Study Quantifies Lands Ban Costs

Exploring and developing the natural resources on U.S. public lands has been subject of debate for decades.

AAPG’s view on this issue is clear:

  • As an association we support the leasing, exploration and development of petroleum resources on the nation’s public lands.
  • It can and must be done in an environmentally responsible manner.
  • These resources belong to the American people, and should be developed for their benefit.

What is the cost for not doing so?

A study released in February strives to answer this question by looking at the social, economic and environmental effects of not allowing oil and natural gas exploration and production on federal lands.

The study, “Analysis of the Social, Economic and Environmental Effects of Maintaining Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Moratoria on and Beneath Federal Lands,” was commissioned in 2007 by the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), with the support of the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission.

NARUC represents the state public service commissioners who regulate utilities, such as electricity, gas, telecommunications, water and transportation. Their job is to protect consumers and ensure that these utilities are offered at fair rates.

The study was conducted by the Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), a consultancy, with the support of the Gas Technology Institute (GTI). Their analysis consisted of two steps.

First, GTI reviewed the latest federal estimates of petroleum resources on onshore and offshore federal lands. They then updated these estimates based on new scientific understanding and technological improvements available since the previous estimates were made.

According to GTI’s estimates, the undeveloped oil resource on federal lands increases from 186 billion barrels of oil (Bbo) to 229 billion Bbo. The undeveloped natural gas resource increases from 1,748 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) to 2,034 Tcf. These increases are due to the expansion of shale gas activity nationwide and the opportunity to deploy new technology and play concepts in regions that were previously restricted.

Second, the study group evaluated different “energy futures” using the 2009 National Energy Modeling System (NEMS). NEMS is the energy model developed and used by the Energy Information Administration for its analyses and forecasts through 2030.

The team ran a series of scenarios using NEMS looking at the social, economic and environmental effects from 2009 to 2030. The scenarios evaluated the impact of opening various areas to exploration and production, as well as the effect of GTI’s updated resource estimates.

The principal conclusions of the study are based on the comparison of two scenarios – (1) EIA’s current resource estimates and maintaining production restrictions with (2) GTI updated resource estimates and lifting production restrictions.

When you make this comparison, the costs of restricting access to federal lands become apparent:

  • Domestic oil and natural gas production decreases (oil down 15 percent annually, natural gas down 9 percent annually).
  • Imports of oil and natural gas increase.
  • Energy prices increase (natural gas up 17 percent annually, electricity up 5 percent annually, petrol up 3 percent).
  • Energy costs to consumers increase 5 percent annually.
  • Gross domestic product decreases 0.52 percent annually.

These are just some of the conclusions reached in the study, which is available free online.

They also look at the impact of just removing production restrictions, using EIA’s current resource estimates.

You can quibble with any model – its inputs, its outputs and the conclusions reached – but the value of this study is that it begins to quantify the impact of not developing the oil and natural gas resources on the nation’s public lands. It does so using the same energy model the government uses for its forecasts. And it clearly shows that failure to develop public resources has real social, economic and environmental costs.

But wait! Hasn’t the moratorium been lifted?

In July 2008, President George W. Bush lifted the presidential withdrawal on the nation’s outer continental shelf (OCS), and on Oct. 1, 2008, the Congressional moratorium on OCS development lapsed. But there have been no lease sales in moratoria areas.

In large part that is due to the formal process that the Minerals Management Service uses to manage OCS resources. The five-year OCS leasing program lays out the areas where the federal government will hold lease sales. Areas not included in the five-year program are not offered for leasing.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar undertook a thorough review of the OCS leasing program upon entering office, but has not yet released the results of that review.

The state of Virginia actually petitioned the Interior Department to include its OCS in the current 2007-2012 five-year program, which MMS did, scheduling a lease sale in 2011 if the moratorium was lifted by then.

However, with the scheduled lease sale looming, Interior has yet to begin its environmental reviews for the lease sale. It hopes to complete these reviews and reach a decision by spring 2012. If the decision is favorable, then Virginia can be added to the sale schedule.

Virginia’s two senators, Jim Webb and Mark Warner, both Democrats, responded in a letter to Secretary Salazar, saying that Virginia’s governor and politicians from both parties support this lease sale. They continued, “Recent media reports highlighting additional delays are a source of frustration to Virginia and to a nation that is looking to turn around the economy while simultaneously addressing energy security.”

Virginia is just one example.

Onshore federal land also are seeing rule changes that, according to Bob Abbey, director of the Bureau of Land Management, quoted by, “ …will slow leasing.”

The fact that the moratoria are no longer in place does not ensure the resources on federal lands will be developed. As the NARUC study shows, this carries a significant cost to the American people.

Comments (0)


Washington Watch

Washington Watch - David Curtiss

David Curtiss served as the Director of AAPG’s Geoscience and Energy Office in Washington, D.C. from 2008-11.

Washington Watch

Washington Watch - Creties Jenkins

Creties Jenkins is a past president of the EMD.

Washington Watch

Washington Watch - Dan Smith

Dan Smith is chair of the Governance Board.

Washington Watch

Washington Watch - Peter MacKenzie

 Peter MacKenzie is vice chair of the Governance Board. 

Policy Watch

Policy Watch is a monthly column of the EXPLORER written by the director of AAPG's  Geoscience and Energy Office in Washington, D.C. *The first article appeared in February 2006 under the name "Washington Watch" and the column name was changed to "Policy Watch" in January 2013 to broaden the subject matter to a more global view.

View column archives

See Also: Book

Alternative Resources, Structure, Geochemistry and Basin Modeling, Sedimentology and Stratigraphy, Geophysics, Business and Economics, Engineering, Petrophysics and Well Logs, Environmental, Geomechanics and Fracture Analysis, Compressional Systems, Salt Tectonics, Tectonics (General), Extensional Systems, Fold and Thrust Belts, Structural Analysis (Other), Basin Modeling, Source Rock, Migration, Petroleum Systems, Thermal History, Oil Seeps, Oil and Gas Analysis, Maturation, Sequence Stratigraphy, Clastics, Carbonates, Evaporites, Seismic, Gravity, Magnetic, Direct Hydrocarbon Indicators, Resource Estimates, Reserve Estimation, Risk Analysis, Economics, Reservoir Characterization, Development and Operations, Production, Structural Traps, Oil Sands, Oil Shale, Shale Gas, Coalbed Methane, Deep Basin Gas, Diagenetic Traps, Fractured Carbonate Reservoirs, Stratigraphic Traps, Subsalt Traps, Tight Gas Sands, Gas Hydrates, Coal, Uranium (Nuclear), Geothermal, Renewable Energy, Eolian Sandstones, Sheet Sand Deposits, Estuarine Deposits, Fluvial Deltaic Systems, Deep Sea / Deepwater, Lacustrine Deposits, Marine, Regressive Deposits, Transgressive Deposits, Shelf Sand Deposits, Slope, High Stand Deposits, Incised Valley Deposits, Low Stand Deposits, Conventional Sandstones, Deepwater Turbidites, Dolostones, Carbonate Reefs, (Carbonate) Shelf Sand Deposits, Carbonate Platforms, Sebkha, Lacustrine Deposits, Salt, Conventional Drilling, Directional Drilling, Infill Drilling, Coring, Hydraulic Fracturing, Primary Recovery, Secondary Recovery, Water Flooding, Gas Injection, Tertiary Recovery, Chemical Flooding Processes, Thermal Recovery Processes, Miscible Recovery, Microbial Recovery, Drive Mechanisms, Depletion Drive, Water Drive, Ground Water, Hydrology, Reclamation, Remediation, Remote Sensing, Water Resources, Monitoring, Pollution, Natural Resources, Wind Energy, Solar Energy, Hydroelectric Energy, Bioenergy, Hydrogen Energy
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/book-m100-Tectonics-and-Sedimentation-Implications-for-Petroleum-Systems.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 5823 Book

See Also: Bulletin Article

The Sierra Diablo Mountains of west Texas contain world-class exposures of Lower Permian (Leonardian) platform carbonates. As such, these outcrops offer key insights into the products of carbonate deposition in the transitional icehouse to greenhouse setting of the early to middle Permian that are available in few other places. They also afford an excellent basis for examining how styles of facies and sequence development vary between inner and outer platform settings.

We collected detailed data on the facies composition and architecture of lower Leonardian high-frequency cycles and sequences from outcrops that provide more than 2 mi (3 km) of continuous exposure. We used these data to define facies stacking patterns along depositional dip across the platform in both low- and high-accommodation settings and to document how these patterns vary systematically among and within sequences.

Like icehouse and waning icehouse successions elsewhere, Leonardian platform deposits are highly cyclic; cycles dominantly comprise aggradational upward-shallowing facies successions that vary according to accommodation setting. Cycles stack into longer duration high-frequency sequences (HFSs) that exhibit systematic variations in facies and cycle architectures. Unlike cycles, HFSs can comprise symmetrical upward-shallowing or upward-deepening facies stacks. High-frequency sequences are not readily definable from one-dimensional stratigraphic sections but require dip-parallel two-dimensional sections and, in most cases, HFS boundaries are best defined in middle platform settings where facies contrast and offset are greatest. These studies demonstrate that HFSs are the dominant architectural element in many platform systems. As such, the lessons learned from these remarkable outcrops provide a sound basis for understanding and modeling carbonate facies architecture in other carbonate-platform successions, especially those of the middle to upper Permian.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/outcrop-based-characterization-leonardian.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3661 Bulletin Article

See Also: CD DVD

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4119 CD-DVD

See Also: Learn! Blog

This conference will provide an opportunity for attendees to share knowledge and identify differences in depositional processes, define how variability affects play elements, and define differences in stratigraphic models and sedimentary concepts.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/hero-latitudinal-controls-on-stratigraphic-models-and-sedimentary-concepts.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 11087 Learn! Blog

See Also: Workshop

This interdisciplinary two-day workshop will provide participants with the opportunity to describe and discuss the Sinai basins from a holistic perspective, to consider predictive exploration models for the less explored regions and perhaps gain new insights for those areas thought to be already mature. Experts on the Eastern Mediterranean-Levant, Nile Delta, Gulf of Suez, Northern Red Sea, Gulf of Aqaba-Dead Sea, and Sinai interior basins will lead the sessions. The workshop is organized by the AAPG Africa Region and the Egyptian Petroleum Exploration Society.
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/ws-Hammam-Faraun-Fault-line-scarp-Gulf-of-Suez-hero.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 22043 Workshop