six
years.
But the energy boom also creates a
challenge. Oil is often extracted in barren areas, like Texas’s Permian Basin, and must be transported hundreds, if
not thousands, of miles to refineries for processing or to ports for export.
The cheapest and most efficient way to do that is through pipelines.
There are currently about 72,000 miles of crude oil pipelines in the U.S. and about 300,000
miles of natural gas pipelines. That may sound like a lot, but it’s not enough.
The fracking boom is allowing producers
to extract crude oil and natural gas from new areas that may not have ready
access to existing pipelines.
Oil producers can and have turned to
rail to transport the oil. But the better option is to lay new pipelines, which
are made of high-grade steel and infused with state-of-the-art technology that
allows constant monitoring.
Fortunately, the Trump administration
has indicated it recognizes the pipeline shortage and plans to begin addressing
the need next year.
The Hill recently quoted White House economic advisor Larry
Kudlow, “We need infrastructure, including pipelines,” adding, “We need
[pipelines] east to west, we need west to east.” Kudlow’s right.
But there will be resistance. The
anti-fossil fuel squads see pipeline resistance as the most expedient way to
hamstring the fossil fuel industry. They have had limited success in passing
anti-fracking laws through the states — only New York, Vermont and Maryland
have done so.
Other tactics have also fallen short. In
the recent election Colorado voters weighed in on an initiative that would have
significantly increased the distance between a new well and any occupied
buildings, effectively stopping new drilling. Voters defeated the
initiative.
But pipeline challenges can be pushed
through the courts, where the left historically has had greater success
imposing its agenda.
Take, for example, the recent Keystone XL pipeline ruling by federal Judge Brian Morris of
the District Court for the District of Montana. Morris blocked further work on
the XL, claiming the Trump administration’s approval of it was incomplete.
You may have thought that issue was
settled — and it was. President Obama quashed the pipeline application in November, of 2015,
so that he could go to the Paris Climate meeting that December and claim the
U.S. was leading the way in cutting back on fossil fuel reliance.
Last year President
Trump overruled
Obama’s denial of the XL pipeline and let the privately funded infrastructure
project move forward.
Morris criticized the administration for
ignoring climate change concerns and claimed the State Department “didn’t
properly account for factors such as low oil prices, the cumulative impacts of
greenhouse gases from Keystone and the Alberta Clipper pipeline, and the risk
of oil spills,” according to reporting in The Hill.
But the State Department is the agency
with the experts charged with making the assessment, and it did so, twice under
the Obama administration, releasing its final report in 2014. The State Department concluded the Keystone XL pipeline would not
have a major climate change impact. In addition, regulators in Nebraska, the
state most likely affected by the pipeline, approved the project in 2017.
Even then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated
she was inclined to approve the pipeline, until she realized doing so would
damage her presidential aspirations among the green crowd.
Perhaps the most ridiculous notion
coming from the judge is that State didn’t account for low prices. Does the
judge know how much oil will be selling for in a few years?
Oil prices have been declining recently,
but only after reaching highs not seen in several years. Trump’s newly imposed
sanctions on Iranian oil exports, once fully implemented, may send oil prices
skyrocketing again.
The importance of fossil fuel production
to the U.S. economy and to national security cannot be overstated. Having
mostly failed at the ballot box, fossil fuel opponents are increasingly turning
to pipeline obstruction, either by protests (e.g., the Dakota Access pipeline)
or the courts, or both. It’s one more way of imposing their will on voters
rather than the other way around.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody
GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment