Despite soaring oil prices, oil and gas
producers worldwide have failed to expand either supply or
investment levels, falling short of meeting the rapidly growing
global demand. The key challenge is ensuring an adequate supply of
transportation fuel for cars and airplanes--not electricity, which
can be generated from coal and nuclear reactors.
The
war on terrorism and operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as
high rates of economic growth in China and the United States have
caused additional gasoline and jet fuel shortages that have led to
higher prices. Fuel costs represent an indirect tax that may
seriously affect the economy, possibly even causing a global
recession. Furthermore, leading industry experts believe that the
global oil well is running dry. Even if this is not the case,
developing the remaining supply poses problems that continue to
confound the industry.
Insufficient
Infrastructure. Currently, supply is limited by
insufficient transportation and refining capacity. No new
refineries have been built in the U.S. in the past three decades.
In addition, world spare tanker capacity, which is essential to
transport oil from overseas, no longer exists, and excess refinery
capacity is at an all-time low.
Overregulation. While many oil fields
are headed for depletion, national oil companies control 58 percent
of oil and natural gas reserves. Laws requiring the government to
own and/or control significant shares in oil ventures are common in
many oil-producing countries. Overregulation prevents oil companies
from owning mineral rights, while weak rule of law and insufficient
protection of property rights in many oil-rich regions makes
multibillion-dollar investments too risky.
A Poor
Investment Environment. In many oil-producing countries,
arbitrary laws, failing and corrupt legal systems, selective
taxation, conflicting legal codes, and government failure to
enforce contracts have created a murky investment environment.
Nationalization has a particularly chilling effect. Russia
frightened many investors away by breaking up its major oil
company, Yukos, and suing British Petroleum's Russian partner for
$790 million in back taxes. Saudi Arabia abandoned its much-touted
privatization of natural gas production.
Unpredictable
International Actors. Pipelines must often cross unstable
regions and borders to reach markets, so elaborate international
agreements are needed before pipelines can be built. Political and
ethnic conflicts and terrorism in the Middle East, Africa, the
Caspian region, and South America also create grave investment
concerns. Some analysts warn that a carefully targeted terrorist
attack on oil facilities in Saudi Arabia could reduce Saudi oil
production to 4 million barrels per day or less for up to three
months, which would have disastrous results for the global
economy.
Weak Lending
Institutions. In many countries, lending institutions are
weak, and excessive taxation diverts oil revenues before
appropriate investments for future development are made. This
limits the funds available to develop new fields and tempers the
profit motive to expand production. These anti-business barriers
have hindered investors from expanding oil and natural gas
supplies, even in the face of surging demand.
Steps to Be
Taken. To help ensure energy security in the near future,
the Administration should:
- Develop a
comprehensive strategy to change the oil investment
climate. Such a strategy should involve the Departments of
State, Energy, and Treasury and be coordinated by the National
Security Council. Consumer countries, including the G-8 and major
oil consumers, should use diplomatic and economic means to pressure
OPEC and non-OPEC suppliers to liberalize their foreign investment
laws, break up state monopolies, and phase out undue government
intervention. Efforts to promote such policies through
international financial organizations should be increased. Economic
assistance should emphasize economic freedom in potential
recipients, including a liberal investment climate similar to
Millennium Challenge Account re-quirements. Arms and vital
equipment sales should be conditioned on improving the investment
climate in the energy sector. The U.S. should also condition
accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) on policy changes
that facilitate foreign investment.
- Build more
tankers, pipelines, and refineries. The Departments of
State and Energy should provide economic aid incentives and
technical assistance to oil-producing and refining countries to
simplify regulations and speed up the licensing process for the
expansion of existing and building of new pipelines and refineries,
especially in Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. Major
shipbuilding companies should be encouraged to expand their tanker
fleets. The U.S. Trade Representative should use the WTO, North
American Free Trade Agreement, and Central American Free Trade
Organization to reduce barriers to oil-sector investment and
development.
- Remove tariffs
on imported ethanol. Since the 1973 Arab oil embargo,
Brazil has reduced its dependence on foreign oil by more than half
by developing "fuel-flexible" vehicles that run on any combination
of gasoline and ethanol. Currently, 4 million such cars are on U.S.
roads. Adding such a feature costs as little as $150 per car. The
U.S. should follow Brazil's example by turning ethanol into a fuel
of choice. However, making fuel-flexible cars viable will require
lifting the U.S. tariff on imported ethanol (currently 54 cents per
gallon) because the U.S. ethanol industry relies on corn and grain
sorghum, which yields much less ethanol per pound than sugar
cane.
Conclusion. There is no silver bullet
that will increase the supply of oil and natural gas or wean the
United States from its dependence. The future may bring
significantly higher energy prices, but an unabated and sharp hike
in oil prices could cause a global recession, as has happened twice
in the past. To avoid a massive crisis, the U.S. government, in
cooperation with the private sector, needs to expand the
transportation fuel supply before it is too late.
Ariel Cohen,
Ph.D., is Senior Research Fellow in Russian and Eurasian
Studies in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy
Studies, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis
Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation.
Heritage Foundation Intern Kevin DeCorla-Souza assisted in
preparing this paper.