« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

How to Kill an Industry, or: Hello $8 Gas!

Imagine if the government required automobile drivers to purchase liability insurance against the Worst Case Accident: totalling a 2010 Maybach Laundalet with four newly-minted orthopedic surgeons aboard. Worst case liability: $50 million or so.

With a $50 million liability insurance requirement, who would drive? Only the wealthy.

The Deepwater Horizon incident pointed up the inadequacy of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990′s $75 million economic liability limit for operations involving high pressure, high-volume deepwater oil.

Some Congressional Democrats would like the liability cap to be set at $20 billion; some want no cap at all. They don’t even acknowledge the fact that shallow water operations are orders of magnitude less risky than deepwater oil; to them, an offshore well is an offshore well.

Independents, small to large, will have no way to insure against a liability of this magnitude. Without insurance, they will cease operations, leaving the Gulf to the only companies with sufficient assets to self-insure. That group would include Exxon, Shell, Chevron and BP among the private companies, plus the National Oil Companies of Brazil, China, Spain and others.

Study outlines economic impact of independents in gulf

WASHINGTON, DC, July 23 — Excluding independent producers from the deepwater Gulf of Mexico would eliminate 265,000 jobs and $106 billion in federal, state, and local tax revenue by 2020, a new study by IHS Global Insight in Lexington, Mass., concluded. If independents left the gulf completely, 300,000 jobs and $147 billion in taxes in the region would be lost over 10 years, it added.

According to the IHS study, in 2009, independent companies drilled 122 wells on the “Shelf” (shallow water); the majors drilled only 8, as they are no longer interested in the Shelf. The average cost of a Shelf well was $6.5 million in 2009. In deepwater, independents drilled 62 of 143 wells that cost on average $77 million. Right now, remember, we have an open-ended deepwater drilling moratorium in place, so who knows when Obama and Salazar will let the deepwater boys start drilling again.

If the Dems get their way, Gulf of Mexico drilling will cease.

The Gulf supplies 30% of domestic oil and 11% of natural gas. The only way to sustain that supply is to continue to drill new wells.

If we don’t drill new wells, the Gulf will dry up and become a boneyard. Of course this affects me, my community, and my state.

It affects every one of you, too.

The Democratic strategy will cripple the domestic industry and its reserve and production base. That necessarily means higher prices for the consumer, and increased imports. Permanently. Think $8 per gallon gasoline.

Some might think rising energy prices are fine, in that they will stimulate the demand for alternatives. If that’s the plan, I will flatly predict that there are no alternative technologies that have the capacity or the ability to take up the slack for oil and gas.

You can’t suck this much industrial activity out of the economy without a cascade of unanticipated effects. We’ve heard that Red Wing Shoes, a Minnesota-based company, has already felt the impact of the moratorium in declining demand for its steel-toed work boots, the offshore workers’ preferred brand. And that’s just one example among thousands.

The next two weeks are critical, not just to the future of the offshore oil and gas industry and to Louisiana, but to the future of the American economy. Your future prosperity. And you can do something about it.

The House breaks for August recess this Friday, the Senate a week later. Before breaking for recess, both chambers plan energy bills that will address spill liability, among other things. Call your Senator and your Congressman — this week! — to let them know that offshore oil and gas matter to you.

Cross-posted at VladEnBlog.

COMMENTS

  • mbecker908

    of the Cubans and the Chinese?

    • acat

      You know, the guys whose notebook on drilling disasters BP have been following? Ixtoc?

      Mew

    • http://vladenblog.tumblr.com Vladimir

      …at least I hope we wouldn’t. There have been so many surprises out of this group of nitwits, you never know.

      But CNOOC has quietly taken a position in the US Gulf of Mexico, but not as an operator.

      Yet.

      • acat

        there’s pockets under the entire gulf, the entire Caribbean basin as well, and it ought to be cheaper to move a drilling platform to the shores of the Yucatan or off Cuba than all the way to China…

        Provided, of course, that there’s someone in Mexico or Cuba (or Dominican Republic or … you get the idea) who, with Chinese or Russian (or, hell, European) backing is willing to drill baby drill…

        Mew

    • kevinwilliams

      Vladimir notes the distinction between shallow water vs deep water drilling, yet they had essentially stopped both, with their defacto moratorium and increased regulations/liability limits.

      Another huge difference is between an exploratory well vs production well, and again, they treat both alike. Unlike riskier exploratory drilling, production wells are like clones – if a platform is planned to have 20 wells, wells 2-20 are clones of #1. BHO would tell a car maker: Ok, that first Taurus is approved, but you’ll have to apply for new permits to make the next one. NUTS! No, actually EVIL!

  • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

    would be glad to do all our gulf drilling for us. I mean if those are now jobs Americans just won’t do or something?

  • johnt

    Plus, if everybody’s income goes down, if people suffer more, won’t they turn to government for help? How can the collectivists lose? They just vote themselves raises and move on.

    • janis

      to reduce our freedom to come and go as we please. If we can’t afford to drive our cars and trucks, then we’re just plain stuck in place like a fly in amber. What could be more lovely for the administration that wishes to control our every move?

  • George Neitz

    Remember a few years back when gas hit $4 and the economy came to a virtual standstill ? What do these people think $8 would do? I know this is all part of the sob’s in charge grand plan to destroy this country and if he cant get crap and tax through the Senate this will do just fine.

    • http://vladenblog.tumblr.com Vladimir

      …is if the economy stays in the dumper, with 14% unemployment or so.

      • acat

        China and/or India manage to bootstrap themselves to the point where they experience consumer-class growth. And they’re both apparently within striking distance.

        That would mean that China needs oil for domestic consumption, not just the export market, so suddenly demand stays high….

        Mew

      • Richard Mullins

        the demand is sort of weak right now and with his plans, 14-17% unemployment sounds quite likely. Europe here we come.

        • audax

          …isn’t high because of supply…it is high because it is mostly a tax. For US petrol to go to $8 a gallon (almost the price now in Europe and plenty of people are still driving here on pretty good roads) oil would probably have to beclose to$300 per barrel. For example todays dated Brent spot is at $75.96 per barrel and the wholsale gas price is $2.06/gal. To get the wholsale price to $8/gal you would need to see the oil price almost quadruple to about $300 per barrel. With state and fed gas tax in Texas at $0.384/gallon the pump price would be about $8.50. Even with the Gulf shut down there is still an excess of oil on the world market keeping the price in the mid $70/barrel range. On the other hand in Europe right now fuel is about Euro1.20 per liter or just over $6 per gallon. Assuming the wholesale price of gasoline is the same the fuel taxes here are more like $4 per gallon or overTEN TIMES the tax per gallon in Texas. Don’t think you will see $8 for a gallon of gas in US until Israel bombs the nuke factories in Iran, then you may see a spike.

    • caverat

      Don’t misjudge your enemy!

      Although we like to think of the current regime as idiots, fools, etc., don’t underestimate them. They’re not fools nor idiots. They’re a well orchestrated gang who are out to destroy this great country. They’re doing it by deliberately overloading the US economy to make it fall flat. The various idealist groups like the environmentalists are only pawns in their bigger scheme. No country in the world is strong enough to resist their quest for total world control – the US. If they can make the US fall, there’s not stopping them.

      The oil spill has been made worse by their obstructions to doing what any 5 year old would do – keep skimmers away, keep oil booms in the warehouses, don’t allow anyone to build barriers to protect the shores, don’t allow anything innovative to be even considered. They WANT the mess to be as large as possible so that they have an excuse to destroy the oil industry and drive the costs of fuel so high that the economy will collapse. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if the original explosion of the Deepwater Horizon was deliberate. These people have no morals and will stop at nothing to gain their complete dictatorship over the world.

      If we continue to just sit around and holler Baaaa, Baaaa in response, first we will be sheared, then slaughtered.

  • miketheknife

    The scenario unfolding is the same mob reaction demonstrated after the Exxon/Prince William Sound fiasco where government response was much more at fault than anything initiated by the actual event. We didn?t have the communications available as now to help keep clear heads. According to much of the MSM we are under attack by and at war with BP or the exploration companies in general. The truth is that we?re under attack by hype and innuendo and at war with mob mentality ignorance and miss spent trust in what?s offered for truth. None of the oil companies is in business to kill people or to pollute the world around them and when a disaster happens to our families or neighbors our first response is to offer help. This is a salvage situation and the first rule of salvage is to mitigate additional harm but the Obama administration seems hell bent to inflict as much as possible to the entire Gulf region. They washed otters in Alaska and they?ve washed pelicans in the Gulf but in both cases Government has chosen to punish the entire industry and by doing so, the entire population by forgetting that first rule and escalating matters exponentially. From a purely scientific point of view there is no comparable, (by volume or expense), means to power our prime mover energy needs than those being sought in the Gulf. To propose an alternative at this point is to take America out of the global market. But hey, maybe that is the idea behind the Administration?s mantra, ?never let a crisis go to waste?.

    • renny

      partly because, contrary to “green” allegations, nature is very good at cleaning herself. Had the fed. gov’t and its bureaucratic inertia not been so oppressing and anti-response originally, we’d be a month or more ahead of recovery.

      The wetlands will be the focus now, as oil is sitting in some and has to be removed before it sinks into roots.

      But we should worry even more than the gulf oil leak about the EPA shutting refineries in TX on new bogus emissions standards invented for “global warming” prevention.

      We haven’t built a US refinery since the 70s and closing the ones we have will be even more disastrous than stopping oil production.

      But even Dems. will be wailing if gasoline goes up to $4 again, and little o will have no cover for his attack on energy when it happens.

  • Richard Mullins

    but it will affect areas that rely on Offshore drilling even harder. I’m guessing it hurting the PCI helicopters service to the Offshore oil rigs since it still in a moratorium(what bad stuff can to Lake Charles and further east in South Louisiana). Less oil drilled in the gulf= less lower cost oil for the Refiners(what a hurt to Valero). I can’t what fools would vote for a person like this and his cohorts.

  • rdelbov

    this year through the gulf will be get us to $5 gas–not wanting it but the structure of our gasoline delivery system is so fragil with no margin of error

  • panzer

    Sorry, Vladimir, I don’t see why the government is getting involved at all. Why should the government be subsidizing the industry by setting liability limits? Nobody puts limits on my liability when I drive. If drilling is so safe, insurance will be cheap. If it’s not, why should we say don’t worry about the damage you do to everyone else? Let the market decide.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      Nice try, but you can’t bootstrap a small government argument that way, when it’s the government that is enforcing this liability to begin with.

      These liability laws are passed on the grounds that making people pay for this kind of spill is for the greater good, but we can also decide a cap is also for the greater good.

      Because we need oil, thanks to you leftys who short-sightedly ban shallow water drilling so much.

      • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

        I noticed a lot of double posts lately, is there anything we can do to the settings in our browser to help with this? I am using the most up to date IE explorer with Win7.

        • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
          • Richard Mullins

            although for a while I double posts when I up the DSL speed to 6MB down. I don’t use IE 8 much in Vista Ultimate(I really only use it do check my checking account at my credit union{http://www.rbfcu.org}). I think I might test IE8 in Vista Ultimate to see if I get the same results.

          • Richard Mullins

            I’m not quite sure if I’m thinking.

          • Richard Mullins

            must be a router problem.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
          • Richard Mullins

            and only happened a few times.

    • http://vladenblog.tumblr.com Vladimir

      Nobody ever, ever, ever suggested that an oil company’s (or a tanker company’s) liability be limited as to the cost of cleaning up the spill.

      Anybody who spills oil into the waters of the United States is absolutely liable for the cleanup costs, even if it puts them out of business.

      What is at issue, and what liability limits cap, are economic damages. I imagine that there is a joint in Bozeman, MT that can make a claim of being economically damaged by the BP spill since they don’t have their regular supply of shrimp for All-You-Can-Eat Thursdays.

      The concept of liability limits was to put smaller firms on a competitive footing with larger ones, since smaller firms could never hang with the cost of litigating all the potential (and some specious) claims that might arise from a spill of this magnitude.

      You may disagree, and that’s fine (we’ll never know, R.I.P.), but at least that’s the rationale for why the limits were there in the first place. If you prefer that the biggest companies always have a competitive advantage, that’s cool.

      But whatever it is, it ain’t a “subsidy”.

  • StandardCandle

    This issue affects economy, national security, and social issues…

    This is a MUST DO for everyone that considers themself a Conservative.

    • http://www.twitter.com/RS_yoyo yoyo

      DeMint will most likely vote in favor of a liability cap.

      Graham, in the spirit of bipartis…..er, CRAP!…… I am sure he will vote for an increase to the high heavens.

      …How many more weeks until we can get rid of Graham? Seriously. Like 222, or something?

      …………

      • sccrenny

        6 days, dammit! As Glenn Beck said in the Bold Fresh Tour visit to Charleston in January, “I HATE Lindsay Graham!” (to raucous applause).

  • Joliphant

    They swallowed all those pipe dreams about post industrial economies and knowledge economies hook line and sinker.

  • clariancall

    The discussions are interesting and some very enlightening. However, the only thing you can do to remedy this situation is to vote in November. Discussion helps frame the issues, but we cannot stop there by feeling we have done our part. Your part is to vote and get every sane person to vote with you. Take the emotion reflected in these comments and focus it on your prime responsibility – to vote!!!

  • chuckl

    The largest error in the Oil Pollution Act, is the failure to exempt the oil Company from damages caused by the Federal Government.

    There is no logical way to hold BP responsible for the damages caused by the over 10 week delay in action forced by the Obama Administration. There is no justification for the delay. The claim that the “Jones” act required this delay is at best questionable since the “Jones” act deals with moving cargo from one U. S. port of Entry to another U.S. Port of Entry. It does not mention the transport of salvage, and surely oil skimmed from the top of the ocean is salvage, or the destination of the salvage.