• Barclays Bank and EPRINC Host Discussion on Fracking Ban

    On February 13, 2020 in NYC, Barclays Bank and EPRINC hosted a discussion on U.S. petroleum policy  with the  investment community and public sector participants.  EPRINC Distinguished fellow Michael Lynch presented  his findings on the implications of a fracking ban on US production and energy security. EPRINC Distinguished Fellow Trisha Curtis updated the attendees on recent productivity trends in unconventional (shale) oil and gas production in the U.S. Lucian Pugliaresi, EPRINC’s President, moderated the discussion.

    Ahead of the 2020 U.S. Presidential elections, several Democratic candidates have been endorsing policies that, to various degrees, would restrict hydraulic fracturing (HF), a drilling technique that has been largely responsible for the rapid expansion of U.S. oil and gas production. The consequences of such a policy initiative have been evaluated and published by EPRINC. The report was authored by Michael Lynch and can be found here and his presentation slides from the event are available here. Trisha Curtis’ slide presentation can be found here.

    EPRINC would like to thank Harry Mateer of Barclays and Paul Tice of Schroeders for organizing and coordinating this event.

    Read More
  • The Impact of a Fracking Ban on Shale Production and the Economy by Michael Lynch

    Oil and gas production from the U.S. petroleum resource base has experienced an unprecedented expansion in output which has now positioned the U.S. as the world’s largest oil and gas producer. The North American petroleum production platform is soon to become a net oil and gas exporter to the world market. This rapid expansion in oil and gas production has enhanced U.S. energy security, provided greater stability to the world oil market, and conveyed sustained economic benefits to the national economy. The expansion in output has been possible through a series of advances in extraction technology including the use of hydraulic fracturing which permits oil and gas production from so-called source rock.

    Concerns over carbon emissions from sustained increases in domestic oil and gas production has now been reflected in the 2020 Presidential race, with some candidates and many public interest groups calling for an end to hydraulic fracturing. Operationally, these initiatives would include a ban on oil and gas development on public lands, prohibition of new infrastructure, such as pipelines, export terminals and even refineries. This effort, championed by several Democratic candidates for President would include features of so-called Green New Deal (GND) to quickly move that national energy complex to a fully renewable fuel system.

    In this paper, EPRINC fellow, Michael Lynch, explores the economic consequences of policies aimed at severely reducing U.S. oil and gas production. Such an estimate is important because whatever the merits (benefits) from reducing carbon emissions through oil and gas production constraints, policy makers will have to confront the costs and public acceptance of such a policy.

    Read More
  • EPRINC Background Note: Outline of NaftoHaz/ GazProm Issues Ahead of 12/31/2019 Transit Agreement Expiration

    EPRINC’s Max Pyziur has created a note describing the background information behind the NaftoHaz/GazProm issues, specifically ahead of the 12/31/2019 transit agreement expiration. This work was penned in December 2019 just before that expiration date.

    Read More
  • For Discussion: EU Natural Gas Overview Powerpoint by Max Pyziur

    EPRINC’s Max Pyziur created the attached presentation on the EU Natural Gas Overview in September 2019.

    Read More
  • Emily Medina on Think Tech Hawaii, “Energy in America Program”

    Emily Medina was interviewed recently on Think Tech Hawaii. Some clips from that broadcast can be found below:

     

    Emily on the attack on the Saudi oil facilities.

     

    Emily on Mexico’s Energy Reform.

    Read More
Regulatory Reform: The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

On January 10, 2020, the Trump Administration proposed a series of regulatory reforms to streamline compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).  For the uninitiated, the  purpose of NEPA is to ensure that environmental factors are weighted equally when compared to other factors in the decision making process for so-called major actions undertaken by federal agencies. 

From the concerns raised by critics in the environmental community, one might conclude that this is a rushed and nefarious initiative  to “gut” environmental reviews. In contrast, critics of the NEPA process point to a  vast number of  projects from the construction of new roads to approval of pipelines that remain tied up in judicial reviews which often have little to do with the merits of the projects.

If you need a reminder that concerns over the NEPA process has been with us for some time, we refer you to “EIS’s vs. the Real World,”  published in the Public Interest by Professor Gene Bardach and EPRINC’s Lucian Pugliaresi back in 1977.  EIS writers at the time, the authors   point out that  the Bureau of Land Management’s agreement to prepare 212 EIS’s in connection with capital investments in rangelands cost in excess of $100 million (ten times the annual budget for the investments themselves during an average year in the early 1970’s). You can find their article here.

Barclays Bank and EPRINC Host Discussion on Fracking Ban

On February 13, 2020 in NYC, Barclays Bank and EPRINC hosted a discussion on U.S. petroleum policy  with the  investment community and public sector participants.  EPRINC Distinguished fellow Michael Lynch presented  his findings on the implications of a fracking ban on US production and energy security. EPRINC Distinguished Fellow Trisha Curtis updated the attendees on recent productivity trends in unconventional (shale) oil and gas production in the U.S. Lucian Pugliaresi, EPRINC’s President, moderated the discussion.

Ahead of the 2020 U.S. Presidential elections, several Democratic candidates have been endorsing policies that, to various degrees, would restrict hydraulic fracturing (HF), a drilling technique that has been largely responsible for the rapid expansion of U.S. oil and gas production. The consequences of such a policy initiative have been evaluated and published by EPRINC. The report was authored by Michael Lynch and can be found here and his presentation slides from the event are available here. Trisha Curtis’ slide presentation can be found here.

EPRINC would like to thank Harry Mateer of Barclays and Paul Tice of Schroeders for organizing and coordinating this event.

The Impact of a Fracking Ban on Shale Production and the Economy by Michael Lynch

Oil and gas production from the U.S. petroleum resource base has experienced an unprecedented expansion in output which has now positioned the U.S. as the world’s largest oil and gas producer. The North American petroleum production platform is soon to become a net oil and gas exporter to the world market. This rapid expansion in oil and gas production has enhanced U.S. energy security, provided greater stability to the world oil market, and conveyed sustained economic benefits to the national economy. The expansion in output has been possible through a series of advances in extraction technology including the use of hydraulic fracturing which permits oil and gas production from so-called source rock.

Concerns over carbon emissions from sustained increases in domestic oil and gas production has now been reflected in the 2020 Presidential race, with some candidates and many public interest groups calling for an end to hydraulic fracturing. Operationally, these initiatives would include a ban on oil and gas development on public lands, prohibition of new infrastructure, such as pipelines, export terminals and even refineries. This effort, championed by several Democratic candidates for President would include features of so-called Green New Deal (GND) to quickly move that national energy complex to a fully renewable fuel system.

In this paper, EPRINC fellow, Michael Lynch, explores the economic consequences of policies aimed at severely reducing U.S. oil and gas production. Such an estimate is important because whatever the merits (benefits) from reducing carbon emissions through oil and gas production constraints, policy makers will have to confront the costs and public acceptance of such a policy.

LOAD MORE POSTS