Calls mount to end ban on oil exports as US production booms

Fox News ^ | February 5, 2014 | Dan Springer

[jazusamo]

When the Arab oil embargo of 1973 shocked the U.S. into long gas lines and rationing, Congress approved what was a no-brainer at the time -- a ban on exporting crude oil produced at home.

But today, with domestic oil production booming, some are questioning whether that ban should stay in place. The new concern is that the U.S. has more oil than its refineries can handle.

“This ban threatens record-breaking U.S. oil production and American jobs by creating inefficiencies, gluts and distortions,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, recently testified at a congressional hearing.

Murkowski has sent a letter to the White House asking President Obama to lift the ban on oil exports, even as the U.S. still imports 40 percent of its oil.

Supporters of lifting the export ban argue that oil is a world commodity -- and more of it on the global market will drive everyone’s gas prices down and create jobs in the U.S.

[PA Engineer]

Murkowski has sent a letter to the White House asking President Obama to lift the ban on oil exports, even as the U.S. still imports 40 percent of its oil.

Funny. This is the same Murkowski that killed the US EMP Commission recommendations to harden the grid. Her numbers must be bad.

[Paul R.]

This is the same Murkowski that killed the US EMP Commission recommendations to harden the grid.

Good God. What was her "reasoning" on that one?

[Paul R.]

Remember the propane debacle.

Remember it? Right now, in our area, we are IN it, big time.

[Paul R.]

We’d create millions of jobs, save people billions of dollars a year on energy costs and thus free up money for the “discretionary” spending that fuels the service economy.

Exactly right. My family's electricity costs have risen so dramatically that, at least until spring, our discretionary spending has had to be cut by over 50%. We expect high billings in unusually cold weather -- but not THIS high.

A very good measure of the strength of an economy, and a civilization, is the affordabililty and availability of plentiful energy. That's not at all to knock efficiency IF the cost of the efficiency is reasonable, but power is... power.

[1010RD]

This rule harms America. End it and let them export oil.

[1010RD]

Any comments or insights on this?

[thackney]

We need to build more refineries.

Why? We already refine more petroleum product than we use ourselves and export the surplus.

[thackney]

We need to keep OUR oil HERE.

Dreamers of cheap oil looking at the Demand Side curve of economics are ignoring the Supply Side. We will end up importing more oil from other locations as the investment dries up if we try to force prices below market value.

Reality is we are still the biggest demand for the local oil. And if we import some cheap heavy oil due to the capabilities of our refineries while exporting some expensive light oil, we will help the trade balance at the same time.

[thackney]

If we are producing so much oil then we should cut back on what we are importing first.

We have.

[jazusamo]

Thanks for your posts.

[1010RD]

This law harms American liberty and independence. It helps our enemies.

[PA Engineer]

Good God. What was her "reasoning" on that one?

The original bill was the GRID Act (H.R. 5026). Murkowski gutted the bill and then introduced her own energy bill (S 1462). Her's was the American Clean Energy Act of 2009. She is one of the worst rhinos in congress. Red State explains why Murkowski Must be Denied Chairmanship of Key Energy Panel, if the Republicans retake the Senate.

[ZULU]

?????????

[1010RD]

Who benefits from this blockage?

[familyop]

I didn’t ask the question that you quoted and responded to.

[ZULU]

The American consumer and worker. Use the oil here for American manufacturing to fuel American factories, and to reduce the price of American fuel and heating oil.

You can make an argument for the other approach also, but I think this one is more valid.

[1010RD]

The American consumer and worker. Use the oil here for American manufacturing to fuel American factories, and to reduce the price of American fuel and heating oil.

Let's take your criteria and see what happens as this embargo continues. Keep in mind that low priced energy is important to economic growth and always has been. Are you thoroughly familiar with supply/demand curves, fixed and variable costs, fungible commodities, etc.?

The American consumer includes American businesses (I presume you're talking geography as in within the continental US, plus Alaska and Hawaii) and that includes oil companies. If a glut of oil occurs two things happen: suppliers cut back and as a consequence oil prices rise. Petroleum products for heating homes are a very small part of the market.

Imagine if the law were such that you must keep the entire product of your labor within the physical confines of your own home. In short order you'd impoverish yourself quickly, despite your skill and the plenty you've produced.

The best way to serve the American consumer (who by the way is paid by American businesses, you must produce before you can consume), is to open the market and sell to the highest bidder all that they'll buy. This undermines our enemies in OPEC and no matter what a cartel is an enemy to America wherever it occurs. Think about it.

[ZULU]

Well, you convinced me.

[1010RD]

Good. May I ping you to help when other FReepers aren’t understanding the concept of free trade.

[ZULU]

Yes. I do believe in Milton Freedman.