Posted October 10, 2017
With talks between the U.S., Canada and Mexico on modernizing NAFTA heading for a fourth round this week, our negotiators can help ensure the global competitiveness of U.S. energy companies by working to retain strong protections for U.S. investments abroad through the agreement’s investment protections and investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provision.ISDS sounds a little wonky, but its basic mission is pretty straightforward: It helps protect U.S. investors from being treated unfairly by host nation governments. Conversely, there’s potential jeopardy if the U.S. allows ISDS to be weakened or removed in the current talks. It could undermine ISDS provisions globally in other treaties and agreements.
Posted September 22, 2017
U.S. businesses and industries continue to press the case for preserving and strengthening NAFTA provisions that have supported U.S. trade with Canada and Mexico. A number of business and industry sectors joined an API-hosted conference call with reporters to underscore the need for ongoing negotiations between the U.S., Canada and Mexico to sustain treaty features that foster North American trade, including North American energy integration.
Posted June 22, 2017
Posted April 24, 2017
The North American energy flows continue to grow and the U.S. is building even stronger energy ties with its closest neighbors – Canada and Mexico. This week, API met with the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) and the Mexican Association of Hydrocarbon Companies (AMEXHI) to discuss priorities and policies that would foster this North American energy alliance.
Posted March 22, 2017
Exports of finished petroleum products – including finished motor gasoline, propane, distillate fuel oil and others – to Canada and Mexico are a big part of the North American energy market that we posted on here, a market that is providing economic and security benefits to all three countries.
Posted March 7, 2017
The North American energy market is progressing toward self-sufficiency in terms of liquid fuels, perhaps arriving in just a few years. According to EIA, the quantity of oil and other liquid energy sources produced by the three countries could outpace their liquid fuels consumption as soon as 2020. With liquid fuels production growing at a rate of 1 percent per year over the projection period while demand grows more slowly at 0.2 percent per year, supply can overtake demand, EIA figures (Table A21) show – provided trade flows remain open.
Posted July 1, 2016
Happy Canada Day! Here in the U.S., if you’re not already celebrating with our friends to the North, think about starting. Canada is much more than a good neighbor.
OK, seriously, we celebrate with the Canadians because Canada is vital in terms of trade and energy security.
Posted November 12, 2015
Another postscript to the president’s unfortunate and shortsighted rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline last week: The U.S. Energy Information Administration reports that as total U.S. crude oil imports decline, Canada’s share of the imports total is rising.
The data shows that in August 1995 the U.S. imported a total of 7.43 million barrels per day (bb/d), including a little over 1 million bb/d from Canada, about 13 percent of the total. In August this year U.S. oil imports were 7.63 million bb/d (down from a high of 10.7 million bb/d in June 2005), including 3.4 million bb/d from Canada, about 45 percent of the total. (At the same time imports from Venezuela, which produces a heavy crude similar to oil sands crude, have declined from 1.29 million bb/d in 2004 to 849,000 bb/d in August – no doubt, a result of increasing supply from Canada.)
What we see here is a snapshot of the strategically important growth in the United States’ energy partnership with Canada. Our neighbor and ally is our No. 1 source of imported oil – almost three times larger than imports from Persian Gulf countries.
Posted November 10, 2015
It’s too bad that when President Obama finally announced his decision on the Keystone XL pipeline, he turned his back on American jobs, economic growth and increased energy security – each of them compelling, “national interest” reasons for building the pipeline. Also unfortunate is that the president also turned his back on science and fact.
Read the State Department’s final word on Keystone XL, and you see that State, as it said in its previous environmental reviews, acknowledges that the pipeline would have little to no climate impact.
The Keystone XL rejection was about perceptions and appearances – perceptions the president and his administration created, detached from science and fact set forth in State’s analysis, to help cultivate the appearances of climate change leadership.
Throughout Keystone XL’s tortuous, seven-year slog at the White House, the pipeline – this pipeline – was a symbol, a foil the administration used to help keep the professional activist class activated and the world climate community applauding.
Posted September 23, 2015
At some point during the past seven years the Keystone XL pipeline ceased to exist only as an important project of energy infrastructure – one that could generate jobs, economic growth and strengthen U.S. energy security – and became a symbol for a narrow ideological agenda, a political football the White House has endlessly punted around to suit its own political needs. Little surprise, then, that Hillary Clinton has decided to join in the KXL kicking.