如果您经常看到我们的信息，就考虑点击上面蓝字投资美国石油俱乐部直接关注呦！

来源：Fuel fix

2015-04-14

WASHINGTON — U.S. oil producers eager to selltheir bounty overseas have cast the debate over the nation’s longstanding banon exporting crude as a straightforward, black-or-white question: Do lawmakerssupport free trade?

But on Tuesday, a pair of Democratsdwelled in the grey middle ground, pondering whether they could boost supportfor oil exports by combining the policy change with environmental incentives,economic safeguards and national security protections.

The discussion — led by Reps. JoaquinCastro of Texas and Brad Sherman of California — hinted at a possible pathforward for big legislative changes to the 1970s-era trade restrictions.

“It is going to be difficult to lift the bancarte blanche,” Castro said during a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee hearingon crude exports. “There are going to have to be safeguards in place, and Ithink we ought to consider whether there’s an opportunity to also supportalternative energies if this is going to happen.”

Castro floated the idea of a “grandbargain” on crude exports that could “allow for some partial lifting of theban, but also an infusion of resources or supportive policies to developalternative energies.”

A handful of senators have advancedother ideas to make crude exports more politically attractive, with Sen. JoeManchin, D-W.V., last month suggesting overseas oil sales could be allowed onlywhen domestic production is above certain threshold levels. And Sen. MariaCantwell, D-Wash., has made clear that any bid to expand crude exports shouldbe accompanied by policies boosting the safety of transporting oil by rail andboat.

But Castro’s comments Tuesday were seenas fresh evidence that Democrats representing oil-producing states could beactively searching for ways to support exports without alienating votersworried about gasoline prices and climate change.

The current ban blocks most U.S. oilexports — with some exceptions for Canadian crude, Alaskan supplies andshipments to Canada — but does not limit foreign sales of gasoline, diesel andother refined petroleum products.

Oil producers argue that the tradelimitations, along with infrastructural bottlenecks and domestic refiningcapacity constraints suppress the domestic price for their crude, forcing it totrade at a discount to international Brent.

Refiners broadly argue that they alreadyhave reduced imports of light, low-sulfur oil to take on domestic supplies ofthat high-quality crude and that they are making changes to consume even more.

Some refiners, particularly those withfacilities in the Northeast, have taken a harder stance and are lobbyingagainst oil exports, warning that the change would put them at an economicdisadvantage to competitors in Europe that would pay less to ship U.S. crude totheir own facilities using non-American vessels.

Jason Grumet, founder of the BipartisanPolicy Center, a Washington-based think tank, said there could be protectionsbuilt in to any crude export changes.

“There will be a handful of refiners — a few inthe Northeast — who clearly are going to have to struggle with thisrecalibrating market, and . . . the Congress is hopefully going to look toopportunities to smooth that transitional challenge,” Grumet said. “There’s acertain reluctance upon the part of those who feel they might be injured tosuggest a path forward because they believe it will, in fact, make it easierfor (Congress) to pursue that path.”

Grumet said those ideas will comeforward as it becomes clear that crude exports are inevitable.

Jason Bord off, director of ColumbiaUniversity’s Center on Global Energy Policy stressed that current law gives thepresident authority to immediately halt exports or limit them in an emergency.

And Elizabeth Rosenberg, director of theenergy, economics and security program at the Center for a New AmericanSecurity stressed that lawmakers could give consumers reassurance that exportswon’t harm them by preserving the president’s power to stop exports and byrequiring regular government reports on oil trade.

Sherman insisted that lawmakers arebeing given a false choice. “It is stick with the current policy — which iskind of crazy — or lift all the barriers,” Sherman said.

Right now, Sherman noted, the idea ispolitically treacherous, because many voters view oil exports as a threat tonational security and the price of gasoline they buy at the pump.

But, he said, there could be more publicsupport for expanding swaps or exchanges of oil with other countries — dealsthat can be approved on a case-by-case basis under the current trade policy butare tough logistically to pull off.

“One could imagine a situation where if youbring in a barrel of crude, you get a chit, and if you want to export a barrelof crude you need a chit, and the price of those chits would be about a penny abarrel, and that solves 99 percent of our problem,” Sherman said. “If we canturn to people and say this is a swap, and for every barrel we’re exporting,we’re importing one . . . that is very different than saying you’re going totake that oil from North Dakota, bring it by the port of Los Angeles, right bythirsty consumers and ship it to Japan.”

Kevin Book, managing director of ClearView Energy Partners, noted that House progress on lifting the crude export ban“remains slow,” possibly reflecting divisions along both party and industriallines, with producers and refiners squaring off. But Sherman and Castro’scomments “tentatively outlined potential pathways to a legislative compromise.”

Reps. Michael Mc Caul and Joe Barton,both Republicans from Texas, used the hearing to make a pitch for their similarbills to lift the export ban.

Barton argued that the building glut oflight oil in U.S. stockpiles is demonstration that the crude has “nowhere togo” inside the nation.

“Texas producers are especially feelingpinched,” he said. “This ban hurts our constituents, our cities and ourcountry.”

The pain is especially acute amid lowoil prices, noted Texas Republican Ted Poe, who cast exports as a balm for whatails the industry. “The ban is already forcing U.S. oil producers to leave oilin the ground and lay off workers,” he said. “The solution to this problem isclear: Export crude oil.”

关于我们

投资美国石油俱乐部

全球第一个专注于美国石油天然气行业投资的华人微信公众平台。美国有超过400万平方公里的土地与矿产资源属于私人所有，是世界上最适合中小资本与个人参与原油开采投资的国家。自2006年美国爆发页岩气革命以来，美国的页岩油、致密油产量剧增，目前的原油日产量排名世界第三。预计2020年美国将成为世界上最大的石油出口国。美国原油生产成本大致在20~65美金/每桶之间，每口油井寿命达10年以上，通常直接销售原油带来的现金收入是初始打井投资额的3倍到10倍。本公众号介绍美国石油与天然气开采行业的资讯与动态、分享中国投资人参与投资的机会。如果想了解更多，可以加微信平台管理员的个人微信号qingqingcupl或jinying0144,为您解答更多问题哦。

免责声明：我们发布的转载资讯，对文中陈述、观点保持中立，不对所包含内容的准确性、可靠性或完整性提供任何明示或暗示的保证。请读者仅作参考，并请自行承担全部责任。如有版权问题，请联系我们，我们负责版权保护。