SEARCH our ARCHIVE of over 14,000 articles
Vol. 19, No. 2 Week of January 12, 2014
Providing coverage of Alaska and northern Canada's oil and gas industry

Senator says export

Murkowski warns of oil glut, calls for ending ban on shipments out of U.S.

Wesley Loy

For Petroleum News

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski is calling for the federal government to end the general ban on exports of U.S. crude oil.

In a Jan. 7 speech at the Brookings Institution, a Washington, D.C., think tank, Murkowski warned of a coming glut of crude, particularly “light tight oil” from hot plays such as the Bakken and Eagle Ford.

Failure to lift the export ban could lead to a refinery crunch, potentially crimping crude production, she said.

“Lifting the prohibition on crude oil exports will serve to increase domestic oil production, and the entry of this oil onto global markets will put downward pressure on international prices,” said Murkowski, according to the prepared text of her speech. “All things equal, this combination will help the American consumer.”

Murkowski’s remarks add to growing sentiment to remove the oil export ban.

Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz recently suggested it might be time to reconsider the ban, in place since the 1970s when the Arab oil embargo rattled the nation.

Support for removal of the export ban, however, is far from unanimous.

Oil export exemptions

Murkowski is the top-ranking Republican on the Democrat-controlled Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

In conjunction with her speech, she released a number of memos from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, including one that explains how export of U.S. oil is generally prohibited, but not completely.

Some exemptions are allowed, such as exports to Canada and exports of foreign-origin crude, the memo says.

Citing data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the memo says 83.5 million barrels of crude were exported from the United States from 2008 to 2012. Nearly all of that oil went to Canada, with very small volumes to two other countries: Costa Rica and Mexico.

Companies wishing to export oil that qualifies under an exemption must first obtain a license from the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, the memo says.

Another export exemption applies to Alaska oil from Cook Inlet and North Slope oil sent through the trans-Alaska pipeline.

Thus, Murkowski’s argument to lift the federal export ban isn’t that relevant for her home state.

“It really isn’t about improving the situation for Alaska, because we’re already there,” said Kevin Banks, a petroleum market analyst in the state Division of Oil and Gas.

Some Alaska oil was exported in the past, but nowadays it goes aboard tankers mainly to West Coast refineries, he said.

Refining mismatch

Murkowski, in her speech, said the export ban also should be lifted for condensate, a very light oil.

The senator said she believes the Obama administration has statutory authority to lift the oil export ban on its own.

“Although the president has the authority to declare it in the national interest to lift the ban, another path is for the Department of Commerce to approve an application for export of crude oil or condensate under a provision in the law permitting the application if it can be demonstrated that those fuels ‘cannot reasonably be marketed’ here in the United States,” Murkowski said.

Domestic oil production is indeed facing the lack of a U.S. market, as much of the nation’s refinery sector is geared for heavier grades of crude compared to the rising volumes of light tight oil, she said.

If the administration is unwilling to act, Murkowski said she is prepared to offer legislation to lift the export ban.

“Opponents of oil exports will of course raise the specter of rising gasoline prices — I think, to scare off elected officials,” she said.

Opponents come out

Even before Murkowski’s speech, one of her colleagues was urging Obama not to ease the oil export ban.

“When Congress first enacted limits on crude exports in the 1970s following the oil embargo, these laws were designed to enhance American energy security and protect U.S. consumers from volatility and price spikes,” Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., said in a Dec. 16 letter to the president. “Despite changes in the global energy market, these goals should remain priorities in our nation’s energy policy. Easing this ban might be a win for Big Oil, but it would hurt American consumers.”

Menendez noted that American consumers have seen average gasoline prices rise from about $1.50 a gallon in 2003 to $3.50 today.

“Crude oil that is produced in the U.S. should be used to lower prices here at home, not sent to the other side of the world,” he wrote.

The Houston Chronicle, in a Jan. 8 story, reported a number of domestic refiners also were opposed to easing the oil export ban.

The story noted refiners were enjoying domestic crude priced well below the London benchmark, while selling record volumes of gasoline, diesel and other finished products to foreign consumers.

Did you find this article interesting?
Tweet it
Digg it
Print this story | Email it to an associate.

Click here to subscribe to Petroleum News for as low as $69 per year.

Petroleum News - Phone: 1-907 522-9469 - Fax: 1-907 522-9583 --- ---

Copyright Petroleum Newspapers of Alaska, LLC (Petroleum News)(PNA)©2013 All rights reserved. The content of this article and web site may not be copied, replaced, distributed, published, displayed or transferred in any form or by any means except with the prior written permission of Petroleum Newspapers of Alaska, LLC (Petroleum News)(PNA). Copyright infringement is a violation of federal law subject to criminal and civil penalties.

Murkowski outlines energy export reforms

In addition to ending the export ban on crude oil, U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski wants other changes to what she terms “the architecture of U.S. energy exports.”

The Alaska Republican lays out her ideas in a new 22-page white paper available online at

“While many Americans have by now learned about the oil and gas revolution currently transforming the nation’s economy, far fewer know about a concurrent surge in energy exports that is remaking the global energy trade,” the paper begins. “Simply put, the United States is both producing and exporting more energy than ever.”

But the regulatory structure that governs energy exports is “antiquated” and unevenly applied across the sector, Murkowski argues.

“There are types of energy sources that are largely prohibited from export due to outdated regulations that have accumulated over the better part of a century,” the white paper says. Meanwhile, other energy supplies trade freely.

Murkowski argues that U.S. exports are important for alleviating “energy poverty” around the world.

LNG reviews lagging

The white paper covers a wide range of energy segments, from coal and crude oil to nuclear and renewable energy technologies.

Regarding natural gas, Murkowski argues the Department of Energy needs to speed up its review of applications to export liquefied natural gas, or LNG.

“Multiple studies have concluded that the domestic price impacts of LNG exports will be minimal and, in any event, will be far outweighed by the net gains to the U.S. economy,” the paper says. “Further, geopolitical benefits will accrue from helping our friends and allies overseas, dependent as many of them are on a limited number of suppliers.”

Murkowski further argues federal environmental review of gas projects should not include potential climate change impacts.

The white paper says exports are proceeding smoothly with respect to certain energy supplies including coal, refined petroleum products such as gasoline and diesel, and natural gas liquids such as butane and propane.

—Wesley Loy