- •Foreword
- •Table of contents
- •1. Executive summary
- •Overview
- •“Energy dominance” strategy
- •Deregulation
- •Energy infrastructure
- •Innovation
- •Power sector transition
- •Policy co-ordination
- •Energy security
- •Energy systems resilience
- •Key recommendations
- •2. General energy policy
- •Country overview
- •Supply and demand of energy
- •Primary energy supply
- •Energy production and self-sufficiency
- •Energy consumption
- •Energy trade
- •Institutions
- •“Energy dominance” strategy
- •Energy policies
- •Federal Power Act
- •Clean Air Act
- •National Environmental Policy Act
- •Natural Gas Act
- •Energy Policy and Conservation Act
- •Energy Policy Act of 2005
- •Energy Independence and Security Act
- •American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
- •Energy permitting and regulatory regimes
- •Energy pricing and taxation
- •Energy data
- •Assessment
- •Recommendations
- •3. Energy and climate change
- •Overview
- •Institutions
- •Climate change mitigation
- •Emissions targets
- •Federal policies and regulations
- •Power sector
- •Transportation sector
- •Oil and gas sector methane emissions and natural gas flaring
- •Regional, state and local policies
- •Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative
- •California’s climate action plan
- •Other regional programmes
- •Adapting to climate change
- •Assessment
- •Recommendations
- •4. Energy efficiency
- •Overview
- •Institutional governance of energy efficiency policies
- •Transport sector
- •Energy consumption in the transport sector
- •Energy efficiency policies in the transport sector
- •Electric vehicles
- •Residential and commercial
- •Energy consumption in the buildings sector
- •Energy efficiency policies in the buildings sector
- •Tax credits
- •Building codes
- •Appliance and equipment standards
- •Co-generation
- •Federal buildings
- •Industry
- •Energy consumption in the industry sector
- •Energy efficiency policies in the industry sector
- •Demand response
- •Utility efficiency obligations
- •Assessment
- •Recommendations
- •5. Renewable energy
- •Overview
- •Supply and demand
- •Renewable energy in TPES
- •Electricity from renewable energy
- •Policies and measures
- •Federal tax credits
- •Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act
- •Renewable portfolio standards
- •Corporate tax policy
- •Trade policy
- •Net metering
- •Grid upgrades
- •Department of Energy initiatives
- •Solar PV
- •Grid Modernization Initiative
- •Hydropower Vision
- •Offshore wind
- •Battery storage
- •Renewable Fuel Standard
- •Biofuels tax credits
- •Low Carbon Fuel Standard
- •Assessment
- •Recommendations
- •6. Energy technology research, development and demonstration
- •Overview
- •Public spending on energy RD&D
- •Institutional framework
- •Energy RD&D programmes
- •Science and innovation programmes
- •National laboratories
- •Loan Programs Office
- •Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy
- •Nuclear energy
- •Energy efficiency and renewable energy
- •Efficiency
- •Renewables
- •Transportation
- •Fossil energy
- •Office of Clean Coal and Carbon Management
- •Advanced fossil energy systems
- •Carbon capture, utilisation and storage
- •Electricity
- •Pathways to commercialisation
- •Technology-to-Market
- •Energy Investor Center
- •Technology Commercialization Fund
- •STEM
- •International collaborations
- •Assessment
- •Recommendations
- •Overview
- •Supply and demand
- •Crude oil production
- •Refined oil products
- •Trade: Imports and exports
- •Trade of crude oil
- •Trade of refined oil products
- •Oil demand
- •Increasing biofuels demand in the United States
- •Outlook of oil supply and demand
- •Prices and taxes
- •Institutions
- •Oil exploration policies
- •Oil exploration
- •Tax reform
- •Permitting and mineral rights
- •Infrastructure
- •Pipelines
- •Price differentials
- •Refining
- •Ports
- •Emergency response policy
- •Legislation and emergency response policy
- •National Emergency Strategy Organization
- •Oil emergency reserves
- •Storage locations
- •SPR modernisation programme, planned sales and commercial lease
- •Emergency response to supply disruptions
- •Impacts of hurricanes
- •Responses to hurricanes
- •Participation in IEA collective actions
- •Assessment
- •Oil upstream
- •Oil markets
- •Oil security
- •Recommendations
- •8. Natural gas
- •Overview
- •Supply and demand
- •Production
- •Consumption
- •Biogas
- •Supply and demand outlook
- •Trade: Imports and exports
- •Market structure
- •Price and taxes
- •Infrastructure
- •Gas pipeline networks
- •Ongoing projects in the Northeast and New England
- •Ongoing projects between the United States and Mexico
- •Recent regulatory developments related to the construction of energy projects
- •LNG terminals
- •Regulation
- •LNG developments
- •Storage
- •Gas flaring
- •Gas emergency response
- •Gas emergency policy
- •Gas emergency organisation: Roles and responsibilities
- •Gas emergency response measures
- •Strategic storage
- •Interruptible contracts
- •Demand restraint
- •Fuel switching
- •Assessment
- •Natural gas markets
- •Natural gas security
- •Recommendations
- •9. Electricity
- •Overview
- •Electricity supply and demand
- •Electricity generation and trade
- •Electricity consumption
- •Electricity system regulation
- •FERC
- •NERC
- •State regulators
- •The physical grid
- •Market structure
- •Wholesale electricity markets
- •Traditional vertically integrated utility bulk systems
- •ISOs and RTOs
- •Capacity markets
- •Energy Imbalance Market
- •Distribution system rates and competition
- •Ownership
- •Retail prices and taxation
- •Policies and regulations
- •Federal Power Act
- •Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act
- •Energy Policy Act of 1992
- •FERC Orders 888 and 889
- •FERC Order 2000
- •Energy Policy Act of 2005
- •Electricity in the low-carbon transition
- •Federal environmental policy
- •State-level clean energy policies
- •Renewable portfolio standards
- •Zero-emissions credits
- •Net metering
- •System integration of renewables
- •Transmission
- •Demand response
- •Energy security
- •Grid reliability and resilience
- •NERC assessments
- •DOE and FERC efforts
- •Capacity market reforms
- •Other capacity mechanisms
- •Fuel security
- •Extreme weather
- •Cyberthreats
- •Emergency response
- •The DOE role
- •Assessment
- •Bulk power markets
- •Electricity reliability
- •Recommendations
- •10. Nuclear
- •Overview
- •Institutional oversight and regulation
- •The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- •The Department of Energy
- •Operational fleet
- •Valuing low-carbon generation
- •Valuing resilience
- •New builds
- •V.C. Summer
- •Vogtle
- •SMRs and other advanced reactors
- •Nuclear fuel cycle
- •Interim storage and the Yucca Mountain repository
- •Production of enriched uranium
- •Accident tolerant fuels
- •Innovation, nuclear research, human resources, education
- •Versatile Test Reactor
- •Funding for nuclear innovation
- •Training nuclear scientists and engineers
- •Assessment
- •Recommendations
- •11. Coal
- •Overview
- •Supply and demand
- •Institutions
- •Policy and regulation
- •Coal mining
- •Environmental regulations for coal-fired power plants
- •Fuel security
- •Emissions reduction efforts for coal-fired generation
- •Refined coal
- •Small-scale coal plants
- •CCUS
- •Assessment
- •Recommendations
- •12. The resilience of US energy infrastructure
- •Overview
- •Definition of resilience
- •Institutional governance
- •Energy resilience policies
- •Incident emergency response
- •Exercises
- •Climate resilience
- •Energy production
- •Energy consumption
- •Energy infrastructure siting
- •Resilience in electricity
- •Resilience in oil and gas infrastructure
- •Upstream
- •Downstream
- •Midstream
- •Cybersecurity resilience
- •Assessment
- •Recommendations
- •ANNEX A: Organisations visited
- •Review criteria
- •Review team and preparation of the report
- •Organisation visited
- •ANNEX B: Energy balances and key statistical data
- •Footnotes to energy balances and key statistical data
- •ANNEX C: International Energy Agency “Shared Goals”
- •ANNEX D: Glossary and list of abbreviations
- •Acronyms and abbreviations
- •Units of measure
7. OIL
rates. The tax credit increase, from USD 10 to USD 35 per tonne of stored CO2, has been well received by the oil industry (see Chapter 6, “Energy Technology Research, Development and Demonstration”).
Tax reform
In December 2017, Congress passed and the president signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which, among its various provisions, reduced the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. The act took effect on 1 January 2018.
Its impact on the economics of multiple energy projects is complex as it depends on the interplay with other factors such as new depreciation and capital structures. However, the lowering of the corporate tax rate has been positive for oil and gas producers.
Permitting and mineral rights
A unique aspect of US oil and gas development is the structure of mineral rights. In the United States, ownership of subsurface mineral resources is granted to the individuals or organisations that are surface landowners. These property owners have both surface rights and mineral rights. This complete private ownership is known as "fee simple” ownership, under which an owner controls the surface, the subsurface and the air above a property. The owner also has the freedom to sell or lease these rights individually or entirely to other entities. Most states have laws that govern the transfer of mineral rights from one owner to another. They also have laws that govern mining and drilling activity. The ownership structure for mineral rights in the United States has helped enable the growth of onshore production as property owners are more economically vested in resource development compared with many other countries, where the government owns all subsurface mineral rights.
Permits for oil wells mostly fall under the jurisdiction of state governments where the drilling will take place, rather than the federal government. The exception is OCS drilling, which falls under the authority of BOEM, as well as drilling on onshore federal lands, which falls under the authority of the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has jurisdiction over oil spills.
Similarly, state governments also take the lead on environmental regulations for oil and gas wells within their territories, though the EPA also sets federal environmental regulations. Following rules to tighten regulations around emissions from new oil and gas wells in 2016 (specifically to target methane emissions), the administration in 2018 proposed rolling back those requirements, in line with “American energy dominance” efforts to lower the costs of environmental regulations in order to promote increased production.
Infrastructure
Pipelines
Pipelines are the most commonly used mode of transport for moving oil across the United States. In 2018, the country had 215 625 miles (346 940 kilometres) of crude gathering and distribution pipelines operated by more than 2 300 companies, and the top 10 operators were responsible for 30% of the network.
141
ENERGY SECURITY
IEA. All rights reserved.
7. OIL
For crude oil, the major pipelines are the Capline, Centurion, Border, Midvalley, Seaway and Basin pipelines, with a combined capacity of around 2.5 mb/d. They were built in the 1970s to transport oil from the Gulf Coast to the Midwest area. This historical flow has been radically changed with the shale revolution. For instance, the Seaway pipeline was reversed in 2012 to flow from the Midwest to the Gulf Coast, and there is now a project to reverse the Capline pipeline by 2021. In addition, in the last five years, new takeaway capacity was built to transport oil. For the Gulf Coast, the pipeline takeaway capacity is expected to almost double from 2018 to 2023, from 2.5 mb/d to 4.9 mb/d. In west Texas, if all planned investments are realised, Permian and Eagle Ford takeaway capacities would more than double from 2.7 mb/d to 5.8 mb/d by the end of 2020.
Four major pipeline systems provide oil products from the Gulf Coast to the East Coast and Midwest regions: Colonial, Plantation, Explorer and TEPPCO.
The Colonial pipeline system originates in Houston and terminates in New York City. The pipeline has four lines from Houston to North Carolina, with a combined capacity of 2.4 mb/d. Two lines, with a capacity of 1.1 mb/d, extend beyond North Carolina and continue delivery into the Northeast region, up to New York City.
The Plantation pipeline system transports products from the Gulf Coast to the East Coast. The pipeline originates near Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and terminates in the Washington, DC, area. The Plantation pipeline comprises two lines with a combined capacity of 700 kb/d and runs largely parallel to the Colonial pipeline.
The Explorer pipeline system originates in the Gulf Coast near Port Arthur, Texas, and terminates in Ardmore, Oklahoma, and Hammond, Indiana. The Explorer pipeline consists of two lines and has a combined capacity of 720 kb/d.
The TEPPCO pipeline system originates near Beaumont, Texas, and extends into Chicago; two lines continue to the Northeast region. It has an operating capacity of 230 kb/d.
The Northeast imports 80% of its fuel supplies from outside the first Petroleum Administration for Defense District (PADD 1). The pipeline infrastructure in the Northeast plays a key role in balancing supply and demand within the region.
The Calnev pipeline system transports refined products from Los Angeles and extends to terminals in Barstow, California and Las Vegas, Nevada. The Calnev pipeline has a capacity of approximately 120 kb/d.
Unlike gas pipelines, interstate oil pipelines are not usually subject to federal permitting, with the exception of cross-border pipelines (which require a permit from the State Department) and for certain water crossings (which require a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers) or federal crossings (which warrant a permit from divisions of the Interior Department). Instead, each state that a pipeline traverses must issue a permit for construction (FERC, 2018). Pipeline safety is monitored and regulated by the Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, while FERC regulates rate-setting and other operational aspects for oil pipelines (PHMSA, 2018; FERC, 2019).
142
IEA. All rights reserved.
7. OIL
Box 7.2 Oil flows from Canada
In 2017, Canada exported around 3.3 mb/d of crude oil, which represents more than 85% of its production. The majority went via pipelines to the United States, with a small portion going by rail and ship. In 2018, Canadian crude oil exports by rail were around 250 kb/d. Exports from Canada to the United States of Canadian oil sands and crude have almost doubled in the last decade.
At the end of 2017, the amount of oil available in Canada for export to the United States was 310 kb/d higher than pipeline takeaway capacity. When the Keystone pipeline closed for an unplanned outage in November 2017, operational capacity fell even more. The shutdown left Canadian producers with few choices other than to store crude or cut output. Canadian oil delivered at the Hardisty, Alberta, terminal came under significant price pressure as a result and traded USD 32 per barrel (bbl) below WTI Cushing on average during 2018. Keystone restarted in late November 2017 and operated at reduced rates until late January 2018. Rail shipments have picked up in recent months to partially address the bottleneck on pipeline takeaway capacity. Despite this increase, new rail car standards (which resulted in the decommissioning of a lot of older units), competition from grain exports and a lack of trained staff have made it difficult to ramp up rail exports quickly.
In 2019, most of the gains in Canadian takeaway capacity are likely to come from the optimisation or replacement of existing pipelines. Enbridge plans to replace its Line 3 pipeline (maintaining its 760 kb/d capacity) between Hardisty and Superior, Wisconsin. The project received a green light from the Canadian government in 2016 but is still awaiting approval from Minnesota. This project is planned for completion by the end of 2020.
Kinder Morgan is also planning to expand the capacity of the Trans Mountain pipeline to 890 kb/d (from 590 kb/d) by the addition of a parallel line. The Trans Mountain pipeline starts in Edmonton, Alberta, and ends in Vancouver, British Columbia, from where crude oil is shipped to US refineries on the West Coast. This project was approved by the Canadian government in 2016 but lawsuits have caused major delays. The pipeline was acquired by the Canadian government in 2018.
Finally, the largest project is TransCanada’s new-build 830 kb/d Keystone XL crude oil pipeline, which would take a more direct route from Canada to Cushing, Oklahoma, than the existing Keystone line. The US administration put this project on hold in 2015 but revived it in 2017 based on a presidential permit issued that year and again in 2019. TransCanada has secured 500 kb/d of firm supply commitments and has started to plan construction work, though it has faced a few legal setbacks related to its permits. The pipeline could be operational by mid-2021, at the earliest, due to the requisite permitting and construction timelines.
Sources: IEA (2018), Oil 2018: Analysis and Forecasts to 2023; IEA (2019), Oil 2019: Analysis and Forecasts to 2024.
Price differentials
The historical hub for crude oil prices in the United States is in Cushing, Oklahoma, where contracts for WTI are settled. Additional hubs exist for WTI Midland, located near the Permian and Eagle Ford basins, and more recently at the refining and export hub of Houston.
143
ENERGY SECURITY
IEA. All rights reserved.
7. OIL
Based on price data from 2012 to 2014, WTI Midland saw discounts to Cushing of up to USD 20/bbl, reflecting a lack of pipeline takeaway capacity. Since 2014, the WTI price in Midland has largely been in line with the Cushing price based on new pipeline capacity. Early in 2018, WTI Midland was trading above WTI Cushing, reflecting the commissioning of the 300 kb/d Sealy pipeline and the expansion of the Cactus pipeline. However, WTI Midland traded at an average discount of USD 7.30/bbl compared with WTI Cushing later in 2018, due to planned maintenance shutdowns of refineries.
Since 2010, WTI Houston has consistently been at a premium to WTI Midland, due to increased crude shipments from Canada to Cushing, increased US production in the Cushing area, and a lack of pipeline infrastructure from Cushing to the US Gulf Coast. The Midland discount versus Houston increased sharply during 2018, up to USD 25/bbl, as pipelines from the Permian to Houston filled up.
Expected new pipeline projects will further alleviate the current bottlenecks in takeaway capacity, but with additional strong production growth in the Permian and Eagle Ford basins over the next few years, the question of whether new pipeline takeaway capacity will keep pace with crude oil output to avoid regional price differentials might arise again.
Refining
As of January 2019, there were 132 refineries operating in the United States, with the top 10 refineries representing 25% of total capacity (18.8 mb/d). The refineries operated with an average capacity utilisation rate of 91%, which is considered high. More than 45% of the refining capacity is located along the US Gulf Coast (8.4 mb/d), which corresponds to PADD 3. In 2017, the Gulf Coast region was the exit point for 79% of crude oil deliveries to both domestic (Northeast and Midwest) and overseas markets (Latin America, Europe and Asia).
Table 7.1 Top ten refineries in the United States
|
Rank |
|
State |
|
Company |
|
Refinery |
|
Capacity |
|
Share of total US |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(bbl per day) |
|
refinery capacity (%) |
|
1 |
|
Texas |
Motiva Enterprises LLC |
|
Port Arthur |
607 000 |
3.2 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
2 |
|
Texas |
|
Marathon Petroleum Co. |
|
Galveston |
|
585 000 |
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
LP |
|
Bay |
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Louisiana |
Marathon Petroleum Co. |
|
Garyville |
564 000 |
3.0 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
LP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
4 |
|
Texas |
|
ExxonMobil Refining and |
|
Baytown |
|
560 500 |
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supply Co. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
Louisiana |
ExxonMobil Refining and Baton Rouge |
502 500 |
2.7 |
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
Supply Co. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
6 |
|
Indiana |
|
BP Products North |
|
Whiting |
|
430 000 |
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
America Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
Louisiana |
Citgo Petroleum Corp |
|
Lake Charles |
418 000 |
2.2 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
8 |
|
Texas |
|
ExxonMobil Refining and |
|
Beaumont |
|
369 024 |
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supply Co. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
California |
Tesoro Refining and |
|
Carson |
363 000 |
1.9 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing Co. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
10 |
|
Mississippi |
|
Chevron USA Inc. |
|
Pascagoula |
|
356 440 |
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note: The table includes only refineries with atmospheric crude oil distillation capacity. Source: EIA (2019), Top 10 US refineries operable capacity, www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.php?page=oil_refining#tab4.
144
IEA. All rights reserved.