Connect with us

Oil & Energy

How Oil Industry Fared Under Last Nine US Presidents

Published

on

With the 2020 Presidential Election looming, and with many claims and counterclaims about a president’s impact on the oil industry, I thought it might be of interest to review the history of U.S. oil production and consumption over the past 50 years. Here are the highlights from each president’s term in office.
Richard Nixon was inaugurated as the 37th president on January 20, 1969. When President Nixon took office, U.S. oil production was nearing a peak after over 100 years of increasing production. Imports made up 10% of U.S. consumption. In 1970, U.S. oil production reached 9.6 million barrels per day (BPD) and began a long, steady decline.
Richard Nixon began his second term on January 20, 1973. U.S. oil production had declined to 9.2 million BPD while consumption had increased by 3 million BPD from the first year of Nixon’s first term. As a result, oil imports would more than double during Nixon’s presidency, and American citizens would learn the danger of the dependence on imports with the OPEC oil embargo of 1973.
Gerald Ford was inaugurated as the 38th president on August 9, 1974 after Nixon resigned in disgrace. During President Ford’s term in office, domestic oil production continued to decline. U.S. oil consumption and imports continued to grow, and both were at all-time highs during Ford’s last year in office.
Jimmy Carter was inaugurated as the 39th president on January 20, 1977. Recent trends in consumption, production, and imports all reversed themselves during President Carter’s term. Consumption fell by 2%, U.S. production increased by 6%, and imports, after initially rising to record highs during his first year in office, were a fraction of a percentage lower at the end of his term than during Ford’s last year in office. Factors beyond Carter’s control, such as the Iranian Revolution and the Iran–Iraq War, heavily influenced the oil markets.
Ronald Reagan was inaugurated as the 40th president on January 20, 1981. Oil consumption continued to decline during most of President Reagan’s first term, and oil production crept back to levels that had not been seen in a decade. Oil imports fell by 35% during his first term.
Ronald Reagan began his second term on January 21, 1985. The trends from his first term all reversed themselves, as consumption rose 10%, domestic production fell by 8%, and oil imports increased by 49%.
George H. W. Bush was inaugurated as the 41st president on January 20, 1989. Consumption fell slightly during his term, but domestic production fell even more, down 12%. Imports increased by 19%, back above 6 million BPD for the first time since the 1970s.
Bill Clinton was inaugurated as the 42nd president on January 20, 1993. During his first term, consumption increased by another 7%, domestic production fell by 10%, and imports increased by another 23%, exceeding 7 million bpd for the first time in U.S. history.
Bill Clinton began his second term on January 20, 1997. His second term trends were almost identical to those of his first term. Consumption rose by another 8%, domestic production fell by another 10%, and imports increased by an additional 21%. Consumption and oil imports were at all-time highs, and production had fallen 40% from the 1970 production peak.
George W. Bush was inaugurated as the 43rd president on January 20, 2001. During his first term, consumption climbed above 20 million BPD for the first time in the nation’s history. Imports also reached new highs, above 10 million BPD. Domestic production continued to fall.
George W. Bush began his second term on January 20, 2005. During Bush’s second term, consumption began to decline as the nation entered a recession and oil prices reached record highs. Imports fell back to below 10 million BPD. The decline in domestic production continued, albeit at a slower rate of decline than during his first term. This marked the first trickle of oil production from hydraulic fracturing, which would make a major impact during the terms of the next two presidents. During Bush’s last year in office, the level of imports reached just over 50% of U.S. consumption.
Barack Obama was inaugurated as the 44th president on January 20, 2009. The economic sluggishness initially continued, but the impact of hydraulic fracturing began to be felt in President Obama’s first year in office. In a reversal of the long decline that began in 1970, crude oil production would rise all four years of Obama’s first term.
President Obama began his second term on January 21, 2013. The fracking boom caused oil production to accelerate until 2015. But then overproduction led OPEC to initiate a price war that ultimately crashed prices and production. Production began to decline in 2015, but 2016, the last year of Obama’s second term, was the first year of his presidency that annual oil production declined.
Between 2009 and 2015 oil production had increased by 4.4 million BPD. This was the fastest increase in oil production in U.S. history, and marked the largest increase in oil production during a single term of any president. If natural gas liquids (NGLs) are included, the gains during Obama’s first seven years were 6 million BPD. U.S. net imports of finished products like gasoline turned into net exports during Obama’s second term, and next imports of finished products plus crude oil fell by over 6 million BPD.
Donald Trump was inaugurated as the 45th president on January 20, 2017. Oil production had declined during President Obama’s last year in office as the average annual price of West Texas Intermediate (WTI) fell to $43.34/bbl. But in 2017 that rose to $50.79/bbl, and then to $65.20/bbl in 2018. Oil production followed prices higher. During the first three years of President Trump’s first term, annual U.S. oil production gained 3.4 million BPD. Net imports of crude oil and finished products turned into net exports in late 2019. U.S. oil production eclipsed the previous 1970 peak (although if you include NGLs, that peak was eclipsed in 2013).
But then the Covid-19 pandemic crushed oil demand. Now, less than a month before the election, U.S. oil production is at 10.5 million BPD, a significant decline from the 12.2 million BPD of 2019.
The net impact of the past 50 years of U.S. Presidents was a long, slow decline of oil production that was only reversed when the hydraulic fracturing revolution began.
U.S. oil production didn’t fall under Bush and rise under Obama based on the policies of these presidents. Production behaved according to policies that had been put in place years earlier, and in accordance with the behavior of oil prices in previous years. Jimmy Carter experienced a rise in oil production because the Alaska Pipeline, approved by Nixon, was completed while Carter was in office. Obama and Trump experienced a rise in oil production following years of climbing oil prices, which led to a fracking boom.
Presidents publicly fretted for decades about the loss of energy independence for the U.S. They tried many different approaches to solving this problem, from serious intervention in the energy markets to letting the free market solve the problem. Many billions of dollars were spent on programs with the intent of eliminating dependence on foreign oil.
Yet in 1969, Americans depended on oil imports for 10% of their consumption, and in 2008 that number had risen to over 50% of consumption. That trend was only reversed when fracking caused U.S. oil production to surge.
Thus, a president may have some impact on U.S. oil production, but it is mostly a factor of influences well beyond their control.
Culled from Oil Price International, London.

Continue Reading

Oil & Energy

Global Energy Crisis Is Reviving Green Hydrogen

Published

on

The global energy crisis has reshaped global energy priorities seemingly overnight. The Strait of Hormuz has been closed to virtually all commercial traffic for well over a month now, severely restricting global flows of oil and gas. As a result, global energy prices have skyrocketed, and supplies have tightened, pushing many countries to explore alternative energy pathways in a big hurry. This has led to an unfortunate resurgence of coal-fired power, especially in Asia – but it is also set to supercharge the clean energy industry on a global scale. And one of the unlikely benefactors of this groundswell of new investment may be the green hydrogen industry.
China, the world’s top hydrogen producer, is planning to ramp up production of hydrogen, and especially green hydrogen, more quickly than previously planned in order to shore up its energy security as import-dependent Asian markets are rocked by skyrocketing oil and gas prices. China’s National Energy Administration (NEA) has referred to hydrogen as a “strategic lever” for national energy autonomy and resilience, and has pledged to accelerate the development of the domestic sector accordingly.
China’s 15th five-year plan, released last month, flagged hydrogen as a “future industry.” But, apparently, the future is now. According to a recent report from the South China Morning Post, the rhetoric around hydrogen coming out of China signals a shift away from research and toward rapid practical development of the sector.
Last year, the NEA earmarked 41 projects in nine regions across the country to lead hydrogen pilot projects all along the value chain “from production and transport to storage and application.” Now, leadership is pushing to bring those projects out of demo phases and into industrial applications as quickly as possible.
European leaders, too, are pivoting to embrace green hydrogen production with renewed enthusiasm. Earlier this month, ministers from Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and Spain petitioned the European Union to loosen production regulations to encourage investment into the sector. And Italy successfully approved a €6 billion state aid plan to support renewable hydrogen.
Even the United States is getting on board. This week, the Trump administration instructed the Department of Energy to save $5 billion worth of hydrogen hubs that were slated for closure. The hydrogen projects – though not green hydrogen ventures – were funded under the Biden administration in order to promote cleaner-burning fuel sources.
Hydrogen could potentially be a critical pathway for decarbonization, as it combusts at high heat like fossil fuels. But, unlike fossil fuels, when it burns, it leaves behind nothing but water vapor. This could make it indispensable for the decarbonization of hard-to-abate sectors like steelmaking and shipping. However, the vast majority of commercial hydrogen is made with fossil fuels. Green hydrogen, by comparison, is made using renewable energies.
But while hydrogen, and especially green hydrogen, could be a key part of the global clean energy transition, research and development in the sector had been cooling for years, as commercial and cost-effective green hydrogen production methods largely failed to materialize. “Even if production costs decrease in line with predictions, storage and distribution costs will prevent hydrogen from being cost-competitive in many sectors,” Roxana Shafiee, a postdoctoral fellow at the Harvard University Center for the Environment, told The Harvard Gazette in 2024. Shafiee led a study that found cause to believe “that the opportunities for hydrogen may be narrower than previously thought.”
But the economics of energy are changing as we speak, and the global hydrogen market is likely about to see a windfall as the world rushes to replace geopolitically risky fossil fuels, which have become prohibitively expensive overnight. Clearly, global leaders are already reembracing the fledgling sector as part of an all-of-the-above approach to energy security and independence. While hydrogen may not be a silver bullet solution, it could be a critical part of a more diverse and therefore more resilient global energy landscape going forward.
By Haley Zaremba
Continue Reading

Oil & Energy

PETAN Tasks Indigenous Oil Firms On Investments Attraction    … Global Engagement Sustenance

Published

on

The Petroleum Technology Association of Nigeria (PETAN) has urged indigenous oil and gas companies to deepen global engagement and attract investment.
The Association urged intending participants to leverage the forthcoming 2026 Offshore Technology Conference (OTC) in the U.S. to expand their access to new technologies and partnerships.
PETAN said its participation at the global event would be driven by a deliberate strategy to position Nigerian firms as competitive players within the international energy value chain.
In a statement issued  by the Association’s Publicity Secretary, Dr Joan Faluyi, In Lagos, at the weekend,  PETAN would anchor its activities at the Nigerian Pavilion, with the theme: “Africa’s Energy Transformation: Scaling Investment, Technology, and Local Capacity for Sustainable Growth”.
Faluyi noted that the conference, scheduled for May 4 to May 7 in Houston, Texas, remained a leading platform for offshore energy dialogue, partnerships and innovation.
According to her, PETAN’s participation goes beyond routine attendance and reflects a focused effort to strengthen Nigeria’s visibility and influence in global energy discussions.
“At OTC 2026, PETAN is returning with stronger alignment and a clearer objective, to ensure Nigerian companies are not just present, but actively engaged and recognised as credible global partners,” she said.
Faluyi explained that the association had consistently showcased the capabilities of indigenous oil and gas service providers at previous editions of the conference, reinforcing their capacity to compete internationally.
She added that the Nigerian Pavilion would serve as a strategic hub for investment discussions, technical exhibitions and direct engagement with global stakeholders.
The association is also scheduled to participate in key engagements, including the African Energy Forum, the NCDMB–OEM Investment Forum and the PETAN Golf Tournament slated for May 7 at Quail Valley Golf Course, Texas.
Faluyi described OTC as a critical gateway for Nigerian companies seeking international opportunities, noting that visibility and engagement at the event often translate into commercial partnerships.
“In an increasingly competitive energy landscape, securing a seat at the global table is essential. Through sustained participation, PETAN continues to assert Nigeria’s place in that conversation,” she said.
Also speaking, PETAN Chairman, Mr Wole Ogunsanya, said the Association’s focus was to ensure that indigenous capacity is fully integrated into global energy decision-making processes.
“We have seen firsthand how global energy decisions are shaped at OTC. This year, we are returning to ensure indigenous Nigerian capacity is not just present but recognised, engaged and heard.
“We are taking our businesses to the table where real partnerships are formed,” he said.
Faluyi added that under Ogunsanya’s leadership, PETAN was prioritising strategic positioning to ensure Nigerian companies are not only visible but considered credible partners in major international energy projects.
Continue Reading

Oil & Energy

Solar Panels Imports Ban: Experts Recommend Phase -out Approach 

Published

on

Stakeholders in Nigeria’s energy sector have warned that an abrupt restriction on solar panels imports would undermine electricity access.
The experts called for a gradual phase-out of imports over several years rather than an outright ban.
Recall that the federal government had announced plans to halt solar panel imports after investing more than N200 billion to encourage domestic production.
Speaking at the Solar Power Media Training, in Abuja, last week, the Campaign Director, Secure Energy Project (SEP), Joseph Ibrahim, said stakeholders support the goal of building local manufacturing capacity but cautioned against sudden policy shifts.
“Let me be clear, we wholeheartedly support local manufacturing of solar panels”.
“We want to see factories in our states, jobs for our youth, and a supply chain that begins and ends on our soil”, he stated.
Ibrahim insisted that the most effective path forward is a carefully managed roadmap implemented over three to five years to give investors and workers time to adjust.
“If we rush this, we risk making solar power too expensive for the millions who currently rely on it for survival.
“By taking a phased approach, we allow time for investors to build their plants, for our workers to learn specialised skills, and for our economy to adjust without losing power”, he said.
The SEP director said policy stability, access to financing, and strict quality standards are essential to building a sustainable local solar manufacturing industry.
“To make local manufacturing a reality, we don’t just need new laws; we need an enabling environment. This means stability — policies that don’t change with the wind,” he said.
Also speaking, Tosin Asonibare,  said renewable energy has become a critical solution to Nigeria’s persistent electricity supply challenges.
He cited findings by the Global Initiative for Food Security and Ecosystem Preservation, indicating that many Nigerians remain unaware of the proposed import restrictions and their potential implications.
According to him, respondents in the report largely favoured a phased ban supported by incentives for importing raw materials needed for local production.
“The report also shows that infrastructure for locally manufactured panels is not fully available, so there is need for foreign direct investment improvement in government policy.
“So that the local manufacturers and assembling companies can have higher capacity to meet demand. If that is not done, the price of solar panels will go up”, he said.
He warned that affordability could become a major concern for consumers if restrictions are implemented without adequate preparation.
Continue Reading

Trending