Energy To Keep America MovingÖ
At the center of America's oil and natural gas industry are the hundreds of thousands of hard-working men and women who work to safely refine, transport and market the petroleum products that keep America moving.
About Those Tax Breaks for Big Oil ...
President Obama has been telling America for months that special tax breaks for the oil and gas industry must come to an end. The presidential demand always prompts puzzled gazes among tax and energy-industry experts, who ask: What special tax breaks?
Gas Prices Up 9 Cents a Gallon
A new rule introduced by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency could raise gas prices at the pump by anywhere from a penny to 9 cents a gallon while cutting back on automobile emissions.
State Gasoline Tax Reports
Motor fuel tax information for all 50 states detailing changes and calculating a nationwide average. The nationwide average tax on gasoline is 48.8 cpg, down .5 cpg from the October 2012 study. The federal tax on gasoline is 18.4 cpg. The average state excise tax is 21.0.
Why I Donít Ride a Unicorn to Work
It isnít because itís too far to work. Nor is it because of the rain & I might get wet. It isnít because the powerful automobile lobby has convinced me that driving a car to work is a better option for me. No, itís a bit more fundamental than that. I donít ride a unicorn to work because...
A Strong Domestic Refining Industry
More than 50 companies own and operate 148 refineries in the U.S. but excessive U.S.
regulation could threaten the ability of some refineries to continue operating domestically, and could result in substantial losses in employment and tax revenue.
Oil & Gas Impact on US Economy
Total labor employment income was $580 billion in 2011, or 6.1 percent of total US labor income. Total value added generated by the industry was $1.1 trillion, or 7.3 percent of US gross domestic product.Read More
EPA's Endangerment Finding
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently issued a finding declaring that greenhouse gases (GHG) endanger public health. Having issued such a finding, the EPA is now prepared to undertake regulation of GHGs under the U.S. Clean Air Act (CAA).
The consequences of this finding and the EPA regulatory actions that could follow are far-reaching and, if put in place, will have a severe negative impact on jobs, the cost of energy and the cost of thousands of consumer products and services, all of which will adversely affect an already fragile U.S. economic recovery. Importantly, these regulations will have little or no impact on global GHG emissions as long as developing nations, principally China and India, do not enact similar measures Ė a step they have made clear they do not intend to take.
The following provides more specific information on this important issue.
- The EPA has issued an Endangerment Finding which concluded that emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from mobile sources (cars, trucks, etc.) endanger human health and public welfare.
- Because of the structure of the CAA, the Endangerment Finding will start in motion various other regulations under the CAA that affect both mobile and stationary sources.
- The resulting burden on stationary sources would likely overwhelm state and local permitting offices, and the Finding could trigger further regulation of fuels or a low carbon fuels standard.
- Any one of these regulations that are expected to cascade from the Finding will place a significant regulatory burden on industries and the consumer.
- Because GHGs are global in nature, attempting to manage these emissions under the CAA will not result in meaningful decreases in world-wide ambient levels of GHGs.
- From a legal perspective, it is troubling to note that EPA only considered studies which favored its position and it did not follow its own procedures when considering the available scientific evidence regarding this issue.
- The Clean Air Act is not an appropriate vehicle for regulating GHG emissions.
- The CAA was developed to address localized air quality issues resulting from emissions of traditional air pollutants.
- The CAA does not have the tools necessary to manage a global air quality issue.
- The programs and limits defined in the CAA were never intended to regulate GHGs, and force fitting GHG regulation within the CAA will lead to massive regulatory inefficiencies and limited or no benefit to the climate.
- EPA has not provided enough data to support its finding that GHG emissions from mobile sources are a danger to both human health and welfare.
- Traditionally, the Agency has only considered direct health effects in making an endangerment finding.
- Here EPA presents health concerns which are not direct health effects and none of which are a result of direct exposure to GHG.
- EPA also fails to quantify any of the risks associated with these concerns.
- EPA failed to conclusively link climate change to man-made (anthropogenic) GHG emissions.
- The Endangerment Finding is not adequately supported.
- EPA must follow its own guidelines under the Information Quality Act.
- EPA must make a more complete review of available scientific literature and studies.
- EPA must present evidence linking climate change to anthropogenic GHG emissions which it intends to regulate by way of this Finding.
- All of these concerns are critical because if the Endangerment Finding is not delayed or overruled by Congressional or Judicial action it will lay the foundation for EPA to issue a final automobile tailpipe standard or some other regulation which will control GHGs for the first time as a “pollutant” under the CAA.
- Once this happens, a cascade of statutory requirements occur as a matter of law, which will affect both mobile and stationary sources.
- Thousands of businesses would be subject for the first time to CAA permitting requirements because GHGs would now be a regulated pollutant. Tens of thousands of businesses already captured by the permitting program would need additional permits addressing GHGs before moving forward with ANY construction and modification projects.
- Small emitters and consumers who rely on electricity and materials like cement and fuels will be hurt by the costs and delays imposed on large emitters, such as electricity plants, manufacturers and refineries.
- Regulation of all these stationary sources would likely overwhelm state and local permitting offices. EPA has proposed a “tailoring rule” to decrease the number of facilities affected, but it will take years for individual states to revise their regulations to provide this relief and EPA lacks the authority for this rule and it will be litigated.
- Stopping or stalling the growth and expansion of businesses and projects means fewer jobs nationwide and a slower economic recovery.
- And, while the CAA may work for controlling certain local or regional emissions, it was never intended to apply to substances like carbon dioxide, which humans and animals exhale, plants absorb for growth, and which are global in nature.
- As with Waxman/Markey and other legislative proposals, unless China, India, and other developing countries make commensurate reductions, there will be no climate benefit from EPA’s regulation of GHGs under the CAA.
Oil & Natural gas: Supporting the Economy While Paying Our FAIR SHARE
API, April 23, 2013
The oil and natural gas industry supports America like no other industry.Read More
Energy Industry StatisticsHave current U.S. energy policies failing America and you? Click here and get the facts!
Energy AnswersWill higher oil industry taxes reduce government revenue, cost jobs and cut domestic production? Click here to find the answers!