Shale Energy in Ohio = Jobs, Economic Hope

More evidence that shale energy in Ohio is looming as an economic dynamo.

First, an op-ed from the Coshocton Tribune discusses ways southeast Ohio can prepare for economic growth stemming from shale energy development. Consultant Jim Evans:

“With current interest in the area's Utica shale resources, there once again is hope for jobs and economic prosperity. Estimates of the numbers of jobs that could be generated vary based on who is making the prediction, but even the most conservative estimates offer promise. If oil and gas development comes to fruition, companies who supply the oil and gas industry will obviously have opportunities to prosper. However, good fortune won't only be reserved for direct suppliers. Most area businesses will have an unparalleled opportunity to capital... more »

Comments

Made in America: Common-Sense Energy Regulatory Structure

We talked recently about increasing access to domestic oil and natural gas as key to a made-in-America energy plan. Here’s another essential piece: common-sense regulation. Without a reasonable regulatory structure that’s transparent and accessible, red tape could tie up America’s ample energy resources.

In its recent report to the platform committees of the two political parties, API outlined what America’s energy regulatory structure needs:

  • Transparency – We need a system that operates in a way that’s clear and unambiguous, with input from all stakeholders, and that bases rules on sound science.
  • Sound analysis – We need regulatory processes that are based on legitimate cost-benefit analysis, with implementation timelines that consider economic impacts and resource availabili... more »

Comments

Still Waiting for Cellulosic Biofuels – EPA Continues to Deny Reality

To pretty much no one’s surprise, EPA announced Friday that it is denying a petition that it reconsider its 2011 advanced cellulosic mandate. The petition was filed by API and the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association (now American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers).

The reason it’s not surprising is that the decision came more than a year after the petition was filed and five months after the end of 2011. Refiners really had no recourse even if EPA had granted the petition.

The rejection is symptomatic of a larger problem: EPA’s continued improper use of its waiver authority.  We now know that no cellulosic biofuels were produced in 2010, 2011 or in the first three months of 2012 (see API’s chart, based on EPA data, below). Yet EPA continues to assert that aggressive mandat... more »

Comments

On Disclosure Rule, SEC Should Heed White House

Common sense should be applied to a federal transparency proposal – the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s pending Section 1504 rule that would make U.S. energy companies disclose what they pay foreign governments and the U.S. government for projects in those countries. The rule also should be consistent with administration policy … as in a directive from the president himself.

The president’s May 1, 2012, executive order, promoting international regulatory harmony and reducing unnecessary business costs by aligning U.S. regulations with those in other nations, appears applicable to Section 1504 – which looks like a harmony wrecker and more.

In written comments to the commission, API Vice President and General Counsel Harry Ng argues Section 1504 could bring U.S. companies int... more »

Comments

Higher Supply = Higher Prices or NRDC Flunks Econ 101

Who could have imagined the day would come when the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) crafted a report focused on relieving Americans’ “pain at the pump”? 

But there it is: the same group that once stated “there’s nothing we can do to control the price of gas in America” released a paper this week outlining the ways in which Keystone XL pipeline is apparently poised to make prices at the pump go higher – as if higher gas prices were something the group actually opposed. 

Of course, we know the truth about NRDC’s position on gas prices – that they support policies that increase the cost of fossil fuels to discourage their use. What’s tougher, though, is determining how the group came up with a methodology allowing it to argue, in effect, that greater supply of secure sources of... more »

Comments

Stay Connected