SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 12
Download to read offline
ENERGY BRIEF 
The Shale Gas and Tight Oil 
Boom: U.S. States’ Economic 
Gains and Vulnerabilities 
Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel 
October 2013 
This brief is made possible through the generous support of the Alfred P. Sloan 
Foundation.
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, 
think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business 
executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens 
in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United 
States and other countries. Founded in 1921, CFR carries out its mission by maintaining a diverse 
membership, with special programs to promote interest and develop expertise in the next generation of 
foreign policy leaders; convening meetings at its headquarters in New York and in Washington, DC, 
and other cities where senior government officials, members of Congress, global leaders, and promi-nent 
thinkers come together with CFR members to discuss and debate major international issues; sup-porting 
a Studies Program that fosters independent research, enabling CFR scholars to produce arti-cles, 
reports, and books and hold roundtables that analyze foreign policy issues and make concrete pol-icy 
recommendations; publishing Foreign Affairs, the preeminent journal on international affairs and 
U.S. foreign policy; sponsoring Independent Task Forces that produce reports with both findings and 
policy prescriptions on the most important foreign policy topics; and providing up-to-date information 
and analysis about world events and American foreign policy on its website, CFR.org. 
The Council on Foreign Relations takes no institutional positions on policy issues and has no affiliation 
with the U.S. government. All views expressed in its publications and on its website are the sole respon-sibility 
of the author or authors. 
For further information about CFR or this paper, please write to the Council on Foreign Relations, 58 
East 68th Street, New York, NY 10065, or call Communications at 212.434.9888. Visit CFR’s website, 
www.cfr.org. 
Copyright © 2013 by the Council on Foreign Relations®, Inc. 
All rights reserved. 
Printed in the United States of America. 
This paper may not be reproduced in whole or in part, in any form beyond the reproduction permitted 
by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law Act (17 U.S.C. Sections 107 and 108) and excerpts 
by reviewers for the public press, without express written permission from the Council on Foreign Re-lations.
1 
INTRODUCTION 
U.S. policymakers have been concerned about the country’s dependence on imported energy since 
World War II. Those concerns were highlighted in the 1970s when episodes of sharply rising oil prices 
led to recessions, economic stagnation, and high inflation. However, recent gains in U.S. oil and natural 
gas production are changing the dialogue about U.S. energy strengths and vulnerabilities. 
The “shale revolution” has stimulated tremendous production of oil and natural gas in the United 
States. The revolution is the product of advances in oil and natural gas production technology— 
notably, a new combination of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. These technological ad-vances 
combined with high oil and gas prices have enabled increased production of the abundant oil 
and natural gas resources in the United States. 
Greater availability of domestic energy resources benefits the United States by reducing dependence 
on imported energy and diversifying the economy.1 But the boom also brings new vulnerabilities. Ex-amining 
how changes in U.S. oil and natural gas production may affect individual state economies 
shows that some of the states providing new energy resources are becoming less economically diversi-fied 
and more economically vulnerable to energy price declines. 
O I L PRI C E S AND EMPLOYMENT IN THE U . S . F O S S I L F U E L I NDUSTRY 
Until recently, the U.S. oil and natural gas industry mostly followed the ups and downs of world oil 
prices, but with a long-term decline that reflected the decreasing availability of U.S. oil and natural gas 
resources. At the height of the early 1980s oil boom, the five industries most sensitive to oil prices— 
coal mining, oil and gas extraction, oil field machinery, petroleum refining, and petrochemicals— 
accounted for 1.6 million jobs, 1.8 percent of total U.S. nonagricultural employment.2 By 2000, the 
share of these five industries had dwindled to 0.4 percent of total U.S. nonagricultural employment, 
only 457,000 jobs. With oil and natural gas prices rising beginning in the early 2000s, employment in 
the oil and natural gas sector began growing too. The boom in production of oil and natural gas from 
shale formations became a significant factor after 2008. Figure 1 shows that rising energy prices and 
the shale boom led to strong growth of U.S. oil and gas employment from 2005 to 2011.
2 
Figure 1. U.S. Fossil Fuel–Related Employment 
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; author calculations. 
Despite recent gains, however, the fossil fuel industry has a smaller share of U.S. employment than it 
did in the early 1980s, and the industry’s share of national economic activity is relatively small. After 
the end of the recession, between 2010 and the end of 2012, the industry added 169,000 jobs nation-wide, 
growing at a rate about ten times that of overall U.S. employment. The industry’s output shares 
follow a similar path. The share of oil and gas extraction was 4.3 percent of U.S. gross domestic prod-uct 
(GDP) at its height in 1981, but declined to 0.6 percent by 1999. The share of oil and gas rose to 1.6 
percent of GDP in 2011 as a result of the shale boom.3 
FOSSI L F U E L I NDUSTRI E S A N D S T A T E EMP LOYMENT 
As energy prices and U.S. oil and natural gas production fell from the mid-1980s to the early 2000s, 
most U.S. energy-producing states diversified away from energy production and energy-intensive in-dustries. 
In 1982, the states with the greatest concentration of energy-related industries were West Vir-ginia, 
Wyoming, Delaware, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Texas.4 Oil and natural gas accounted for much 
of the activity except in Delaware, which had a high concentration of the petrochemical industry, and in 
West Virginia, the heart of coal country. Shares of energy-related employment ranged from 7.3 percent 
in Texas to 13.7 percent in West Virginia. By 2000, these shares had declined to a range from 2.5 per-cent 
to 7.4 percent. 
Rising oil and gas prices since the early 2000s prompted a resurgence of energy employment. In-creased 
use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing led to further gains in oil and gas hiring. As of 
2011, the states with the highest shares of energy employment were Alaska, Louisiana, New Mexico, 
North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming. As shown in Figure 2, energy em-ployment 
shares increased in all eight of these states from 2000 to 2011.5 Although there is little oil and 
gas activity in West Virginia, its coal production grew because coal prices followed the upward trend in 
oil prices in the 2000s. Despite these gains, however, almost every one of these states depends less on 
the five main energy-related industries than they did in 1982.
3 
Figure 2. State Employment Shares 
Sources: Author calculations with data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 
Fossil fuel production has been important to these states’ recent economic performance. Since the early 
days of the shale boom in 2006, the four states with the highest rates of employment growth are the 
states with the highest shares of oil and gas employment (Figure 3). The greatest growth has been in 
Texas and North Dakota, states with production from shale and the largest production increases. As 
seen in Figure 3, between 2006 and 2012, U.S. employment declined 0.05 percent per year on average, 
while employment in North Dakota and Texas grew by 3.4 and 1.5 percent, respectively, the fastest 
growth in the country. 
Figure 3. Shale Oil and Employment Growth 
Note: 2006–2012 yearly employment growth rates; U.S. average annual employment growth of -0.05. 
Sources: Author calculations; data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; U.S. Energy Information Administration.
4 
O I L P R I C E S HOCKS A N D REGIONAL E CONOMI C ACTIV ITY 
Because the United States is an oil importer, its economy has been hurt by previous episodes of sharply 
rising oil prices that resulted from oil supply shocks.6 Given the oil production increase in the past cou-ple 
of years, has the response of the U.S. economy to oil price shocks changed? The economic composi-tion 
of individual states affects their responses to oil price shocks. We find that the economies of forty-two 
states and the District of Columbia would suffer if oil prices rise. In contrast, the economies of 
eight states—Alaska, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia, and 
Wyoming—would benefit from such increases. 
To assess the effects of oil price shocks on states’ economies, we first estimate the responses of indi-vidual 
industries to changes in oil prices using methods we used in a 1995 paper.7 As shown in Table 1, 
the estimated price elasticity of total U.S. employment, based on data for 2000–2011, is -0.02, which 
means that a 10 percent increase in oil prices reduces U.S. employment by 0.2 percent.8 Employment 
in the fossil fuel industries is considerably more responsive to oil price movements than employment in 
the overall economy is, but the responsiveness is less than we estimated eighteen years ago.9 These dif-ferences 
are the result of changing relationships between the industries, such as the reduced sensitivity 
of coal and natural gas prices to oil prices, the closure of some U.S. refineries, and how relative changes 
in oil and natural gas prices affect the U.S. petrochemicals industry. 
Table 1. Elasticities of Employment With Respect to Oil Prices10 
Elasticity 
Total U.S. Employment -0.02 
Coal Mining 0.24 
Oil and Natural Gas Extraction 0.40 
Oil Field Machinery 0.29 
Refining -0.03 
Petrochemicals 0.36 
Sources: Author calculations. 
To calculate the employment response of each state to an oil price shock, we combine these elasticities 
with the input-output analysis framework we previously developed and published in 1995 (updated 
with new multipliers).11 The framework takes into account the composition of each state’s economy, 
quantitative differences in multiplier effects across states, and the response of individual fossil fuel in-dustries 
to changes in oil prices. Differences across the states in concentrations of energy-producing 
and energy-consuming industries account for most of the variation in the response of employment to 
oil price changes across the states. Differences in multiplier effects also account for some of the varia-tion 
between states.12 
The results show that a 25 percent increase in oil prices (for example from $100 to $125) would re-sult 
in a loss of more than 550,000 jobs nationwide.13 None of the states stand out as being hurt by ris-ing 
oil prices by much more than the country as whole (Table 2). Several states without much of an oil 
and gas industry would see somewhat stronger negative effects from rising oil prices than the country 
as a whole.
5 
Table 2. Estimated Employment Response to a 25 Percent Increase in Crude Oil Prices, 2012 
Percent Percent 
United States -0.43 
Wisconsin -0.74 Ohio -0.61 
Minnesota -0.73 Missouri -0.60 
Tennessee -0.72 Illinois -0.59 
Rhode Island -0.71 Massachusetts -0.59 
Florida -0.71 Delaware -0.58 
New Hampshire -0.70 South Dakota -0.57 
Idaho -0.69 New York -0.57 
Nevada -0.69 California -0.56 
Arizona -0.68 Alabama -0.56 
Indiana -0.68 District of Columbia -0.50 
Nebraska -0.67 Kentucky -0.48 
Vermont -0.66 Pennsylvania -0.47 
Iowa -0.66 Utah -0.38 
New Jersey -0.65 Kansas -0.35 
Washington -0.64 Mississippi -0.35 
Maryland -0.64 Arkansas -0.34 
Georgia -0.64 Montana -0.31 
Michigan -0.64 Colorado -0.15 
Virginia -0.64 New Mexico 0.36 
South Carolina -0.64 West Virginia 0.36 
Oregon -0.64 Texas 0.60 
Connecticut -0.63 Louisiana 0.78 
Maine -0.62 Alaska 0.87 
North Carolina -0.62 North Dakota 1.01 
Hawaii -0.61 Oklahoma 1.16 
Wyoming 2.14 
Sources: Author calculations; data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Wall Street Journal.
6 
Figure 4. Estimated Employment Response to a 25 Percent Increase in Crude Oil Prices, 2012 
Sources: Author calculations; data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Wall Street Journal. 
Several states with larger fossil fuel industries see positive effects or a smaller negative effect than the 
country as a whole. Alaska, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia, 
and Wyoming would benefit from rising oil prices. Combined, these eight states would add around a 
hundred thousand jobs in response to a 25 percent rise in oil prices. 
Wyoming would benefit most from an oil price spike because it has a small population and a large 
share of oil and gas extraction employment. Alaska’s economy has traditionally depended on the oil 
extraction industry, has the second highest share of extraction employment among all states, and re-mains 
a beneficiary of higher oil prices. North Dakota’s fossil fuel industry has grown rapidly since the 
onset of the shale boom and extraction is now 4 percent of state employment. West Virginia, with a 
strong coal industry, benefits from higher oil prices, but by less than what we previously estimated in 
1995 for 1982 and 1992.14 Coal prices moved together more tightly with oil prices until the global re-cession. 
Although coal prices have slowly trended higher during the recovery, the relationship with oil 
has weakened. As long as coal prices move with those for oil, the West Virginia economy will benefit 
from higher oil prices, albeit in a more muted manner than in the past. 
The Louisiana and Texas economies are helped by rising oil prices, but employment response is less 
than in some energy states. These two states are home to 40 percent of U.S. refining capacity, and refin-ing 
is hurt by rising oil prices. In addition, Texas has a large and diverse economy: the share of oil and 
gas extraction is about 2 percent of state employment, much less than in other energy-producing states. 
Louisiana and Texas are also home to a substantial portion of U.S. petrochemical production. Rising 
oil prices help the U.S. petrochemicals industry as long as natural gas prices remain low. If enough do-mestic 
natural gas were exported such that U.S. natural gas prices again moved with oil prices, the U.S. 
petrochemicals industry would no longer benefit from rising oil prices.15 
These employment responses differ substantially from those we previously estimated for 1982, a year 
at the height of the last U.S. oil and gas boom.16 For that year, economies of thirteen states would have 
benefitted from rising oil prices. In addition to the eight states mentioned above, rising oil prices would 
have aided Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Mississippi, and Utah. Over the past thirty years, the economies 
in these five states have diversified away from crude oil production, and they no longer respond favorably 
to rising crude oil prices. Nonetheless, the presence of sizable oil and natural gas industries in these five 
states mutes their negative response to rising oil prices.
7 
STATE VULNERA B I L I T Y TO A D ECLI N E I N O I L PRI C E S 
Increased energy prices and technological improvements were catalysts for the U.S. fossil fuel indus-try’s 
turnaround. Would declining prices reverse those gains? A brief look at history is telling. 
From 1972 to 1982, when oil prices increased more than tenfold, Texas economic output and em-ployment 
averaged annual growth rates of 7.5 percent and 5.5 percent, respectively. When oil prices 
collapsed to about eleven dollars per barrel in 1986, the Texas economy went into a deep recession for 
two years. Economic output contracted 5.6 percent and employment fell 1.1 percent. 
Even though oil and gas extraction accounted for 19 percent of the Texas economy in 1981, that 
share was the second smallest among the eight oil-sensitive states (West Virginia was smallest). As a 
percentage of state GDP, the oil and gas sector accounted for 49 percent in Alaska, 37 percent in Wy-oming, 
35 percent in Louisiana, and 20 percent in North Dakota. The 1986 oil price crash also caused a 
recession in most of these states, with employment declines largest in Wyoming (-5.9 percent) and 
Alaska (-4.5 percent)—states with the largest oil and gas output shares. The economies of these oil-sensitive 
states rebounded after 1987, but their growth rates were weaker than that of Texas. 
Table 3 shows how the fossil fuel industry’s output shares contracted after the oil industry peak in 
1981 and later expanded with the shale boom, especially in North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Wyoming. The 
2012 shares of state GDP from oil and gas extraction should prove even higher, given that oil production 
has been increasing in these states.17 If oil prices were to collapse, these states with the highest concentra-tions 
in oil and gas extraction would be the hardest hit. 
Table 3. Share of Oil and Gas Extraction in State GDP 
Percent 
1981 2000 2010 
Alaska 49.5 15.1 19.1 
Louisiana 35.5 11.1 9.7 
New Mexico 26.1 5.2 5.1 
North Dakota 20.3 0.9 4.3 
Oklahoma 21.6 4.8 9.1 
Texas 19.1 5.8 7.8 
West Virginia 2.4 1.0 1.5 
Wyoming 37.1 9.8 18.5 
Source: Author calculations; data from U.S. Bureau of Economic 
Analysis. 
This finding is consistent with the results reported in Table 2. Applying our model in the same way for 
a price decline as for a price increase shows that falling oil prices would cause overall employment loss-es 
in Wyoming, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Alaska, Louisiana, Texas, West Virginia, and New Mexico, 
with the greatest percentage losses in the first three.18 
States like Texas and Louisiana that have downstream oil and gas industries that benefit from falling 
energy prices such as refining and petrochemicals would be less affected. In addition, states in which 
natural gas is more prominent than oil are likely to see less harm from falling oil prices. With the recent 
weakening in the relationship between oil and natural gas prices, a decline in oil prices does not neces-sarily 
imply as big a change in natural gas prices as it once did, lessening the effect of an oil price decline. 
While many states have diversified away from either a heavy reliance on energy consumption or en-ergy 
production, others have seen and will continue seeing an increasing dependence on energy pro-
8 
duction as a result of the shale revolution. Economic activity in these states is vulnerable to energy price 
declines. The smaller and less diversified the state, the larger the vulnerability. This vulnerability will 
increase with growing oil and natural gas production. 
Yet most states that currently benefit from falling oil and gas prices will still gain from such devel-opments 
even if their oil and gas production rises significantly in the coming years. For example, Cali-fornia, 
Colorado, and Pennsylvania produce a considerable amount of oil and natural gas, but these 
states would still gain from falling oil prices—even if their oil and gas sectors grew substantially. The 
California oil and gas sector, for example, would need to be more than 9.5 times larger than it is today 
for an oil price fall to hurt the California economy. Similarly, the sector would need to be more than 3.9 
times larger in Pennsylvania and more than 1.3 times larger in Colorado for oil price declines to hurt 
the relevant state economies. 
CONCLUSION 
Given that oil is priced on an international market, increased domestic oil production will not do much 
to lower prices for U.S. consumers, as any gains in U.S. production will be spread across the interna-tional 
market. Greater reliance on domestic oil resources in substitution for imports will reduce the 
vulnerability of the economy to oil supply disruptions, although not by much. 
Reduced energy use has lessened the vulnerability of the U.S. economy to oil price shocks. A similar 
phenomenon is seen at the state level, with many state economies having diversified away from energy-using 
industries. At the same time, the growing prominence of energy production can make states with 
small, undiversified economies more susceptible to an economic downturn during an energy price de-cline.
9 
About the Authors 
Stephen P.A. Brown is a professor of economics and the director of the Center for Business and 
Economic Research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. An internationally recognized scholar 
for his work in energy economics, Brown has conducted economic research and analysis on regional 
economic growth, aggregate economic activity, economic indicators, business conditions, public 
finance, energy, environment, climate policy, and economic impacts. 
Mine K. Yücel is senior vice president and director of research at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, 
where she has worked since 1989. Yücel analyzes the regional economy and energy markets on an ongo-ing 
basis and has published numerous articles on energy economics and regional growth. She has been 
the president of both the International and U.S. Association of Energy Economics and has served on the 
boards of numerous professional organizations. 
The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Federal Reserve Bank 
of Dallas or the Federal Reserve System.
10 
Endnotes 
1. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Hillard G. Huntington, “Assessing the U.S. Oil Security Premium,” Energy Economics vol. 38 no. C, July 
2013, pp. 118–127; and Stephen P.A. Brown and Ryan T. Kennelly, “Consequences of U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil,” Center for 
Business and Economic Research, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 2013. 
2. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 
3. U.S. sectoral GDP data come out with a lag. The latest data are from 2011. 
4. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve 
Bank of Dallas, Second Quarter, 1995. 
5. Latest detailed state sectoral data are from 2011, as of this writing. 
6. Lutz Kilian provides evidence that rising oil prices that result from demand shocks do not adversely affect U.S. economic activity. See 
Lutz Kilian, “Not All Oil Price Shocks Are Alike: Disentangling Demand and Supply Shocks in the Crude Oil Market,” American Eco-nomic 
Review vol. 9 no. 4, June 2009, pp. 1053–1069. 
7. Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank 
of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. 
8. This estimate of the overall U.S. employment response is in the range of estimated GDP responses to oil price movements. 
9. We previously estimated the oil-price elasticities of employment in coal mining, oil and natural gas extraction, oil field machinery, 
refining, and petrochemicals at 0.45, 1.01, 1.23, -0.56, and -0.32. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State 
Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. 
10. The industry elasticities are obtained from regressions of sectoral employment on WTI crude oil prices, using monthly data for the 
time period 2000–2011. The total U.S. employment elasticity is taken from empirical work in the economics literature. See Stephen 
P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, 
second quarter, 1995. 
11. Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank 
of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. We used the RIMS II multipliers for 2010 from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis to update the 
analysis. 
12. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve 
Bank of Dallas, second quarter, 1995, for an exposition of the model. 
13. Previous research on the response of U.S. economic activity to oil price shocks, such as James Hamilton’s 2003 paper, finds the U.S. 
economy responds more strongly to oil price increases than oil price decreases. See James D. Hamilton, “What Is an Oil Shock?,” Journal 
of Econometrics vol. 113 no. 2, April 2003, pp. 363–98. 
14. Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank 
of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. 
15. We showed in 2009 that there is coordinated movement in natural gas prices across the Atlantic, which can be accomplished 
through LNG shipments. But their results strongly suggest that the coordination of natural gas prices across the Atlantic is facilitated 
through oil prices, especially given that natural gas contracts in Europe are linked to oil prices. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. 
Yücel, “Market Arbitrage: European and North American Natural Gas Prices,” Energy Journal vol. 30, special issue, 2009, pp. 167–185. 
16. Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank 
of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. 
17. At the time of this writing, the most recent detailed GDP data for the states were from 2010. 
18. Because the results for the energy-producing states are dominated by shifts within the fossil fuel industry, applying our model to oil 
price decreases creates only a slight upward bias to our estimates. That bias increases as we shift our attention toward energy-importing 
states.

More Related Content

What's hot

EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlookEY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlookEY
 
Report: Benefits of Natural Gas Production & Exports for US Small Businesses
Report: Benefits of Natural Gas Production & Exports for US Small BusinessesReport: Benefits of Natural Gas Production & Exports for US Small Businesses
Report: Benefits of Natural Gas Production & Exports for US Small BusinessesMarcellus Drilling News
 
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2015
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2015Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2015
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2015Mercer Capital
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 April 2021
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 April 2021EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 April 2021
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 April 2021EY
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q319
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q319EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q319
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q319EY
 
Energy renaissance-outlook-2013[1]
Energy renaissance-outlook-2013[1]Energy renaissance-outlook-2013[1]
Energy renaissance-outlook-2013[1]John M Olson, CLTC
 
API Report: Oil and Natural Gas Stimulate American Economic and Job Growth
API Report: Oil and Natural Gas Stimulate American Economic and Job GrowthAPI Report: Oil and Natural Gas Stimulate American Economic and Job Growth
API Report: Oil and Natural Gas Stimulate American Economic and Job GrowthMarcellus Drilling News
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook (Q4, October 2020)
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook (Q4, October 2020)EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook (Q4, October 2020)
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook (Q4, October 2020)EY
 
EY Price Point: Global oil and gas market outlook - 1Q19
EY Price Point: Global oil and gas market outlook - 1Q19EY Price Point: Global oil and gas market outlook - 1Q19
EY Price Point: Global oil and gas market outlook - 1Q19EY
 
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Year-End 2014
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Year-End 2014Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Year-End 2014
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Year-End 2014Mercer Capital
 
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2014
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2014Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2014
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2014Mercer Capital
 
VF: Exploration and Production: Q4 2018 | Region Focus: Appalachia
VF: Exploration and Production: Q4 2018 | Region Focus: AppalachiaVF: Exploration and Production: Q4 2018 | Region Focus: Appalachia
VF: Exploration and Production: Q4 2018 | Region Focus: AppalachiaMercer Capital
 
Deloitte White Paper: Shale & Renewable Energy
Deloitte White Paper: Shale & Renewable EnergyDeloitte White Paper: Shale & Renewable Energy
Deloitte White Paper: Shale & Renewable EnergyMarcellus Drilling News
 
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Energy Industry | Q3 2021 | Segment: Bakken
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Energy Industry | Q3 2021 | Segment:  BakkenMercer Capital's Value Focus: Energy Industry | Q3 2021 | Segment:  Bakken
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Energy Industry | Q3 2021 | Segment: BakkenMercer Capital
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlookEY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlookEY
 
EY Price Point: Global Oil and Gas Market Outlook - Q3
EY Price Point: Global Oil and Gas Market Outlook - Q3EY Price Point: Global Oil and Gas Market Outlook - Q3
EY Price Point: Global Oil and Gas Market Outlook - Q3EY
 
Power transactions and trends Q1 2019
Power transactions and trends Q1 2019Power transactions and trends Q1 2019
Power transactions and trends Q1 2019EY
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 | April 2022
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 | April 2022EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 | April 2022
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 | April 2022EY
 
High Yield Bonds - The Rise of the Fallen
High Yield Bonds - The Rise of the FallenHigh Yield Bonds - The Rise of the Fallen
High Yield Bonds - The Rise of the FallenAranca
 

What's hot (20)

Commodity report 01 june 2015 Ways2Capital
Commodity report 01 june 2015 Ways2CapitalCommodity report 01 june 2015 Ways2Capital
Commodity report 01 june 2015 Ways2Capital
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlookEY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook
 
Report: Benefits of Natural Gas Production & Exports for US Small Businesses
Report: Benefits of Natural Gas Production & Exports for US Small BusinessesReport: Benefits of Natural Gas Production & Exports for US Small Businesses
Report: Benefits of Natural Gas Production & Exports for US Small Businesses
 
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2015
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2015Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2015
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2015
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 April 2021
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 April 2021EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 April 2021
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 April 2021
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q319
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q319EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q319
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q319
 
Energy renaissance-outlook-2013[1]
Energy renaissance-outlook-2013[1]Energy renaissance-outlook-2013[1]
Energy renaissance-outlook-2013[1]
 
API Report: Oil and Natural Gas Stimulate American Economic and Job Growth
API Report: Oil and Natural Gas Stimulate American Economic and Job GrowthAPI Report: Oil and Natural Gas Stimulate American Economic and Job Growth
API Report: Oil and Natural Gas Stimulate American Economic and Job Growth
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook (Q4, October 2020)
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook (Q4, October 2020)EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook (Q4, October 2020)
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook (Q4, October 2020)
 
EY Price Point: Global oil and gas market outlook - 1Q19
EY Price Point: Global oil and gas market outlook - 1Q19EY Price Point: Global oil and gas market outlook - 1Q19
EY Price Point: Global oil and gas market outlook - 1Q19
 
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Year-End 2014
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Year-End 2014Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Year-End 2014
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Year-End 2014
 
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2014
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2014Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2014
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Auto Dealer Industry | Mid-Year 2014
 
VF: Exploration and Production: Q4 2018 | Region Focus: Appalachia
VF: Exploration and Production: Q4 2018 | Region Focus: AppalachiaVF: Exploration and Production: Q4 2018 | Region Focus: Appalachia
VF: Exploration and Production: Q4 2018 | Region Focus: Appalachia
 
Deloitte White Paper: Shale & Renewable Energy
Deloitte White Paper: Shale & Renewable EnergyDeloitte White Paper: Shale & Renewable Energy
Deloitte White Paper: Shale & Renewable Energy
 
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Energy Industry | Q3 2021 | Segment: Bakken
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Energy Industry | Q3 2021 | Segment:  BakkenMercer Capital's Value Focus: Energy Industry | Q3 2021 | Segment:  Bakken
Mercer Capital's Value Focus: Energy Industry | Q3 2021 | Segment: Bakken
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlookEY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook
 
EY Price Point: Global Oil and Gas Market Outlook - Q3
EY Price Point: Global Oil and Gas Market Outlook - Q3EY Price Point: Global Oil and Gas Market Outlook - Q3
EY Price Point: Global Oil and Gas Market Outlook - Q3
 
Power transactions and trends Q1 2019
Power transactions and trends Q1 2019Power transactions and trends Q1 2019
Power transactions and trends Q1 2019
 
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 | April 2022
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 | April 2022EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 | April 2022
EY Price Point: global oil and gas market outlook, Q2 | April 2022
 
High Yield Bonds - The Rise of the Fallen
High Yield Bonds - The Rise of the FallenHigh Yield Bonds - The Rise of the Fallen
High Yield Bonds - The Rise of the Fallen
 

Viewers also liked

Swiss Space Systems _ 2014 USA
Swiss Space Systems _ 2014 USASwiss Space Systems _ 2014 USA
Swiss Space Systems _ 2014 USADmitry Tseitlin
 
Губанов _ спасение блока А Энергия
Губанов _ спасение блока А ЭнергияГубанов _ спасение блока А Энергия
Губанов _ спасение блока А ЭнергияDmitry Tseitlin
 
Satellite Industry Report Sept 2014
Satellite Industry Report Sept 2014Satellite Industry Report Sept 2014
Satellite Industry Report Sept 2014Dmitry Tseitlin
 
презентация а.чубайса по роснано 26 мая 2010
презентация а.чубайса по роснано 26 мая 2010презентация а.чубайса по роснано 26 мая 2010
презентация а.чубайса по роснано 26 мая 2010Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Annual report -_2014_Aerojet Rocketdyne
Annual report -_2014_Aerojet RocketdyneAnnual report -_2014_Aerojet Rocketdyne
Annual report -_2014_Aerojet RocketdyneDmitry Tseitlin
 
Pre Seed workshop six year study 2004-2010
Pre Seed workshop  six year study 2004-2010 Pre Seed workshop  six year study 2004-2010
Pre Seed workshop six year study 2004-2010 Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Aerojet 2012 модификация нк-33
Aerojet 2012  модификация нк-33Aerojet 2012  модификация нк-33
Aerojet 2012 модификация нк-33Dmitry Tseitlin
 
CALS _ PLM ЦСКБ Прогресс
CALS _ PLM ЦСКБ ПрогрессCALS _ PLM ЦСКБ Прогресс
CALS _ PLM ЦСКБ ПрогрессDmitry Tseitlin
 
Additive mfg consortium overview 2010
Additive mfg consortium overview 2010Additive mfg consortium overview 2010
Additive mfg consortium overview 2010Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Выездные проверки Резников Сколково
Выездные проверки Резников СколковоВыездные проверки Резников Сколково
Выездные проверки Резников СколковоDmitry Tseitlin
 
Commercial Crew Program status-update-1-9-13
Commercial Crew Program status-update-1-9-13Commercial Crew Program status-update-1-9-13
Commercial Crew Program status-update-1-9-13Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Incubit Technology Ventures _ ELBIT 2014
Incubit Technology Ventures _ ELBIT 2014Incubit Technology Ventures _ ELBIT 2014
Incubit Technology Ventures _ ELBIT 2014Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Cколково взгляд за горизонт
Cколково   взгляд за горизонтCколково   взгляд за горизонт
Cколково взгляд за горизонтDmitry Tseitlin
 
Диспут. мой взгляд на Сколково
Диспут. мой взгляд на СколковоДиспут. мой взгляд на Сколково
Диспут. мой взгляд на СколковоDmitry Tseitlin
 
Статистика нанопродукция 16 июля 2010
Статистика нанопродукция 16 июля 2010Статистика нанопродукция 16 июля 2010
Статистика нанопродукция 16 июля 2010Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Инкубатор Минерва -МИСиС 20 дек 2010
Инкубатор Минерва -МИСиС 20 дек 2010Инкубатор Минерва -МИСиС 20 дек 2010
Инкубатор Минерва -МИСиС 20 дек 2010Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Инновации: технопредприниматели, волонтёры и опыт MIT
Инновации: технопредприниматели, волонтёры и опыт MITИнновации: технопредприниматели, волонтёры и опыт MIT
Инновации: технопредприниматели, волонтёры и опыт MITDmitry Tseitlin
 

Viewers also liked (18)

Swiss Space Systems _ 2014 USA
Swiss Space Systems _ 2014 USASwiss Space Systems _ 2014 USA
Swiss Space Systems _ 2014 USA
 
Губанов _ спасение блока А Энергия
Губанов _ спасение блока А ЭнергияГубанов _ спасение блока А Энергия
Губанов _ спасение блока А Энергия
 
Satellite Industry Report Sept 2014
Satellite Industry Report Sept 2014Satellite Industry Report Sept 2014
Satellite Industry Report Sept 2014
 
презентация а.чубайса по роснано 26 мая 2010
презентация а.чубайса по роснано 26 мая 2010презентация а.чубайса по роснано 26 мая 2010
презентация а.чубайса по роснано 26 мая 2010
 
Annual report -_2014_Aerojet Rocketdyne
Annual report -_2014_Aerojet RocketdyneAnnual report -_2014_Aerojet Rocketdyne
Annual report -_2014_Aerojet Rocketdyne
 
Pre Seed workshop six year study 2004-2010
Pre Seed workshop  six year study 2004-2010 Pre Seed workshop  six year study 2004-2010
Pre Seed workshop six year study 2004-2010
 
Aerojet 2012 модификация нк-33
Aerojet 2012  модификация нк-33Aerojet 2012  модификация нк-33
Aerojet 2012 модификация нк-33
 
CALS _ PLM ЦСКБ Прогресс
CALS _ PLM ЦСКБ ПрогрессCALS _ PLM ЦСКБ Прогресс
CALS _ PLM ЦСКБ Прогресс
 
Nsrc2013 program-slides
Nsrc2013 program-slidesNsrc2013 program-slides
Nsrc2013 program-slides
 
Additive mfg consortium overview 2010
Additive mfg consortium overview 2010Additive mfg consortium overview 2010
Additive mfg consortium overview 2010
 
Выездные проверки Резников Сколково
Выездные проверки Резников СколковоВыездные проверки Резников Сколково
Выездные проверки Резников Сколково
 
Commercial Crew Program status-update-1-9-13
Commercial Crew Program status-update-1-9-13Commercial Crew Program status-update-1-9-13
Commercial Crew Program status-update-1-9-13
 
Incubit Technology Ventures _ ELBIT 2014
Incubit Technology Ventures _ ELBIT 2014Incubit Technology Ventures _ ELBIT 2014
Incubit Technology Ventures _ ELBIT 2014
 
Cколково взгляд за горизонт
Cколково   взгляд за горизонтCколково   взгляд за горизонт
Cколково взгляд за горизонт
 
Диспут. мой взгляд на Сколково
Диспут. мой взгляд на СколковоДиспут. мой взгляд на Сколково
Диспут. мой взгляд на Сколково
 
Статистика нанопродукция 16 июля 2010
Статистика нанопродукция 16 июля 2010Статистика нанопродукция 16 июля 2010
Статистика нанопродукция 16 июля 2010
 
Инкубатор Минерва -МИСиС 20 дек 2010
Инкубатор Минерва -МИСиС 20 дек 2010Инкубатор Минерва -МИСиС 20 дек 2010
Инкубатор Минерва -МИСиС 20 дек 2010
 
Инновации: технопредприниматели, волонтёры и опыт MIT
Инновации: технопредприниматели, волонтёры и опыт MITИнновации: технопредприниматели, волонтёры и опыт MIT
Инновации: технопредприниматели, волонтёры и опыт MIT
 

Similar to Energy Brief Oil Shale

2016 International Index of Energy Security Risk
2016 International Index of Energy Security Risk2016 International Index of Energy Security Risk
2016 International Index of Energy Security RiskMarcellus Drilling News
 
AmeraTex Energy | The American Oil & Gas Industry Is Rescuing The Obama Economy
AmeraTex Energy | The American Oil & Gas Industry Is Rescuing The Obama EconomyAmeraTex Energy | The American Oil & Gas Industry Is Rescuing The Obama Economy
AmeraTex Energy | The American Oil & Gas Industry Is Rescuing The Obama EconomyAmeraTex Energy Inc
 
The Keystone Xl ( Kxl ) Pipeline
The Keystone Xl ( Kxl ) PipelineThe Keystone Xl ( Kxl ) Pipeline
The Keystone Xl ( Kxl ) PipelineCynthia Wilson
 
Oil & gas = economy economy = oil &gas february 2016
Oil & gas = economy economy = oil &gas    february  2016Oil & gas = economy economy = oil &gas    february  2016
Oil & gas = economy economy = oil &gas february 2016Bruce LaCour
 
The State of American Energy Speech
The State of American Energy SpeechThe State of American Energy Speech
The State of American Energy SpeechPorts-To-Plains Blog
 
FinalDissertation
FinalDissertationFinalDissertation
FinalDissertationMyles Walsh
 
12.21.2021 us-action-climate-change
12.21.2021  us-action-climate-change12.21.2021  us-action-climate-change
12.21.2021 us-action-climate-changeR. Jay Olson
 
Cost Of Climate Change Essay
Cost Of Climate Change EssayCost Of Climate Change Essay
Cost Of Climate Change EssayAna Espinal
 
U.S. Petrochemical Industry Future - Upstream - Crude Oil - Logic Versus Fai...
U.S. Petrochemical Industry Future -  Upstream - Crude Oil - Logic Versus Fai...U.S. Petrochemical Industry Future -  Upstream - Crude Oil - Logic Versus Fai...
U.S. Petrochemical Industry Future - Upstream - Crude Oil - Logic Versus Fai...Bruce LaCour
 
Step on the Gas! How to Extend America's Energy Advantage
Step on the Gas! How to Extend America's Energy AdvantageStep on the Gas! How to Extend America's Energy Advantage
Step on the Gas! How to Extend America's Energy AdvantageMarcellus Drilling News
 
AESC--This Time It's Different
AESC--This Time It's DifferentAESC--This Time It's Different
AESC--This Time It's DifferentBaron Lukas
 
Disadvantages Of Fracking Essay
Disadvantages Of Fracking EssayDisadvantages Of Fracking Essay
Disadvantages Of Fracking EssayDotha Keller
 
CASE STUDY ON DEPRESSION AND RECESSION( 2001)
CASE STUDY ON DEPRESSION AND RECESSION( 2001)CASE STUDY ON DEPRESSION AND RECESSION( 2001)
CASE STUDY ON DEPRESSION AND RECESSION( 2001)Vineeth Poliyath
 
Deloitte: Oil and Gas Reality Check 2014
Deloitte: Oil and Gas Reality Check 2014Deloitte: Oil and Gas Reality Check 2014
Deloitte: Oil and Gas Reality Check 2014Marcellus Drilling News
 
Bp statistical-review-of-world-energy-2014-full-report
Bp statistical-review-of-world-energy-2014-full-reportBp statistical-review-of-world-energy-2014-full-report
Bp statistical-review-of-world-energy-2014-full-reportEnergy for One World
 
CRS: U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Non-Federal Areas
CRS: U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Non-Federal AreasCRS: U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Non-Federal Areas
CRS: U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Non-Federal AreasMarcellus Drilling News
 
ACCF Letter to DOE Sec. Ernest Moniz Requesting Expedited Approval of LNG Exp...
ACCF Letter to DOE Sec. Ernest Moniz Requesting Expedited Approval of LNG Exp...ACCF Letter to DOE Sec. Ernest Moniz Requesting Expedited Approval of LNG Exp...
ACCF Letter to DOE Sec. Ernest Moniz Requesting Expedited Approval of LNG Exp...Marcellus Drilling News
 
The Implications Of Oil Trade
The Implications Of Oil TradeThe Implications Of Oil Trade
The Implications Of Oil TradeJenna Welch
 

Similar to Energy Brief Oil Shale (20)

2016 International Index of Energy Security Risk
2016 International Index of Energy Security Risk2016 International Index of Energy Security Risk
2016 International Index of Energy Security Risk
 
AmeraTex Energy | The American Oil & Gas Industry Is Rescuing The Obama Economy
AmeraTex Energy | The American Oil & Gas Industry Is Rescuing The Obama EconomyAmeraTex Energy | The American Oil & Gas Industry Is Rescuing The Obama Economy
AmeraTex Energy | The American Oil & Gas Industry Is Rescuing The Obama Economy
 
The Keystone Xl ( Kxl ) Pipeline
The Keystone Xl ( Kxl ) PipelineThe Keystone Xl ( Kxl ) Pipeline
The Keystone Xl ( Kxl ) Pipeline
 
Senior Thesis 2016
Senior Thesis 2016Senior Thesis 2016
Senior Thesis 2016
 
Oil & gas = economy economy = oil &gas february 2016
Oil & gas = economy economy = oil &gas    february  2016Oil & gas = economy economy = oil &gas    february  2016
Oil & gas = economy economy = oil &gas february 2016
 
The State of American Energy Speech
The State of American Energy SpeechThe State of American Energy Speech
The State of American Energy Speech
 
FinalDissertation
FinalDissertationFinalDissertation
FinalDissertation
 
12.21.2021 us-action-climate-change
12.21.2021  us-action-climate-change12.21.2021  us-action-climate-change
12.21.2021 us-action-climate-change
 
Cost Of Climate Change Essay
Cost Of Climate Change EssayCost Of Climate Change Essay
Cost Of Climate Change Essay
 
U.S. Petrochemical Industry Future - Upstream - Crude Oil - Logic Versus Fai...
U.S. Petrochemical Industry Future -  Upstream - Crude Oil - Logic Versus Fai...U.S. Petrochemical Industry Future -  Upstream - Crude Oil - Logic Versus Fai...
U.S. Petrochemical Industry Future - Upstream - Crude Oil - Logic Versus Fai...
 
Step on the Gas! How to Extend America's Energy Advantage
Step on the Gas! How to Extend America's Energy AdvantageStep on the Gas! How to Extend America's Energy Advantage
Step on the Gas! How to Extend America's Energy Advantage
 
AESC--This Time It's Different
AESC--This Time It's DifferentAESC--This Time It's Different
AESC--This Time It's Different
 
Disadvantages Of Fracking Essay
Disadvantages Of Fracking EssayDisadvantages Of Fracking Essay
Disadvantages Of Fracking Essay
 
CASE STUDY ON DEPRESSION AND RECESSION( 2001)
CASE STUDY ON DEPRESSION AND RECESSION( 2001)CASE STUDY ON DEPRESSION AND RECESSION( 2001)
CASE STUDY ON DEPRESSION AND RECESSION( 2001)
 
Deloitte: Oil and Gas Reality Check 2014
Deloitte: Oil and Gas Reality Check 2014Deloitte: Oil and Gas Reality Check 2014
Deloitte: Oil and Gas Reality Check 2014
 
Shale gas
Shale gasShale gas
Shale gas
 
Bp statistical-review-of-world-energy-2014-full-report
Bp statistical-review-of-world-energy-2014-full-reportBp statistical-review-of-world-energy-2014-full-report
Bp statistical-review-of-world-energy-2014-full-report
 
CRS: U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Non-Federal Areas
CRS: U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Non-Federal AreasCRS: U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Non-Federal Areas
CRS: U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production in Federal and Non-Federal Areas
 
ACCF Letter to DOE Sec. Ernest Moniz Requesting Expedited Approval of LNG Exp...
ACCF Letter to DOE Sec. Ernest Moniz Requesting Expedited Approval of LNG Exp...ACCF Letter to DOE Sec. Ernest Moniz Requesting Expedited Approval of LNG Exp...
ACCF Letter to DOE Sec. Ernest Moniz Requesting Expedited Approval of LNG Exp...
 
The Implications Of Oil Trade
The Implications Of Oil TradeThe Implications Of Oil Trade
The Implications Of Oil Trade
 

More from Dmitry Tseitlin

Ton Tlegram Open Network
Ton Tlegram Open NetworkTon Tlegram Open Network
Ton Tlegram Open NetworkDmitry Tseitlin
 
State of innovation Thomson Reuters 2016
State of innovation Thomson Reuters 2016 State of innovation Thomson Reuters 2016
State of innovation Thomson Reuters 2016 Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Clarity from above PWC 2016
Clarity from above PWC 2016Clarity from above PWC 2016
Clarity from above PWC 2016Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Отчет Фонд Сколково 25 апреля 2011
Отчет Фонд Сколково 25 апреля 2011Отчет Фонд Сколково 25 апреля 2011
Отчет Фонд Сколково 25 апреля 2011Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Technology roadmap highlights_report 2015
Technology roadmap highlights_report 2015Technology roadmap highlights_report 2015
Technology roadmap highlights_report 2015Dmitry Tseitlin
 
IGS Low cost access to space April 2016
IGS Low cost access to space April 2016IGS Low cost access to space April 2016
IGS Low cost access to space April 2016Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Satellite technologies in UK agriculture 2015
Satellite technologies in UK agriculture 2015Satellite technologies in UK agriculture 2015
Satellite technologies in UK agriculture 2015Dmitry Tseitlin
 
A Roadmap to Interstellar Flight Philip Lubin Physics Dept, UC Santa Barbara ...
A Roadmap to Interstellar Flight Philip Lubin Physics Dept, UC Santa Barbara ...A Roadmap to Interstellar Flight Philip Lubin Physics Dept, UC Santa Barbara ...
A Roadmap to Interstellar Flight Philip Lubin Physics Dept, UC Santa Barbara ...Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Постановление Правительства "О реализации национальной технологической иниц...
Постановление Правительства "О реализации национальной технологической иниц...Постановление Правительства "О реализации национальной технологической иниц...
Постановление Правительства "О реализации национальной технологической иниц...Dmitry Tseitlin
 
ESA - 2013 space transportation
ESA - 2013 space transportation ESA - 2013 space transportation
ESA - 2013 space transportation Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Результаты РФФИ 2015
Результаты РФФИ 2015 Результаты РФФИ 2015
Результаты РФФИ 2015 Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Cоздание сверхтяжелых РН для исследования и освоения Луны и Марса - прошлое, ...
Cоздание сверхтяжелых РН для исследования и освоения Луны и Марса - прошлое, ...Cоздание сверхтяжелых РН для исследования и освоения Луны и Марса - прошлое, ...
Cоздание сверхтяжелых РН для исследования и освоения Луны и Марса - прошлое, ...Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Ракета космического назначения «Зенит 3SL» для программы «Морской Старт» В.М...
Ракета космического назначения «Зенит 3SL» для программы «Морской Старт» В.М...Ракета космического назначения «Зенит 3SL» для программы «Морской Старт» В.М...
Ракета космического назначения «Зенит 3SL» для программы «Морской Старт» В.М...Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Space Works Nano Microsatellite Market forecast 2016
Space Works Nano Microsatellite Market forecast 2016Space Works Nano Microsatellite Market forecast 2016
Space Works Nano Microsatellite Market forecast 2016Dmitry Tseitlin
 
WIPO Global Innovation Index 2015
WIPO Global Innovation Index 2015WIPO Global Innovation Index 2015
WIPO Global Innovation Index 2015Dmitry Tseitlin
 
Agritech Funder Investing report 2015
Agritech Funder Investing report 2015Agritech Funder Investing report 2015
Agritech Funder Investing report 2015Dmitry Tseitlin
 
High technology entrepreneurs and the patent system. 2008 Berkeley
High technology entrepreneurs and the patent system. 2008 BerkeleyHigh technology entrepreneurs and the patent system. 2008 Berkeley
High technology entrepreneurs and the patent system. 2008 BerkeleyDmitry Tseitlin
 
Start-up Space Tauri Group 2016 -
Start-up Space Tauri Group 2016 -Start-up Space Tauri Group 2016 -
Start-up Space Tauri Group 2016 -Dmitry Tseitlin
 
NASA_CCO_status-2013 update
NASA_CCO_status-2013 updateNASA_CCO_status-2013 update
NASA_CCO_status-2013 updateDmitry Tseitlin
 

More from Dmitry Tseitlin (20)

Ton Tlegram Open Network
Ton Tlegram Open NetworkTon Tlegram Open Network
Ton Tlegram Open Network
 
Marinet en 2017
Marinet en 2017Marinet en 2017
Marinet en 2017
 
State of innovation Thomson Reuters 2016
State of innovation Thomson Reuters 2016 State of innovation Thomson Reuters 2016
State of innovation Thomson Reuters 2016
 
Clarity from above PWC 2016
Clarity from above PWC 2016Clarity from above PWC 2016
Clarity from above PWC 2016
 
Отчет Фонд Сколково 25 апреля 2011
Отчет Фонд Сколково 25 апреля 2011Отчет Фонд Сколково 25 апреля 2011
Отчет Фонд Сколково 25 апреля 2011
 
Technology roadmap highlights_report 2015
Technology roadmap highlights_report 2015Technology roadmap highlights_report 2015
Technology roadmap highlights_report 2015
 
IGS Low cost access to space April 2016
IGS Low cost access to space April 2016IGS Low cost access to space April 2016
IGS Low cost access to space April 2016
 
Satellite technologies in UK agriculture 2015
Satellite technologies in UK agriculture 2015Satellite technologies in UK agriculture 2015
Satellite technologies in UK agriculture 2015
 
A Roadmap to Interstellar Flight Philip Lubin Physics Dept, UC Santa Barbara ...
A Roadmap to Interstellar Flight Philip Lubin Physics Dept, UC Santa Barbara ...A Roadmap to Interstellar Flight Philip Lubin Physics Dept, UC Santa Barbara ...
A Roadmap to Interstellar Flight Philip Lubin Physics Dept, UC Santa Barbara ...
 
Постановление Правительства "О реализации национальной технологической иниц...
Постановление Правительства "О реализации национальной технологической иниц...Постановление Правительства "О реализации национальной технологической иниц...
Постановление Правительства "О реализации национальной технологической иниц...
 
ESA - 2013 space transportation
ESA - 2013 space transportation ESA - 2013 space transportation
ESA - 2013 space transportation
 
Результаты РФФИ 2015
Результаты РФФИ 2015 Результаты РФФИ 2015
Результаты РФФИ 2015
 
Cоздание сверхтяжелых РН для исследования и освоения Луны и Марса - прошлое, ...
Cоздание сверхтяжелых РН для исследования и освоения Луны и Марса - прошлое, ...Cоздание сверхтяжелых РН для исследования и освоения Луны и Марса - прошлое, ...
Cоздание сверхтяжелых РН для исследования и освоения Луны и Марса - прошлое, ...
 
Ракета космического назначения «Зенит 3SL» для программы «Морской Старт» В.М...
Ракета космического назначения «Зенит 3SL» для программы «Морской Старт» В.М...Ракета космического назначения «Зенит 3SL» для программы «Морской Старт» В.М...
Ракета космического назначения «Зенит 3SL» для программы «Морской Старт» В.М...
 
Space Works Nano Microsatellite Market forecast 2016
Space Works Nano Microsatellite Market forecast 2016Space Works Nano Microsatellite Market forecast 2016
Space Works Nano Microsatellite Market forecast 2016
 
WIPO Global Innovation Index 2015
WIPO Global Innovation Index 2015WIPO Global Innovation Index 2015
WIPO Global Innovation Index 2015
 
Agritech Funder Investing report 2015
Agritech Funder Investing report 2015Agritech Funder Investing report 2015
Agritech Funder Investing report 2015
 
High technology entrepreneurs and the patent system. 2008 Berkeley
High technology entrepreneurs and the patent system. 2008 BerkeleyHigh technology entrepreneurs and the patent system. 2008 Berkeley
High technology entrepreneurs and the patent system. 2008 Berkeley
 
Start-up Space Tauri Group 2016 -
Start-up Space Tauri Group 2016 -Start-up Space Tauri Group 2016 -
Start-up Space Tauri Group 2016 -
 
NASA_CCO_status-2013 update
NASA_CCO_status-2013 updateNASA_CCO_status-2013 update
NASA_CCO_status-2013 update
 

Recently uploaded

Connector Corner: Extending LLM automation use cases with UiPath GenAI connec...
Connector Corner: Extending LLM automation use cases with UiPath GenAI connec...Connector Corner: Extending LLM automation use cases with UiPath GenAI connec...
Connector Corner: Extending LLM automation use cases with UiPath GenAI connec...DianaGray10
 
Babel Compiler - Transforming JavaScript for All Browsers.pptx
Babel Compiler - Transforming JavaScript for All Browsers.pptxBabel Compiler - Transforming JavaScript for All Browsers.pptx
Babel Compiler - Transforming JavaScript for All Browsers.pptxYounusS2
 
Crea il tuo assistente AI con lo Stregatto (open source python framework)
Crea il tuo assistente AI con lo Stregatto (open source python framework)Crea il tuo assistente AI con lo Stregatto (open source python framework)
Crea il tuo assistente AI con lo Stregatto (open source python framework)Commit University
 
Introduction to Matsuo Laboratory (ENG).pptx
Introduction to Matsuo Laboratory (ENG).pptxIntroduction to Matsuo Laboratory (ENG).pptx
Introduction to Matsuo Laboratory (ENG).pptxMatsuo Lab
 
Designing A Time bound resource download URL
Designing A Time bound resource download URLDesigning A Time bound resource download URL
Designing A Time bound resource download URLRuncy Oommen
 
Cloud Revolution: Exploring the New Wave of Serverless Spatial Data
Cloud Revolution: Exploring the New Wave of Serverless Spatial DataCloud Revolution: Exploring the New Wave of Serverless Spatial Data
Cloud Revolution: Exploring the New Wave of Serverless Spatial DataSafe Software
 
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 8
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 8UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 8
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 8DianaGray10
 
Basic Building Blocks of Internet of Things.
Basic Building Blocks of Internet of Things.Basic Building Blocks of Internet of Things.
Basic Building Blocks of Internet of Things.YounusS2
 
RAG Patterns and Vector Search in Generative AI
RAG Patterns and Vector Search in Generative AIRAG Patterns and Vector Search in Generative AI
RAG Patterns and Vector Search in Generative AIUdaiappa Ramachandran
 
Things you didn't know you can use in your Salesforce
Things you didn't know you can use in your SalesforceThings you didn't know you can use in your Salesforce
Things you didn't know you can use in your SalesforceMartin Humpolec
 
Apres-Cyber - The Data Dilemma: Bridging Offensive Operations and Machine Lea...
Apres-Cyber - The Data Dilemma: Bridging Offensive Operations and Machine Lea...Apres-Cyber - The Data Dilemma: Bridging Offensive Operations and Machine Lea...
Apres-Cyber - The Data Dilemma: Bridging Offensive Operations and Machine Lea...Will Schroeder
 
Nanopower In Semiconductor Industry.pdf
Nanopower  In Semiconductor Industry.pdfNanopower  In Semiconductor Industry.pdf
Nanopower In Semiconductor Industry.pdfPedro Manuel
 
Bird eye's view on Camunda open source ecosystem
Bird eye's view on Camunda open source ecosystemBird eye's view on Camunda open source ecosystem
Bird eye's view on Camunda open source ecosystemAsko Soukka
 
IaC & GitOps in a Nutshell - a FridayInANuthshell Episode.pdf
IaC & GitOps in a Nutshell - a FridayInANuthshell Episode.pdfIaC & GitOps in a Nutshell - a FridayInANuthshell Episode.pdf
IaC & GitOps in a Nutshell - a FridayInANuthshell Episode.pdfDaniel Santiago Silva Capera
 
The Data Metaverse: Unpacking the Roles, Use Cases, and Tech Trends in Data a...
The Data Metaverse: Unpacking the Roles, Use Cases, and Tech Trends in Data a...The Data Metaverse: Unpacking the Roles, Use Cases, and Tech Trends in Data a...
The Data Metaverse: Unpacking the Roles, Use Cases, and Tech Trends in Data a...Aggregage
 
Videogame localization & technology_ how to enhance the power of translation.pdf
Videogame localization & technology_ how to enhance the power of translation.pdfVideogame localization & technology_ how to enhance the power of translation.pdf
Videogame localization & technology_ how to enhance the power of translation.pdfinfogdgmi
 
IESVE Software for Florida Code Compliance Using ASHRAE 90.1-2019
IESVE Software for Florida Code Compliance Using ASHRAE 90.1-2019IESVE Software for Florida Code Compliance Using ASHRAE 90.1-2019
IESVE Software for Florida Code Compliance Using ASHRAE 90.1-2019IES VE
 
UiPath Community: AI for UiPath Automation Developers
UiPath Community: AI for UiPath Automation DevelopersUiPath Community: AI for UiPath Automation Developers
UiPath Community: AI for UiPath Automation DevelopersUiPathCommunity
 
COMPUTER 10: Lesson 7 - File Storage and Online Collaboration
COMPUTER 10: Lesson 7 - File Storage and Online CollaborationCOMPUTER 10: Lesson 7 - File Storage and Online Collaboration
COMPUTER 10: Lesson 7 - File Storage and Online Collaborationbruanjhuli
 
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 7
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 7UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 7
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 7DianaGray10
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Connector Corner: Extending LLM automation use cases with UiPath GenAI connec...
Connector Corner: Extending LLM automation use cases with UiPath GenAI connec...Connector Corner: Extending LLM automation use cases with UiPath GenAI connec...
Connector Corner: Extending LLM automation use cases with UiPath GenAI connec...
 
Babel Compiler - Transforming JavaScript for All Browsers.pptx
Babel Compiler - Transforming JavaScript for All Browsers.pptxBabel Compiler - Transforming JavaScript for All Browsers.pptx
Babel Compiler - Transforming JavaScript for All Browsers.pptx
 
Crea il tuo assistente AI con lo Stregatto (open source python framework)
Crea il tuo assistente AI con lo Stregatto (open source python framework)Crea il tuo assistente AI con lo Stregatto (open source python framework)
Crea il tuo assistente AI con lo Stregatto (open source python framework)
 
Introduction to Matsuo Laboratory (ENG).pptx
Introduction to Matsuo Laboratory (ENG).pptxIntroduction to Matsuo Laboratory (ENG).pptx
Introduction to Matsuo Laboratory (ENG).pptx
 
Designing A Time bound resource download URL
Designing A Time bound resource download URLDesigning A Time bound resource download URL
Designing A Time bound resource download URL
 
Cloud Revolution: Exploring the New Wave of Serverless Spatial Data
Cloud Revolution: Exploring the New Wave of Serverless Spatial DataCloud Revolution: Exploring the New Wave of Serverless Spatial Data
Cloud Revolution: Exploring the New Wave of Serverless Spatial Data
 
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 8
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 8UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 8
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 8
 
Basic Building Blocks of Internet of Things.
Basic Building Blocks of Internet of Things.Basic Building Blocks of Internet of Things.
Basic Building Blocks of Internet of Things.
 
RAG Patterns and Vector Search in Generative AI
RAG Patterns and Vector Search in Generative AIRAG Patterns and Vector Search in Generative AI
RAG Patterns and Vector Search in Generative AI
 
Things you didn't know you can use in your Salesforce
Things you didn't know you can use in your SalesforceThings you didn't know you can use in your Salesforce
Things you didn't know you can use in your Salesforce
 
Apres-Cyber - The Data Dilemma: Bridging Offensive Operations and Machine Lea...
Apres-Cyber - The Data Dilemma: Bridging Offensive Operations and Machine Lea...Apres-Cyber - The Data Dilemma: Bridging Offensive Operations and Machine Lea...
Apres-Cyber - The Data Dilemma: Bridging Offensive Operations and Machine Lea...
 
Nanopower In Semiconductor Industry.pdf
Nanopower  In Semiconductor Industry.pdfNanopower  In Semiconductor Industry.pdf
Nanopower In Semiconductor Industry.pdf
 
Bird eye's view on Camunda open source ecosystem
Bird eye's view on Camunda open source ecosystemBird eye's view on Camunda open source ecosystem
Bird eye's view on Camunda open source ecosystem
 
IaC & GitOps in a Nutshell - a FridayInANuthshell Episode.pdf
IaC & GitOps in a Nutshell - a FridayInANuthshell Episode.pdfIaC & GitOps in a Nutshell - a FridayInANuthshell Episode.pdf
IaC & GitOps in a Nutshell - a FridayInANuthshell Episode.pdf
 
The Data Metaverse: Unpacking the Roles, Use Cases, and Tech Trends in Data a...
The Data Metaverse: Unpacking the Roles, Use Cases, and Tech Trends in Data a...The Data Metaverse: Unpacking the Roles, Use Cases, and Tech Trends in Data a...
The Data Metaverse: Unpacking the Roles, Use Cases, and Tech Trends in Data a...
 
Videogame localization & technology_ how to enhance the power of translation.pdf
Videogame localization & technology_ how to enhance the power of translation.pdfVideogame localization & technology_ how to enhance the power of translation.pdf
Videogame localization & technology_ how to enhance the power of translation.pdf
 
IESVE Software for Florida Code Compliance Using ASHRAE 90.1-2019
IESVE Software for Florida Code Compliance Using ASHRAE 90.1-2019IESVE Software for Florida Code Compliance Using ASHRAE 90.1-2019
IESVE Software for Florida Code Compliance Using ASHRAE 90.1-2019
 
UiPath Community: AI for UiPath Automation Developers
UiPath Community: AI for UiPath Automation DevelopersUiPath Community: AI for UiPath Automation Developers
UiPath Community: AI for UiPath Automation Developers
 
COMPUTER 10: Lesson 7 - File Storage and Online Collaboration
COMPUTER 10: Lesson 7 - File Storage and Online CollaborationCOMPUTER 10: Lesson 7 - File Storage and Online Collaboration
COMPUTER 10: Lesson 7 - File Storage and Online Collaboration
 
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 7
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 7UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 7
UiPath Studio Web workshop series - Day 7
 

Energy Brief Oil Shale

  • 1. ENERGY BRIEF The Shale Gas and Tight Oil Boom: U.S. States’ Economic Gains and Vulnerabilities Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel October 2013 This brief is made possible through the generous support of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.
  • 2. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries. Founded in 1921, CFR carries out its mission by maintaining a diverse membership, with special programs to promote interest and develop expertise in the next generation of foreign policy leaders; convening meetings at its headquarters in New York and in Washington, DC, and other cities where senior government officials, members of Congress, global leaders, and promi-nent thinkers come together with CFR members to discuss and debate major international issues; sup-porting a Studies Program that fosters independent research, enabling CFR scholars to produce arti-cles, reports, and books and hold roundtables that analyze foreign policy issues and make concrete pol-icy recommendations; publishing Foreign Affairs, the preeminent journal on international affairs and U.S. foreign policy; sponsoring Independent Task Forces that produce reports with both findings and policy prescriptions on the most important foreign policy topics; and providing up-to-date information and analysis about world events and American foreign policy on its website, CFR.org. The Council on Foreign Relations takes no institutional positions on policy issues and has no affiliation with the U.S. government. All views expressed in its publications and on its website are the sole respon-sibility of the author or authors. For further information about CFR or this paper, please write to the Council on Foreign Relations, 58 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10065, or call Communications at 212.434.9888. Visit CFR’s website, www.cfr.org. Copyright © 2013 by the Council on Foreign Relations®, Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. This paper may not be reproduced in whole or in part, in any form beyond the reproduction permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law Act (17 U.S.C. Sections 107 and 108) and excerpts by reviewers for the public press, without express written permission from the Council on Foreign Re-lations.
  • 3. 1 INTRODUCTION U.S. policymakers have been concerned about the country’s dependence on imported energy since World War II. Those concerns were highlighted in the 1970s when episodes of sharply rising oil prices led to recessions, economic stagnation, and high inflation. However, recent gains in U.S. oil and natural gas production are changing the dialogue about U.S. energy strengths and vulnerabilities. The “shale revolution” has stimulated tremendous production of oil and natural gas in the United States. The revolution is the product of advances in oil and natural gas production technology— notably, a new combination of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. These technological ad-vances combined with high oil and gas prices have enabled increased production of the abundant oil and natural gas resources in the United States. Greater availability of domestic energy resources benefits the United States by reducing dependence on imported energy and diversifying the economy.1 But the boom also brings new vulnerabilities. Ex-amining how changes in U.S. oil and natural gas production may affect individual state economies shows that some of the states providing new energy resources are becoming less economically diversi-fied and more economically vulnerable to energy price declines. O I L PRI C E S AND EMPLOYMENT IN THE U . S . F O S S I L F U E L I NDUSTRY Until recently, the U.S. oil and natural gas industry mostly followed the ups and downs of world oil prices, but with a long-term decline that reflected the decreasing availability of U.S. oil and natural gas resources. At the height of the early 1980s oil boom, the five industries most sensitive to oil prices— coal mining, oil and gas extraction, oil field machinery, petroleum refining, and petrochemicals— accounted for 1.6 million jobs, 1.8 percent of total U.S. nonagricultural employment.2 By 2000, the share of these five industries had dwindled to 0.4 percent of total U.S. nonagricultural employment, only 457,000 jobs. With oil and natural gas prices rising beginning in the early 2000s, employment in the oil and natural gas sector began growing too. The boom in production of oil and natural gas from shale formations became a significant factor after 2008. Figure 1 shows that rising energy prices and the shale boom led to strong growth of U.S. oil and gas employment from 2005 to 2011.
  • 4. 2 Figure 1. U.S. Fossil Fuel–Related Employment Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; author calculations. Despite recent gains, however, the fossil fuel industry has a smaller share of U.S. employment than it did in the early 1980s, and the industry’s share of national economic activity is relatively small. After the end of the recession, between 2010 and the end of 2012, the industry added 169,000 jobs nation-wide, growing at a rate about ten times that of overall U.S. employment. The industry’s output shares follow a similar path. The share of oil and gas extraction was 4.3 percent of U.S. gross domestic prod-uct (GDP) at its height in 1981, but declined to 0.6 percent by 1999. The share of oil and gas rose to 1.6 percent of GDP in 2011 as a result of the shale boom.3 FOSSI L F U E L I NDUSTRI E S A N D S T A T E EMP LOYMENT As energy prices and U.S. oil and natural gas production fell from the mid-1980s to the early 2000s, most U.S. energy-producing states diversified away from energy production and energy-intensive in-dustries. In 1982, the states with the greatest concentration of energy-related industries were West Vir-ginia, Wyoming, Delaware, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Texas.4 Oil and natural gas accounted for much of the activity except in Delaware, which had a high concentration of the petrochemical industry, and in West Virginia, the heart of coal country. Shares of energy-related employment ranged from 7.3 percent in Texas to 13.7 percent in West Virginia. By 2000, these shares had declined to a range from 2.5 per-cent to 7.4 percent. Rising oil and gas prices since the early 2000s prompted a resurgence of energy employment. In-creased use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing led to further gains in oil and gas hiring. As of 2011, the states with the highest shares of energy employment were Alaska, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming. As shown in Figure 2, energy em-ployment shares increased in all eight of these states from 2000 to 2011.5 Although there is little oil and gas activity in West Virginia, its coal production grew because coal prices followed the upward trend in oil prices in the 2000s. Despite these gains, however, almost every one of these states depends less on the five main energy-related industries than they did in 1982.
  • 5. 3 Figure 2. State Employment Shares Sources: Author calculations with data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Fossil fuel production has been important to these states’ recent economic performance. Since the early days of the shale boom in 2006, the four states with the highest rates of employment growth are the states with the highest shares of oil and gas employment (Figure 3). The greatest growth has been in Texas and North Dakota, states with production from shale and the largest production increases. As seen in Figure 3, between 2006 and 2012, U.S. employment declined 0.05 percent per year on average, while employment in North Dakota and Texas grew by 3.4 and 1.5 percent, respectively, the fastest growth in the country. Figure 3. Shale Oil and Employment Growth Note: 2006–2012 yearly employment growth rates; U.S. average annual employment growth of -0.05. Sources: Author calculations; data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; U.S. Energy Information Administration.
  • 6. 4 O I L P R I C E S HOCKS A N D REGIONAL E CONOMI C ACTIV ITY Because the United States is an oil importer, its economy has been hurt by previous episodes of sharply rising oil prices that resulted from oil supply shocks.6 Given the oil production increase in the past cou-ple of years, has the response of the U.S. economy to oil price shocks changed? The economic composi-tion of individual states affects their responses to oil price shocks. We find that the economies of forty-two states and the District of Columbia would suffer if oil prices rise. In contrast, the economies of eight states—Alaska, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming—would benefit from such increases. To assess the effects of oil price shocks on states’ economies, we first estimate the responses of indi-vidual industries to changes in oil prices using methods we used in a 1995 paper.7 As shown in Table 1, the estimated price elasticity of total U.S. employment, based on data for 2000–2011, is -0.02, which means that a 10 percent increase in oil prices reduces U.S. employment by 0.2 percent.8 Employment in the fossil fuel industries is considerably more responsive to oil price movements than employment in the overall economy is, but the responsiveness is less than we estimated eighteen years ago.9 These dif-ferences are the result of changing relationships between the industries, such as the reduced sensitivity of coal and natural gas prices to oil prices, the closure of some U.S. refineries, and how relative changes in oil and natural gas prices affect the U.S. petrochemicals industry. Table 1. Elasticities of Employment With Respect to Oil Prices10 Elasticity Total U.S. Employment -0.02 Coal Mining 0.24 Oil and Natural Gas Extraction 0.40 Oil Field Machinery 0.29 Refining -0.03 Petrochemicals 0.36 Sources: Author calculations. To calculate the employment response of each state to an oil price shock, we combine these elasticities with the input-output analysis framework we previously developed and published in 1995 (updated with new multipliers).11 The framework takes into account the composition of each state’s economy, quantitative differences in multiplier effects across states, and the response of individual fossil fuel in-dustries to changes in oil prices. Differences across the states in concentrations of energy-producing and energy-consuming industries account for most of the variation in the response of employment to oil price changes across the states. Differences in multiplier effects also account for some of the varia-tion between states.12 The results show that a 25 percent increase in oil prices (for example from $100 to $125) would re-sult in a loss of more than 550,000 jobs nationwide.13 None of the states stand out as being hurt by ris-ing oil prices by much more than the country as whole (Table 2). Several states without much of an oil and gas industry would see somewhat stronger negative effects from rising oil prices than the country as a whole.
  • 7. 5 Table 2. Estimated Employment Response to a 25 Percent Increase in Crude Oil Prices, 2012 Percent Percent United States -0.43 Wisconsin -0.74 Ohio -0.61 Minnesota -0.73 Missouri -0.60 Tennessee -0.72 Illinois -0.59 Rhode Island -0.71 Massachusetts -0.59 Florida -0.71 Delaware -0.58 New Hampshire -0.70 South Dakota -0.57 Idaho -0.69 New York -0.57 Nevada -0.69 California -0.56 Arizona -0.68 Alabama -0.56 Indiana -0.68 District of Columbia -0.50 Nebraska -0.67 Kentucky -0.48 Vermont -0.66 Pennsylvania -0.47 Iowa -0.66 Utah -0.38 New Jersey -0.65 Kansas -0.35 Washington -0.64 Mississippi -0.35 Maryland -0.64 Arkansas -0.34 Georgia -0.64 Montana -0.31 Michigan -0.64 Colorado -0.15 Virginia -0.64 New Mexico 0.36 South Carolina -0.64 West Virginia 0.36 Oregon -0.64 Texas 0.60 Connecticut -0.63 Louisiana 0.78 Maine -0.62 Alaska 0.87 North Carolina -0.62 North Dakota 1.01 Hawaii -0.61 Oklahoma 1.16 Wyoming 2.14 Sources: Author calculations; data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Wall Street Journal.
  • 8. 6 Figure 4. Estimated Employment Response to a 25 Percent Increase in Crude Oil Prices, 2012 Sources: Author calculations; data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Wall Street Journal. Several states with larger fossil fuel industries see positive effects or a smaller negative effect than the country as a whole. Alaska, Louisiana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming would benefit from rising oil prices. Combined, these eight states would add around a hundred thousand jobs in response to a 25 percent rise in oil prices. Wyoming would benefit most from an oil price spike because it has a small population and a large share of oil and gas extraction employment. Alaska’s economy has traditionally depended on the oil extraction industry, has the second highest share of extraction employment among all states, and re-mains a beneficiary of higher oil prices. North Dakota’s fossil fuel industry has grown rapidly since the onset of the shale boom and extraction is now 4 percent of state employment. West Virginia, with a strong coal industry, benefits from higher oil prices, but by less than what we previously estimated in 1995 for 1982 and 1992.14 Coal prices moved together more tightly with oil prices until the global re-cession. Although coal prices have slowly trended higher during the recovery, the relationship with oil has weakened. As long as coal prices move with those for oil, the West Virginia economy will benefit from higher oil prices, albeit in a more muted manner than in the past. The Louisiana and Texas economies are helped by rising oil prices, but employment response is less than in some energy states. These two states are home to 40 percent of U.S. refining capacity, and refin-ing is hurt by rising oil prices. In addition, Texas has a large and diverse economy: the share of oil and gas extraction is about 2 percent of state employment, much less than in other energy-producing states. Louisiana and Texas are also home to a substantial portion of U.S. petrochemical production. Rising oil prices help the U.S. petrochemicals industry as long as natural gas prices remain low. If enough do-mestic natural gas were exported such that U.S. natural gas prices again moved with oil prices, the U.S. petrochemicals industry would no longer benefit from rising oil prices.15 These employment responses differ substantially from those we previously estimated for 1982, a year at the height of the last U.S. oil and gas boom.16 For that year, economies of thirteen states would have benefitted from rising oil prices. In addition to the eight states mentioned above, rising oil prices would have aided Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Mississippi, and Utah. Over the past thirty years, the economies in these five states have diversified away from crude oil production, and they no longer respond favorably to rising crude oil prices. Nonetheless, the presence of sizable oil and natural gas industries in these five states mutes their negative response to rising oil prices.
  • 9. 7 STATE VULNERA B I L I T Y TO A D ECLI N E I N O I L PRI C E S Increased energy prices and technological improvements were catalysts for the U.S. fossil fuel indus-try’s turnaround. Would declining prices reverse those gains? A brief look at history is telling. From 1972 to 1982, when oil prices increased more than tenfold, Texas economic output and em-ployment averaged annual growth rates of 7.5 percent and 5.5 percent, respectively. When oil prices collapsed to about eleven dollars per barrel in 1986, the Texas economy went into a deep recession for two years. Economic output contracted 5.6 percent and employment fell 1.1 percent. Even though oil and gas extraction accounted for 19 percent of the Texas economy in 1981, that share was the second smallest among the eight oil-sensitive states (West Virginia was smallest). As a percentage of state GDP, the oil and gas sector accounted for 49 percent in Alaska, 37 percent in Wy-oming, 35 percent in Louisiana, and 20 percent in North Dakota. The 1986 oil price crash also caused a recession in most of these states, with employment declines largest in Wyoming (-5.9 percent) and Alaska (-4.5 percent)—states with the largest oil and gas output shares. The economies of these oil-sensitive states rebounded after 1987, but their growth rates were weaker than that of Texas. Table 3 shows how the fossil fuel industry’s output shares contracted after the oil industry peak in 1981 and later expanded with the shale boom, especially in North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Wyoming. The 2012 shares of state GDP from oil and gas extraction should prove even higher, given that oil production has been increasing in these states.17 If oil prices were to collapse, these states with the highest concentra-tions in oil and gas extraction would be the hardest hit. Table 3. Share of Oil and Gas Extraction in State GDP Percent 1981 2000 2010 Alaska 49.5 15.1 19.1 Louisiana 35.5 11.1 9.7 New Mexico 26.1 5.2 5.1 North Dakota 20.3 0.9 4.3 Oklahoma 21.6 4.8 9.1 Texas 19.1 5.8 7.8 West Virginia 2.4 1.0 1.5 Wyoming 37.1 9.8 18.5 Source: Author calculations; data from U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. This finding is consistent with the results reported in Table 2. Applying our model in the same way for a price decline as for a price increase shows that falling oil prices would cause overall employment loss-es in Wyoming, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Alaska, Louisiana, Texas, West Virginia, and New Mexico, with the greatest percentage losses in the first three.18 States like Texas and Louisiana that have downstream oil and gas industries that benefit from falling energy prices such as refining and petrochemicals would be less affected. In addition, states in which natural gas is more prominent than oil are likely to see less harm from falling oil prices. With the recent weakening in the relationship between oil and natural gas prices, a decline in oil prices does not neces-sarily imply as big a change in natural gas prices as it once did, lessening the effect of an oil price decline. While many states have diversified away from either a heavy reliance on energy consumption or en-ergy production, others have seen and will continue seeing an increasing dependence on energy pro-
  • 10. 8 duction as a result of the shale revolution. Economic activity in these states is vulnerable to energy price declines. The smaller and less diversified the state, the larger the vulnerability. This vulnerability will increase with growing oil and natural gas production. Yet most states that currently benefit from falling oil and gas prices will still gain from such devel-opments even if their oil and gas production rises significantly in the coming years. For example, Cali-fornia, Colorado, and Pennsylvania produce a considerable amount of oil and natural gas, but these states would still gain from falling oil prices—even if their oil and gas sectors grew substantially. The California oil and gas sector, for example, would need to be more than 9.5 times larger than it is today for an oil price fall to hurt the California economy. Similarly, the sector would need to be more than 3.9 times larger in Pennsylvania and more than 1.3 times larger in Colorado for oil price declines to hurt the relevant state economies. CONCLUSION Given that oil is priced on an international market, increased domestic oil production will not do much to lower prices for U.S. consumers, as any gains in U.S. production will be spread across the interna-tional market. Greater reliance on domestic oil resources in substitution for imports will reduce the vulnerability of the economy to oil supply disruptions, although not by much. Reduced energy use has lessened the vulnerability of the U.S. economy to oil price shocks. A similar phenomenon is seen at the state level, with many state economies having diversified away from energy-using industries. At the same time, the growing prominence of energy production can make states with small, undiversified economies more susceptible to an economic downturn during an energy price de-cline.
  • 11. 9 About the Authors Stephen P.A. Brown is a professor of economics and the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. An internationally recognized scholar for his work in energy economics, Brown has conducted economic research and analysis on regional economic growth, aggregate economic activity, economic indicators, business conditions, public finance, energy, environment, climate policy, and economic impacts. Mine K. Yücel is senior vice president and director of research at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, where she has worked since 1989. Yücel analyzes the regional economy and energy markets on an ongo-ing basis and has published numerous articles on energy economics and regional growth. She has been the president of both the International and U.S. Association of Energy Economics and has served on the boards of numerous professional organizations. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas or the Federal Reserve System.
  • 12. 10 Endnotes 1. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Hillard G. Huntington, “Assessing the U.S. Oil Security Premium,” Energy Economics vol. 38 no. C, July 2013, pp. 118–127; and Stephen P.A. Brown and Ryan T. Kennelly, “Consequences of U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil,” Center for Business and Economic Research, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 2013. 2. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 3. U.S. sectoral GDP data come out with a lag. The latest data are from 2011. 4. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Second Quarter, 1995. 5. Latest detailed state sectoral data are from 2011, as of this writing. 6. Lutz Kilian provides evidence that rising oil prices that result from demand shocks do not adversely affect U.S. economic activity. See Lutz Kilian, “Not All Oil Price Shocks Are Alike: Disentangling Demand and Supply Shocks in the Crude Oil Market,” American Eco-nomic Review vol. 9 no. 4, June 2009, pp. 1053–1069. 7. Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. 8. This estimate of the overall U.S. employment response is in the range of estimated GDP responses to oil price movements. 9. We previously estimated the oil-price elasticities of employment in coal mining, oil and natural gas extraction, oil field machinery, refining, and petrochemicals at 0.45, 1.01, 1.23, -0.56, and -0.32. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. 10. The industry elasticities are obtained from regressions of sectoral employment on WTI crude oil prices, using monthly data for the time period 2000–2011. The total U.S. employment elasticity is taken from empirical work in the economics literature. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. 11. Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. We used the RIMS II multipliers for 2010 from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis to update the analysis. 12. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, second quarter, 1995, for an exposition of the model. 13. Previous research on the response of U.S. economic activity to oil price shocks, such as James Hamilton’s 2003 paper, finds the U.S. economy responds more strongly to oil price increases than oil price decreases. See James D. Hamilton, “What Is an Oil Shock?,” Journal of Econometrics vol. 113 no. 2, April 2003, pp. 363–98. 14. Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. 15. We showed in 2009 that there is coordinated movement in natural gas prices across the Atlantic, which can be accomplished through LNG shipments. But their results strongly suggest that the coordination of natural gas prices across the Atlantic is facilitated through oil prices, especially given that natural gas contracts in Europe are linked to oil prices. See Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Market Arbitrage: European and North American Natural Gas Prices,” Energy Journal vol. 30, special issue, 2009, pp. 167–185. 16. Stephen P.A. Brown and Mine K. Yücel, “Energy Prices and State Economic Performance,” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, second quarter, 1995. 17. At the time of this writing, the most recent detailed GDP data for the states were from 2010. 18. Because the results for the energy-producing states are dominated by shifts within the fossil fuel industry, applying our model to oil price decreases creates only a slight upward bias to our estimates. That bias increases as we shift our attention toward energy-importing states.