Regulatory: Considering energy regulations—Oil
3 aspects of federal oil regulation may change the shape of the countrys energy sector, and its economy, for decades to come
January 18, 2012 at 06:47 AM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Federal regulation of oil as an energy source currently has three principal aspects: regulation of drilling, especially off-shore drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS); review of a proposed pipeline to bring oil from Canadian tar sands to U.S. refineries; and regulation of consumption of motor vehicles to limit tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases. The policies emerging from these stovepipes are only loosely coordinated. The outcomes depend upon the unique politics of each policy area, which factor in the public's strong aversion to high gasoline prices.
Offshore drilling. New technologies and techniques developed since the late 1990s have greatly increased the ability to recover oil from deep waters (greater than 600 feet). Today, 30 percent of domestic U.S. oil production occurs in the Gulf of Mexico, and off-shore drilling enjoys popular support in all Gulf states except Florida. However, 85 percent of the OCS (especially off the East Coast and California) is closed to drilling.
To lower pump prices and enhance national energy security, in March 2010, the Obama Administration proposed to permit drilling off Virginia and the eastern Gulf near Florida. Three weeks later, the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded. The administration publicly imposed a moratorium on further offshore drilling and withdrew its proposal.
Litigation losses ultimately forced the administration to withdraw the moratorium and replace it with regulations imposing greater health and safety requirements on individual wells, and requiring the drilling industry to deploy a response and remediation capacity commensurate with the scope of the risks. However, the administration has adopted a de facto “go slow” policy, and is granting just enough drilling permits to avoid further litigation. New production from the Gulf will be slow in coming.
Tar sands pipelines. Canada ranks second worldwide in proven oil reserves, thanks to its abundant oil sands. Advances in technology have made it possible to extract petroleum from these sands by burning natural gas to create steam that is pumped into underground formations.
The president is considering a petition to construct the Keystone pipeline to transport Canadian oil to U.S. refineries. The project would use well-understood technology to deliver oil that would enhance the diversity and security of the country's oil supply. The petition has engendered substantial opposition, however, because the carbon dioxide released through this production method is materially greater than emissions from normal extraction techniques.
The president faces a stark choice between new policies that focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the policy considerations (effects on prices, energy security, reducing country risk) that traditionally have dominated oil supply decisions.
Fuel economy standards. The greatest use of oil in the American economy is in vehicle fuels. While the U.S. has reduced tailpipe emissions of traditional pollutants by 99 percent since 1975, the transportation sector still emits large quantities of carbon dioxide. Rather than seek authority for a direct tax on fuels to encourage pollution reductions, the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency have issued regulations that require manufacturers to reduce tailpipe emissions of CO2, and double the average mileage of new cars. The rules will force automobile companies to develop new technologies to meet these requirements. Proponents hope that the rules will facilitate a transition to vehicles powered by alternative technologies other than oil.
This concerted effort to force a change in the fuels used to power the U.S. vehicle fleet is one of the greatest engineering and behavioral experiments ever required by a federal regulation. Its outcome will change the shape of the country's energy sector, and its economy, for decades to come.
Federal regulation of oil as an energy source currently has three principal aspects: regulation of drilling, especially off-shore drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS); review of a proposed pipeline to bring oil from Canadian tar sands to U.S. refineries; and regulation of consumption of motor vehicles to limit tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases. The policies emerging from these stovepipes are only loosely coordinated. The outcomes depend upon the unique politics of each policy area, which factor in the public's strong aversion to high gasoline prices.
Offshore drilling. New technologies and techniques developed since the late 1990s have greatly increased the ability to recover oil from deep waters (greater than 600 feet). Today, 30 percent of domestic U.S. oil production occurs in the Gulf of Mexico, and off-shore drilling enjoys popular support in all Gulf states except Florida. However, 85 percent of the OCS (especially off the East Coast and California) is closed to drilling.
To lower pump prices and enhance national energy security, in March 2010, the Obama Administration proposed to permit drilling off
Litigation losses ultimately forced the administration to withdraw the moratorium and replace it with regulations imposing greater health and safety requirements on individual wells, and requiring the drilling industry to deploy a response and remediation capacity commensurate with the scope of the risks. However, the administration has adopted a de facto “go slow” policy, and is granting just enough drilling permits to avoid further litigation. New production from the Gulf will be slow in coming.
Tar sands pipelines. Canada ranks second worldwide in proven oil reserves, thanks to its abundant oil sands. Advances in technology have made it possible to extract petroleum from these sands by burning natural gas to create steam that is pumped into underground formations.
The president is considering a petition to construct the Keystone pipeline to transport Canadian oil to U.S. refineries. The project would use well-understood technology to deliver oil that would enhance the diversity and security of the country's oil supply. The petition has engendered substantial opposition, however, because the carbon dioxide released through this production method is materially greater than emissions from normal extraction techniques.
The president faces a stark choice between new policies that focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the policy considerations (effects on prices, energy security, reducing country risk) that traditionally have dominated oil supply decisions.
Fuel economy standards. The greatest use of oil in the American economy is in vehicle fuels. While the U.S. has reduced tailpipe emissions of traditional pollutants by 99 percent since 1975, the transportation sector still emits large quantities of carbon dioxide. Rather than seek authority for a direct tax on fuels to encourage pollution reductions, the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency have issued regulations that require manufacturers to reduce tailpipe emissions of CO2, and double the average mileage of new cars. The rules will force automobile companies to develop new technologies to meet these requirements. Proponents hope that the rules will facilitate a transition to vehicles powered by alternative technologies other than oil.
This concerted effort to force a change in the fuels used to power the U.S. vehicle fleet is one of the greatest engineering and behavioral experiments ever required by a federal regulation. Its outcome will change the shape of the country's energy sector, and its economy, for decades to come.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWhy Seemingly Simple Off-Channel Communication Rules Still Vex Finance Industry
5 minute readSEC Enforcement Chief Grewal—Whose Hard Line on Crypto Tormented the Industry—Stepping Down
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250