Not only is existing energy production often rapacious to our environment but Trump will also see this trend as yet more stimulus to expand drilling and exploration in some of our most sensitive ecosystems, like our waters, shores and the virgin reserve of northern Alaska. Just as we are suffering from opioid addiction rampant in American individuals, this entire nation is suffering from a sustained addiction to oil. This is not good news for our future, and the fact that this Times story gives such short shrift to the negative aspects of this oil boom -- I counted two paragraphs out of about 32 -- reflects the boosterism of many sectors and fickle approach to the development of renewable energies and biofuels. The industry attitudes, the political push and this kind of hurrah coverage are not doing us any favors.
The BAD news is that continued use of fossil fuels is seriously imperiling the future of our children, not to mention civilization. Oh dear. . . . That's terrible. But the GOOD NEWS is that we're not running out of oil after all! We have lots and lots of oil! Drilling frenzy, piplines, prices are dropping. Hey, Detroit, how about some new SUVs, and let's take more road trips, America! Woo hoo!
Homo sapiens isn't so smart after all.
1
At a time when the earth's climate demands drastic reductions in fossil fuel consumption, the US is leading the charge in accelerating oil prodction. The Trump regime is determined to be as irresponsible as it can.
1
I believe that I have read in multiple sources that it was an element within the US government who developed horizontal drilling. Give credit where credit is due.
In 1970 the United States lifted a mean of 9.6 Mbpd, though actually more than 10 Mbpd in the months of October + November. That still stands as the record for American, in spite of so much recent rhetoric.
The movie, "There Will Be Blood," was about the oil boom in late 19th century America. This oil boom will be similar if not better. It will be better because it is happening when Donald J. Trump is the President of the United States! America is kicking under Trump. Kicking like never before. I support the President. I support Trump. Thank you.
1
The reader is left with the impression that US is now a net exporter of oil, which is not true, not by a long shot. We are a net exporter of refined products: gasoline, diesel and jet fuel while we remain a net importer of crude oil, some 4 million barrels per day. The real big story has been natural gas, mainly fracked, supplanting coal in power generation plants and thus reducing our overall CO2 emissions to 1993 levels, something not even EU can claim and certainly not China or India who continue to base their economies on coal. Natural gas produces half the amount of CO2 compared to coal. It is THE bridge to the clean energy world economy of the future decades.
6
The ecological nature of oil consumption will continue to cause reduction of our natural resources unless we take measures to preserve our nature resources. Continual drilling is not the answer but renewables may cause a sustained change.
We need to change our ways by reducing petroleum fuel usage and establishing a new solid infrastructure of sustainable energy to power our lives. That would include getting electric power from wind turbines, solar arrays, from ocean waves and tidal flows, even nuclear if the problems can be worked out. Also bio-fuels from waste materials, heat from geothermal, crops grown for fuel, etc, are there to use.
And helping us to reduce demand for petroleum fuels is the fact that people are finding that electric cars are really nice to drive. I bought a used one as a second car and love to drive it for local trips. Many more people will buy them as their primary car now that the range is over 200 miles on some new models.
Some nations are outlawing vehicles powered by internal combustion engines. And it has been reported there are many more new electric car models on the way, over 140 expected by 2022. And now there are even electric semi-trucks, electric buses, and electric light delivery vans, even some electric airplanes.
It is time for the US to start stopping with oil too, and get on the “band-wagon”. Our children will thank us for it.
6
Americans are some of the most innovative and tenacious people on earth. We are competitive and resilient because of the free movement of capital, a compulsion to innovate and the good old motivation to turn a profit. Remember American companies drilled and developed the oil fields in Saudi Arabia. Ha, take that Kings and Princes, you can’t touch this!!
3
If Obama had his way, we’d be begging despots to buy oil at $150/barrel and the poor would be freezing to death because they couldn’t afford wind-generated electricity
3
When Bush the oil man left office in his last year America produced 5.0 BPD.
When Obama left office America produced 9.4 BPD.
When Trump arrived 2.8 million jobs where already created in solar energy mostly installation, the fastest growing jobs sector in the country, lets see how Trump does.
4
...and the Internet allows car drivers to save gas if prices per gallon go up. Amazon and Walmart were not available when OPEC started to harass We The Consumers in order to support dictatorships.
2
One day, hopefully in the not-too-distant future, advancing technologies will allow renewable energy sources to compete economically, and not just politically, in the marketplace. And that will be a great day for the world. I hope I live to see it.
Fossil fuels will be with us until that day. Like it or not.
Markets will always reward the producer of the lowest cost resource. If leftist billionaires would spend their money investing in such technologies, and figure out how to drive those costs down, instead of investing in an ever-growing Nanny State, we'd get there much sooner. Government policies that advantage non-economic alternatives only result in wasteful investments and lower economic growth, which would harm the developing world far more than a Quixotic effort to keep the oceans from encroaching on the multi-million dollar beach homes of the governing class.
Yes, I recognize that the oil business receives some tax preferences, and those should be eliminated as well. If government would just get out of the way, things would be a lot better. This is the bright side of an otherwise repugnant Trump presidency.
Let’s never forget that the oil boom occurred despite Obama’s best efforts to stop it. Obama sabotaged the oil industry at every turn, yet they preserved and prospered. Let’s be grateful they did
3
Somebody call me an ambulance!
I just fell off my throne.
I read something positive about domestic energy production and possibly..........Trump [gasp]
I think I'm hallucinating......
2
A similar boom is happening in Canada: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/canada-shale-oil-production-1.4508484
Also, another oil sands mine is coming on stream: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/suncor-fort-hills-first-oil-fort-...
What happens when shale technology spreads globally? Short-term good news for consumers, long-term bad news for climate.
3
The Canadian boom is directly due to u.s. demand and the decline of sources like mexicos. There will always be oil, but the cheap stuff is going away.
2
The Times is on a roll! Yesterday you were telling us how great our economy as my 27 year old son struggles to find work and countless friends work as adjunct professors for less than minimum wage with no benefits. Today it’s how wonderful fracking is. This after the state you publish from banned fracking due the environmental impact. Who’s the deluded fool in this piece: the citizens of New York State or.......?
1
No shocker here. Make as much money as you can today and the heck with tomorrow. Instead of leading the world with innovation in renewable resources we're ravaging the earth for that quick buck. Typical of this money grubbing administration. Yep, bring back coal and squeeze every drop of oil from the earth - how progressive. It's all so yesterday.
6
I have long been a proponent to the unleashing of out
Such a rosy outlook, reads like a Press Release from the North American Carbon Industry!!!
2
Meanwhile, we poison Earth.
3
Finally!
Still, in Boston we now import 20% of New England's heating needs worth of Russian liquefied natural gas with huge tankers.
Since blue NY does not let pipelines go through from Pennsylvania. (Now THAT, NYS's, is the real Russia collusion.)
3
OK I'll bite and show how dumb I am. If we were that good in producing oil why have we been paying through the nose for it to Saudi Arabia and others?
1
While we celebrate the oil boom in our collective national stupidity (including this newspaper) the Chinese are plowing ahead with the real “boom” - renewable energy products.
So, while the Chinese are gearing up to dominate a 21st century world market, our nation continues its slide down to third world status because we idiotically continue to “celebrate” a product that is growing more obsolete and unwanted by the day.
9
Sadly Northeastern Blue state citizens are not enjoying the cheap gas and tax revenue because your wacko environmentalist democrat politicians refuse to allow pipelines or fracking.
So you get to pay the highest fuel costs in the nation AND use the most polluting fuel, fuel oil
When your power plants start running out of options and your electricity costs run off new business, happening now, maybe you all will figure this out.
NO please don't, we love having your companies move down here.
4
Yay! Hate subsidizing the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others.
But on the other hand, we should be weaning ourselves off of the highly addictive, black stuff.
1
This is great news for American innovators, American workers and American agility in foreign markets and international affairs! To those commenters who can only see doom and gloom, I would say the same thing I said to conservatives during the Obama and Clinton years: if you can't recognize such self-evidently good news about our country and say so, then you're part of our country's problem with divisiveness, not a solution!
2
Just as Big Oil Tillerson planned right? Help Texas export oil while the rest of us pay for the pollution clean up?
This may be a report but as with all reports, it is as biased as it needs to get. Trump's huge investments in oil is such skankology. He signs an executive order getting Stinky Zinke to open up the East Coast to oil drilling except for Florida where Mar-a-Lago is located? Smell that skankology?
So now these eastern coastal states are suing the Trump Administration to keep Big Oil off our shores and from another Gulf style spill that would destroy tourism and the fishing industries that are major parts of these states economies.
Why should these states care about Texas? Oklahoma, Alaska or North Dakota drilling oil in their states? When the pollution kills their people or creates cells of diseases related to that pollution, we on the East Coast will not offer one dime of help.
The Gulf Coast is known as the Cancer Coast. Feel better?
1
Environmentally-minded people hate gasoline-powered cars, but celebrate electric vehicles. They hate fossil-fuel powered electric generation, but embrace solar.
I just wonder if they've actually explored the environmental impact of the mining/processing of the rare metals used in batteries and and solar panels. In short, it's not pretty.
2
All talk about renewables as the answer. Today we add ethanol to oil, thanks to Congress. But adding that actually had many unintended consequences - a higher carbon footprint (result of getting crude to processing and back to regions for use), and we're using food (corn) to create energy, increasing food crises. Thanks Congress. Even though this has been proven, Congress actually increased the amount that can be added. Dummies. Solar and wind work well, when they work well. Cannot approach handling the needs of the US; works only in small countries with concentrated, shrinking, populations. And that is the issue - population. It's not CO2, it's population growth that cannot be sustained. But, no one here wants to hear that as you've drunk the koolaid.
1
One question to anyone here: Is there exploitable shale geologically spread everywhere is the world? Or is it uniquely present and geologically accessible in the US? If it's everywhere, then we should expect the catbird seat to move around the world as the US dries up and other regions become developed.
2
"Many environmentalists argue that by increasing oil and gas supplies and lowering prices for consumers, shale drilling is extending the life of fossil fuels to the detriment of the environment and the development of cleaner energy."
Yes, indeed. Why is this decisive insight nothing but an orphan in a sea of red white and crude cheering?
3
Oil Boom Gives the U.S. a New Edge in Energy and Diplomacy
By CLIFFORD KRAUSS JAN. 28, 2018
Really? I'm not seeing it. Under Trump, the U.S. has quickly become the world's #3 super power, behind Russia and China.
5
So we are poisoning our water to get energy that we could get easier + cleaner from renewables - at the same time that droughts around the world are starting civil unrest or cost billions to our society (of course not the fossil fuel companies). Smart move!
2
We the u.s., has made a deal with the devil. We have opted for quantity over quality. We are the third most populous country on earth and have the highest growth rate of any industrial, western country, all due to immigrants and their offspring. No reputable scientist thinks we can ever become sustainable given these numbers and our lifestyle. Destroying the environment and in the end the planet (we are the highest per capita co2 producers on earth) is the price we're going to pay for not taking the long view and opting for a smaller, sustainable population. In the end, nature will have the last say as it always has. The shame is that this could have all been avoided, as even democratic studies, see the "Jordan report" have made it clear for decades that we can't continue as we are now.
2
Apparently, our oligarchs who are in near total control the political process and policy decisions are confident that they and their offspring can thrive in a post-climate change apocalyptic future, or else they would see climate change as a huge national security threat.
That the reprehensible perspective of this article can appear in a liberal news outlet does not bode well for efforts to reverse climate change - unless we can wrest control of the levers of power from our deranged oligarchs and their minions.
3
What ever happen to the oil shortage we were sold back in the 70's. We were told that we are running out of oil and reason for high prices. Now a days there pump oil at record pace. I don't know about you, but I'm getting tired of all the lies being told by people who control our commodities, and now the constant lies that come out of Trump and the Trump Administration. I thought that George W. Bush was the worse President, but Trump is the worse of the worse, and here again it's another Republican. Republicans have shown they are nothing but Corrupt and Dishonest and will steal the American Taxpayer Blind as Donald Trump is now doing to America. The only ones who will be coming out of the next great Recession are the Rich, and the next Recession is just around the corner. Every Republican President in the last hundred years had a Recession in their first term. Any week now and the Market will crash as profit takers tank the economy.
One major aspect of a booming economy which few mention is that it means an accelerated attack on the environment. Period. While the powers that be in Washington clearly have no worries about this, as is shown by the Trump administration's massive deregulation processes which have opened the doors to reckless over-consumption, the rest of the world has every reason to be terrified as is evidenced by rising pollution, extinctions, and climate change. We need a new goal for the future of world, not based on greed and gambling with the lives of every organism on Earth, but oriented toward stability and well-being for all. Instead, our so-called leaders are contorting themselves to keep themselves, primarily, and their party, secondarily, in power. Time for a change - be fore it is way too late.
1
Did you know, it’s almost impossible to buy home solar panels in Florida.
Thank you Florida Power and Light.
1
I am tired of news stories that become meaningless the moment they are placed in context. Who cares if we gain an "edge" in a field that will kill us all soon enough?
Our ability to myopically compartmentalize various facts without focusing on how they feed the biggest, scariest, fact of all (our own anhiliation) is our downfall.
U.S.A! U.S.A! Go ahead and gain that energy "edge." But don't expect me to cheer about it. I know where this story ends....
2
This is an even bigger tipping point than the article implies. The only reason we are not already a net exporter of oil is we are still building the additional refineries and ports needed to do so. But that is happening rapidly. We will likely import nothing within 10 years, and perhaps be the primary energy supplier to both Western Europe and China. A strong hand indeed.
1
Trump & gang put a tariff on solar panels that will accomplish nothing other than putting US installers out of work and lessening the amount of solar energy we'll use.
We can make solar not work. The Koch Bros will help with that task as well.
2
I dislike the global warming and pollution caused by oil as much as anyone. But we need to all understand that 'renewables' are not the panacea to all our problems. We cannot switch over and live happily ever after.
Wind and solar are not as energy dense as oil. They are intermittent. Try pushing a car 20 miles by hand to see the power in one gallon of oil. The solar panels in my yard sit idle for days when the weather turns overcast. Storage to prevent intermittency requires more lithium than the world probably has. Lithium mining is nasty, and you need oil to run the mining process.
Yes, let's convert to renewables- we must- but the elephant in the room is that we cannot do this while continuing to live our energy intensive consumer lifestyles. Our fascination with perpetual economic growth would also have to change.
5
Let's set the record straight. We still use more oil than we produce. The socalled exports are offset by import. We are in no way energy self sufficient, but our situation is better than it was 10 years ago.
2
The Oil industry and natural gas industry is going to milk us on their last gasp. Renewable energy is around the corner and the innovations cannot be stalled by trade tariffs. Americans want the latest technology and if energy is free and less costly, they want it. Like the coal industry, oil corporations do not want to go the way of the dinosaur. Well, too late. Americans have seen the light and are on their way to making history by taking on corporations and their old energy. Those corporations who do not see the future will be left behind. In the age of instantaneous gratification, Americans want it now.
Caveats abound but the price of petroleum has risen again to 60$ a barrel. These high hopes have shown in the stock market. Green energy seems to be growing rapidly as well with the environmental concerns on green house gases and fracking. The 1973 oil embargo seems from a bygone era now.
Not to rain on the parade, but an Oil Boom can only occur if oil prices are rising, and if oil prices are rising guess which two countries are the two biggest beneficiaries: the world's #1 and #2 producers; Russia and Saudi Arabia.
If you think Russia has been behaving badly in an era of low oil prices, just wait until you see what Putin feels he can do when sanctions have zero bite.
As for Saudi Arabia, the last time oil prices were climbing, they blew up the World Trade Center.
I'm all for America's (and UK/Western European) oil companies benefiting from a boom and a price rise. But, be wary of the unintended consequences; some of our enemies rely on high prices to fund their more nefarious activities. It's why we should never give up research into alternative, competing forms of energy production.
2
The real story here: we are threatening our present and future by doubling down on dirty energy sources and by destabilizing our climate, so, pushing fossil fuels only increases security if one completely ignores the effects of extracting and burning fossil fuels.
3
The article only briefly mentions the boom in natural gas production brought on by shale technology. Natural gas is a relatively clean fossil fuel source, inarguably more clean than coal, gasoline, and diesel. Clean burning natural gas, replacing dirty coal power, is lowering manmade carbon emissions. Less pollution is a good thing and for that we should all be thanking shale producers!
2
The price of oil will drop precipitously as the percentage of new vehicles sold are electric. The story of coal will be the story of oil...
Not true. While transportation is a huge proportion of the economy and most of that runs on oil, in truth, the entire economy rune on Dino juice. From agriculture, to energy, to much of manufacturing, to plastics, it's all dependent and will be for the foreseeable future on oil and hydrocarbons. The only conceivable way forward to a sustainable future is to reduce our numbers and alter our lifestyle and even then there is no assurance we'll make the transition successfully.
Germany still gets about 40% of energy form coal even after spending around three quarters of trillion euros. In addition German electrical rates are about triple what they are in the US, and in recent winters they have come close to having blackouts. Court cases are starting to be settled regarding compensation for losses by electrical utilities who were forced to shut down power plants, and the utilities are winning.
In the US we have an energy policy that both parties have supported, starting with the US not signing the Kyoto Protocol due to the Byrd-Hagel Resolution that passed 95-0 in the Senate in 1997. As of 2016 the US is the only signatory that has not ratified the Protocol. Improvements in solar in the US appear to have relied upon dumping of Chinese solar panels. If solar is so important to the future energy needs of the US then the US should be less reliant upon foreign suppliers, not unlike the US was with oil for so many decades.
Large scale movement to electrical vehicles will primarily be in urban areas, due to reduced range and the need for another electrical infrastructure to support it. In addition we still rely primarily on diesel for trucks, construction, farm, equipment, marine, etc., vehicles that will be expensive to replace in mass.
The article is spot on regarding the benefits of energy independence, we still need to keep working on the downsides of using fossil fuels, hopefully more intelligently than Germany approached the problem.
2
One would hope in the not too distant future oil will go the way of coal. There is plenty of coal in the ground but it is a dying industry, partly because it is a dirty fuel and there are regulations discouraging its use but primarily because it is being undercut by gas. The oil industry will suffer the same fate only if other sources can undercut it. What the world cannot afford is to burn up all the oil reserves, the amount of CO2 released guarantees catastrophic climate change.
1
For starters and ONCE AGAIN, for the record, Canada is America's single largest supplier of oil not Saudi Arabia, so the idea of energy independence from the Middle East is one that has been significantly overblown for decades by those, especially attached to the industry who feel the need to drill, drill , drill. at the expense of the environment and longer term solutions in changing to clean energy.
The problem with all of this is that this so-called advantage will probably be short-lived as automakers around the world have already announced that over the next ten years they will be substantially ramping up the proportion of vehicles they will offer that will be run by electricity and NOT gas, hence, since automobiles are among the largest consumer of oil, that need will start to reduce considerably over time.
If the U.S. government and some industries still wish to ignore the idea of climate change and the need to turn the subsidies away from fossil fuels and towards energy efficient, non-polluting means of producing clean power, then within the next 20 yrs. America will be left way behind the rest of the world anyway as few will wish to buy products manufactured by those companies who continue to do so by using fossil fuels as their source of power.
4
Oil Boom, Planet Bust.
6
This NYT article on the diplomatic “edge” our generation of oil gives us makes only a brief, passing reference to the catastrophic climate change fossil fuels have helped set in motion.
5
We've been the world's largest oil producer since the Obama administration.
3
Clifford Krause has the picture.
The rear view mirror is focused. We can destroy our environment.
We can compel and compete with the Saudis. We can ignore Iran, Nigeria, Venezuela and Iraq.
Time for Justin Gillis to spell out the consequences.
Planet Earth will repay us in time. Fools gold attracts fools.
And they can store their illgotten in Bitcoin.
Sounds like a plan.
2
Great! Consumers will pay more, and their coast lines will be ruined for oil we don't need.
The worst of all Trump worlds.
3
This is a dangerous piece that addresses climate change, only on the surface level, twice. Included in this article should be a lengthy explanation on how this will detrimentally affect our Earth and our climate in America. The economic price will be much higher after the short-lived uptick and America will be further in the hole than we would be without harmful shale.
6
Why are we exporting oil?
4
Why doesn't oil fund a national pension fund for the US like it does in Norway with its $1 trillion fund? We are going to squander away our natural resource. Normal people won't see many benefits.
1
@ John Big City - John, thanks for the reminder about the Norwegian national pension fund. The first reply to my main comment chastised me for not mentioning Norway as a Nordic oil producer. Have replied and will add your note to next reply.
Thanks.
"Oil" boom? Are we celebrating our resurgence in whale oil, and buggy whips, too? Oh, no, snake oil from the oligarchs and kleptocrats.
3
Do you keep your family warm in Idaho with solar cells this winter?
Please share!
Nope. It takes hydrocarbons. My house is insulated, and I wear a"jimmy carter Eco sweater" even in the house and I still burn 100$ a month of gas to heat the place. We are tied to this stuff forever.
Driving into the local shopping mall in my Prius, while, seeing the lot fill up with Pickup Trucks (this is a suburban mall), giant SUV's, mid-size SUV's, high end sedans, you do wonder if my attempt at energy conservation was worth it--I keep thinking what kind of planet am I leaving my grandchildren, but, as I hear those big gas guzzlers turn on their engines, I guess our country has made the decision to roll the climate dice.
4
Obama promised, and he delivered. Energy independence. It was one of the core issues of his first election. Not relying on foreign oil meant fracking. It's a dirty, disgusting mess, but he pulled it off. Every oil company in America should have a statue of Barack Obama in front of their building.
Oh wait, but only Republicans care about domestic energy production.
2
If you make energy more expensive - one of Barack Obama's campaign promises - then you make life more expensive. Everything depends on energy - the energy to sow, grow, fertilize, harvest, produce, and ship food from seed to your mouth is cheaper today than it was 200 years ago because the energy required to do so is cheaper today than it was 200 years ago. If you make energy more expensive, you make everyone's lives more expensive. Meaning more middle-class become poor, and more poor become even poorer.
Cheap energy = more progress. Unless you're a Progressive, in which case cheap energy = evil, and that must be crushed under a jackboot.
6
Don't worry, KarlosTJ from "Bostonia", I can't remember where I put my jackboots.
Oil boom with no environmental controls will create Superfund Sites all over the US. Our children and grandchildren will pay the price with poor health and early death.
2
There's only one little paragraph about "Concerns over climate change..." Does anyone seriously think that we can wait "the next few decades" - when "popularity of electric cars and the eventual aging of the best shale fields... curb production and demand"?
I wonder what the people think about the price of excessive heat days, increasing earthquakes, increasingly scorched or drowned farm fields, a nearly year-round season for forest fires (and their accompanying mudslides), more severe snow and rain events, more frequent southerly dips of the polar vortex, more severe tornado and hurricane events...........................
When will we have a carbon tax on fossil fuel developers and users to pay for all the damage caused by global warming/climate change?
3
The Times still seems unable to grasp reality. Thirty more years of an oil based economy probably spells our doom. I certainly guarantees a future no one living now will recognize.
Humans are crazy and lazy, after all, this is about nothing more than convenience.
Solar, wind, bikes, and localized economies are the answer.
5
So Clifford Krauss is celebrating the anthropocene suicide, accelerated by increased fossil fuel production - with a mere 1-sentence mention of environmentalists (without any background info).
(Incidentially Mexico is also selling off deap-sea oil drilling licences).
Let's play the violins on the Titanic!
3
Good. Drill like crazy. We are tired of being held hostage by OPEC. Put the final nails into their coffin. If it wasn't for oil they'd be nowhere.
6
Not going to happen. The u.s. Is still a net oil importer and given our increasing population and lifestyle that is not going to change. Canada exports oil to us because their population is 1/10 ours. We would be self sufficient if we controlled our numbers but that is not politically acceptable.
Too bad this surge in US production didn't happen before the first gulf war in the early 1990s. Would have avoided our blood for oil military campaign. Environmentalists often fail to acknowledge the benefits to an increase in US oil generation.
3
The u.s. in the 60s broke open embargoes because of our loweropultion and increased production. Given that there are 325 million of us now and we add a net 1-2 million per year that will never happen again.
The rest of the world is pivoting to green renewable energy sources for their future and developing new industries and uses while the U.S. thinks they have an edge in oil production.
3
This was an interesting article, but I think until we view oil as a temporary and transitional energy source that can best be used to move us away from fossil fuel and to renewable energy we will lose this edge.
1
I appreciate the climate change perspective but let's remember something, one of the ways to dig ourselves out of the climate change hole was technology. There has always been a class of scientists and forward thinkers that say we are currently ill equipped to fix our carbon footprint, or geoengineer an atmospheric reduction in the greenhouse effect.
The cure could be as bad as the illness.
But future unknown technology could solve these problems.
This article highlights that relentless march of well funded technology; the economic effects and the geopolitical effects. There are thousands of oil shock/peak oil prognosticators out there that were flat wrong because they failed to have faith in technology.
So the lesson learned here is a rich nation that can fund R&D can solve the energy "crisis" and climate change. It just wont happen overnight and strapping an economy to renewables today is ruinous to funding the R&D necessary to actually solve climate change.
2
Since when has oil money been used to fund renewable energy technology? I mean seriously?
"Consumption. Total U.S. petroleum and other liquid fuels consumption is forecast in the STEO to average 20.3 million barrels per day (b/d) in 2018, an increase of 470,000 b/d (2.4%) from the 2017 level. Consumption is forecast to grow by 340,000 b/d (1.7%) in 2019. The growth in both years is led primarily by higher consumption of hydrocarbon gas liquids (HGL) and distillate fuel with modest contributions of growth in motor gasoline and jet fuel."
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/us_oil.php
Also from the EIA, U.S. crude oil production is forecast to average 10.3 million b/d in 2018
Only in alternative facts land is production keeping pace with consumption.
More projections from the EIA: "After declining by 1.0% in 2017, energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are forecast to increase by 1.7% in 2018 and by 0.2% in 2019"
Climate change is a threat to national security. National security and energy security go hand in hand.
Energy independence? Leverage on the world stage? Baloney.
3
Some commenting here want the author to take sides. This is a report not an editorial. Take the information and make of it what you will.
Oil and natural gas production in the US are good things. They make us safer as we are less reliant on other countries that don't share our same values.
At the same time that we are producing oil and natural gas, we need to invest in solar and wind. Let's be the nation that cracks the code and solves the real problem of these two approaches - namely storage & transportation. Solve that issue and Texas really can start to supply the country with clean energy.
Anyone who bemoans the increase in wealth brought about from oil & gas production needs to make sure they know how their pension or 401K is invested before they cast the first stone. Chances are good you too are one of the "fat-cat" owners of Chevron and Exxon Mobil.
4
The author glosses over the fact that 20% of U.S. oil is exported, thanks to the 2015 law. If this oil were refined here in the U.S. and sold here in the U.S. (not shipped overseas) than we would see a significant drop in prices at the pump. But, the oil companies have sold Congress on the idea that this is a world market and the more that goes out overseas, the lower overall prices are. This, of course, makes no sense to U.S. consumers. Our natural resource is being sold overseas for profit. Not good.
6
And what is the difference between American Companies selling at a profit on the spot market and England or Saudi Arabia doing the same thing?
Listen it is not your oil, if you want to buy some land and drill for some oil, where are you gonna sell it? Be altruistic, you are a great person.
I believe those governments have a stake in the oil companies and in theory that money is returned to the people. Yes, one can say that money is returned here via the stock market, as small is it may be (if any) to the average consumer.
Okay Dave now you are addressing mostly oil drilled on gov't leased land. Maybe you could espouse on what the lease rates on gov't land are?
My point is that a lot of oil rigs are on private land. The land is leased (or owned) by oil companies. It is none of your business where they sell the oil they have harvested.
Shouldn't we be celebrating the fact that the United States is approaching total energy independence from corrupt regimes like Saudi Arabia and Venezuela? And that we have overcome the nefarious plot by the Saudis to ruin our oil production in America. As an oil superpower we have some additional leverage in competing with the Russians and the Chinese.
Of course, the lamentations by so many who want the US to curb or eliminate its oil production due to climate change forgets a simple fact: CLIMATE CHANGE IS A WORLD PROBLEM, NOT JUST AN AMERICAN PROBLEM. The USA cannot solve climate change alone by decreasing our energy output. China and India are also responsible for a major portion of the world's carbon emissions. And don't forget the second & third world countries like Brazil & Indonesia. The war on carbon emissions must be a universal one, not just America. In the meantime, we are safer with an oil production advantage instead of being held hostage to oil rich economies.
5
I am always happy when our country shakes free of dependency on countries like Saudi Arabia, whose state-sponsored madrassas create terrorists.
It is also wonderful that more Americans have jobs, period.
How lovely it would be if these enormous energy companies plowed some of their profits into *clean* fuels! That sort of investment could provide (safer) jobs for all the oil/gas workers who will need them in the not-so-distant future, AND help our planet.
I see no downside to clean energy investment, and I even have an idea where oil companies can begin. How about a 30% subsidy on Chinese made solar panels? Why rely on a currently incompetent government when we can just use good old capitalism?
Cmon, Exxon: this is a win/win that could be yours for the taking!
No doubt solar is a long-term solution. Oil companies want to make their money now, not 5 years from now. Typical American, yes, but maybe you are not an owner or a stockholder of an American energy company.
Just one small paragraph about the impact on the environment. We need better reporting. We are trading our children's health for this surge. We are ruining our environment.
7
I'd be more than happy to see the Americans drive the Saudis totally out of business. I think that was me in my VW bug I see there in that long gas line in the old B&W photo. I had one just like it back then.
There is something terribly wrong with this article. It dismisses climate change as an irrelevant concern of "environmentalists", and something that we might need to start thinking about in a few decades. Certainly nothing that will effect the REAL and SERIOUS and IMPORTANT business of extracting and burning as much fossil fuel as possible as quickly as possible.
I don't believe we're going to extract every last drop of burnable fossil fuel, as this article assumes. It's going to stop.
The world is driving toward a cliff, and you're completely oblivious to it, cheerily discussing the great prospects for accelerating the demise of the world. It's really peculiar.
7
"There Will Be Blood." I hear there is also gold in California! Luckily, I'm already here, I hope it pans out well.
1
..."sheer force of its production, the supremacy of its technology"...and mega volumes of cheap, cheap oil from Canada...the article did get the pipeline supremacy thing right, though.
The article complete ignores the environmental affects of fracking, refining dirty oil, transporting oil through farmland, the aging pipeline infrastructure, etc. The US has no disposal plans for the toxic sludge left after refining and fracking except to keep it held in pools!!
The NYT should accompany this article with arial photos of Alberta, CA oil fields where holding pools of sludge are replacing fertile farmland. Is this the future of N. Dakota, Oklahoma, etc.
For over 200 years this country has ignored the pollution of our land, water and air from drilling and refining. Looks like the next 100 years will be the same.
2
It's a good article on how plain old market forces can weed out the weak businesses and force innovation, if it's read as an account of how capitalsm is sposed to work rather than a chance to praise Hizzoner's "insight," and attack President Obama one more time.
On the other hand, those of us who know that global warming's real and dangerous take it as one more sign of the foolish way we're burning though the future.
4
When I read the ridiculous passing mention of environmentalism in an article about a new oil boom, presented merely as the opinion of zealots and not really worth considering, I took a look at Clifford's list of contributions to the NYTimes. Topics of his most recent articles (I didn't skip any): oil; coal; oil; coal country suffering because wind doesn't employ enough people; coal; oil job losses because of renewable energy; oil; oil; oil. Always sympathetic to fossil fuels; hardly ever reports on renewable energy or casts it in a positive light. Some "energy business correspondent" you have there, NYTimes.
10
Anyone familiar with the carbon budget and climate science can only be depressed by this article. And by the author labeling all those concerned about climate change “environmentalists”. It makes caring about maintaining a habitable climate sound like a hobby. From my perspective, given what we now know, ramping up production of fossil carbon is insane.
7
Good. We can stop blowing all of our tax payers' dollars subsidising giant fans that are destroying our public spaces and generate a fraction of what is required to keep our nation moving.
2
"...in the short term, the boom has changed the landscape."
NYT, this is pretty irresponsible framing. Shale drilling has had well-documented acute environmental consequences and its relative abundance only serves to perpetuate the myth that carbon-based fuels are the only economically feasible option for energy security. It's telling that liberals and centrists only champion environmental concerns when it's economically and politically convenient to do so. As soon as oil prices rise and natural gas extraction expands then those existential threats take a back seat to imperialist concerns about economic dominance over Russia and OPEC producers. This should sound like stale, cold-war era petro-nationalism but hey you dropped the phrase "balance of power" so it must be legit right?
It's also disingenuous to pretend that the "technological advances" and the expansion of pipeline infrastructure has nothing to do with the Trump administration's abysmal environmental deregulation. This sort of "increased efficiency" always comes at the cost of environmental and human risk. It's pure neoliberal ideology to print that "the current rise is the result of private companies responding to global markets" as though that has nothing to do with dangerous environmental policy and tax incentives. I suppose it makes it easier for the liberal economic establishment to ignore that it has no problems reaping the morally reprehensible fruits of a reckless administration it claims to distain...
3
Gas prices have been going up in Orange County, New York steadily since 2017. No complaints from the GOP, either, the same party that ranted and raved any time gas prices rose under President Obama, just like their silence when they went down again.
2
While the renewable energy industry sector is one the fastest growing in America, energy self sufficiency can not be over rated. The Trump Idiocracy will end as a slimy bump in the road, as America, led by states such as California, forge ahead, creating hundreds of thousands of valuable renewables jobs. Red states, such as Kansas are already on board. Meanwhile, fracking, with all its dangers, is leading to the demise of coal power and lowering emissions in the short run. As important, the international political dynamics around oil are very positive.
2
It is not a time be satisfied momentarily looking in front of our eyes, we need to look at the horizon. Where we will be after few decades?
Unless there is an alternative source of fossil fuel, its production, consumption, proliferation etc all should be regulated.
Use of Electric vehicle, public transportation, High speed electromagnetic Railways, wind energy, solar energy should be encouraged. Individual transportation should be discouraged.
3
We are already suffering the effects of climate change.
This year's storms are just the latest evidence.
It is suicidal to put more carbon in our atmosphere.
7
Good news or bad news? More money for an industry that is killing our eco system? More money in the hands of avaricious corporations? Concentration of wealth in Texas, the tail that was been waging the dog of America with idiotic policies and pols. More money for Koch extractive industries and propaganda campaign?
Bottom line: corporations private rights have been over run the public interest, and now have staged a government take over.
Corporate capture and we gave away the store with the silly tax debacle. When will we learn?
42
I'm not so sure that it concentrates all wealth in Texas. There are many public companies at work everyday in the oil filed. Many hardworking blue collar families are seeing benefits as well - some of them are moving from other states to do so.
Also, the hedge fund money rolling in that is looking for an "oil deal" in the Permian Basin right now is huge. Much of the more local "smart money" these days is more cautious.
1
I don't mean to denigrate hardworking blue collar families. God forbid. Texas is just the poster child for idiotic polices and pols. Read Lawrence Wrights article in the New Yorker on their legislature. But the problem of idiocy is larger. Watch C-Span2 coverage of the Senate.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/07/10/americas-future-is-texas
We won't ever learn, Lax. Greed is good - if not God - in Trump's Amerika.
I suggest, for your own sanity, join a yoga class, perhaps take up prayer if you
are so philosophically inclined or get a lifetime Rx for Xanax - your choice.
You will go mad hoping anything but divine intervention will alter the course of the only species on the planet which has developed a monetary system. I'm afraid the Garden of Eden is lost forever.
Are you not in Berkeley CA? Light one, chill out and go hug a doomed child while you still can. Sorry.
2
It's unfortunate because it won't happen, but this is *precisely* the time the US should be implementing policies that reduce reliance on fossil fuels. The economy is humming along and oil is cheap. Whatever the policy is now would be the best time to implement it because consumers will be able to better handle the impact. Republicans are in the business of corporate cronyism however and would never consider challenging powerful oil companies.
9
I seem to remember the last ime the price of oil went up we heard these same stories. I have a question: Has the strategic oil reserve been refilled? Because at one time it was very important, and I'm convinced we will need it again. I am skeptical of all this "we don't need the Saudis anymore" talk.
1
How does the shale oil boom affect the world's geopolitics and specifically the regional politics of the Middle East including the Israelis?
If the US needs less Saudi Arabian oil will Israel be less important as well?
Will the Israeli's feel more threatened with less support from the US and Europe?
Russia's potential impact of its shale oil reserves on the world's geopolitics can then be better understood including the value of President Trump and Secretary of State Tillerson to President Putin. And the presidents of Russia and China do not have a recent historical relationship that would make them adjust their policies for the benefit of either the Israelis or the Saudi Arabians.
1
This is great news. One obstacle to this success not mentioned in the article was the intense propaganda campaign against fracking waged by practically every media outlet in the country. Remember that Mat Damon movie? I wonder if somehow any interested parties were financially backing any of that. If I had the resources of a news organization I might look into it.
6
It's great news until you run out of water - fracking doesn't occur without water and they were trucking water into these rigs because the aquafer has disappeared in some areas. Eventually there won't be any water for fracking period. Then what?
How does the US fracking boom affect the Paris accord goal to keep global warming "well below" 2 degrees Celsius? That's a goal most of the world wants to keep, so why no analysis of that here?
7
Can you show the equation that expresses barrels of shale oil sold per global warming temperature rise? Yeah, I thought not.
If the remaining signatories to the 2015 Paris non-treaty actually adhere to their activists' demands (note: the signatories to the 1997 Kyoto protocol don't appear to have reached their "goals"), then they'll suffer the consequences of higher prices for energy - meaning that every country that isn't adhering to the non-treaty will be able to sell products to those that do at much lower prices. Energy is what makes production and trade happen - making energy more expensive (the only possible outcome for the non-treaty) makes life more expensive. Why do you want to drive the poor into more misery?
3
Although radical environmentalists oppose the American oil boom, most economic nationalists embrace it as a sign of American resurgence from years of economic malaise and mediocrity. I support economic nationalism! As for those who don't, its time to get with program. Thank you.
8
So you support polluting our environment instead of innovative ways to help it. Here's the kind of news we need:
In August, six electric barges will set sail between Belgium and the Netherlands from the ports of Antwerp, Amsterdam, and Rotterdam, according to the Guardian.
But while electric container barges may seem boring, they have the potential to greatly reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of the transportation industry, becoming vital tools in the global fight against climate change.
7
There is nothing more backwards than thinking that burning more fossil fuels is the sign of a resurgence.
FYI, there are FIVE times as many Americans employed in the renewable energy industry than the fossil fuel electric industry [source: https://energy.gov/downloads/2017-us-energy-and-employment-report]. If you really consider yourself an "economic nationalist" (cringe), you should really learn to keep an open mind.
3
As much as I enjoy these demands for everybody to shaddap and form a rank behind you, it might be useful to a) note that the article explains, and explains clearly, that this boomlet is the result of plain old market forces, and b) global warming caused by irresponsible burning of fossil fuels happens to be real.
And, dangerous.
Sorry to not be in the army.
2
The piece praises the very thing that is killing the planet. It goes hand-in-glove with Trump choosing to slap a tariff on solar panels from China. Why did he chose that in particular? It does two things at once: it makes him look good to his "base" (who don't realize their jobs are on the line), and it helps the Kochs stave off the rise of renewable energy awhile longer. They know their product is toxic but don't care as long as there is money to be made.
So here we have a praise singer for the industry that is indirectly causing billions of dollars of climate disruption damage, causing the oceans to die and threatening life itself. Nice article, NYT. No one can say you don't work both sides of the street.
15
The solar panel tariff is a great idea. We need to build some here in the US. Not sure why we need to sell that idea.
Boom boom boom seems like the words that best describe the state of the Union and Trump presidency. Stock market is booming, oil is booming, employment is booming, It is a sharp contrast to the first 16 years of this century during the Bush and Obama years when we kept hearing bangs and bombs all the time beginning with 911. It is unfortunate that there still are bombs in Afghanistan's capital Kabul but that is due to the abject failure to stop the support to terrorists by Afghanistan's neighbor, who has been receiving billions of military aid from the US tax payers during the Bush and Obama era. Trump has finally realized the deception and hopefully close the tap of US military aid for ever.
3
If we would ever take into account the ACTUAL cost of fossil fuels, we would know full well that this is not good news.
9
Did oil price go up because of the dollar is weaker?
Does a higher price help Russia more than us?
Doesn't the current administration which favors fossil fuels be emboldened and further kill solar and wind industries?
If there is no more motivation to get into Middle East wars what happens to our defense industry?
Will we buy all the weapons we make?
Now that Trump can claim title to the rebirth of the American oil industry maybe at the same time he can eliminate the silly government funding for the production of biofuels like ethanol. Not only is ethanol bad for most engines, and a number of small engine product companies have told us not to use this fuel as they have shown that it does damage small engines, but it is also more damaging to the environment and it costs the American taxpayers even more via special tax credits those companies enjoy all for something we no longer need. So get to work Trump and at least make this small fix to our messed up government
3
The author makes this all sound great, but it's really not.
Even without global warming, the future is renewable energy. Once installed, renewable energy is nearly free, and the price is dropping quickly. Solar can be installed on individual's roofs, talking power from global oil consensus and poor in in the hands of the users. Solar can be installed over parking lots creating share and power for the cars.
Fossil fuels create pollution that makes people sick, and the pipelines leak and the rail cars explode. And they are warming the planet in a war that shifts weather, creating record rain, record droughts, and even record cold snaps as global weather patterns are changed in accordance of the principles of chaos mathematics.
And states with mass shale fracking are experiencing more earthquakes.
And while we are protecting 19th century energy technologies, many other countries are pushing into the future with massive renewable infrastructure programs, with some countries creating more than half of the energy from renewables. Another case of America being penny wise and pound foolish.
Obama did have a big effect on this, as his administration did not push for a renewable energy future, but instead his "all of the above" strategy, which combined with oil corrosion political power, meant more fracking, more pipelines, and weak investment in renewables.
We are crippling our future economy by clinging to ancient dirty technologies. The future is clean, renewable, free energy.
5
We are fortunate to have a President and Secretary of State who understand the global political influence of energy. Civilization demands a balance that is flexible enough to turn on a dime in response to emerging technologies. LEDs can now light the world for a fraction of the cost and less pollution than incandescent bulbs. This progress did not result from political agreement to reduce emissions.
The last 50 years of energy policy have been based on exaggerated ecological claims from the left. A pipeline from Canada to U.S. refineries represents efficiency and North American dominance while Mr. Obama’s opposition was simply pandering to an ignorant political base. Governor Andrew Cuomo has blocked shale oil production in northwest New York to appeal to his ignorant political base. His dad, Mario Cuomo, had done the same thing with nuclear power on Long Island in the 1980s.
The Trump administration seems poised to take the opposite approach by opening huge tracks of federal land and costal waterways to drilling. The potential oversupply results in not just an effective price cap, but also puts limits on political adversaries from Russia to Saudi Arabia to Venezuela. Adding oil to the coal already shipped to China also improves our balance of trade and takes advantage of a low dollar.
Carbon taxes and politically motivated international emissions agreements are counterproductive. Let technology and the Trump train re-balance the energy sector with less regulation.
3
I installed solar on my house and now get 85% of my electricity for FREE while causing no pollution to the atmosphere. Our fossil-fuel "president" wants to discourage others from doing the same by taxing solar cells.
Your statement that LED bulbs came into common use without political support is simply false. There were, and still are, government mandates involved.
Regarding oil drilling on federal lands and "coastal waterways", in some cases you're talking about our national parks and monuments, and right in front of our beautiful beaches from the Carolinas to California - but exempting FL because, hey, their Republican governor just asked them to. Nothing to do with our President owning a beach front resort there, right?
It would be interesting to know how you earn your living.
"The success has come in the face of efforts by Saudi Arabia and its oil allies to undercut the shale drilling spree in the United States. Those strategies backfired and ultimately ended up benefiting the oil industry.
Overcoming three years of slumping prices proved the resiliency of the shale boom. Energy companies and their financial backers were able to weather market turmoil — and the maneuvers of the global oil cartel — by adjusting exploration and extraction techniques.
After a painful shakeout in the industry that included scores of bankruptcies and a significant loss of jobs, a steadier shale-drilling industry is arising, anchored by better-financed companies."
Sure doesn't sound like it backfired on the Saudi's and their allies at all! The shale industry was really hurt when oil prices fell significantly. Yeah we've come back but it hurt a lot for a while.
1
I find it difficult to call it an "Oil Boom".
Perhaps a "Let's Go Find It" attitude may be more appropriate, since the oil has been sitting there for millions of years.
Thank you Barack Obama for a balanced energy policy that included domestic oil production along with renewables. A transition period of America and the World where we have enough low cost fuel to make the switch to wind and solar electric.
We still can fulfill that vision if we don't get consumed by corporate fossil fuel fascism.
4
Higher fossil fuel prices aren’t a good thing.
2
We need to use this short term advantage to also advance the efficiency of renewables. I have read that Texas, though rich in oil, has more wind generated power than any other state in the union. That is the kind of things we need to pursue to reduce as much as reasonably possible our use of fossil fuels.
Renewables are just not economically competitive yet, and so to just abandon fossil fuels without ramping up the technology to make renewables cost effective, as they have done in the shale drilling industry, would be foolish.
4
The lack of exposition in this article regarding the dreadful environmental implications of this "oil boom" (I can't believe they used this term in 2018) is genuinely dismaying. This article is a disservice to not only those reading it, but the future generations who will suffer at the hand of the ongoing negligent and irresponsible fossil fuel burning. This really put a damper on my morning.
5
A large percentage of the things we use daily are made of petroleum-based materials, especially plastics and synthetic materials. We will always need oil. The stupid thing to do is to burn it for quick energy in cases where it is possible to use renewables. This should not be hard to understand, but apparently it is.
3
So we turn the “surface” areas of our planet into Swiss cheese to extract more and more fossil fuels, manipulating markets to extract more and more wealth from the citizens of the planet, and thereby concentrating the world’s assets into the control of the few. Sound familiar?
Meanwhile, solar panel prices are going up thanks to a 30% tariff from Washington courtesy of you-know-who, the same who slapped a tariff on Canadian lumber to increase profits for his domestic building supply buddies.
Somehow we have GOT to put this planet back on track to provide for everyone, including those in the future. The short-sighted greed we see from day to day needs to be called out and identified as the cancer that will be the death of us all. Not fossil fuels, mind you, but the unmitigated greed that comes from maximizing profits without regard for the future; from placing the power and wealth into the hands of fewer and fewer individuals, then allowing them to perpetuate their monarchy by controlling our minds through media advertising (propaganda) while making rules that benefit them.
3
See the other article today, which punts out that even as is oil experts increase, computers and robots are replacing workers, with a third of oil jobs lost since 2014.
There are already more renewable energy installation jobs than fossil fuel jobs.
Anytime the believes global oil corporations cars about your job is not paying attention.
America is not going to get greater by going back to 1900. The future is clean, renewable, free energy.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/business/energy-environment/oil-jo...
1
This is the kind of journalism I appreciate in the NYTimes. Doesn't have a twitter hashtag, et cetera; it's solely really important news. I learned quite a bit from this article.
5
"Shale drilling" is Newspeak for hydraulic fracturing (hydrofracking), which involves pumping undisclosed, unregulated chemicals underground to extract the oil from the shale it's embedded in. Hydraulic fracturing has already been shown to poison the water table (and local aquifers, ergo also drinking water), cause earthquakes, kill livestock, etc. Remember those videos of flammable water coming out of kitchen taps in Pennsylvania a few years ago? That was from hydraulic fracturing. The New York Times SHOULD NOT BE reporting on hydrofracking under a prettified new label designed to give this hugely dangerous and under-regulated industry a better image. Shame on you!
3
Still pursuing 19th century technology to solve 21st century energy challenges. This is not good news for anyone except the oil Mafioso.
Well, it may not be good for the environment, but the silver lining is that it gives us the option to shrug our shoulders and ignore whatever is going on in the Middle East, Nigeria, Venezuela, etc. That's not say we always should, but knowing the U.S. has the option may force some of these kings and presidents-for-life to think twice before doing something to destabilize their regions, since they can't guarantee the U.S. will step in to restore order.
1
I'm happy for the 1 percent that aspire to rule this country. Where did we go wrong as a Nation with Liberty and Justice for all? How long will we allow a small percentage of the population operating extractive industries to collect most of the wealth at the expense of people and the environment. And now these firebugs have ignited a brush fire over immigration to cover their tracks! Think about it.
1
People found out that they could vote people into office that will line their pockets. That happened. Now well-intentioned people want to have open borders so many more people can flush toilets and take showers in the desert that is Southern California.
1
I Only have questions, I find it interesting that every time the Government claims to be giving us a tax break on our pay checks, my cost of living goes up. Gas at the pumps has gone up, my satellite cable just went up, oh and the biggy is my Wendy's lunch salad and my small frostie both went up. This is all recently, even before I have seen one dollar in more wage earnings. Thanks for nothing!!
It is a good thing that we have energy independence. It’s a bad thing that oil and gas continue to pollute the planet. I lived through the 1970’s energy crisis. Trust me, you don’t want to have your gas rationed as we did back then and wait in gas lines for hours - it was scary. Yes, we need to move more towards renewable energy sources but I sleep better at night knowing that our country is self reliant for its energy.
3
The environmentalist in me hates this, but the pacifist in me thinks it's great. When we starve authoritarian/theocratic governments of their oil revenue, they are forced to modernize. That means less hostilities, and less war between nations. And maybe once technology finally weens the US off of oil, this country will finally abandon its theocratic tendencies and modernize as well.
28
That's nice, but if you believe the overwhelming majority of climate scientists, you know that we're in a race against time. This is a problem we should have begun addressing in the 80s when we began to understand the consequences of an overabundance of CO2 in the atmosphere. The fossil fuel companies, having funded their own internal research, knew what we have now known for a while: Too much CO2 in the atmosphere will warm the planet beyond any climate in which humans have ever existed. Fossil fuel companies launched massive campaigns to cast doubt on the science they knew was true and we burned ever more fossil fuels for 30 more years. Now we are well beyond incremental measures.
We must act with enormous speed to transition off of fossil fuels, or risk losing any sort of recognizable civilized world.
1
Classical Reaganomics/Thatcherism.
Short term gain for long term pain.
4
This article could easily include the impacts this boom will have on the planet. Offset the price of disasters like Hurricane Irma against the 'boom' and you will find it is much more of a bust for humankind, for the planet, and for every living thing on it. This is really just half an article. I give the reporter an Incomplete, do-over, please.
9
This article is complete as it stands. It is all about changes in the fossil fuel industry. Damage to the climate is a topic for another essay.
Rah, rah, riot. Booming domestic production should result in lower prices, not higher. And yet, we are exporting as a way to keep prices high? We are polluting our air, water, and land with carbon fuels production, fossil fuels extraction, and burning them, producing CO2 in the process.
That, and protectionism of raising governmental enforced price controls, tariffs, on imported solar energy equipment.
Alternative energy, non-polluting and endless, should be a top national priority. Solar panels on every government building, windmills everywhere there is wind, and low cost private solar and mega solar installations. Remove the restrictions and prohibitions of rooftop solar.
15
"Few experts" have ever predicted long term trends in oil and gas production; the author may not have either. For one thing, the Trump administration's lax approach to regulation means that American producers may think they can break anti-trust laws and take over the job of price fixing from OPEC.
The second major problem: While no one should doubt China was dumping solar on the American market, the Trump administration remedy is designed to harm our solar industry in order to advantage fossil fuel producers. Had Trump et al wished a level energy playing field they would have broken less crockery by instituting compensatory subsidies to American manufacturers. But because the Trump administration's strategy is to delay the transition to clean energy, they chose to punish America's solar installers and their employees for China's sins.
Lastly, there is no discernible "new edge in diplomacy" in this well described energy trend. Rather than decrease our military involvement in the Middle East, the Trump administrations is increasing it (even proposing, without Congressional authorization, to permanently station "small" forces in Syria).
9
Renewables are not ready for prime time, yet. The development of fracking and the subsequent energy lead the US has taken gives renewables valuable time to mature into true alternatives to oil and gas. These industries should use the time to evolve into cheap, sustainable options for transportation and heating/cooling.
1
Rich, “renewables” have not been ready for prime time for 50 years, and won’t be ready 50 years from now. The reason has nothing to do with time or cost (solar panels could be free) but with physics - and physics always wins.
The sooner we stop listening to investment banks and start listening to experts - physicists, engineers, and climatologists - the sooner we can start making meaningful advances toward addressing climate change.
5
You need to do some research on renewables. Things have changed, even in the last year.
1
I have long been a proponent of oil exploration and gathering.
However, part of this process I believe should include a small per barrel fee or something similar that is put aside for increased honest research and development of alternative energies.
I am not a flag waver for “clean energy” specifically ... it’s simply that there is room for many types of energy creation especially as we use more of this asset. Most of the sources we have available at this time are ... not very efficient or reliable (wind, solar, tidal & etc) and producing the devices that make that power is relatively “dirty”.
I am also not a proponent of Trusting the Government to watch over or distribute the funds but I see no other way.
I think it’s great that the oil producers are making serious money but, if that’s a reality, NOW is the time to finance the research that will drive our nation and perhaps the world in the future.
4
Thom, clean energy is efficient, reliable, and.....clean. Large solar installations are now the lowest installed cost in terms of investment per megawatt. And the energy is 'free'.
If the production of solar panels or windmills is "dirty", well then that production should be cleaned up as we would with any industrial product. Cars, airplanes, computers, cell phones have the same materials and processes. Are they also tainted with "dirty" production?
1
? YOU can feel free to allocate anywhere from .0001% to 100% of YOUR INCOME to "honest research" into anything you like. You have NO "right" to steal MY money, earned from MY time, for YOUR pet projects. Move to NK.
1
OPEC May have missed the point, but so do domestic energy companies. Fossil fuels are dinosaurs.
5
They’ll milk every last dollar before moving on to the next thing.
Fossil fuels are dinosaurs? I didn't realize that fans and teams for next Sunday's Super Bowl in your state were flying in on solar powered airplanes.
they know that. their point is to make as much money as possible before the beasts become extinct.
For a long time I have felt we have past the tipping point when it comes to climate change, so the headline to this article could read America throws in the towel and is far ahead in destroying the environment.
Ironically we will not run out of oil or coal fast enough to save humanity, but the planet will rejoice and flourish with our departure.
16
Dave, I understand your skepticism, but refuse to accept it.
In the 1980s new nuclear plants were coming online at a rate of one per week, mostly in France. The French now get 75% of their electricity from zero-carbon nuclear, and have the lowest per-capita carbon emissions of any developed country in the world.
By resuming this rate of nuclear construction we could halt atmospheric carbon concentration dead in its tracks by 2050 - all that’s missing is the will.
2
Dave, your instincts are correct. Most scientist think we are well past the point of no return. The population of the u.s. has doubled in my lifetime. With immigration, there is no end in sight. BHO knew that no president ever gets elected with high gas prices so he boosted oil and gas production to its highest levels in 45 years. The steps we would need to take are far beyond anything that would be politically palatable, so we will continue to "drill baby drill" and out population will continue to be the highest growth rate in the developed world and like the frogs in the slowly heated pot of water we won't realize our situation until it's far too late.
In many oil rich countries their citizens benefit with prices for oil/gas well under the equivalent of a dollar with other benefits as well. Yet in our country we do not seem to derive any particular benefit even though the oil companies are using the peoples resources, land, etc. Why? And please do not reply with look at Europe. In Europe, for example, their high prices include taxes that help to cover benefits for their people like health care, education, etc. It appears we in the U.S. will be left with the earthquakes and the cleanup.
5
... and the widening inequality gap.
Yes it has changed the world of oil but more in terms of higher cost supplies like Canadian oil sands and deep water production not being developed further. But today's high prices are unlikely to persist because of the responsiveness to these prices by frackers since surpluses to world demand will develop quickly and OPEC is unlikely to cut production further to support the price. The laws of supply and demand will hold. What just went up will go down. These cycles now will be much shorter because of the nature of the marginal supplies in the US, quick to bring on and relatively short life of 3 years at peak production so quick to need replacing.
3
The article makes passing reference to environmental concerns, including climate change. But those concerns looming ever larger by the day. I would like to see another article about the new drilling techniques such as horizontal fracking and their impacts on the environment. Most of the fossil fuel reserves in the ground must remain there if we are to have a good chance of a habitable planet for our children and grandchildren.
16
Absent an infrastructure to deliver US produced oil to US refineries, refineries equipped to handle that grade of crude oil, and petroleum product distribution infrastructure to deliver refined product, additional US production will not provide additional domestic energy security. Until we began exporting oil, the Cushing Oklahoma oil terminals were backing up with an oversupply of oil, and an inability to send it to market. To make it possible for the USA to use all this oil domestically, additional infrastructure is needed, including pipelines, the bane of environmentalists.
However, from an economics point of view, the export of US oil brings in foreign exchange and helps our balance of payments.
Notwithstanding the fact that new recovery techniques make it possible to recover oil formerly left behind, the total amount of oil in the ground is finite. We need to move to a renewable energy economy before the oil runs out, or becomes so expensive that it would cripple the economy.
Thus, this new production buys us some time, but is not a long term solution.
5
A double edged sword. For those living on the east coast, water is not an issue. It is definitely not an issue in Houston which continues to be drowned by flooding. It is an extreme issue here in the west and southwest where we have not seen rain in months and little snow means little water. The oil industry in New Mexico (really Texas) is salivating at the prospects of new fracking fields. Fracking consumes water that we do not have. The next war will be over water. Humans, wildlife, plant life have always preferred water over oil. We also prefer cleaner air over the largest ozone cloud hanging over parts of 4 states out here. The oil boom is well and good until it isn't. The 21st century will not be built on fossil fuels as amazing sustainable ideas are being put into place around the world. The longer we kick the can, the worse for our environment so enjoy it while it lasts.
15
All this means is that we are extracting faster a finite resource, which will make the crash, when it inevitably comes, that much harder.
10
Which is why it would behoove us to institute a small fee to be used for proper research and development of alternatives.
Most of the ones we currently use are half baked and neither efficient, easily usable or particularly clean in their manufacture or operation.
1
Ket's see, the US has decided that coal, oil and natural gas are the future. Giving extraction companies gigantic tax breaks; even more in the new so called "tax cut" bill. Meanwhile, to make wind power and solar power expensive, they imposed tariffs to protect the extraction industry. My guess, it is to get all those Medicaid recipients, living in coal extraction states, back to the mines. Maybe the Us shoudl divide itself into 13 zones and rename it Panem. As, with Trump, that is the direction this country is going. What is Panem? See "Hunger Games".
13
There is a follow on story related to Natural Gas Liquids in Appalachia as characterized by DOE in its December report, “Natural Gas Liquids Primer With A Focus On The Appalachian Region.” The opportunity to revitalize a region that needs an economic boost to manage poverty, opioid abuse, and to facilitate the growth of a next generation of entrepreneurs is undeniable. The development of infrastructure to build an Appalachian Storage and Trading Hub to create a domestic market for US natural resources for the benefit of our domestic workers is imminent and newsworthy.
2
a pipe dream being sold to u by trump and his administration of one percenters.
Using energy from renewable sources to power battery electric vehicles is already (off the shelf technology available right now) lower cost. This is true even if you totally ignore environmental cost.
One major exception is air travel. We'll have to use fossils for while to do that.
People at a high level in the fossil fuel industry know they're in the end game. It's a very logical strategy to keep it going as long as they can, extract just a little more gold out of that very deep hole in the ground. Sad there are so many of them with the moral blind spot regarding the impact on future generations.
23
“We have all suffered these depressed prices over the last two years"
"We" meaning oil companies and investors.
Heating oil is back up to $3.31/ gallon here on Long Island.
7
Where is the new energy boom that we really need for energy independence and to confront the problem with releasing too many megatons of carbon into the air??
20
A stable, tight trading range for oil of $50 - $60 per barrel will also do wonders for technological and efficiency investments in renewables as it provides a predictable competitive price for renewables to beat.
8
Not so fast! The Saudis will always be the low cost producer and will pull the strings to set the price and balance that against market share to maximize profits. It's Economics 101.
4
Did you not understand the article?
"The success has come in the face of efforts by Saudi Arabia and its oil allies to undercut the shale drilling spree in the United States. Those strategies backfired and ultimately ended up benefiting the oil industry."
1
Sorry, but like GM's cars, Saudi's oil has a much higher break-even point. In GM's case, it is their pension obligations which add thousands to the price of any car they sell. With Saudi oil, it is the welfare state that their oil money must support. The price of oil must be $70/barrel for them just to break even: http://www.businessinsider.com/saudi-arabia-needs-70-oil-to-break-even-2.... Thus, the Saudis will never be the low cost producer.
As demonstrated by this article, when the costs of doing business get too high, Americans find a way to do the same job more efficiently and profitably. People predict economic disaster resulting from deporting all of the illegal aliens from our country; I see increased efficiency, higher productivity, and higher profitability.
there's only so much string pulling they will do. production too low risks lower revenue and higher prices that will finance greater u.s. shale production. they're caught between a shale rock and a hard place.
1
"Oil Boom"..........indeed, those with the supply control the price through production control thereby enriching the industry and the investors that in turn drive up the prices. It's a boom for the industry, but not us, who suffer high oil prices when they do.
Overlay graphical displays of decades of oil prices with graphical displays of the health of our economy and employment, and you will find that low oil prices mean a prospering economy while high oil prices inhibit economic activity. Then overlay them with graphs of who is in political control of the nation. You will see that Republicans oversee high oil prices and anemic declines in the economy while Democrats are on guard during times of low prices and prosperity. This is why recessions occur under Republicans and expansions under Democrats; because oil is the fuel of our economy. It goes into and moves everything.
I anticipate that following historical trends; under this oil industry partisan government, the oil industry will boom, the investors will boom, and the consumers will suffer as prices escalate under profiteers either leading to a recession like 2008 following the peak price of 147 dollars per barrel in July of that year, or at the least, slowed economic growth.
Even worse is the future of price rigging through the state department I fear with the former head of Exxon Mobil as our Secretary of State. Perhaps that is why Trump and Tillerson are such good friends with big oil Russia.
7
It warms my heart to know we are no longer beholden to the Oil Barons of the world.This leverage enables us to put pressure on the despots that control petroleum, like Iran & Russia.
It’s too bad it had to happen while Trump was in office, with a good overall economy, low unemployment, & a strong Stock Market, it will be difficult to take away Trumps mandate in the Mid Term Elections.
3
It will be easy once the truth is laid out for the people that it was Obama policies that paved the way for nearly every single "boom" that Trump claims...even the one related to Oil exports (a 2015 lifting of a ban)....sigh Trump is so much "Fake news".
We are still beholden to the global oil corporations.
Renewable energy can be created in your roof. That is independence and freedom.
trump's "mandate" has nothing to do with any of this. but perception is reality (to some).
One big reason for higher oil prices is the world economy. A rising tide floats tankers and small vessels too. Maybe we can increase offshore drilling and maybe we can drill in the far reaches of Northern Alaska. And then what?
One answer is, that drilling will work for 20 years. By then the oil boom will have made us all so rich nobody will care.
Another answer is that it may work for as long as 20 years and that will give us time to move to renewals, rebuild our infrastructure and diversify our economy so that we can deal with the increased impact of global warming and climate change.
Well, that's 20 years in the future and it's almost certainly an issue that will have much more of an impact on the lives of my grandchildren than on the lives of the Republicans who sponsor this madness.
2
This is a technology story not an oil story. Drilling and extraction technology is improving at such a rapid pace driving down the cost of both drilling and extraction as well as being able to extract greater and greater amounts of oil and gas from decades old fields. And this advancement in technology is continuing right now. Meaning five or ten years from now oil and gas proven reserves will will be more expansive and cheaper still to recover than they are today, and so on and on. And technology will advance in solar panels as the cost per watt is expected to be less than 1/4 of the cost of today by the year 2030. Energy is about to get very, very cheap thanks to technology. That's the story.
11
"technology will advance in solar panels as the cost per watt is expected to be less than..." ---- i guess u missed the headline on trump's tariffs on solar panels:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/01/22/trump-imposes-tar...
A front page article espousing the greatness of the oil sector with but a single passing mention of "Concerns over climate change" tells less than half the story. The implications of accelerated fossil fuel production and use weigh heavily on the stability of our climate and on conflicts caused by the temperature and rainfall disruptions. This "resurgence in American oil production" only increases the chances of global wars over water and displaced humanity. We are not safer as a result.
The other obvious impact is on the economics of renewables. While the transition is inevitable, higher oil and gas prices drive demand and only through a rapid adoption of wind, solar, and other sustainable technologies can we avert the worst consequences of global warming. In the meantime, other countries with meaningful energy policies and incentives are developing the needed technologies and they see the US as their logical marketplace.
When those squeezed-out O&G fields do dry up the US will be left with the painful process of catching up with more strategic-thinking countries but without the manufacturing sector to roll out renewables in time to prevent an economic collapse. We remain hostage to the energy policies of Cheney.
One-sided stories such as these are a disservice to readers.
80
Absolutely correct. What's more, the longer we delay the transition to renewables and the more carbon we emit into the atmosphere, the more challenging it will become to do anything about it. We are very near a tipping point and decisions made within the next decade will determine the outcomes. Negative emissions technologies will not save us, because there will be too much carbon to try to remove. Meanwhile irreversible changes like thawing of the permafrost and its resulting methane emissions will be well underway. (Methane is a potent, if short-lived, greenhouse gas.)
The real story here is climate change. There's nothing good about any oil boom. Period. The fossil fuel cheerleaders commenting here are short sighted contrarians and just adding noise to the discussion.
14
I suggest you put your toe in the water first and use this platform to say you personally have :
1. Given up traveling by car, boat or jetliner
2. Make a pledge you will not heat your home or stove with gas, or heating oil
3. With refrain from using your smart phone or computer all made with Petro By prods.)
Until then,... your preaching to everyone is very shallow.
I support taking advantage of America's oil reserves so long as we focus on transitioning to renewables in the process and we continue to protect vulnerable habitats, like in Alaska. Reserves run out and the toll on the planet only get worse. Imagine a USA completely self reliant on renewable energy. That's what I'd like to see for my children.
39
Having waited in line two hours for gas in 1974 and hear countless presidents call for America’s need to break our addiction to foreign oil, and having witnessed the greatest transfer of our wealth to the Mid East oil producers I think we’re fine. We can choke our planet with good old American Oil.
11
I hope you are equally concerned about the biggest transfer of wealth right here to the oil and gas industry.
Amongst other things, a country is measure by the value of what it produces. Energy is a fundamental and thankfully the USA has the technology to drill deeper and frack to reach resources that 10 years ago were only numbers on a piece of paper.
6
Disgusting exploitation of the US and world environment. Very short-sighted, though typical of the oil industry and the people who are themselves fossils.
73
wait, what? the oil that you hate and proselytize against, as part of your evil religion of leftism, is "giving the US a new edge in energy and diplomacy."???? It must be KILLING you that trump is not trying to kill America, like the bushs, clintons, obama, etc. MORE oil. MORE coal. Use technology to keep it clean.
6
No such thing as clean oil or coal. This stuff does in fact actually kill people, more so than even terrorist. Mean while headlines in China are related to solar, tech innovation and AI. America back to the 70s it seems.
How about taking a look at the graph provided in this article? The peak of production was in 2014/2015 - during the Obama time. The production is not controlled by the administration - neither Obama's nor Trump's.
Did you look at the graph? All off this happened under Obama. Clinton opened a new section of the state department devote to exporting natural gas.
Meanwhile Germany, China and other countries are moving to a free energy future, while backward looking voters let global billionaires trick you into voting for 19 th century technology, that makes people and the planet sick.
Where is all the water for West Texas drilling coming from?
42
I would like to know this too? Anyone have an answer? Also, New Mexico?
Short term, short sighted gains. When we should be leaving it all in the ground. Business as usual, NYT.
29
"Sanders calls for national fracking ban, ..."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/04/11/sanders-...
22
This article brought my breakfast back. Under our stewardship of drilling and dirtying we've put this problem off (again), furthering alienating volatility and promoting same worldwide, whilst counting our cash and destroying the environment. We're BAD at this.
5
What a beautiful thing for the world, low cost enery supply fueling positive high paying job growth in a major democracy. This makes the world much less dependent on tyrants like Putin and the crazies in the Middle East, Africa and Venezuela. The Chinese also can't compete due to their lack of resources and this helps our trade deficit.
All of this in spite of Obama and his efforts to shut down Shale Energy. What people in the USA don't get is our real energy business is what scares, indeed undermines, Putin's power more than anything else. Yep, no country in the world is close to being as technically advanced in shale gas and oil as the USA. Be Proud!
9
And no country in the world contributes more to the global warming more than the US. You want to put Putin and China in their place, become energy self-sufficient by encouraging the development and installation of renewables. Plenty of energy over the long run and cleaner energy for a climate future that threatens to dominate the future of our grandchildren for generations to come. Just because your energy stocks are going up doesn’t mean it is good for your grandchildren.
12
China passed the U.S. in greenhouse gas emissions several years ago. I agree with the rest of your comment though.
From Mark Holbrook: `And no country in the world contributes more to the global warming more than the US.`
SImply not true, China contributes much more carbon to the atmosphere than the US.
Its amazing to me that we are still messing around with industrial revolution era energy sources to the degree that this even needs to be reported.
7
The paragraph in the middle of the article:
“Many environmentalists argue that by increasing oil and gas supplies and lowering prices for consumers, shale drilling is extending the life of fossil fuels to the detriment of the environment and the development of cleaner energy.”
is misleading. It should say that the “vast majority of climate scientists argue” that by increasing oil and gas supplies shale drilling is threatening the survival of millions of species, including the human species. The paragraph enables the article to vastly underrate the dire effects of the shale oil boom in the US.
58
Not true. Shale gas is responsible for a huge DECREASE in CO2 emissions from the U.S. Shale gas has caused a decline in coal use and a coupled decline in emissions. There is a huge body of evidence that supports this. Right now, the largest factor in limiting global CO2 emissions is not solar or wind, it is shale gas.
1
Enjoy it while it lasts. Shale wells decline as much as 80% in their second year of production. The reckoning has only been delayed a few years in gas-guzzling America.
High oil prices are good for getting us away from oil. And one geopolitical disaster under Trump or some other sociopath will end the party.
16
Glad to learn that you will be fully supporting, Trump`s proposal to raise the gas tax to pay for infrastructure spending.
1
Amy, a gas tax used to be a great idea, but I'd prefer a national one that is a factor of miles driven by vehicle weight. Heavy vehicles degrade the roads faster and electrics and hybrids should pay their share.
Trump's infrastructure plan should include more for better rail and transit, but don't count on it.
It's unfortunate that this government under Trump is looking strictly short term. Yes, the economy is doing well and we're selling a great deal of shale oil, but this government has decided that the future be damned. There is no incentive to preserve our drinking water from shale oil drilling, there's no push for alternate solar or wind power energy and climate change has been relegated to a myth.
The future will come and our children and grandchildren will suffer from the decisions made in the present time unless reason prevails and we change our ways.
20
The OPEC cartel always believes, cutting or raising production has impact on sustained global rice.
That was true till USA discovered Fracking. Not being part of OPEC, ad with the political drive, to be energy independent, USA seeks to capitalize on this weak move by OPEC to gain market share and even exports.
Saudi, Kuwait can sustain the cuts, but other nations in OPEC who signed on to the deal will hurt financially.
Russia who agreed to the cuts, will soon renege, and go back to full production as it is in an election cycle.
Lower prices by summer 2018.
1
Oil is doing so very well that the Koch brothers and friends are kicking in $400 million to buy the next election for Republicans.
8
Don't worry Tom Steyr, George Soros and Hollywood is putting up three times that amount.
This is nothing to be proud of unless you simply believe these two things:
1) That climate change controlled all or in large part by the release of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere either is not occurring or is to be welcomed.
2) That oil and natural gas extraction has no adverse environmental effects and no hazards are created by various methods of transport.
This new edge is the edge of the climate-change cliff that DT and his advisers want to push us over.
I must note in closing, that readers seem not at all interested in learning from my comments that there are 24/7 renewable energy systems standard in the Nordic countries that they could adopt or encourage their energy supplier to adopt. I have presented these 100s of times here in comments so I no longer do that here. These methods - including West Palm Beach the American exception that proves the American rule - are depicted at:
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen - US SE
12
Dear Larry Lundgren,
Why don't you lecture your Nordic neighbor to the west, Norway. Their economy and wealth is 90% generated from fossil fuel production. If Norway had no oil, their economy would look much poorer than it does today.
1
@ gpickard - I do, I often refer to Nordic countries. You are way out of date, however. They are planning on the end of oil, they had a tv series 2 years ago showing what other countries that stuck with fossil fuel might do if Norway ended oil drilling. Electric cars are being bought there at the highest rate per unit population anywhere I believe.
Thanks for the reply. Since you are writing from Luxembourg, perhaps you would tell me how your living space is heated - and cooled if that is ever needed. My home here in Sweden is heated by renewable energy and the local buses I take run on biogas made from food waste that goes to our trash cans in green plastic bags. The bags are optically separated from the solid waste at the Gärstad plant, one of the 3 most modern in the world.
@ pickard again - a comment reminds me that the Norwegians are doing with their oil money what no other country has done, invested it to set up funds that will be there when they stop producing. Do not know the details, I will learn a few, you might do the same.
"This year, the United States is expected to surpass Saudi Arabia and to rival Russia as the world’s leader, with record output of over 10 million barrels a day, according to the International Energy Agency."
This is terrifying news! This will roast our planet, destabilize its weather, and flood our towns even faster. This oil-production "success", to steal Krauss's dubious descriptor, was bad when President Obama made few substantial steps to combat the pace of fracking and drilling, and it is far worse with the anti-regulation, anti-life, pro-birth covfefe GOP.
If the US keeps up this misguided windmill tilt toward independence from foreign oil (as opposed to independence from, well, *oil*), we won't get Tired Of Winning—we'll be too busy being dead!
3
As usual, I expected to see arguments here against our energy independence, security, and freedom.
3
Great short term gain and horrible long term environmental consequences.
7
This is a fools errand. Oil is going away. Note that Wall Street values Tesla at several times the value of GM or Ford, and China has already set a date in the near future after which internal-combustion automobiles will be illegal. This spells the end of the internal-combustion automobile industries and the oil industries. We are in the midst of a huge technology change every bit as big as the technology turnover from horses to internal-combustion engine cars. The internal-combustion engines has served us well for a very long time but its time has come to go away. There is nothing the internal-combustion engine automobile companies or the oil industry can do about this; time marches on and technologies change. Note that the price of electric cars is only a little higher than internal-combustion engine cars. When the price becomes the same or lower, which it will soon, that will spell the dying gasp of the internal-combustion engine automobile. Electric cars do not create smog, they are much quieter than internal-combustion engine cars, and they require much less maintenance.
7
Dear Thomas Dorman,
You do realize that most electricity is generated by burning fossil fuels. So if you use more electricity without finding ways to generate it in a cost effective and efficient manner without fossil fuels all you are doing is creating the same amount of fossil fuel usage and pollution only it will be at the electric plants rather than in internal combustion engines.
The difficulty is that so far wind and solar energy are just not as cost effective or efficient. They also require large tracts of land devoted to nothing but these devices.
I am hopeful that we will find better ways to produce power without using fossil fuels and I believe we will, but electricity does not produce itself, it has to be generated some how.
Being oil independant is like paying off your mortgage.
Do not believe the nay sayers, Donald Trump is a business man and as such he knows how to create wealth. Our former feeble leadership was great at apologizing but not so great in the art of the deal.
The wealth that has already been created is similar to the dynamics of the sixties this could become the dawning of a new American Age.
3
A business man who led his companies into bankruptcy three times. Quick fixes don’t last and leave us worse off than we were before.
1
It's the same old story, boom and bust until we start to gradually go to renewables.
Oh, and there is that small side issue of polluting the environment and land, sea and air and earthquakes in Okla.
6
Just another major area where Obama was disastrously wrong. Guess we can "drill our way out of" supply shortages after all!
The list of major errors made by Obama that damaged our economy and the working men and women of the US continues to grow.
Why did Hillary lose? (outside of being a completely corrupt person, that is) Obama and his wrong headed ideology is the major reason.
1
Increasing US oil production was a strategic blunder on the part of the United States. In the long term it is much better to hold on to the oil within the US and save the reserve. Lets face it the amount of oil & natural gas in the world is limited. Within another lifetime oil will become scarce and the price will only go up, way up. We should be using this time of plenty to develop technology that will reduce our use of Oil and Oil based products. Another short sighted idea to make money today at the cost of tomorrow.
31
Meanwhile other countries are pulling ahead on the technologies and materials for renewables.
Why are our policies preventing us from leading the global markets for renewables.
Renewables and sustainable infrastructure are the future.
Wouldn't we leverage our current strength in oil/gas to buy time/ resource to ramp up renewables?
60
"Why are our policies preventing us from leading the global markets for renewables"?
Because the fossil fuel industry (primarily through the "Kochtapus" network of politically active oligarchs) owns so much of our government at the federal and state level (in many key states). To really understand what is going on in our country, read "Dark Money" by Jane Mayer.
1
History in littered with industries and corporations which failed to understand what business they were actually in and subsequently missed out when disruptive innovation came along to provide better product at less cost. Good example was Kodak. The company acted as if it was in business to make film, when what the market wanted was “images.” They missed the digital revolution. Oil and gas are not the true product, “energy” is. Failure to invest in new, less expensive, renewable and less detrimental sources of energy will lead to extinction of many fossil fuel companies.
108
Dear concerned MD. You like most people do not know that renewable energy is not less expensive than traditional nuclear, coal and natural gas generation.
Renewable happen toady only because you and the rest of the US taxpayers pay 30% of the capital cost. And NJ adds even more incentives so we see ridiculous things like solar PV panels all over NJ instead of southern states.
Renewable make no economic sense at all. It happens only because it makes people feel good.
If your argument is that cost is the only factor to be considered when investing in new technologies you miss the point. Those actually working in these fields know the costs have come down each year and breakthroughs in battery and other storage techniques will soon revolutionize energy availability
2
Let us also not forget Kodak invented the digital camera.
In 2-4 years battery electric cars will reach price parity with internal combustion engine cars. Once people get a chance to drive electric you will never go back. They are simply better on pretty much all metrics. Depending on where you live driving on electricity can be as little as 2.5cents a mile, while gas will run around 12.5 cents a mile. And of course you have the option of buying solar panels and freezing the cost of your local transportation fuel for decades. Try that with gasoline.
56
Yes, fool, and your precious electric cars are run by coal burning electricity plants that pollute your precious atmosphere with greenhouse gasses, and the resulting ash causes acid in the aquifers.
3
Chris,
I am sure somewhere in the future electric cars may be the primary transport means for individuals. Nevertheless, unless the electricity is generated from some other source other than fossil fuels, it will not be any less of a cause for pollution. The electric grid is primarily powered by fossil fuels, natural gas, coal and fuel oil.
1
Until Battery life is significantly improved and the charging station infrastruction and delivery is better; electric cars will not be a viable option for most. When I have a battery that can run 500 miles without a charge; I will consider buying one. When the technology exists that I can charge my battery in the same amount of time that it takes for me to fill my gas tank; I will consider buying one.
Drill baby, drill. Let’s maximize output, while minimizing our adversaries influence on world affairs. Let’s reassert US global political, military and economic leadership to shape the world we want to live in. While the going is good, let’s use our oil boom to fund the continued development of more efficient and cheaper renewables. Fossil fuels won’t last forever. Let’s use our newfound leverage to plan for the future from a position of strength.
18
The trade off--tainted wells, earthquake prone landscape, rural roads torn up due to infrastructure damage by gas company rigs(who pays the bills for that?). Come to rural scenic America. Boom and bust economy for all those towns. The past becomes our future if we don't wake up
34
In north-central PA, the oil companies have repaved the roads, provided excellent jobs along with a boom to housing and local businesses. And there have not been tainted wells, just solid economic growth. They are now laying pipelines to local power plants, replacing coal, and designing bigger pipelines for export. I am sure Maine only wishes they had the same type of economic opportunity.
6
This is demonstrably not true. The roads are as torn up as ever in Pennsylvania. Water sources have been tainted by dumping of produced water. Far worse, the health effects of living near the wells is becoming known, disease cluster by disease cluster.
2
And filled the drinking water with gas and chemicals that will be there long after fracking is ancient history. Is that the legacy you want to leave your children?
2
"Only a major war or other disruption is likely to send prices soaring."
Look for the Republican Party or their Russian-Republican cousins to contrive a war to line their oleaginous pockets with.
Meanwhile, global warming continues unabated as Trump tamps down on solar panel installations in the USA.
Always keep your head in the oil: GOP 2018
Nice GOPeople
29
Brilliant comment!
The American oil boom is a republican-Russian conspiracy.
What is wrong with these people?
There are far better ways to "limit market upheaval."
Reduce oil consumption. Our consumption is astronomical even by our own past standards.
I don't mean past as in a couple of years ago, I mean long term past economic function. In WW2, our more limited oil production supplied a world war AND near the entire rest of the world. US production was over 80% of the entire world production.
We went hog wild for half a century. It is not just recent.
Looked at with that time frame, there are many other choices to restructure our economy away from oil. We ignored those choices for half a century. We have a lot of catching up to do. Fortunately, that has left a lot of scope for good new choices.
We don't need all that oil. We shouldn't use it. The strategic choice is not to drill madly for every last drop in places that are really short term anyway. The strategic choice is reduced consumption, drastic reduction.
Remember, fracking is not a long term supply. In ten years, it is gone. It just revives played out wells and breaks open rather poor sources. It is a temporary high, not a long term solution.
54
A temporary high, indeed. A nice analogy, the fossil fuel barons have their own addiction; only instead of killing them it is killing the entire planet.
1
The frackalypse has been predicted now for 5 years. Please update your data, as the more informed observers have stopped predicting it.
As someone whose bread is on the table due to oil, the supply and demand of oil & gas will continue the up and down cycle because that law of economics seems unbreakable. As we ramp up production and bask in high prices, companies continue to chase profits. Our oil companies have no government controls for production, nor can they gather together and allocate production among themselves like OPEC can. What we have learned is knock off the private jets and save your money...a bust is somewhere down the unpredictable road.
21
We’ve engaged in several different conflicts in foreign countries to preserve the flow of oil. We’ve ruined countless ecosystems, and have had countless oil spills in oceans in order to preserve the flow of oil. We are so entangled in foreign affairs because of our need for energy. Why aren’t we shoving money into solar and wind technologies? If I’m not mistaken if our thirst for energy is so high, and we’re so reliant on the world, and others... why don’t we invest in these renewables to remove our need for oil, thus eliminating the need to spend frivolously elsewhere and ruining our planet?
104
Why? Pretty simple really. So called "renewables" are very, very expensive, intermittent (the biggest problem), unreliable and come with their own set of environmental issues along with requiring the use of vast amounts of land and huge amounts of resources.
In a truly free market solar and wind would make up an even more minuscule amount of total energy production than they now do.
Increasing use of "renewables" costs lives and consigns millions to needless poverty.
Other than that they are just fine!
5
Where have we ruined countless ecosystems? After every oil spill, pipeline rapture, offshore disaster and ship wreck nature bounces back. Do you really believe oil companies do nothing to prevent pollution? What about the government?
Countless is a big number. I vote in my own interest and I can come up with some numbers on how much better off I am paying 2 rather than 5 dollars a gallon.
3
As with all technology, its initially expensive. Just take a look at cars. When they were first created no one really thought that nearly every American would be able to afford one. They were just too time consuming to make, and way to expensive. However, as entrepreneurs continued to fund money into the technology they improved the actual technology themselves, and the manufacturing behind it. "Its expensive" simply isn't a good argument because there are several studies pointing to the fact that year over year its cost has continued to decrease.
As more people continue to fund Solar, and Wind their cost to manufacture and distribute will decrease significantly. With oil, and fossil fuels, they are bad for the ecosystems, and are actively contribute to climate change, and keep us hostage to unnecessary conflicts in foreign areas.
https://futurism.com/the-cost-of-solar-will-drop-another-25-by-2022/
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/the-price-of-solar-is-de...
2
The real story here is the greatest threat facing our planet and us as a species—the ever rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and the heat that it will trap. All this is brought about by fossil fuels. So there's nothing rosy about drilling for more of them or delaying the inevitable switch to renewables.
164
"delaying the inevitable switch to renewables"
This is what it's all about. It's the biggest political fight of our time.
4
Hyperbole like this makes global warming and modern environmentalism feel like a scam to anyone thinking critically about the issue. Global warming is obviously happening, but the dangers of global warming and risks to human life are poorly understood. Humans have lived through at least one episode of global climate change, so extinction is not a foregone conclusion.
My point is, how is global warming a greater threat to human existence than nuclear weapons? Why is the oil and gas industry demonized when both Republicans and Democrats pull out of nuclear weapon treaties with the Russians? Where is the environmentalist response to pulling out of nuclear missile treaties? Saving the Sage Grouse or Panda from global warming isn't going to be useful if they get vaporized in a nuclear blast.
TW, if you read the peer-reviewed scientific literature, you'll know I'm not being hyperbolic. If you only receive your information via social media or from like-minded media or friends, perhaps you're not getting the full picture. I'll offer you one relatively recent scientific journal article (link below) outlining the severe risks we face from climate change. There are many, many more such articles. I read Nature Climate Change, which I highly recommend to anyone interested in the topic. As for nuclear weapons, I'll leave that discussion to another thread. We're talking about fossil fuels here.
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/news/new-climate-risk-classification-created-ac...
1
The boom bust cycle of oil prices will exist until the last drop is drank. This is the main reason we need a stable and predictable tax and incentive policy on wind and solar development. Wind and solar create permanent energy maintenance jobs for semi-skilled and skilled workers -- the jobs we need most to fill in the holes in our employment data. And remember, every new windmill or solar panel reduces long-term demand for oil and so helps keeps the price of oil and gas lower. Maybe only pennies, but those pennies do eventually fill the jar...
131
The "last drop" will never be drunk, as you put it. Like all commodities use is self regulating as costs rise. We will never run out of oil. That is basic economics.
2
But, Steve, where will we find the dinosaurs to replace the oil that we have extracted? As I look around, I just don't see any dinosaurs. They may be lurking around somewhere just itching to turn themselves into the fossil fuel called "oil" but I can't find any. So, I guess with the lack of the material needed to make oil in the first place, oil is finite. And finite means there is a last drop. And after that, no more oil. Basic economics doesn't have much to do with what's actually happening underground.
1
@ nick in Abruzzo - Nick, the same is true for other renewable energy systems that unlike wind and solar work 24/7 365. I am writing this in my home in Linköping, Sweden, where the most advanced renewable energy plant at Gärstad on E4 5 km from me is doing what is not yet done in the USA.
Solid waste is heating water that will travel through insulated lines and then enter each building, my home for example, where the heat from the water is transferred to water that partly travels to each radiator and partly becomes water for kitchen and bathrooms.
At the same time in the Gärstad plant, food waste that enters in green plastic bags is fed to the biogas system to become the renewable energy fuel that is used by the city buses.
I have just returned from an island on the west coast, Styrsö, and there the home I stay in is heated - and cooled if ever it were warm enough in the summer - by a highly efficient heat pump system.
All those systems are fossil-fuel free. They combine with solar and wind systems producing electricity to provide the fully renewable energy system that perhaps will never appear in the USA until Mar a Largo is under water.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
Stating the obvious. With oil prices above $50 dollars a barrel marginal production in the US can make money therefore capacity is brought back on line.
11
It's nice to have a booming economy, but we need to focus on renewables.
123
Yes, lets impoverish our fellow citizens and starve millions of faceless foreigners through useless government fiat.
So compassionate!
1
@ ABQ - good to see that your single sentence is the most highly recommended. There is a hitch that I point to in my comment (presently 9 recommends). The hitch is that although I have had 100s of comments accepted pointing to renewable energy technologies standard in the Nordic countries that could easily be used by Americans or by a municipality almost never does a reader say - yes, I have adopted that or yes I plan to adopt that when my present fossil fuel system needs to be replaced.
So this time I simply pointed to my blog where these technologies are presented.
In other words, although I see so many people recommending comments like yours I see very few comments or replies stating "Yes, I have adopted the following renewable technology" and - to use a special example from West Palm Beach Florida - "Yes, I never knew that it is now possible to end the use of solid-waste landfills by using an advanced technology developed in Sweden and Denmark to produce electricity using the renewable energy fuel, solid waste after recycling. Amazing - electricity for 44,000 homes in West Palm Beach using technology from Denmark, and already in place in Linköping SE.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
3
Steve W- I just filled my oil tank last week. It cost me almost $650!!! The prior fill-up was $432 for the same quantity of oil. Almost a 50% increase within a few weeks is hardly a fuel that is affordable to many people.
Know what? We'll go back to burning wood pellets, which are, at this point, far cheaper than oil and environmentally friendly as well.
3