Energy Citizens Because energy is our way of life in
Login with Facebook
No nostalgia for crude oil export ban

In 1975, in reaction to fears of a possible global oil shortage, Congress placed severe restrictions on U.S. crude oil exports.

In 1975, Gerald Ford was the president, Patti Hearst was on the FBI’s Most Wanted list, and 8-track audiotapes were high technology.

All of that has changed, except for the crude oil export ban.  It is time for that policy to be relegated to the history books as well.

The need for restrictions on exports of U.S. crude (if it ever really existed in the first place) has long since passed.  Thanks to fracking and other innovative production techniques, America has gone from energy scarcity to energy abundance.

We will soon be the world’s largest oil producer and must have the ability to sell that American-made energy where demand is highest.  Exporting U.S. crude will open new markets and spur investment, and a recent study by ICF International and EnSys Energy concluded that it could result in an estimated increase of 500,000 barrels per day in domestic crude production by 2020.

Consumers have nothing to fear from crude oil exports.  The ICF/EnSys study also concluded that adding U.S. crude to the global energy supply would put downward pressure on fuel prices, saving U.S. consumers up to $5.8 billion in fuel costs from 2015-2035.

Allowing crude oil exports will also provide a tremendous boost to the U.S. economy.  The ICF/EnSys study estimates that, in 2020, lifting the outdated crude export ban could add an estimated $38 billion to GDP, increase government revenues by $13.5 billion, reduce our trade deficit by $22 billion, and support as many as 300,000 new jobs for American workers.

The crude oil export ban is a relic from a long-gone era that today stands in the way of economic growth, job creation, and more affordable fuel for U.S. consumers.  Congress needs to move into the 21st Century and let it go.

Make the Keystone XL a Priority This Election Year

It’s an election year, and candidates are asking for your vote. That makes it a great time to let your members of Congress know you support the Keystone XL Pipeline.

This important energy infrastructure project has bipartisan support. From Democrats to Republicans to Independents, Americans across the political spectrum want to see it built.

Unfortunately, it’s being held up because of politics in Washington, D.C. This election year, we have a chance to tell our elected officials to put aside the politics and do what’s right for the American people.

The Keystone XL Pipeline will support 42,100 jobs, grow workers’ income by $2 billion, and contribute $775 billion to our GDP. By providing 830,000 barrels of oil each day from our trusted ally, Canada, it will reduce our reliance on unfriendly foreign nations for the energy we need.

When candidates ask for our support, we need to ask if they support the Keystone XL Pipeline. With all the benefits it will provide for our nation, it’s vital for this project to have the backing of the people who represent us in Congress.

This election year, make the Keystone XL a cornerstone issue when you cast your vote. And make sure that any candidate you see knows that you’ll be voting with the Keystone XL Pipeline in mind.

Time to Approve the Keystone XL Pipeline

For six years, President Obama has been considering whether or not to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. Six years is a long time. But there is no indication that the president will make a decision any time soon. The Beaumont Enterprise is calling on the president to end the delay:

The political games that have delayed the pipeline have gone on too long. President Obama has said he will approve it unless it significantly increases carbon pollution. There's still no evidence that will happen, and he needs to stop making excuses to placate environmentalists.

He needs to show bold leadership - now - so the northern leg of it can brings jobs and oil to a weak recovery that needs both.

We agree. The American people want the Keystone XL Pipeline to be built. The State Department has studied it again and again, finding it will not cause any significant environmental impact. It’s time to get moving and let this important part of our nation’s energy infrastructure be built.

Washington Post Endorses Crude Oil Exports

There’s a move in Washington to lift the outdated ban on crude oil exports. This ban, dating back to the 1970s, was written for an era of U.S. energy scarcity. It does not make any sense when our nation is in the middle of an energy revolution.

The editors of the Washington Post understand this. In a recent editorial, they explained the benefits that would come to the U.S. by updating our nation’s crude oil export law:

“A new report by IHS Global explains why that thinking is outmoded. Actually, the report notes, allowing U.S. producers to sell their light crude abroad, where more refineries are equipped to process it efficiently, would incentivize additional U.S. production and job creation. At the same time, increasing the world supply of crude oil would translate into lower world prices for other heavier grades of crude, which U.S. refineries do use, and for gasoline. That, in turn, would be reflected in moderate gas prices in the United States. The IHS study estimates free trade in U.S. crude oil could save U.S. motorists $265 billion between 2016 and 2030. This does not count the geopolitical benefits of bringing a stable new source of supply onto world markets to offset those from Iraq, Libya and other trouble spots.”

Our energy laws shouldn’t be stuck in the 1970s. They should reflect the reality of today’s energy production. It’s time to change the outdated crude oil export law. 

[+] Blogs[-] Collapse