What Iran deal could mean for US ban on oil exports
In the wake of a historic agreement with Iran, a bipartisan push to lift the decades-old ban on US oil exports may be gaining traction in Congress.
Crude oil prices tumbled after Iran and six world powers, including the United States, announced a deal Tuesday that would curb Tehran鈥檚 nuclear program in exchange for an easing of US and EU economic sanctions on Iran.
The shift in the world market, along with a recent surge in domestic energy production, has provided an opening for bipartisan efforts to end a 40-year ban on most US oil exports, in 鈥渁 quest that鈥檚 become a cause c茅l猫bre among energy-state legislators from Texas to North Dakota,鈥� Jared Gilmour wrote for 海角大神.
Opponents of the 1975 oil exports ban have portrayed it as a relic of a bygone era, created in response to the 1970s energy crisis. Today, the US is competing with Russia and Saudi Arabia as the world鈥檚 top energy producer, and advocates, both in Washington and in the oil and gas industry say ending the ban could help boost US production.
In May, Senate Energy Committee Chair Lisa Murkowski (R) of Alaska and Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D) of North Dakota to lift the ban, with Sen. Heitkamp 鈥� the bill鈥檚 only Democratic co-sponsor 鈥� calling the restriction 鈥渁s outdated as the typewriters on which the policy was written.鈥�
鈥淚t鈥檚 past time for an upgrade,鈥� she in a statement.
According to industry projections, allowing US producers to sell oil on the global market could lead to tens of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in additional GDP. The Iran deal could reinforce that argument, experts say.
鈥淲hat this means in terms of foreign policy may actually provide additional incentives. Especially if, as we see, the oil price will come down a bit,鈥� Jamie Webster, senior director at the energy analysis giant IHS, Politico ahead of Tuesday鈥檚 agreement.
听
Indeed, Sen. Murkowski in late June on the nuclear pact that pointed to the irony of allowing Iran access to markets that the US does not have. 鈥淎ny deal that lifts sanctions on Iranian oil will disadvantage American companies unless we lift the antiquated ban on our own oil exports,鈥� she said.
Still, not everyone is convinced that lifting the ban is either necessary or desirable.
Environmentalists argue it would encourage more US oil extraction, including fracking, which they say endangers local environments and increases greenhouse gas emissions.
Others say that although the US is producing more energy than ever before, it has not yet achieved energy independence. Exporting oil would result in billions of barrels more annually from other countries and would pose a greater national security risk, Jay Hauck, executive director of the CRUDE coalition, Fox News on Friday.
鈥淧ro-ban supports would like to make it cut and dry, but it鈥檚 a very complicated issue,鈥� Mr. Hauck said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 an onion, and you have to peel away the layers.鈥�
Still others wonder what real effects lifting the ban on crude exports would have on 鈥渢he notoriously unpredictable world market,鈥� the Monitor鈥檚 Mr. Gilmour wrote, as well as on US gasoline prices.
Nonetheless, Rep. Kevin Cramer (R) of North Dakota, who is co-sponsoring bills by Texas Republican Reps. Joe Barton and Mike McCaul that seek to lift the ban and that combined have about 10 Democratic co-sponsors, said he feels positive about the push to end restrictions.
鈥淚鈥檓 optimistic about our efforts,鈥� he told Fox News. 鈥淲e have bipartisan support and a broad understanding of the issue among members.鈥�
