Obama’s Failed War
on March 25, 2012 at 12:32 pm…on energy production:
Overall, oil and gas production on federally controlled land is down by 40% since Obama took office.
So how is it possible that oil production can increase when the Obama administration is so overtly anti-oil?
Easy. As Gerard explains, there’s nothing they can really do to stop it.
While oil production is up, the increase relates almost entirely to investment and leasing decisions made before, sometimes long before, this administration came into office. The increase is also due to oil and gas development on private and state lands over which the administration has little or no control at all.
…while it’s true oil production in America is up, this is clearly in spite of Team Obama’s best efforts. Because the Founding Fathers limited the authority the federal government has on private and state lands, hundreds of small oil companies — not “Big Oil,” as environmentalists want you to believe — are able to drill for oil on private and state land, unencumbered by the heavy hand of Obama’s anti-oil agenda.
For him to take credit for this is like the crowing rooster who thinks it made the sun rise.
“For him to take credit for this is like the crowing rooster who thinks it made the sun rise.”
This is the incorrect parable.
He’s the cricket claiming credit for the ant’s storeroom – after burning half of it to the ground.
That’s why this Constitution thing is such a good idea. I used to think Obama was the Worst President Ever, but I realize that he won’t be (that honor I think will be reserved for some future president in the twilight of the US), just due to the clever divisions of power that were placed in the Constitution. I believe that document and our resistance to tyranny will manage to turn Obama into a mere grossly incompetent president despite his mendacious, narcissistic, and ideologically hidebound nature.
“For him to take credit for this is like the crowing rooster who thinks it made the sun rise.”
The current story aside, this is an amazingly apt analogy for politicians in general (and Obama in particular)
All I can say is it just pisses me off that the media allows this. I don’t care if they lean left. The truth isn’t hidden that well. Would they all lose their jobs if they told the truth?
I liked Obumble’s statement about laying enough pipeline to encircle the earth and then some.
I’m guessing whomever wrote that line doesn’t realize just how much pipeline 25 THOUSAND miles of pipeline would be. Nor the logistics of ordering it manufacturing it, delivering it, digging the trenches, welding it, and ALL the rest that would go with that wildly idiotic exaggeration.
Sadly, too many people people either accepted it as fact because The One said it. And others failed to do the math of how BIG an undertaking it would be for it to be true, and won’t see the outright lie. And unfortunately, both of those groups will vote.
For those that are interested here is a chart of oil production in the U.S. since 1859.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS2&f=A
And a more detailed breakdown
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_crpdn_adc_mbblpd_a.htm
Most of the decline in oil from public land appears to a result of the Alaskan decline (it started in 1988) which the Bush Administration failed to reversed (ANWR).
But yes there is a lag and Jimmy Carter never did get the credit he deserved for deregulating oil prices in 1979 that produced the bump in production during the Reagan Administration
So it peaked during Nixon and has been falling since Carter. Very interesting.
Rand,
This statement in the article you linked to is incorrect.
[[[Overall, oil and gas production on federally controlled land is down by 40% since Obama took office.]]]
IF you follow the link in the article you find the article misquoted their source. Here is the actual quote from the source the article LINKS to.
http://blog.heritage.org/2012/01/18/under-obama-oil-and-gas-production-on-federal-lands-is-down-40/
Citing publicly available federal data, the House Natural Resources Committee noted these figures:
[[[Oil and natural gas production on federal lands is down by more than 40 percent compared to 10 years ago.]]]
Now ten years ago, and given that 2011 is the last year annual figures would available, would make it 2001, when the Bush Administration took office…
Except that the Federal Document linked to by THAT article is a single page citing “the data have changed. See another document for further details.”
Without a graph showing when the decline happened, repeating the same tired “It’s Bush’s fault” line is insincere at best, and outright lying at worst. Heritage doesn’t qualify when any peak in Federal Land production occurred, they’re merely stating that production today is 40% lower than production in 2001. Hell, it could have been UP 95% as of 2010, but if it’s down 40% as of 2011, that’s all they’re reporting.
There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. One can pretty much spin the numbers any way he/she wants; show that production is up from 2008, down from 2001, up from 1932, what have you. Pick a timeframe that makes one’s guy/gal look good (or that makes one’s opponent look bad), and run with it. That’s what statistics are for, right?
The trends and figures for what happened from 2001 to 2011 are quite important.
John,
Yes, Rob Bluey didn’t bother to update his link. Typical and the problem with using hyperlink reference… But if you follow the instructions on that PDF saying its being updated you go to the updated chart.
http://www.eenews.net/assets/2012/03/15/document_pm_01.pdf
Table 1 on pgae 2 clearly shows that crude oil production from Federal laws was 4.0 quatrillion BTU in 2003, declined to 3.3 quatrillion BTU in 2008, increased to 4.3 quatrillion BTU in 2010 then declined again to 3.7 quatrillion BTU in2011.
Table 2 on page 3 provides more detail information on oil production from offshore, online shore and Indial leases. The numbers speak for themsleve, especially the decline in offshore production from the BP oil spill.
But if you look at it you see the 40% decline number from 2003 is also fiction. But I will let you do the math…
As for the production figures from 2001 to 2011, the total production from ALL U.S. production decreased until 2008m when it started increasing, but the chart from http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS2&f=A makes that clear to anyone.
Given the lag inherent in bringing production on line, I do not think your narrative holds up. It takes a lot longer to start production than to shut it down.
The liberals are all into lags when they argue “it would take 10 years to bring that oil on line.” Of course, they’ve been making that argument for well over 10 years.
Bart,
Ten years is about right for a major oil field. That is about the time it took to get the North Slope online. North Slope production basically peaked in 1988 and has been declining since then.
Not sure I get the point.
No, that’s not true. I’m sure.
It’s quaDrillion, not quatrillion, but that’s just picking nits…
In any case, the quote is “Oil and natural gas production on federal lands is down by more than 40 percent compared to 10 years ago.”
You link to (and talk about tables of) figures that only go as far back as FY 2003, and then cite them as proof that production isn’t down 40% from FY 2003 to FY 2011, even though the quote is talking about FY 2001 to FY 2011.
Finally, the chart that shows total US production (or what you labeled as “ALL U.S. production”) only shows just that – the total in production. Without a breakout of production on Federal lands vs. private and state lands, you cannot make a cogent argument about the fiction vs. non-fiction in the percentage change in production on Federal lands, because you haven’t provided any of the data to back up your argument.
John,
Going back to your original complaint, this is the data that Rob Bluey linked to YOU couldn’t find, so your beef is with him. But as the report shows production from Federal land declined to a low in 2008, then rose. Note especially the increased on on shore production.
[[[Now, under my administration, America is producing more oil today than at any time in the last eight years.]]]
That statement is accurate as it is worded. Under the 8 years of the Bush Administration national oil production declined from 5,801,000 barrels a day average to 4,950.000 barrels a day average.
Under the three years of President Obama’s Administration oil output increased from 5.381.00 barrels a day average to 5,673,000 barrels a day average a level not seen since 2003.
This chart provides the figures. It’s an interactive chart so if you click on the line it should the production for the different years.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS2&f=A
But I have no doubt those who oppose President Obama with it will read what they want into, just as they do with space policy claiming his shift to commercial provides it an attack on American exceptionalism. And no amount of data will change their beliefs…
So Thomas, just to be clear, you do agree with Rand that Obama is crowing at the sun?
Ken,
Except that President Obama is NOT taking credit for it. From the ACTUAL press release by Press Secerarty Jay Carney.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/20/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-32012
[[[MR. CARNEY: It is certainly true that the price of oil is driven by a global market, and that's a point I make when asked about what tools the American government has to drive down prices at the pump. And those tools are limited in the near term.]]]
You really have to stop believing the stories the anti-Obama blog posts…
Its no different then the Republican Presidential candidates blaming President Obama for the end of the Shuttle era.
Except that President Obama is NOT taking credit for it.
Obama’s remarks in Oklahoma just last week:
Now, under my administration, America is producing more oil today than at any time in the last eight years. (Applause.) That’s important to know. Over the last three years, I’ve directed my administration to open up millions of acres for gas and oil exploration across 23 different states. We’re opening up more than 75 percent of our potential oil resources offshore. We’ve quadrupled the number of operating rigs to a record high. We’ve added enough new oil and gas pipeline to encircle the Earth and then some.
Go back a day to his trip to New Mexico, and there’s even more I’s in his remarks then.
Leland,
I made the mistake of posting my response above. As noted, as worded that statement is accurate even if you don’t like the statement.
I made no commentary. I just provided quotes from the anti-Obama blog, whitehouse.gov. They are accurate. You can click the links to verify.
Obama is amusingly inconsistent. On the one hand, he claims that simply increasing production won’t lower oil prices. On the other hand, he’s asking the Saudis to increase production to lower oil prices. He’s also hinting at tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to increase supply to lower oil prices. In that regard, he views it as the Political Petroleum Reserve. I guess he sees anything that might help him get reelected is strategic (for him, not the nation).
Another way to look at it would be to ask, “What would our production be like if federal lands had held on pace with increases in production on State and Private lands?” My understanding is that federal production has dropped 10% since 2010. While private and state controlled land has increased 30%. So, it could be said that there is a unrealized loss of productive capacity of 40% over the last two years on federal lands. Federal lands just as well could have made a push to increase production on the same trajectory as private and state lands. But the EPA’s strict regulations regarding emissions and air quality over drill sites is a disincentive to oil producers to drill more on federal land.
Your point is correct. However, your math underestimates the impact since public and private land for drilling are not proportional.
Ken,
Good point, since the federal government only owns about 30% of the U.S. land area.
http://www.nationalatlas.gov/printable/fedlands.html
30% more than they should. Most private land is developed and drilling is not an option.