What is the energy sector's future in a post-coronavirus world?
Former CEO of BP Lord John Browne reminds everyone that the supply-and-demand imbalance started before coronavirus hit the world, but when the virus started to spread, it halted demand, causing inventories to fill up storage.
Former Vice President Joe Biden is continuing to move from the left, to the far-left, to the radical fringe in a desperate effort to capture the enthusiastic support of the followers of self-described socialists Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. Nowhere is this more true than in Biden’s dangerous positions on energy issues.
If Biden defeats President Trump in the November election and sticks to his pledge to dramatically change energy policies to move toward the radical Green New Deal, the American people will suffer. We can all expect to face disruptive energy shortages, big energy price increases, an increased dependence on foreign countries outside our hemisphere to meet our energy needs, and a massive increase in unemployment in the U.S. energy industry.
The latest example of Biden’s irresponsible leftward lurch on energy policy is his recently announced promise to overturn President Trump’s approval of the Keystone XL pipeline – a pipeline that would safely transport up to 830,000 barrels of Canadian crude oil to Nebraska, from where it would be sent by pipeline to U.S. refineries on the Gulf Coast each day.
BIDEN COMMITS TO RESCINDING TRUMP'S KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PERMIT IF ELECTED
With the coronavirus pandemic understandably dominating the news, the Biden pledge to kill Keystone XL hasn’t received anywhere near the attention it deserves. And it is only one of several actions to endanger our energy security that Biden has pledged to take under pressure from Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, who are heading up the Biden campaign’s environmental policy committee.
More from Opinion
- Daniel Turner: Biden’s energy policies, guided by AOC, would boost unemployment and hurt economy
- Daniel Turner: AOC disrespects working people – this Tweet tells us where we stand with the left
- Daniel Turner: Democratic embrace of Sanders’ energy and environment policies could bring defeat in election
Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez would like to outlaw fossil fuels – oil, natural gas and coal – after just a few years. Never mind that this would create an energy, economic and employment disaster for our country. Biden’s decision to put Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez in charge of formulating his energy policy is like putting two vegans in charge of overseeing all U.S. meat production.
The Keystone XL pipeline should not be controversial. The 1,210-mile oil pipeline would be just one of the many pipelines that keep America running.
Natural gas and oil crisscross our country in over 2.6 million miles of pipeline. That’s enough to get to the moon and back 10 times! Buried pipelines are out of sight and have an outstanding safety record. Without them, we’d have to move from a 21st-century lifestyle back to the 19th century.
Biden’s decision to put Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez in charge of formulating his energy policy is like putting two vegans in charge of overseeing all U.S. meat production.
The Keystone XL pipeline needs State Department approval because it crosses into the U.S. from Canada. Six comprehensive reviews by the department over a decade found Keystone XL could be built and operated in an environmentally safe manner. State environmental reviews along the route came to the same conclusion.
A State Department study commissioned during the Obama administration determined the pipeline would create 3,200 temporary construction jobs directly, 42,000 additional jobs indirectly, and generate over $2 billion in wages and hundreds of millions of dollars in property taxes. It would boost the U.S. gross domestic project by an estimated $3.4 billion annually.
Keystone XL should have begun construction in 2011. The same Obama State Department study concluded it would not contribute significantly to climate change. And remember, the Obama administration praised itself for doing the most ever to combat climate change. One could say “the science is settled.”
Obama should have trusted the advice of his own administration’s experts and given the pipeline the green light, but it was an election year. Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential nominee, was within two points of Obama in the polls. Romney had enthusiastically supported the Keystone XL pipeline and Obama needed the progressive base, so the president punted.
Obama didn’t cancel the project altogether. Clearly, he understood Keystone XL’s economic benefits. But a delay bought him valuable time leading up to his reelection bid. After winning reelection in 2012, Obama should have moved the project forward for the good of the nation. Instead, he delayed another four years.
Finally, in 2016 Obama denied all the necessary government permits for Keystone XL, citing “climate change,” in direct contradiction of his own State Department’s conclusion. The economic benefits (jobs, tax revenue) and national security benefits (energy independence) no longer mattered. Obama was cementing his legacy as a green president.
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton supported Obama’s decision. And since she was heavily favored to win the presidential election in 2016, Keystone XL seemed doomed.
However, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump tweeted: “If I am elected President I will immediately approve the Keystone XL pipeline. No impact on environment & lots of jobs for U.S.” And true to his word, President Trump signed an executive order five days after his inauguration allowing the Keystone XL pipeline to cross into the U.S. from Canada.
Keystone XL is now under construction, but its political baggage endures. Radical environmentalists have proclaimed it a symbol of their opposition to fossil fuels. And now Biden has bowed to their irrational demand to stop construction of the pipeline.
Would President Biden tear down the pipeline’s construction at taxpayers’ expense? Our close ally Canada would not appreciate that. And Canada is not going to stop producing oil.
So what would Biden accomplish by blocking Keystone XL?
Instead of sending the oil to the U.S. through the Keystone XL pipeline, Canada could continue sending oil here via truck and rail – a more dangerous and costly shipping method than pipelines. Canada could also ship more oil to China or elsewhere in Asia via oil tankers – again, a more costly and dangerous mode of transportation.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR OPINION NEWSLETTER
Losing our northern neighbor’s reliable, inexpensive oil to China or elsewhere in Asia would be a foreign policy nightmare, but if Biden wants to continue the Obama-Biden tradition, foreign policy nightmares are to be expected.
And if we wind up importing more oil from the Middle East to make up for the loss of the Keystone XL pipeline – and losses in domestic oil production created by other Biden policies – that will worsen greenhouse gas emissions and put our national security in the hands of unstable regimes not always friendly to the U.S.
One thing is for sure: stopping the Keystone XL pipeline will not magically end our use of oil and other fossil fuels.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Supporting Keystone XL was a winning issue for Trump in 2016 and it can be again this year. His policies that have brought our country more jobs, a stronger foreign policy, a stronger economy, greater national security and energy independence have all made America great again.
Biden is foolish to attempt to make Keystone XL a political issue. America needs energy. America needs jobs. Our nation doesn’t need more Obama-Biden posturing and holding up vital energy projects to create a phony green legacy that will hurt the American people.