Trending

Fine: Washington, D.C., on oil and gas

REUTERS/Nick Oxford

REUTERS/Nick Oxford

The “deal” between the parties over the energy future of the United States and the San Juan Basin at the end of 2015 was the most misguided example of politics at the fuel pump since the 1970s. Then it was retail price control and now it’s a free-for-all in the price of oil in the world market with West Texas Crude approaching 10-year lows.

Lifting the restriction on exporting crude oil adds American oil to a world market which is over-supplied. Expect no cash flow increase for American producers and still lower world prices than with the restriction or ban in place.

This is not the place to assess the other side of the “deal.” However, tax credit extensions for wind and solar as alternative fuels to replace coal and later natural gas are no longer of concern to the Republican Party in Congress.

With petroleum economics based on market prices, there is virtually no way that the “deal” will bring about tens of thousands of new jobs in the oil and gas fields. How does exporting crude oil lead to increased drilling and rig deployment if this increases supply in an oversupplied world market? On the contrary, it leads to lower prices and negative cash flows for producers who must cut their workforces.

If oil and gas prices rebound in the next three years, the alternative fuels are beneficiaries as tax credits shape new non-fossil fuel investment, offsetting the risk of lower oil and gas prices, This was no doubt the objective of the climate change politics of Paris and the Democratic Party in Congress as well as the White House.”

Dr. Daniel Fine is the Associate Director of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy and is a Senior Policy Analyst in the New Mexico State Department of Energy Minerals and Natural Resources. The opinions he expresses in this column are his own.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*