Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Global Focus Publishing Institution Center on Global Energy Policy

11. New Realities, New Risks: Rethinking the Strategic Petroleum Reserve

Author:
Jason Bordoff, Antoine Halff, and Akos Losz
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy
Abstract:
The last few years have offered a reminder, if any was needed, that oil markets are no stranger to volatility. From OPEC’s reported demise to OPEC’s resurgence, the rapid fall and rise again of US shale, and the ebb and flow of geopolitical risk, oil has been on a rocky ride. After industry leaders and experts declared that the days of cheap oil were over—“$100 per barrel is becoming the new $20,” explained one top oil CEO in 2014[1]—consensus shifted to a view that oil prices would remain “lower for longer”[2] before sharply rising again in the last few months. Each day brings yet another reminder of risks to oil prices, with oil markets tight, OPEC nations signaling they intend to continue supporting prices beyond $80 per barrel, President Trump canceling the Iran nuclear deal, Venezuelan production in freefall, and geopolitical risks rife from Syria to Libya and beyond.
Topic:
Energy Policy, Oil, and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12. Asian LNG Trading Hubs: Myth or Reality

Author:
Mike Fulwood
Publication Date:
05-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy
Abstract:
Almost every LNG conference has on its agenda nowadays the topic of Asian LNG trading hubs. Governments, regulatory authorities, academics, and market participants are all presenting on how a hub might be developed in Asia. There have also been a number of reports published in the last few years on the development of hubs in Asia.
Topic:
International Political Economy and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Global Focus

13. Making Sense of the Trump Administration's Fuel Economy Standard Rollback

Author:
Jason Bordoff, Akos Losz, and Aaron Linn
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy
Abstract:
On April 2, 2018, the EPA announced that planned fuel economy increases for cars and light trucks in model years 2022–2025 are too stringent and should be revised.[2] The EPA thus initiated a process to set new standards for 2022–2025, in partnership with the NHTSA. The standards were a central part of the Obama administration’s efforts to reduce US greenhouse gas emissions. The move to weaken the standards has been sharply criticized by many environmental groups, policymakers, and others. Supporters of the current standards argue that the standards would substantially reduce emissions at a modest cost. But the standards have been highly controversial, and the move has also received a great deal of praise from other groups. Supporters of weakening the standards—including those in the Trump administration—argue that the current standards would be excessively costly to consumers and automakers, while providing little or no benefit to the public. Many analyses have proclaimed that this announcement would have profound effects on consumers, oil consumption, oil imports, and greenhouse gas emissions. One think tank, for example, told the Financial Times that US oil consumption, which was nearly 20 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2017, would be 1.5 million bpd higher in 2025 if the 2022–2025 fuel economy standards were rolled back
Topic:
Energy Policy, International Political Economy, and International Affairs
Political Geography:
Global Focus

14. U.S. Energy Diplomacy

Author:
Tim Boersma and Casey Johnson
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy
Abstract:
Over the preceding decade until November 2016, energy came to occupy a more central position in the United States’ foreign policy apparatus, and the term “energy diplomacy” became frequently used in policy circles and the media. The reasons for this are numerous, but a 2014 headline from the New York Times captures the essence: “Oil’s Comeback Gives U.S. Global Leverage.”[1] Indeed, the unleashing of massive amounts of US unconventional oil and gas transformed the country from a political and economic superpower that was relatively energy poor in relation to its consumption habits into an energy superpower in its own right. The US energy narrative shifted quickly from talk of scarcity and ever-increasing import dependence to one of abundance, in which the nation became a major global exporter. For US diplomats, this occasioned the rethinking of what role energy could play in advancing strategic interests abroad. In October 2012, then secretary of state Hillary Clinton gave a major address at Georgetown University on energy diplomacy in the 21st century, proposing that energy could be used to help solve territorial and maritime disputes, promote competition in Europe, get the Republic of Iraq back on its feet, bring peace in the South Sudan and Sudan conflict, and tackle energy poverty and climate change.[2] Secretary Clinton’s State Department stood up a Bureau of Energy Resources with dozens of diplomats devoted to these topics. At meetings abroad and in Washington, energy was literally on the agenda, assuming a more prominent role than at any time since the Carter administration.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Energy Policy, International Affairs, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Global Focus

15. Reforming the Renewable Fuel Standard

Author:
James Stock
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy
Abstract:
The US Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was introduced in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and expanded in both scope and duration in the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007. The policy goals of the RFS program are threefold: - enhance energy security through additional domestic production of biofuels, - support rural economies by expanding the demand for agricultural products, and - expand the development and production of second-generation low–greenhouse gas transportation fuels. The RFS requires the blending of increasing quantities of biofuels into the US surface vehicle transportation fuel supply. These quantities are specified in the EISA but are subject to modification by the US EPA under certain conditions (“waiver authorities”). The EPA issues annual rules specifying the overall fractions of renewable fuels in the fuel supply. The fractional requirements are specified by fuel category: cellulosic, advanced biomass-based biodiesel, other advanced fuels, and total renewable fuels. Compliance with the blending standards is demonstrated by obligated parties (petroleum refiners and importers) retiring electronic certificates, called renewable identification numbers (RINs), when they sell petroleum fuel into the surface transportation fuel supply. RINs, which become available when a renewable fuel is blended into the fuel supply, are tradable and bankable (with limitations). Thus obligated parties have the choice of either producing RINs themselves through blending operations or purchasing RINs on the open market.
Topic:
Energy Policy, International Affairs, and Climate Finance
Political Geography:
Global Focus

16. US Carbon Tax Design: Options and Implications

Author:
Jason Bordoff and John Larsen
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy
Abstract:
While there seem to be no immediate prospects for a national carbon tax in the United States, there is growing interest among some policymakers and thought leaders across the political spectrum. If and when a legislative opening emerges in the coming years, policymakers will need to grapple with a range of important design issues that will determine the effectiveness of a carbon tax in reducing carbon emissions.
Topic:
Energy Policy, International Affairs, and Climate Finance
Political Geography:
Global Focus