The impending end to the four-decade long Crude Oil Export Ban took on another layer of inevitability last week when the proposal passed through the House’s Energy and Commerce subcommittee on energy and power. These significant victories for supporters of lifting the ban bring the vote closer to the House floor where it will presumably pass with a Republican majority, aided by Democrats from oil & gas states.
The Crude Export Ban will be lifted once it is put to a vote in the House – the current economic arguments are far too compelling given the potential stabilising effect it could have on oil prices and the evident bipartisan political will. The interests of oil and gas states will carry the vote over the line as the classic lure of job creation and market growth will cloud the long-term political and environmental damage.
The days of protectionism appear to be over as the United States strives to become an energy exporter. Advocates for lifting the ban have cited the inefficiency of maintaining an archaic legislation given the abundant surplus crude in storage. Their argument is supported by an energy policy that has pursued exporting refined oil products and offshore exploration in the Gulf of Mexico, the Atlantic and Arctic.
Republicans and oil industry lobbyists have emphasised the obvious benefits of lifting the ban – the potential economic benefits from an increase in crude exports which will provide American jobs and the geopolitical gains in countering OPEC’s supply leverage.
Ending the ban appears to be a defeat for an attempted U.S. deviation from fossil fuel dependency, undermining the Obama Administration’s series of clean energy initiatives. Republicans and fossil fuel lobbyists will view the end of the ban as a key victory in their pursuit of dismantling clean energy policies. Ending the ban will carry implications for the incumbent victor in the 2016 Presidential election also as they will be faced with honouring a legislation that deviates from implementing a cohesive climate change policy. Republican candidates may well use it as a sounding board for their electoral campaigns, citing the United States potential to become an energy superpower.
Once again, the Republicans and their Big Oil supporters will use the deceptive appeal of the medium-term gains of lifting the ban to mask the long-term structural implications of this decision. An unsustainable dependency on fossil fuels will be the true victor, giving the major oil and gas companies continued influence over energy policy and regulation. This will inhibit any climate change initiatives made in Paris this coming December.
