石油价格


“美国选民正在关注。”这是美国石油学会主席在本周的 API 活动上必须告诉联邦政府的话。选民们正在注视着,他们对当前政府的能源政策并不感到兴奋。

当联邦政府推行以转型为重点的能源政策时,美国石油学会不会袖手旁观并保持沉默。然而,这可能是选举年开始之际游说团体发出的最直率的警告。

“想象一下,如果一位总统阻止农田开发,扰乱我们国内的粮食供应,使我们更加依赖外国来养活我们的家庭,”萨默斯在 美国能源状况 活动上说道。

“美国选民正在观看。随着今年晚些时候美国人即将举行大选,能源在选票上占据重要地位,能源所涉及的一切也是如此:就业、美国安全、制造业、通货膨胀。

拜登政府确实一直忙于尽可能遏制石油和天然气勘探,去年年底,联邦政府在墨西哥湾举行了未来两年的最后一次石油和天然气租赁销售,达到了顶峰。此外,它是在拜登政府尽其所能地找到阻止它的方法之后发生的。

租赁销售是美国能源行业和现任政府之间的主要争论点之一。后者优先考虑转向非碳氢能源,并一直在努力以牺牲石油和天然气为代价来支持这些能源。

这方面具有里程碑意义的立法成功是《降低通货膨胀法案》,该法案是经过数月谈判的主题。作为其中的一部分,政府有时有义务进行租赁销售。即便如此,内政部还是试图取消 2023 年的租赁销售,然后试图减少提供的面积,直到联邦法官 命令 其按原计划进行招标后才停止尝试。

然而与此同时,白宫 批准了 阿拉斯加的威洛石油项目,这引起了绿营中很多拜登支持者的不满。这个耗资 80 亿美元的项目将开采多达 6 亿桶原油储量,日产量为 16 万桶至 18 万桶。

一直是拜登政府及其过渡议程的直言不讳的支持者的环保组织对威洛的批准有很多话要说,这表明选民可能会疏远。现在,他们的目标是液化天然气。

最近,激进分子的压力促使联邦政府开始审查新的液化天然气产能的审批程序。能源行业担心,这一审查可能会导致新液化天然气工厂的批准数量减少且速度减慢。

API 的萨默斯在这一点上简洁明了:“改变美国液化天然气的审批将使我们的盟友面临风险。” 这不应该引起争议,”他  在本周的游说团体活动中表示。

事实上,美国液化天然气主要销往欧洲,随着欧洲试图用美国液化天然气完全取代俄罗斯天然气,需求将进一步上升。长期交易已经到位,现货市场上的购买也很活跃。然而,如果审批速度放缓,这对欧洲来说将是个坏消息。

据路透社去年 10 月报道,批准新液化天然气出口项目的期限已经比特朗普执政时期更长  。在特朗普的领导下,获得出口许可证的平均时间仅为 49 天,这对于热爱石油和天然气行业的政府来说很合适。在拜登执政期间,这一批准期限已延长至 330 天,是奥巴马政府期间平均批准期限的两倍。

目前,所有人的目光都集中在 Venture Pass 的 Calcasieu Pass 2 项目上,该项目正在等待联邦政府最终批准开工。

与此同时,能源行业正面临管道短缺的困境,因为新管道的批准比液化天然气工厂更难获得批准。管道是环保抗议者最喜欢的目标,州和联邦当局往往站在他们一边。

“由于诉讼、阻力以及取消能源基础设施和现代社会的运动,我们现在所享受的工业世界受到了严重损害。 殷拓集团首席执行官托比·赖斯(Toby Rice)去年在评论美国天然气管网状况时对英国《金融时报》表示,我们已经失去了灵活性 。

缺乏足够的管道意味着天然气生产以及液化天然气出口受到限制,更不用说国内天然气供应了。根据该行业的说法,这威胁到了美国人的能源安全。

根据《今日美国》和萨福克大学最近的一项民意调查,在这些有争议的能源政策中,拜登的支持率大幅下降, 尤其 是四年前坚定支持民主党阵营的群体,如美国黑人和西班牙裔,其支持率下降尤其明显。能源政策不是唯一原因,但却是一个很大的原因。

这并不是因为大多数人喜欢石油和天然气生产。这是因为大多数人,尤其是上述一些传统的民主党选民,都想要负担得起的、可用的能源。

 

作者:Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

 


原文链接/oilandgas360

Oil Price


“American voters are watching.” This is what the president of the American Petroleum Institute had to tell the federal government at an API event this week. Voters are watching, and they are less than thrilled with the current administration’s energy policies.

The American Petroleum Institute is not known to sit back and shut up when the federal government pursues its transition-focused energy policies. Yet this is perhaps the bluntest warning from the lobby group yet as election year begins.

“Imagine if a president blocked development of farmland, disrupting our domestic food supply and making us more reliant on foreign countries to feed our families,” Sommers said, speaking at the State of American Energy event.

“American voters are watching. And as Americans head to the polls later this year, energy is very much on the ballot — and so is everything energy touches: Jobs, America’s security, manufacturing, inflation.”

The Biden administration had indeed been busy trying to curb oil and gas exploration as much as possible, with the culmination coming late last year when the federal government held the last oil and gas lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico for the next two years. Besides, it took place after the Biden administration failed to find a way to stop it, try as it might.

Lease sales are one major point of contention between the U.S. energy industry and the current administration. The latter has prioritized the switch to non-hydrocarbon energy sources and has been hard at work supporting those at the expense of oil and gas.

The landmark legislative success in this respect was the Inflation Reduction Act, which was the subject of months of negotiations. It was as part of these that the administration was obliged to hold lease sales on occasion. Even so, the Interior Department tried to cancel the 2023 lease sale, then it tried to reduce the acreage to be offered and only stopped trying after a federal judge ordered it to carry out the tender as originally planned.

At the same time, however, the White House gave the go-ahead to the Willow oil project in Alaska, which got a lot of Biden supporters in the green camp up in arms. The $8-billion project will tap reserves of up to 600 million barrels of crude and produce between 160,000 bpd and 180,000 bpd.

Environmentalist groups that have been vocal supporters of the Biden administration and its transition agenda had a lot to say about the Willow approval, suggesting certain potential voter alienation. Now, they are targeting liquefied natural gas.

Activist pressure recently prompted the federal government to start a review of the approval process for new LNG production capacity. That review, the energy industry fears, might result in fewer and slower approvals for new LNG plants.

API’s Sommers was succinct on that point: “Halting US LNG approvals would put our allies at risk. This should not be controversial,” he said at the lobby group’s event this week.

Indeed, U.S. LNG has been headed mostly to Europe, and demand will rise further as Europe tries to completely replace Russian gas with U.S. LNG. There are long-term deals in place already and active buying on the spot market. Yet if approvals slow down, that would be bad news for Europe.

Already, the length of the period for approving a new LNG export project is greater than it was under Trump, Reuters reported last October. Under Trump, the average period for getting an export license was just 49 days as befits an administration that is a fan of the oil and gas industry. Under Biden, this has gone up to 330 days—twice as long as the average approval period during the Obama administration.

Right now, all eyes are on Venture Pass’s Calcasieu Pass 2 project, which is awaiting the final greenlight from the federal government to begin construction.

Meanwhile, the energy industry is struggling with a pipeline shortage as approvals for new pipelines become harder to get than approvals for LNG plants. Pipelines are a favorite target for environmentalist protesters, and state and federal authorities tend to side with them.

“The industrial world that we enjoy now is severely compromised because of the lawsuits, the pushback and the movement to cancel energy infrastructures and modern society. We’ve run out of flexibility,” the chief executive of EQT, Toby Rice, told the FT last year in comments on the state of the U.S. gas pipeline network.

Lack of enough pipelines means a cap on gas production and, by extension, on LNG exports, not to mention domestic gas supply. Per the industry, this threatens the energy security of Americans.

Amid these controversial energy policies, Biden’s approval rating has plummeted, with the decline especially notable among groups that four years ago were firmly in the Democrat camp, such as Black Americans and Hispanics, per a recent poll from USA Today and Suffolk University. Energy policies are not the only reason, but they are a big reason.

It’s not because most people like oil and gas production. It’s because most people, especially in some traditional Democrat-voting demographics like the abovementioned, want affordable, available energy.

 

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com