Are the United States and Saudi Arabia conspiring to keep oil prices down?

As my colleague Jordan Weissmann wrote Tuesday, there are a number of factors behind the continuing global slide in oil prices, including North American production, increased energy efficiency, Europe’s economic stagnation, and China’s slowing growth. But a big one is Saudi Arabia, which, to the dismay of fellow oil -producing nations, has resisted pressure to cut production in order to stabilize prices.

Ahead of an OPEC meeting in Vienna next week, there are some contradictory theories about why Saudi Arabia is content to keep oil cheap for the time being. One is that the Saudis want to nip the U.S. oil boom in the bud. American shale oil is more expensive to produce and needs high prices to remain competitive. As one analyst put it when the kingdom cut prices for U.S. customers earlier this month, “the Saudis have basically declared war on the U.S. oil producers.”

Read more at: Slate

Oil, ethanol groups say EPA delay hurting their industries

U.S. ethanol producers and the oil industry responsible for mixing the renewable fuel into the gasoline supply rarely agree on anything.

But the two foes say the failure of the Environmental Protection Agency to finalize how much ethanol should be mixed into the country’s motor fuel supply in 2014, more than a year after the regulator first issued its proposal, has created uncertainty and hindered the ability of the free market to work.

“The market is kind of frozen right now because the EPA hasn’t responded,” said Bob Greco, downstream director with the American Petroleum Institute, a trade group representing more than 550 oil and natural gas companies. “The EPA, because of the way (the Renewable Fuel Standard) is structured, moves markets by making these decisions. You’ve got billions of dollars of investments threatened.”

In November 2013, the EPA proposed reducing ethanol produced from corn in 2014 to 13.01 billion gallons from 14.4 billion gallons initially required by Congress in the 2007 Renewable Fuel Standard, a law that requires refiners to buy alternative fuels made from corn, soybeans and other products to reduce the country’s dependence on foreign energy.

Read more at: Des Moines Register

NYT: Keystone vote solved nothing, provided no new insights

The U.S. Senate failed, by one vote (as some observers predicted), to advance legislation demanding that President Obama approve the Keystone XL pipeline.

New York Times opinion-page writer David Firestone says the debate surrounding the vote — 59 senators approved, including 14 Democrats, leaving the measure shy of the 60 “yeas” needed to avoid a filibuster threat — was a “pointless” one that played into Republican hands:

The bill to approve the pipeline failed by one vote, and even if had passed, it would almost certainly have been vetoed by President Obama. The debate provided no new insights into the value of the pipeline, or its liabilities, and it changed no one’s mind.

As for why Democrats sought to push their own pro-Keystone bill during a lame-duck session before Republicans take over as the majority in the Senate in January, The Times opines that it amounted to a last-ditch and probably futile effort to save Sen. Mary Landrieu’s job. The Louisiana Democrat is competing against Congressman Bill Cassidy, who got his own pro-Keystone bill approved in the House, for Landrieu’s seat in a runoff election next month.

The Times’ coverage of Tuesday’s approval of the Senate measure includes a section on the lengths Landrieu went to convince colleagues to pass the measure:

At the lunch, Ms. Landrieu made an “impassioned plea” that at moments verged on tears, according to a Democrat. Ms. Landrieu, according to the Democrat, focused part of her pitch on how the legislation would help her back home, though at one point she argued that Democrats should send the bill to Mr. Obama’s desk because it would help him politically by giving him something to veto.

So what happens next? The president has the final say on whether the 1,179-mile pipeline extension gets built, regardless of what happens in Congress. But the next Congress could force him to either approve the bill (possibly after trading for something from Republican leadership) or veto it.

A Q&A in Wednesday’s NYT hints that the new, more heavily Republican Senate that convenes in January “may be able to muster a nearly veto-proof majority,” considering their ranks will swell from 45 to 54 (assuming Landrieu loses). But they need 67 votes to override a presidential veto.

Redlands to offer CNG /LNG fueling stations in town

Residents and businesses in need of Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) for their vehicles will have an increased ability to fill up in town.

The city has added new Compressed Natural Gas fuel dispensers at its corporate yard to allow up to four alternative fuel vehicles to fill up at the same time.

“There’s not a whole lot of stations around that you can get that fuel source,” said Councilwoman Pat Gilbreath, adding that the availability of the fuel stations give residents more options for the types of vehicles they can purchase.

Compressed Natural Gas is a clean burning alternative fuel that helps reduce carbon emissions and costs less than fossil fuels, according to a city news release.

Read more at: Redlands Daily Facts

Vote count: Keystone XL backers one shy in Senate

There are dueling bills in Congress that would clear the way for construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline in the United States.

The House already has passed a bill, sponsored by Republican Bill Cassidy, who’s a candidate for Senate in Louisiana.

The Senate has its own pro-KXL bill, sponsored by Democrat Mary Landrieu, the other candidate for Senate in Louisiana. They’ll square off in a runoff election Dec. 6.

Landrieu has 59 supporters for her bill, but she needs 60 to prevent it from being stalled by a filibuster threat.

A vote is scheduled for Tuesday.

Bloomberg has more on the horse-trading going on over the Senate bill.

 

Vox answers ‘9 questions about KXL you were too embarrassed to ask’

Great, informative piece by Vox.com about the Keystone XL pipeline, which the U.S. House approved yet again Friday.

The Vox post answers “9 questions about the Keystone XL pipeline you were too embarrassed to ask.”

There’s even music!

President Obama is described as possibly leaning toward skepticism about the project, saying in an ABC interview: “Understand what this project is: It is providing the ability of Canada to pump their oil, send it through our land, down to the Gulf, where it will be sold everywhere else. It doesn’t have an impact on US gas prices.”

Is that true? As with many aspects of the KXL debate, it depends on whom you ask, and what data set you consult.

Here’s what an op-ed in the Great Falls (Montana) Tribune said in October:

Canada’s National Energy Board anticipates 15 Midwestern states will experience a 10 to 20 cent per gallon increase in gasoline prices if KXL is built. It would happen because an oversupply of Canadian crude now refined for U.S. domestic use will be diverted to KXL for export.

New rules would require treating Bakken crude before transport

North Dakota’s top energy industry regulator unveiled new rules on Thursday that would require oil companies to reduce the volatility of crude  before it is shipped by rail.

The regulator, the mineral resources director Lynn D. Helms, proposed to the North Dakota Industrial Commission that all crude from the state would have to be treated to remove certain liquids and gases to “ensure it’s in a stable state” before being loaded onto rail cars. “The focus is safety first,” Mr. Helms said.

Oil trains in the United States and Canada were involved in at least 10 major accidents in the last 18 months, including an explosion in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, that killed 47 people.

Read more at: The New York Times

Report declares opportunity for growth in E85 market

NACSonline reported that there are opportunities to grow the E85 market — but only if prices remain significantly below those of regular grade gasoline and the automobile industry continues to produce flex-fuel vehicles at historic rates, according to a new report released today by the Fuels Institute.

Depending upon the likelihood of various scenarios, E85 sales will, at a minimum, double by 2023 — but could experience a 20-fold increase in sales over the same time period, according to the 40-page report, “E85: A Market Performance Analysis and Forecast.”

Researchers evaluated the performance of more than 300 stores that sell E85, also known as flex fuel, and developed forecasts taking into account a variety of factors that could ultimately affect sales. The Fuels Institute projects that E85 sales will increase from 196 million gallons in 2013 to between 400 million and 4.4 billion gallons in 2023.

Biofuels have experienced remarkable growth over the past 12 years, from 1.75 billion gallons sold in 2001 to 14.54 billion gallons sold in 2013. While the bulk of that growth has been from the embrace of E10, future biofuels sales growth will be highly dependent upon increasing the sale E85, a blend of gasoline with 51 to 83% ethanol.

Read more at: The Auto Channel

Gal Luft: Key to energy security is fuel competition

Gal Luft, an advisor for the U.S. Energy Security Council, and a member of Fuel Freedom’s board, explains a great deal about energy security in this interview with China Dialogue.

Energy security requires two things, essentially: availability and affordability.

In order for energy to be affordable, there must be competition, so that one form of energy — say, power generated by oil — doesn’t have a monopoly. Here’s an excerpt:

The key for energy security is to have fuels that can compete against each other. In 2008, for the first time in Brazil, less gasoline was sold than ethanol (many cars used in Brazil are multi fuel efficient). The economy is then much more resilient. With competition over price, the pricing will then eventually reach equilibrium. There are many other options to create competition for the running of transportation, such as electric vehicles, bio fuels, CNG. Both China and the US are able to reduce their reliance on oil. China is the largest producer of methanol, while the US is the largest producer of ethanol – this would however, require flexible fuel vehicles.

 

Gasoline will average $2.94 in 2015, feds predict

Are low gas prices going to stick around for a while? The U.S. government thinks so.

The federal Energy Information Administration issued its monthly report on Thursday, and it predicts that gasoline will remain below $3 a gallon throughout 2015.

Specifically, gas prices will average $2.94 in the new year, 45 cents cheaper than this year. That will let consumers keep a total of about $61 million in their collective pockets.

According to AP:

That may not seem like a lot in the context of a $17.5 trillion U.S. economy, but economists say it matters because it immediately gives consumers more money to spend on other things. Consumer spending accounts for 70 percent of the U.S. economy.

“It would be a reversal of the trend over the last few years where consumers can’t stretch a dollar far enough,” says Tim Quinlan, an economist at Wells Fargo.

Quinlan says the price of gasoline is one of the three big drivers of consumer confidence, along with stock prices and the unemployment rate. “Lately all three are moving in the right direction,” he says.

Energy analyst Michael Lynch, writing in Forbes, acknowledges that “Some will scoff at the drastic change in the forecast, arguing that such a big revision cannot be credible, and that an economic recovery next year should bring higher prices.”

But analysts usually make predictions based on the current price of oil, and don’t predict wild swings one way or the other. However, increased global supply should keep prices down in 2015, according to Lynch’s own analysis:

A strong global economy next year, combined with slowing shale oil production growth and/or instability in Libyan production should tighten markets, but might not raise prices much, certainly not to $100 a barrel. And a diplomatic agreement with Iran that ends sanctions, combined with rising Iraqi and Kurdish production, will probably turn $80 into the new price ceiling. Longer run, I remain an outlier with a firm belief that even $80 a barrel cannot be sustained in the wake of rising global oil supply.