Posted on 03/17/2015 10:14:34 AM PDT by thackney
Lifting a 40-year-old U.S. ban on crude exports would create a wide range of jobs in the oil drilling supply chain and broader economy even in states that produce little or no oil, according to a report released on Tuesday.
Some 394,000 to 859,000 U.S. jobs could be created annually from 2016 to 2030 by lifting the ban, according to the IHS report, titled: "Unleashing the Supply Chain: Assessing the Economic Impact of a U.S. crude oil free trade policy."
Only 10 percent of the jobs would be created in actual oil production, while 30 percent would come from the supply chain, and 60 percent would come from the broader economy, the report said. The supply chain jobs would be created in industries that support drilling, such as oil field trucks, construction, information technology and rail.
Many of the jobs would be created in Florida, Washington, New York, Massachusetts, and other states that are not known as oil producers.
"The jobs story extends across the supply chain, right across the United States...
(Excerpt) Read more at rigzone.com ...
Well, if oil really is a fungible commodity then this is true and US fuel prices would not be affected.
Man, the people with big bucks play the American public like an old record.
We'll never be energy independent unless only everything over US consumption plus a few percent can be exported because there will always be "market reasons" to buy foreign oil and "national security" reasons to sell oil and gas both of which will serve to drive the price of fuel in this country up to the level it's at in Europe.
That's the goal, that's the endpoint, and all this "free market" trash is no different than banks gambling and getting to keep their winnings while the Taxpayer has to cover their losses.
If being able to export everything that's surplus to our needs isn't sufficient incentive then the BS about oil and gas being tough to recover and/or in short supply is total garbage just to keep the price up.
JMHo
In my opinion, the US job market and the oil consumers would benefit from exporting “excessive”, expensive, light sweet crude while importing cheaper heavy sour crude oil.
We have already spent billions of dollars upgrading many of refineries to use the cheaper heavy sour that contains more BTUs per barrel.
At the same time, we need to stop blocking projects like the Keystone XL which would bring more heavy sour into the US from a secure source.
That price is driven by taxes greatly exceeding the price of the products. It is not a lack of supply, but an overage of government. We are trying to reduce the government's role in private industry, not increase it.
Our oil reserves should remain our oil reserves.
Depleting our oil reserves only to run out and have to depend on other nations again makes no sense whatsoever.
Neither did the bronze, iron ages, etc.
Funding our enemies while hoping the technology doesn't advance to others is foolish.
I'm also curious why you think you have ownership of someone else’s minerals. Do you believe other people should be able to tell you who you are allowed to sell your products and labor?
We don’t need to create jobs exporting our precious resources so other countries can take the remaining American jobs.
We need to keep our oil and raise import tariffs, so that production moves back to the U.S.
That would only push our refinery jobs overseas along with our oil production jobs. Making it more expensive to do business in the US is foolish.
It would push our petrochemical industry more overseas as well.
Stop looking for government to select winners and losers in private industry. We should be trying to minimize their impact and not looking for ways to grow their regulations and increase their taxes.
Create jobs? Well you can stick a fork in that idea then.
Do you think we were in a good sound position when we were relying on Middle-Eastern oil?
Do you want to return to that scenario faster than we would otherwise have to?
You can dance around this primary concern all you like. We have a market for the product here in the U. S. We should keep our oil reserves for domestic consumption.
Yes, some things are truly worth more than increased profits. Sometimes reasoned profits should be enough.
Now back to the charge that I’m a fascist Leftist...
The U.S. imports around 20% of the oil it consumes. That percentage wouldn’t change . We would be swapping excess light oil for the heavy oil our refineries are designed to use in a blend. Currently, West Texas Intermediate trades for $10 a barrel less than Brent (North Sea) because it’s piling up in storage tanks far in excess of our domestic needs. When the price oil drops worldwide, everyone can spend the money saved on something else. We used to export crude oil until the first Arab oil embargo in 1973.
You suggestions will not decrease our dependence on foreign oil. It will increase our dependence on foreign refineries and petrochemical plants.
Hoping the demand curve will rule while ignoring the supply curve is a sure way to fail economics.
I want smaller government, you want larger. We don’t agree.
Cheers!
You remember, back when we still manufactured our own sheet rock, steel, and electronics ?
I don't believe a word of that crap anymore since every single big free trade initiative so far has lowered standard of living of the same middle class it reduces in number.
You need to focus on how government makes it more expensive to do business in the US. Adding to that expenses won’t improve the problem.
Now it's that if we don't alter the existing law it's the same a adding more government expense ?
Kewl
Is that Alynsky or just pure hot air?
Oil companies aren't struggling to keep their heads above water and the only regulations in the way are EPA regulations, not limitations on what can be exported to be refined where the EPA doesn't rule. The EPA is the root of the problem so get rid of or reign in the EPA but don't tell me dodging the EPA to increase oil company profits helps the US towards energy independence. Changing the existing law is just feeding the same alligator that already deindustrialized half the country instead of facing the real problem.
I prefer the government stay away. But an effective way of doing what you intend would be a tax on exported oil.
Of course, that would eventually be abused though.
The key point, is government. Yes, that is certainly a big hurdle. I don’t like it anymore than you do.
I just realize how bad it was when we had long lines at gas stations because the Middle-East had us literally over a barrel.
We need to be energy self-sufficient. Selling off our energy around the world is a fools game IMO.
Sorry, I guess I confused your comments with other responders wanting to add a Tarriff as well.
Oil companies aren't struggling to keep their heads above water and the only regulations in the way are EPA regulations
We don't agree that is the only regulation restricting business in the US. The export ban is certainly on example. The Jones Act that restricts and adds expense to transporting oil from Texas to New Jersey refineries help drive more imports from overseas as well.
Do you understand that was more caused by government price controls and restriction than a real lack of supply?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.