Obama’s energy policies are a key vulnerability in the November elections, which has his staff scrambling to make it look like he’s actually done something to support domestic energy production. Since neither he nor anyone in his Administration knows the first thing about oil and gas, that can lead to some pretty ridiculous claims.
Like, for example, the [accompanying] graph, found at Obama For America‘s website (The small arrow reads “Obama Takes Office”...)
...At the end of this post you will find a FIFY (“Fixed It For You”) graph which identifies several other events of significance equal to or greater than that of Obama’s inauguration...
...the main suggestion of this graph that I find so offensive is that Obama had anything at all to do with today’s record levels of production. As his own graph clearly shows, OBAMA TOOK OFFICE DURING A GAS BOOM! There had already been four consecutive years of production growth under Bush.
Much of the ramp-up in production is in the shale gas plays: the Barnett of Texas, the Haynesville of Louisiana, the Woodford of Oklahoma, the Fayetteville of Arkansas, the Marcellus of Pennsylvania and West Virginia, the Eagleford of Texas. All of them are on private, not Federal lands, and under the jurisdiction of state, not Federal, regulatory bodies.
Consequently, Federal permitting/regulation is not a dominant issue in any of these plays.
After scratching my head and studying the graph for a while, I did conclude that President Obama’s election had one discernible impact on natural gas: it turned the color of the bars on the graph from very light blue to a darker hue. Well done, Mr. President!
Based on the three-and-a-half years of de-industrialization policies enacted by Obama's EPA, it's a wonder things aren't significantly worse than they are.
Of course, it could just be that President Obama is waiting for the election, after which he will have considerably more, uhm, "flexibility".
No comments:
Post a Comment