Why Is The Obama Administration Allowing The Chinese Government To Buy Up U.S. Oil And Gas Deposits

Comments Off on Why Is The Obama Administration Allowing The Chinese Government To Buy Up U.S. Oil And Gas Deposits

If we are trying to become independent of foreign oil, then why is the Obama administration allowing the Chinese government to buy up U.S. oil and gas deposits worth billions of dollars?


This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.  The United States desperately needs to maintain control over its own domestic energy resources so that we can end our addiction to foreign oil.  As I have written about previously, the United States actually has plenty of oil.  If we would simply use the resources that we already have, we would never have to import a single drop of foreign oil.  But instead, we continue to be the largest importer of oil on the planet and we are allowing China to rapidly buy up oil and gas deposits inside the United States.  This is fundamentally wrong and it is a serious threat to our national security.  But apparently everything is for sale in the United States today, and that includes our precious energy resources.

The Chinese government is using two giant corporations to buy up these energy resources.

The first is the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC).  According to Wikipedia, this corporation is 100 percent owned by the Chinese government….

CNOOC Group is a state-owned oil company, fully owned by the Government of the People’s Republic of China, and the State-Owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council (SASAC) performs the rights and obligations of shareholder on behalf of the government.

The second is Sinopec Corporation.  Sinopec Group is the largest shareholder (about 75% of the shares) in Sinopec Corporation.  And as the Sinopec website tells us, Sinopec Group is owned by the Chinese government….

Sinopec Group, the largest shareholder of Sinopec Corp., is a super-large petroleum and petrochemical group incorporated by the State in 1998 based on the former China Petrochemical Corporation. Funded by the State, it is a State authorized investment arm and State-owned controlling company.

So wherever you see CNOOC or Sinopec you can replace those names with the Chinese government.  The Chinese government essentially runs both of those companies.

And both companies have been very busy buying up U.S. oil and gas deposits.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Obama’s Upcoming Visit To Keystone Pipeline Site: ‘So Hypocritical

Comments Off on Obama’s Upcoming Visit To Keystone Pipeline Site: ‘So Hypocritical

Talk about the height of Hypocracy…..keep in mind while he’s pushing the Southern end of the pipeline that doesn’t need his approval, he’s still blocking the Northern end...I predict after November if he wins, then he’ll approve the Northern end coming from Canada. This stunt today is just for votes and shows how stupid he thinks the average American is.

 

Under fire over sky-high gas prices, President Barack Obama embarks Wednesday on a two-day trip to defend his energy policy from a Republican onslaught linking his policies to Americans feeling pain at the pump. He will announce plans to fast-track the permit process for the southern portion of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, according to CNN

The White House announced last week that Obama would use a stop in Cushing, Okla., on Thursday to highlight his support for the southern portion of the pipeline after he blocked the overall project amid anger from environmentalists. Republicans have used the issue to bludgeon Obama’s energy policy, blaming him for the high cost of filling up at the pump.

Now CNN reports, citing “a source familiar with the president’s announcement,” that Obama will announce in Cushing that his administration will put the southern section of Keystone on the fast-track to approval. “The permit process for a project like this can typically take a year or more. The source familiar with the president’s announcement says the administration could shave several months off that timeline,” says the network. (Also keep in mind as I said, the approval process doesn’t need Obama’s approval at all, it’s the domestic part of the pipeline)

Read more

Obama’s Upcoming Visit To Keystone Pipeline Site: ‘So Hypocritical And So Ironic’

It will be a strange and remarkable visit considering that Obama in January denied a permit for the northern section of the pipeline that would have crossed the Canadian border. The strangeness wasn’t lost of Harold Hamm, the chief executive of Continental Resources, Mitt Romney’s new energy advisor, and a first-rate oil tycoon, worth $11.5 billion by Forbes’ most recent reckoning.

“It’s so hypocritical and so ironic after everything he’s tried to do against the industry,” said Hamm in a phone interview with me today. “He’s trying to take credit for all the gains we’ve made against the backdrop of the biggest oil storage complex in the world.”

Take credit? Naw, the president couldn’t be taking credit for this stretch of the Keystone XL, could he? After all, he must know full well that TransCanada got approvals to build the southern stretch months ago, and that pipelines that stay within U.S. borders don’t need presidential approval anyway.

Read more

Obama Officials Tried to Convince S&P Not to Issue Credit Warning

Comments Off on Obama Officials Tried to Convince S&P Not to Issue Credit Warning

You think the White House doesn’t know what’s they’re doing and what’s going on? Don’t fool yourself!

Even though the White House has publicly downplayed the credit warning issued Monday from a leading agency, Obama administration officials were privately trying in recent weeks to convince Standard & Poor’s not to lower its outlook for U.S. debt from “stable” to “negative,” Fox News has confirmed.

But after a series of meetings between the Treasury Department and S&P, the ratings agency ignored the pressure and told administration officials late Friday that the U.S. government was at risk of losing its sterling credit rating, a senior administration official told Fox News.

The Washington Post first reported on the private meetings in which Treasury officials argued to S&P analysts that a ratings change was unnecessary because the nation’s $14.3 trillion debt was under control and the administration had a feasible plan in the offing. Treasury officials also contended to S&P analysts that they were overlooking the ability of U.S. lawmakers to reach a compromise to tame deficits.

But the argument failed. The agency based its assessment on the sentiment that a budget agreement addressing the country’s long-term deficit and debt problem might not be reached until after the 2012 election.

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said in a tweet, “It is alarming that the WH would encourage S&P to suppress a damaging fiscal report for Obama’s partisan speech.”

The White House has been trying to minimize the credit warning ever since it was issued Monday. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, in an interview with Fox Business Network Tuesday morning, said there is no risk the country will lose its AAA credit rating.

White House chief spokesman Jay Carney said Monday that the political atmosphere for consensus is better than S&P predicts.

Read entire article @ Fox News

What Makes Gas Prices Soar? More Than Just Oil

Comments Off on What Makes Gas Prices Soar? More Than Just Oil

Just think if we didn’t have the deep sea moratorium and could drill in the continental United States.

It’s one of the biggest unknowns in the petroleum industry. Just how do
gas station owners decide how much you pay at the pump? A gas station
owner near Atlanta offers some answers.

Finance Armageddon

, ,

Obama, Not Egypt, is Biggest Threat to U.S. Energy Prices

Comments Off on Obama, Not Egypt, is Biggest Threat to U.S. Energy Prices

This is an interesting article, that goes on to explain that President Obama’s policies are more of a threat to rising US energy prices than the Middle East. Of course that’s no surprise to those of us watching Obama’s policies, like putting a moratorium on deep sea drilling when the experts said that wasn’t needed and would hurt the US economy.

Obama, Not Egypt, is Biggest Threat to U.S. Energy Prices

Last Friday on a conference call with reporters about the Obama Administration’s long-term energy proposals, Energy Secretary Steven Chu responded to a question about the situation in Egypt, saying: “Certainly any disruption in the Middle East means a partial disruption in the oil we import. It’s a world market and [a disruption] could actually have real harm of the price. The best way America can protect itself against these incidents is to decrease our dependency on foreign oil, in fact to diversify our supply.” This is a nice sentiment. Unfortunately, everything the Obama Administration is doing is only increasing our dependence on foreign sources of oil.

Secretary Chu is right: Oil does sell on a world market. But transportation and other distribution factors do segment oil markets somewhat. In fact, the United States is currently paying about $10 less for a barrel of oil than European and Asian nations are. Why? Because of U.S. access to oil refined from Canadian oil sands. Access to these vast natural resources is a great diversification of our oil supply. But now the Obama Administration is trying to make it harder for American consumers to get Canadian oil. The Obama Environmental Protection Agency is stonewalling approval for the Keystone pipeline, which would increase the amount of oil the U.S. receives from Canada by over a million barrels per day. And that is not the only oil the Obama Administration is trying to keep out of American consumers’ hands.

Offshore, the Obama Interior Department has blocked access to 19 billion barrels of oil in the Pacific and Atlantic coasts and the eastern Gulf of Mexico—and another 10 billion barrels estimated in the Chukchi Sea off the Alaskan coast. Onshore, federal leasing of oil and gas exploration in the western United States has dropped significantly in the past two years. According to data compiled by the Western Energy Alliance, the Bureau of Land Management offered 79 percent fewer leases for oil and natural gas development in Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming in 2010 than in 2005. And then there is the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, where an estimated 10 billion barrels of oil lie beneath a few thousand acres that can be accessed with minimal environmental impact.

Allowing Americans to develop these resources could easily produce at least 1 million new barrels of oil a day. The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis estimates that, if the United States managed to increase its domestic oil production by 1 million barrels a day, it would create an additional 128,000 jobs and generate $7.7 billion in economic activity.

As bad as these existing energy policies are, President Obama’s planned energy policies are even worse. Today, the President is meeting with Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D–NM) to plot passage of a clean energy standard (CES) bill. CES is just another cap-and-trade, energy-tax-like policy, except it’s all cap and no trade. A CES would mandate that all electricity providers generate a certain percentage of energy from carbon-free sources. Just like cap and trade, this policy is fundamentally just an energy tax that would drive up everyone’s electricity prices. Ironically, this would make electric vehicles even more expensive to operate, but we’re sure the Obama Administration would offer another round of taxpayer-funded subsidies to fix that problem.

Government policies that ban economically feasible energy development while subsidizing economically unsustainable ones only raise energy costs rather than lowering them. What the U.S. economy really needs is a truly free-market energy approach, one that includes (1) real nuclear energy reform, not more loan guarantees; (2) predictable and sensible coal regulations; (3) reduced regulation on renewable energy; (4) an end to all energy subsidies; and (5) common-sense limits to environmental litigation.

Congress should not let unrest in the Middle East scare them into energy policies that would make all our energy only more expensive. More bans on energy development, more subsidies for economically unproven technologies, and expensive new alternative energy production mandates are not the answer. America needs a true free-market approach to energy, and we need it now.

blog.heritage.com