Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on August 20, 2020
How Might Oil and Gas Fare Under a Biden Admin?
Democratic Presidential nominee Joe Biden’s stance on the issue of hydraulic fracturing has been unclear. During a March 15 debate with then-rival U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Biden said that there would be “no new fracking” in his administration. In an interview with a Pittsburgh TV station the following month, however, Biden pledged not to “shut down this (natural gas) industry.” His campaign website also states that a Biden administration would ban “new oil and gas permitting on public lands and waters.”
Given the mixed messages Biden and his campaign have presented regarding oil and gas development, Rigzone caught up with an energy industry veteran for his insights on what the Biden camp’s proposals could mean for the industry – and how they might influence voters. Read on for a perspective from Bill Ebanks, Houston-based managing director in the energy practice of global consulting firm Alix Partners.
Rigzone: How might Biden’s stance on hydraulic fracturing resonate with voters, particularly in oil and gas-producing states?
Bill Ebanks: Vice President Biden has communicated what some might say are several conflicting positions over the past year on issues important to the domestic oil and gas industry, including hydraulic fracturing. With the recent release of Biden’s plan for “Climate Change and Environmental Justice,” he appears to be staking out an ambitious proposal to achieve 100-percent clean energy and reach net zero emissions by 2050, among other goals.
While there does not appear to be any specific mention of Biden’s stance on fracing in the document, he does mention several proposed initiatives that would likely impact the oil and gas industry, including:
- Requiring aggressive methane pollution limits for new and existing oil and gas operations – likely impacting the practice of gas flaring as well as requiring additional monitoring of methane emissions from wells, facilities and pipeline infrastructure
- Ending subsidies for fossil fuels – for oil and gas, the majority of the subsidies come in the form of tax deductions and incentives on royalty payment relief
- Eliminating drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) – an area recently seeing an uptick in exploration activity
- Banning new oil and gas permitting on public lands and modifying royalties to account for climate costs – potentially a very significant impact on the industry.
While hydraulic fracturing is not a common practice in the offshore area, it is necessary in many of the onshore basins – including on federal lands – to make new oil and gas development economic. By potentially banning new oil and gas permitting on public lands, he will in effect be banning hydraulic fracturing on federal lands since most often that practice is used at the time new wells are drilled.
In terms of popularity with voters, the majority of the federal onshore land producing oil and gas are in two states: Wyoming and Colorado. Voters in Republican-leaning Wyoming may not favor this policy while Democratic-leaning Colorado voters may be more supportive of the proposal. Other areas with onshore oil and gas on federal land may be similarly split along traditional lines, with Alaska and Utah likely leaning against a ban and California supporting it.
Rigzone: Unfavorable commodity prices have already stifled offshore development in recent years, during both the Obama and Trump administrations. What impact do you see Biden’s proposed ban on new permitting on public waters having on the industry?
Ebanks: A potential ban on oil and gas permitting in offshore waters could have a significant negative impact on the domestic oil and gas industry. Federal waters current provide approximately 15 percent of total U.S. oil production and five percent of all natural gas production and are an important contributor to the U.S. economy – with estimates of $3 billion a year going directly to the U.S. government from leasing and royalty payments and $30 billion a year injected into the U.S. economy from the spending associated with drilling and producing oil and gas.
Importantly, federal offshore lands are believed to hold billions of barrels of undiscovered oil and gas which the industry would like to pursue under the right economic environment. An offshore ban would likely not only impact existing offshore areas such as the Gulf of Mexico off the Texas and Louisiana coasts, but extend the moratorium in other prospective areas such as in federal waters off the Florida coast and along the Atlantic coast.
At a time when many oil and gas producers and service companies are struggling financially, a ban on offshore drilling in federal waters could add even further pressure to the industry and could result in many companies moving their activities to explore and produce oil and gas overseas. The U.S. is already one of the most highly regulated countries in the world in terms of emissions and environmental pollution controls. Shifting oil and gas development activity overseas to countries with less developed climate policies could, ironically, service to increase on the climate and environment.
59 Comments on "How Might Oil and Gas Fare Under a Biden Admin?"
Abraham van Helsing on Fri, 21st Aug 2020 1:43 am
Steve Bannon released on 5 million bail:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8648803/Steve-Bannon-appears-court-HANDCUFFS-pleads-not-guilty-25-million-wall-scam.html
He was arrested on a yacht owned by a CHINESE billionaire.
Even Trump’s son and wall-supporter has distanced himself from this fat fraud.
Davy on Fri, 21st Aug 2020 2:53 am
Sounds like something Duncan Idaho would be proud of:
“I Have A Right To Make Sure That My Home Is Secure”: Chicago Mayor Lightfoot Defends Ban On Protesters On Her Block”
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/i-have-right-make-sure-my-home-secure-chicago-mayor-lightfoot-defends-ban-protesters-her
“In the aftermath of the George Floyd killing, protests erupted across dozens of cities in California with hundreds of thousands of people taking to the streets, and despite the raging coronavirus pandemic they were cheered on loudly by the state’s liberal elite with some of the most prominent Hollywood actors taking daily turns to voice their support for the protesters while condemning anyone who did not side with the BLM movement, even when so frequently it devolved into violent rioting and looting of innocent bystanders. All of that abruptly ended, however, when BLM invaded Beverly Hills chanting “eat the rich.” That’s when the police quickly showed up and immediately cleared out all the protesters. But while such NIMBY hypocrisy has long been a fixture of the ultra-liberal Golden State, nothing compares to what just happened in Chicago whose Mayor Lori Lightfoot – best known for encouraging local BLM protests, going so far as saying that black lives are “more important that downtown corporations” after the unprecedented looting that took place last week – defended the Chicago Police Department’s ban on protesters being able to demonstrate on the block where she lives, telling reporters Thursday that she and her family at times require heightened security because of threats she receives daily.”
Abraham van Helsing on Fri, 21st Aug 2020 3:01 am
Were skwatting on stolen land Davy. We should move back to Europe where we belong. Were an invasive sub-species. The black folk can stay Cus we forced them into bein hear. JuanP is a REAL American. Were a Eurotard.
I’m afraid Europe is not available for large scale resettling, black or white or Yellow.
On a time-scale of thousands of years everybody is a “squatter”.
The mongoloid “Indians” arrived in the Americas during the ice age via the Bering Street land bridge.
Aryans “marched” from Southern Russia to India, Persia, Egypt, Greece, Europe (replacing the Celts, the English still hate us for it), to the Americas:
http://marchofthetitans.com/
Japanese and Chinese are fairly stable (“little talent for tourism” is another way of describing it).
White Americans (“Yanks”) are destined to own a white homeland in the Americas, not as big as the original US, but a very large “Reserve” indeed (probably Mississippi River basin). On the tomb stone of the old USA will be written: “RIP white USA. Defeated by the Jews”.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321318694_Jewish_Involvement_in_Shaping_US_Immigration_Policy
Hitler was right about Jews. Will become general knowledge after the end of the American Era. The only interesting question about America is who will get what from the heritage. Give us in Europe a call if you need help.
Davy on Fri, 21st Aug 2020 3:06 am
Duncan types abandoning ship while at the same time championing woke liberalism:
“White Flight Is Real” – Hollywood’s Apocalypse Triggers Mass Exodus”
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/white-flight-real-hollywoods-apocalypse-triggers-mass-exodus
“White flight is real. The elites and middle classes are leaving. People are taking losses on the sales of their homes to get out,” veteran publicist Ed Lozzi told the Daily Mail while referring to the socio-economic implosion of Los Angeles. Lozzi said the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area was already “changing before coronavirus brought us to our knees. The homeless problem has been escalating for years, exacerbated by weak politicians making bad decisions.” “Hollywood has always been the wokest of the woke, so politicians have done nothing to stop people sleeping on the streets. It’s not illegal and the weather’s nice, so they keep coming,” he said, adding that, “there is insufficient housing, inadequate mental health care. Add in Covid and it’s a perfect storm.” Lozzi remembers the days when Los Angeles “smelled of orange blossoms.” He said today’s scent is urine and feces with once beautiful parks now filled with homeless encampments and carpeted with drug needles… “Liberal politics has destroyed this city,” he said. “The homeless encampments are legal and there’s nothing the police can do. White, affluent middle-class folk are getting out. People don’t feel safe any more.”… At least 66,000 people are sleeping on the streets of Los Angeles, up 12.5% YoY. The wealth gap continues to soar to alarming levels as the coronavirus pandemic has resulted in depressionary unemployment. The socio-economic implosion of the city has allowed the woke Hollywood crowd to finally realize decades of liberal policies are, in fact, a failure. Now, the same elites who championed liberal policies are abandoning ship and moving to suburbia”
Abraham van Helsing on Sat, 22nd Aug 2020 3:09 am
Everybody bets on batteries. Except for Toyota, that keeps believing in hydrogen:
https://www.spiegel.de/auto/toyota-warum-das-unternehmen-im-alleingang-auf-den-wasserstoffantrieb-setzt-a-00000000-0002-0001-0000-000172636974
http://emag.directindustry.com/does-the-future-of-cars-lie-in-hydrogen/
“Does the Future of Cars Lie in Hydrogen?”
My gut-feeling says Toyota is right, especially in the light of ambitious hydrogen plans in Europe and Japan.
Davy on Sat, 22nd Aug 2020 5:15 am
“Everybody bets on batteries. Except for Toyota, that keeps believing in hydrogen: “Does the Future of Cars Lie in Hydrogen?” My gut-feeling says Toyota is right, especially in the light of ambitious hydrogen plans in Europe and Japan.”
The best examples I have seen is a combination of a fuel cell with batteries. That is where you get the higher travel distances before charge up. The following is a high priced example but scaled down versions might be an option:
“The Nikola Motor Badger Will Have 600 Mile Range & Arrive As A Battery Electric & Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle”
https://tinyurl.com/yx58cf9s clean technica
“Today, Nikola Motors unveiled a new electric truck, the Badger. The vehicle is still in the early stages of development, but the company is working on a battery electric version and a hydrogen fuel cell electric configuration that can also recharge its onboard battery from the grid. The Badger will hit the market with a 600 mile (965 km) range and a 0–60 mph time of 2.9 seconds…The Badger’s expected 600 mile (965 km) range is more than enough for just about any workday, and with fast recharging times overnight or from any one of a number of public DC fast charging networks, range is no longer an issue. In fact, the massive 160 kWh battery in the Badger brings new functionality to workers with a 15 kW power export outlet that will allow owners to use their truck to provide electricity to power their workday. That’s more than enough juice to run power tools, job lights, compressors, and the like. A High-Performance Beast Of A Work Truck The performance of the Badger promises to blow the socks off of internal combustion-powered trucks with a staggering 906 peak horsepower (455 HP continuous) and 980 ft·lb of torque. The current list of specs, while only preliminary at this point, are about as impressive as it gets for a truck. The FCEV configuration will be able to operate on grades up to 40% thanks to a unique blend of power from the batteries and the fuel cell.”
Check out the full list of yet to be finalized pre-production specs on this puppy:
600 miles on blended FCEV / BEV
300 miles on BEV alone
Operates on blended FCEV / BEV or BEV only by touch of a button
906 HP peak
455 HP continuous
980 ft. lbs. of torque
160 kWh, flooded module – lithium-ion battery
120 kW fuel cell
Advanced Supercapacitor Launch Assist that blends with lithium ion and fuel-cell
-20F operating environments without major performance or SOC losses
Towing capacity of over 8,000 pounds
Operating targets without motor stalls up to 50% grade
15 kW power export outlet
Compatible with industry standard charging for BEV mode
Five seats
Truck dimensions: 5900 mm long x 1850 mm tall x 2160 mm wide a 1560 mm bed width
Chrome Mags on Sat, 22nd Aug 2020 12:31 pm
How will oil and gas fare under Biden? All arrows point to Jevons Paradox.
Cloggie on Sat, 22nd Aug 2020 12:40 pm
“The Nikola Motor Badger Will Have 600 Mile Range & Arrive As A Battery Electric & Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle“
A hybrid solution could work during the initial stage of the transition, when there are unsufficient hydrogen fueling stations. In the long run everything depends on the price development of fuel cells vs batteries, as well as the price of hydrogen-from-electrolysis to see who wins.
Hydrogen could very well win, because it can be stored on a seasonal basis; electricity only for a few hours (batteries, pumped hydro).
And this could be the hydrogen form-of-choice for car fuel: borohydride
https://deepresource.wordpress.com/?s=borohydride
Russellwem on Sun, 23rd Aug 2020 4:56 am
coinoco.me Brute BTC Wallet
https://prnt.sc/u2c9sh
[img]https://image.prntscr.com/image/VnZWanwkQ8WvItAtB67hhg.png[/img]
max 300 threads
instant payment
no ban
Download
https://mega.nz/file/QURACQhY#Vk3W73HapLoiaVd1wH9QVGuy7c69wK8pSf9ZAqnr-lA
VT
https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file…2VlNDZhN2QwMjlhYmI6MTU5Nzg1NTIzMw==/detection