US energy production growing, consumption down

[Trakar]

Report finds US energy production growing, consumption down

By Zack Colman - 12/26/12 12:53 PM ET

A new report shows U.S. energy consumption dropping, even as the industry experiences a boost in production.


U.S. energy consumption declined 3 percent between January and September compared with that period last year, according to data the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) released Wednesday.






During the period evaluated, energy use from transportation and industry dropped 1.2 and 1.5 percent, respectively. Residential and commercial energy use declined 5.2 percent.

Energy production, however, rose 2 percent through the same time frame. Fossil fuel development increased 3.14 percent, while renewable energy production fell 2.8 percent.

The statistics underscore two energy-related debates sure to get attention in the next Congress — energy efficiency and fossil-fuel drilling on federal lands.

Green groups are hoping some of President Obama’s executive actions will curtail energy consumption further. Meanwhile, the oil-and-gas industry and its congressional allies aim to push Obama to open more federal lands to fossil fuel drilling, boosting domestic energy production.

New shale oil-and-gas plays buoyed much of the energy sector’s growth through the past year. Led by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, most of that increase has come from private and state lands.

The oil-and-gas industry wants Obama to open more federal lands to drilling, saying it could bring additional revenues to the Treasury.

While the White House has praised states' monitoring of fracking — which injects a high-pressure mixture of water, sand and chemicals into tight rock formations to tap hydrocarbons — it has been cautious on expanding its use.

Green groups say the process might contaminate drinking water and that it releases heat-trapping methane gas. Industry has said the method is safe.

The Interior Department is set to release regulations for fracking on federal lands next year. Industry and GOP have resisted those rules, warning they might impose a “one-size-fits-all” approach to areas with different geological concerns and considerations.

On the energy demand side, green groups are fixing to get comprehensive energy efficiency legislation through the next Congress.
Lawmakers recently passed upgrades for efficiency on some appliances, and have expressed a willingness to work on more sweeping legislation.


Organizations ranging from environmental to national security groups want to focus more on enhancing energy efficiency in buildings. Buildings account for 36 percent of the nation’s total energy consumption, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

If Congress proves to be a roadblock, green groups contend Obama will continue using administrative authority to achieve energy efficiency goals.
They point to recently finalized vehicle fuel efficiency standards — which proponents say will help lower transportation-related energy consumption even further — and a directive to improve energy efficiency at manufacturing facilities.

Report finds US energy production growing, consumption down - The Hill's E2-Wire

 

[Mr. H.]

Good article.

I'm for increased efficiencies, but this so-called "administrative authority" has got to end.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Report finds US energy production growing, consumption down

By Zack Colman - 12/26/12 12:53 PM ET

A new report shows U.S. energy consumption dropping, even as the industry experiences a boost in production.


U.S. energy consumption declined 3 percent between January and September compared with that period last year, according to data the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) released Wednesday.






During the period evaluated, energy use from transportation and industry dropped 1.2 and 1.5 percent, respectively. Residential and commercial energy use declined 5.2 percent.

Energy production, however, rose 2 percent through the same time frame. Fossil fuel development increased 3.14 percent, while renewable energy production fell 2.8 percent.

The statistics underscore two energy-related debates sure to get attention in the next Congress — energy efficiency and fossil-fuel drilling on federal lands.

Green groups are hoping some of President Obama’s executive actions will curtail energy consumption further. Meanwhile, the oil-and-gas industry and its congressional allies aim to push Obama to open more federal lands to fossil fuel drilling, boosting domestic energy production.

New shale oil-and-gas plays buoyed much of the energy sector’s growth through the past year. Led by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, most of that increase has come from private and state lands.

The oil-and-gas industry wants Obama to open more federal lands to drilling, saying it could bring additional revenues to the Treasury.

While the White House has praised states' monitoring of fracking — which injects a high-pressure mixture of water, sand and chemicals into tight rock formations to tap hydrocarbons — it has been cautious on expanding its use.

Green groups say the process might contaminate drinking water and that it releases heat-trapping methane gas. Industry has said the method is safe.

The Interior Department is set to release regulations for fracking on federal lands next year. Industry and GOP have resisted those rules, warning they might impose a “one-size-fits-all” approach to areas with different geological concerns and considerations.

On the energy demand side, green groups are fixing to get comprehensive energy efficiency legislation through the next Congress.
Lawmakers recently passed upgrades for efficiency on some appliances, and have expressed a willingness to work on more sweeping legislation.


Organizations ranging from environmental to national security groups want to focus more on enhancing energy efficiency in buildings. Buildings account for 36 percent of the nation’s total energy consumption, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

If Congress proves to be a roadblock, green groups contend Obama will continue using administrative authority to achieve energy efficiency goals.
They point to recently finalized vehicle fuel efficiency standards — which proponents say will help lower transportation-related energy consumption even further — and a directive to improve energy efficiency at manufacturing facilities.

Report finds US energy production growing, consumption down - The Hill's E2-Wire

Green groups say the process might contaminate drinking water and that it releases heat-trapping methane gas.

Only if you do it right. Idiots.

 

[Dubya]

Report finds US energy production growing, consumption down

By Zack Colman - 12/26/12 12:53 PM ET

A new report shows U.S. energy consumption dropping, even as the industry experiences a boost in production.


U.S. energy consumption declined 3 percent between January and September compared with that period last year, according to data the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) released Wednesday.








During the period evaluated, energy use from transportation and industry dropped 1.2 and 1.5 percent, respectively. Residential and commercial energy use declined 5.2 percent.

Energy production, however, rose 2 percent through the same time frame. Fossil fuel development increased 3.14 percent, while renewable energy production fell 2.8 percent.

The statistics underscore two energy-related debates sure to get attention in the next Congress — energy efficiency and fossil-fuel drilling on federal lands.

Green groups are hoping some of President Obama’s executive actions will curtail energy consumption further. Meanwhile, the oil-and-gas industry and its congressional allies aim to push Obama to open more federal lands to fossil fuel drilling, boosting domestic energy production.

New shale oil-and-gas plays buoyed much of the energy sector’s growth through the past year. Led by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, most of that increase has come from private and state lands.

The oil-and-gas industry wants Obama to open more federal lands to drilling, saying it could bring additional revenues to the Treasury.

While the White House has praised states' monitoring of fracking — which injects a high-pressure mixture of water, sand and chemicals into tight rock formations to tap hydrocarbons — it has been cautious on expanding its use.

Green groups say the process might contaminate drinking water and that it releases heat-trapping methane gas. Industry has said the method is safe.

The Interior Department is set to release regulations for fracking on federal lands next year. Industry and GOP have resisted those rules, warning they might impose a “one-size-fits-all” approach to areas with different geological concerns and considerations.

On the energy demand side, green groups are fixing to get comprehensive energy efficiency legislation through the next Congress.
Lawmakers recently passed upgrades for efficiency on some appliances, and have expressed a willingness to work on more sweeping legislation.


Organizations ranging from environmental to national security groups want to focus more on enhancing energy efficiency in buildings. Buildings account for 36 percent of the nation’s total energy consumption, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

If Congress proves to be a roadblock, green groups contend Obama will continue using administrative authority to achieve energy efficiency goals.
They point to recently finalized vehicle fuel efficiency standards — which proponents say will help lower transportation-related energy consumption even further — and a directive to improve energy efficiency at manufacturing facilities.

Report finds US energy production growing, consumption down - The Hill's E2-Wire

Green groups say the process might contaminate drinking water and that it releases heat-trapping methane gas.

Only if you do it right. Idiots.

OK!

Some analysts say Obama will not risk the economic stimulus of cheaper, domestic energy by pushing for tougher regulations. The oil sector is one of the few bright spots in the U.S. economy; natural gas prices are near their lowest in a decade, a boon for manufacturers, and U.S. oil output is the highest in 18 years.

Source: After Jackson, EPA faces big decisions on U.S. fracking boom - Business - Oil & energy | NBC News

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Report finds US energy production growing, consumption down

By Zack Colman - 12/26/12 12:53 PM ET

A new report shows U.S. energy consumption dropping, even as the industry experiences a boost in production.


U.S. energy consumption declined 3 percent between January and September compared with that period last year, according to data the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) released Wednesday.








During the period evaluated, energy use from transportation and industry dropped 1.2 and 1.5 percent, respectively. Residential and commercial energy use declined 5.2 percent.

Energy production, however, rose 2 percent through the same time frame. Fossil fuel development increased 3.14 percent, while renewable energy production fell 2.8 percent.

The statistics underscore two energy-related debates sure to get attention in the next Congress — energy efficiency and fossil-fuel drilling on federal lands.

Green groups are hoping some of President Obama’s executive actions will curtail energy consumption further. Meanwhile, the oil-and-gas industry and its congressional allies aim to push Obama to open more federal lands to fossil fuel drilling, boosting domestic energy production.

New shale oil-and-gas plays buoyed much of the energy sector’s growth through the past year. Led by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, most of that increase has come from private and state lands.

The oil-and-gas industry wants Obama to open more federal lands to drilling, saying it could bring additional revenues to the Treasury.

While the White House has praised states' monitoring of fracking — which injects a high-pressure mixture of water, sand and chemicals into tight rock formations to tap hydrocarbons — it has been cautious on expanding its use.

Green groups say the process might contaminate drinking water and that it releases heat-trapping methane gas. Industry has said the method is safe.

The Interior Department is set to release regulations for fracking on federal lands next year. Industry and GOP have resisted those rules, warning they might impose a “one-size-fits-all” approach to areas with different geological concerns and considerations.

On the energy demand side, green groups are fixing to get comprehensive energy efficiency legislation through the next Congress.
Lawmakers recently passed upgrades for efficiency on some appliances, and have expressed a willingness to work on more sweeping legislation.


Organizations ranging from environmental to national security groups want to focus more on enhancing energy efficiency in buildings. Buildings account for 36 percent of the nation’s total energy consumption, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

If Congress proves to be a roadblock, green groups contend Obama will continue using administrative authority to achieve energy efficiency goals.
They point to recently finalized vehicle fuel efficiency standards — which proponents say will help lower transportation-related energy consumption even further — and a directive to improve energy efficiency at manufacturing facilities.

Report finds US energy production growing, consumption down - The Hill's E2-Wire

Green groups say the process might contaminate drinking water and that it releases heat-trapping methane gas.

Only if you do it right. Idiots.

OK!

Some analysts say Obama will not risk the economic stimulus of cheaper, domestic energy by pushing for tougher regulations. The oil sector is one of the few bright spots in the U.S. economy; natural gas prices are near their lowest in a decade, a boon for manufacturers, and U.S. oil output is the highest in 18 years.

Source: After Jackson, EPA faces big decisions on U.S. fracking boom - Business - Oil & energy | NBC News

Some analysts say Obama will not risk the economic stimulus of cheaper, domestic energy by pushing for tougher regulations.

If there is ever a decision between the economy and adding new regulations, Obama will always choose new regulations.

Maybe he thinks the printing of the regs will stimulate the economy?

 

[Dubya]

Green groups say the process might contaminate drinking water and that it releases heat-trapping methane gas.

Only if you do it right. Idiots.

OK!

Some analysts say Obama will not risk the economic stimulus of cheaper, domestic energy by pushing for tougher regulations. The oil sector is one of the few bright spots in the U.S. economy; natural gas prices are near their lowest in a decade, a boon for manufacturers, and U.S. oil output is the highest in 18 years.

Source: After Jackson, EPA faces big decisions on U.S. fracking boom - Business - Oil & energy | NBC News

Some analysts say Obama will not risk the economic stimulus of cheaper, domestic energy by pushing for tougher regulations.

If there is ever a decision between the economy and adding new regulations, Obama will always choose new regulations.

Maybe he thinks the printing of the regs will stimulate the economy?

Try facts, not words!

Who was President 18 years ago, when crude production was higher than today?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

OK!



Source: After Jackson, EPA faces big decisions on U.S. fracking boom - Business - Oil & energy | NBC News

Some analysts say Obama will not risk the economic stimulus of cheaper, domestic energy by pushing for tougher regulations.

If there is ever a decision between the economy and adding new regulations, Obama will always choose new regulations.

Maybe he thinks the printing of the regs will stimulate the economy?

Try facts, not words!

Who was President 18 years ago, when crude production was higher than today?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/270823-epa-takes-over-in-texas.html

 

[Trakar]

Only if you do it right. Idiots.

THe goal of fracking is to capture the methane and sell it. Unfortunately the process of fracking often releases substantial fractions (8-18%) of the sequestered methane into surface fissures that allow the methane to seep into groundwater and the atmosphere.

Press Release - Fracking Operations Increase Methane Seepage

New EPA Rules Could Prevent 'Fracking' Backlash - Businessweek

Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing

Air sampling reveals high emissions from gas field

Methane leaks during production may offset climate benefits of natural gas. - Air sampling reveals high emissions from gas field : Nature News & Comment

(many more available upon request)

 

[Dubya]

Some analysts say Obama will not risk the economic stimulus of cheaper, domestic energy by pushing for tougher regulations.

If there is ever a decision between the economy and adding new regulations, Obama will always choose new regulations.

Maybe he thinks the printing of the regs will stimulate the economy?

Try facts, not words!

Who was President 18 years ago, when crude production was higher than today?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/270823-epa-takes-over-in-texas.html

I didn't ask that and the fact that production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes. The fact that Bush's dad started that moratorium on offshore drilling speaks volumes.

Your rhetoric only shows your willingness to ignore facts.

If your "fine" state of Texas thinks it has the right to avoid federal law, then they get what they deserve. Of course, they could decide to secede again and see how far that gets them.

The air doesn't stay over Texas, so figure it out!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Only if you do it right. Idiots.

THe goal of fracking is to capture the methane and sell it. Unfortunately the process of fracking often releases substantial fractions (8-18%) of the sequestered methane into surface fissures that allow the methane to seep into groundwater and the atmosphere.

Press Release - Fracking Operations Increase Methane Seepage

New EPA Rules Could Prevent 'Fracking' Backlash - Businessweek

Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing

Air sampling reveals high emissions from gas field

Methane leaks during production may offset climate benefits of natural gas. - Air sampling reveals high emissions from gas field : Nature News & Comment

(many more available upon request)

THe goal of fracking is to capture the methane and sell it.

And it seems to be doing just that.

Methane leaks during production may offset climate benefits of natural gas.

That's a shame. I guess we need more coal. And more nukes.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Try facts, not words!

Who was President 18 years ago, when crude production was higher than today?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/270823-epa-takes-over-in-texas.html

I didn't ask that and the fact that production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes. The fact that Bush's dad started that moritoriam on offshore drilling speaks volumes.

Your rhetoric only shows your willingness to ignore facts.

If your "fine" state of Texas thinks it has the right to avoid federal law, then they get what they deserve. Of course, they could decide to secede again and see how far that gets them.

The air doesn't stay over Texas, so figure it out!

I didn't ask that

I thought you wanted facts about regulations?

production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes.

Your math is weak. And has nothing to do with Obama stimulating energy production. Because he isn't.

If your "fine" state of Texas thinks it has the right to avoid federal law,

Hurt that economy, Obama, it's one thing you're good at. LOL!

 

[Dubya]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/270823-epa-takes-over-in-texas.html

I didn't ask that and the fact that production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes. The fact that Bush's dad started that moritoriam on offshore drilling speaks volumes.

Your rhetoric only shows your willingness to ignore facts.

If your "fine" state of Texas thinks it has the right to avoid federal law, then they get what they deserve. Of course, they could decide to secede again and see how far that gets them.

The air doesn't stay over Texas, so figure it out!

I didn't ask that

I thought you wanted facts about regulations?

production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes.

Your math is weak. And has nothing to do with Obama stimulating energy production. Because he isn't.

If your "fine" state of Texas thinks it has the right to avoid federal law,

Hurt that economy, Obama, it's one thing you're good at. LOL!

More meaningless rhetoric that isn't supported by anything more than mouth!

I've posted EIA figures, so if they don't know about crude production, who does?

Obama has done more in 4 years to stimulate production than Bush did in his 8 years, but you're one of those people who thinks they are a capitalist and gives away public resources to oil companies for pennies on the dollar and claims that isn't a subsidy. I say that's corporatism and not capitalism.

Obama also had the world's largest oil spill as he did it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I didn't ask that and the fact that production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes. The fact that Bush's dad started that moritoriam on offshore drilling speaks volumes.

Your rhetoric only shows your willingness to ignore facts.

If your "fine" state of Texas thinks it has the right to avoid federal law, then they get what they deserve. Of course, they could decide to secede again and see how far that gets them.

The air doesn't stay over Texas, so figure it out!

I didn't ask that

I thought you wanted facts about regulations?

production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes.

Your math is weak. And has nothing to do with Obama stimulating energy production. Because he isn't.

If your "fine" state of Texas thinks it has the right to avoid federal law,

Hurt that economy, Obama, it's one thing you're good at. LOL!

More meaningless rhetoric that isn't supported by anything more than mouth!

I've posted EIA figures, so if they don't know about crude production, who does?

Obama has done more in 4 years to stimulate production than Bush did in his 8 years, but you're one of those people who thinks they are a capitalist and gives away public resources to oil companies for pennies on the dollar and claims that isn't a subsidy. I say that's corporatism and not capitalism.

Obama also had the world's largest oil spill as he did it.

I've posted EIA figures, so if they don't know about crude production, who does?

And it shows total oil and gas production in the last 4 years is higher than in the 8 before that?
Prove it.

Obama has done more in 4 years to stimulate production than Bush did in his 8 years

What has he done to stimulate production? Block offshore permits?
Require permits for CO2? Block production in ANWR? Block pipelines?
Spell it out for me.

 

[Dubya]

I didn't ask that

I thought you wanted facts about regulations?

production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes.

Your math is weak. And has nothing to do with Obama stimulating energy production. Because he isn't.

If your "fine" state of Texas thinks it has the right to avoid federal law,

Hurt that economy, Obama, it's one thing you're good at. LOL!

More meaningless rhetoric that isn't supported by anything more than mouth!

I've posted EIA figures, so if they don't know about crude production, who does?

Obama has done more in 4 years to stimulate production than Bush did in his 8 years, but you're one of those people who thinks they are a capitalist and gives away public resources to oil companies for pennies on the dollar and claims that isn't a subsidy. I say that's corporatism and not capitalism.

Obama also had the world's largest oil spill as he did it.

I've posted EIA figures, so if they don't know about crude production, who does?

And it shows total oil and gas production in the last 4 years is higher than in the 8 before that?
Prove it.

Obama has done more in 4 years to stimulate production than Bush did in his 8 years

What has he done to stimulate production? Block offshore permits?
Require permits for CO2? Block production in ANWR? Block pipelines?
Spell it out for me.

We are talking about crude oil production and not right-wing talking points.

Don't you know how to use the EIA to find energy production or consumption of any kind in the United States or the world? The EIA information comes from the CIA. It is the gold standard source of all energy information. If you don't know how to use it, spend some time and figure it out instead of arguing with people who do know how to use it. Stop being so lazy! I'm not going to keep looking the tables up and posting them for right-wingers just trying to run their mouths.

Block offshore permits? A moratorium on drilling is always done after a major spill, but even when the right-wingers were claiming there was no drilling, I was posting figures on how many permits were issued. The moratorium only lasted a short period of time.

ANWR? Why should we give away known crude reserves around 12 billion barrels, when we can just hire companies to develop it and sell it to oil companies, like other countries do. That oil belongs to every American and their future children if it isn't produced by then.

Blocked pipelines? The northern part of the Keystone XL pipeline was told to find a new route, because they wanted to go across the major Ogallala aquifer, but the keystone pipeline already exists and the southern connection from Cushing OK to the Texas refineries was approved. Why didn't the oil companies just follow next to the old route, where they already bought up the land by eminent domain? Cushing already has an oil glut, so it's the southern route that's needed right now.

They also approved a pipeline through that ANWR area.

Now, once you figure out how to use the EIA site, check the figures on gasoline exports, because the increase in gasoline exports match the figures for that bitumen being sent to America by the Keystone pipeline. Yes, you can get figures on nearly anything energy related, even down to the state level at the EIA.

Here is what the whole Keystone project eventually involves:

 

[Dubya]

Only if you do it right. Idiots.

THe goal of fracking is to capture the methane and sell it. Unfortunately the process of fracking often releases substantial fractions (8-18%) of the sequestered methane into surface fissures that allow the methane to seep into groundwater and the atmosphere.

Press Release - Fracking Operations Increase Methane Seepage

New EPA Rules Could Prevent 'Fracking' Backlash - Businessweek

Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing

Air sampling reveals high emissions from gas field

Methane leaks during production may offset climate benefits of natural gas. - Air sampling reveals high emissions from gas field : Nature News & Comment

(many more available upon request)

Fracking also involves crude oil production and presently they are allowed to vent the natural gas in areas where there aren't pipelines to remove it from the area. They've been given time to make changes and stop venting methane.

 

[Trakar]

Obama has done more in 4 years to stimulate production than Bush did in his 8 years

What has he done to stimulate production? Block offshore permits?
Require permits for CO2? Block production in ANWR? Block pipelines?
Spell it out for me.

"The Five Worst Ideas Romney and Obama Agree On" - The Five Worst Ideas Romney and Obama Agree On - Bloomberg

1. Coal is awesome. Last night, the two candidates fell over each other in claiming their support of coal.
First Obama bragged about "increases in coal production and coal employment." Then Romney complained that Obama isn't pro-coal enough: "What we don't need is to have the president keeping us from taking advantage of oil, coal and gas. ... I was in coal country. People grabbed my arms and say, please, save my job."
But Obama said it's Romney who is the real enemy of coal:
When I hear Governor Romney say he's a big coal guy -- and keep in mind when -- Governor, when you were governor ofMassachusetts, you stood in front of a coal plant and pointed at it and said, this plant kills, and took great pride in shutting it down. And now suddenly you're a big champion of coal.
Obama is even running a radio ad in Ohio, touting his record of increasing coal production and attacking Romney for shutting down that coal plant...
​

"U.S. Redraws World Oil Map" - Obama Energy Policy Now Begins With Bountiful Supplies, Not Scarcity - WSJ.com

...
The Paris-based agency, which advises industrialized nations on their energy policies, said the global energy map "is being redrawn by the resurgence in oil and gas production in the United States."

The assessment—a stark contrast from last year, when Russia and Saudi Arabia were seen vying for the top position—comes a week after the end of a presidential campaign in which energy was a prime topic, and it shows how different President Barack Obama's second term will be from his first on energy policy.
Four years ago, the perception of energy scarcity and rising concern about global warming led Mr. Obama to push for legislation capping greenhouse-gas emissions and to pump billions of federal dollars into green-energy companies. Both policies caused grief for the president, as the greenhouse-gas bill died in the Senate and Republicans attacked him over the bankruptcy of solar-panel maker Solyndra LLC.
In Mr. Obama's second term, Republican control of the House makes any big climate-change legislation unlikely, and budget deficits will limit any effort to spend billions more on green-energy projects.
But the surge in U.S. oil production, to a projected 11.1 million barrels a day in 2020, has given the White House a chance to make peace with Republicans and energy executives, at least on some fronts. Like Republicans, Mr. Obama has said that growing energy extraction in the U.S. can create jobs and boost the economy...
​

Why Climate Change Has Become the Missing Issue in the Presidential Campaign | TIME.com


The Future of Oil, Coal, and Gas Under Obama - Businessweek

...Oil, gas, coal, and electricity companies spent more than $115 million on the presidential campaign, more than any race since at least 1990, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Eighty percent of the candidate donations went to Republicans. Yet President Obama’s reelection may wind up benefiting some parts of the industry. Obama “is now going for a full-throated endorsement of oil and natural gas production in the United States, which is 180 degrees opposite from where he started,” says Jack Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute (API), a trade association that represents the breadth of the industry. “The real question will be: Will the president’s actions match his words?”

While the industry has adopted a defensive stance, oil and gas didn’t fare too badly during Obama’s first term. Output of crude and other liquid petroleum products in the U.S. is on track to surge by more than 80 percent through 2020, the kind of consistent growth that hasn’t been seen since the 1960s, says Edward Morse, global head of commodities research for Citigroup (C). The administration has made more acreage on federal land available to energy companies than any president since Ronald Reagan, he says. “Facts are stubborn things, and they often defy people’s ideology,” says John Hanger, a special counsel at Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott and the former head of Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection...
​

(More available upon request)

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

More meaningless rhetoric that isn't supported by anything more than mouth!

I've posted EIA figures, so if they don't know about crude production, who does?

Obama has done more in 4 years to stimulate production than Bush did in his 8 years, but you're one of those people who thinks they are a capitalist and gives away public resources to oil companies for pennies on the dollar and claims that isn't a subsidy. I say that's corporatism and not capitalism.

Obama also had the world's largest oil spill as he did it.

I've posted EIA figures, so if they don't know about crude production, who does?

And it shows total oil and gas production in the last 4 years is higher than in the 8 before that?
Prove it.

Obama has done more in 4 years to stimulate production than Bush did in his 8 years

What has he done to stimulate production? Block offshore permits?
Require permits for CO2? Block production in ANWR? Block pipelines?
Spell it out for me.

We are talking about crude oil production and not right-wing talking points.

Don't you know how to use the EIA to find energy production or consumption of any kind in the United States or the world? The EIA information comes from the CIA. It is the gold standard source of all energy information. If you don't know how to use it, spend some time and figure it out instead of arguing with people who do know how to use it. Stop being so lazy! I'm not going to keep looking the tables up and posting them for right-wingers just trying to run their mouths.

Block offshore permits? A moratorium on drilling is always done after a major spill, but even when the right-wingers were claiming there was no drilling, I was posting figures on how many permits were issued. The moratorium only lasted a short period of time.

ANWR? Why should we give away known crude reserves around 12 billion barrels, when we can just hire companies to develop it and sell it to oil companies, like other countries do. That oil belongs to every American and their future children if it isn't produced by then.

Blocked pipelines? The northern part of the Keystone XL pipeline was told to find a new route, because they wanted to go across the major Ogallala aquifer, but the keystone pipeline already exists and the southern connection from Cushing OK to the Texas refineries was approved. Why didn't the oil companies just follow next to the old route, where they already bought up the land by eminent domain? Cushing already has an oil glut, so it's the southern route that's needed right now.

They also approved a pipeline through that ANWR area.

Now, once you figure out how to use the EIA site, check the figures on gasoline exports, because the increase in gasoline exports match the figures for that bitumen being sent to America by the Keystone pipeline. Yes, you can get figures on nearly anything energy related, even down to the state level at the EIA.

Here is what the whole Keystone project eventually involves:

We are talking about crude oil production and not right-wing talking points.


You claimed US oil production has doubled under Obama. Prove it.

 

[Dubya]

I've posted EIA figures, so if they don't know about crude production, who does?

And it shows total oil and gas production in the last 4 years is higher than in the 8 before that?
Prove it.

Obama has done more in 4 years to stimulate production than Bush did in his 8 years

What has he done to stimulate production? Block offshore permits?
Require permits for CO2? Block production in ANWR? Block pipelines?
Spell it out for me.

We are talking about crude oil production and not right-wing talking points.

Don't you know how to use the EIA to find energy production or consumption of any kind in the United States or the world? The EIA information comes from the CIA. It is the gold standard source of all energy information. If you don't know how to use it, spend some time and figure it out instead of arguing with people who do know how to use it. Stop being so lazy! I'm not going to keep looking the tables up and posting them for right-wingers just trying to run their mouths.

Block offshore permits? A moratorium on drilling is always done after a major spill, but even when the right-wingers were claiming there was no drilling, I was posting figures on how many permits were issued. The moratorium only lasted a short period of time.

ANWR? Why should we give away known crude reserves around 12 billion barrels, when we can just hire companies to develop it and sell it to oil companies, like other countries do. That oil belongs to every American and their future children if it isn't produced by then.

Blocked pipelines? The northern part of the Keystone XL pipeline was told to find a new route, because they wanted to go across the major Ogallala aquifer, but the keystone pipeline already exists and the southern connection from Cushing OK to the Texas refineries was approved. Why didn't the oil companies just follow next to the old route, where they already bought up the land by eminent domain? Cushing already has an oil glut, so it's the southern route that's needed right now.

They also approved a pipeline through that ANWR area.

Now, once you figure out how to use the EIA site, check the figures on gasoline exports, because the increase in gasoline exports match the figures for that bitumen being sent to America by the Keystone pipeline. Yes, you can get figures on nearly anything energy related, even down to the state level at the EIA.

Here is what the whole Keystone project eventually involves:

We are talking about crude oil production and not right-wing talking points.


You claimed US oil production has doubled under Obama. Prove it.

Quote where I said that and I'll see if I can find someone help you read it!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Try facts, not words!

Who was President 18 years ago, when crude production was higher than today?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/270823-epa-takes-over-in-texas.html

I didn't ask that and the fact that production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes. The fact that Bush's dad started that moratorium on offshore drilling speaks volumes.

Your rhetoric only shows your willingness to ignore facts.

If your "fine" state of Texas thinks it has the right to avoid federal law, then they get what they deserve. Of course, they could decide to secede again and see how far that gets them.

The air doesn't stay over Texas, so figure it out!

the fact that production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes.

LOL!

 

[Dubya]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/270823-epa-takes-over-in-texas.html

I didn't ask that and the fact that production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes. The fact that Bush's dad started that moratorium on offshore drilling speaks volumes.

Your rhetoric only shows your willingness to ignore facts.

If your "fine" state of Texas thinks it has the right to avoid federal law, then they get what they deserve. Of course, they could decide to secede again and see how far that gets them.

The air doesn't stay over Texas, so figure it out!

the fact that production of crude and natural gas is more in Obama's less than 4 years than in the oil man Bush's 8 years speaks volumes.

LOL!

I'll see if I can find someone good at teaching special ed and help you with that sentence.