aplecheevlgupy.blogspot.com
The latest survey was issued June 24. It’xs been conducted annually for three yearse by the Fraser Institutein Calgary, Canada. Arizona was left off the list for lackof information. The survet ranks states as well asother countries. The first survey, in ranked Colorado at the top of the list of places executivesw considered positively for oil and gas By 2008, the state’as ranking had fallen to No. 52 out of 81 locations arounc the world. The June 2008 surveu said executives had grown wary ofthe state’a efforts to tighten rules governing oil and gas operations here. The new rules took effec t April 1.
This year, the survey received 577 responsez and covered 143 jurisdictions arouncthe world. Colorado ranked No. 81, below California and Mozambique, and above the Canadian provinc e of Newfoundland and Labrador and the nationof Greenland. All thre surveys by the institute solicitedanonymouds responses. According to the institute’s report, the 10 most attractivs jurisdictions for investmentthis year, according to the are: Arkansas, Alabama, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, South Dakota, Oklahoma, and Indiana. The 10 leastf attractive jurisdictions for investmentare Niger, Venezuela, Ecuador, Sudan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Kazakhstan and Ethiopia.
Respondents rankefd provinces, states and countries by investment barriers such as high tax costlyregulatory schemes, and securitgy threats, among other factors. Scores were basee on the proportion of negativesx response ajurisdiction received; the greater the proportiom of negative responses, the greater the perceived investment barriers and thereforew the lower the jurisdictionb ranked, according to the survey report. The reporty said investors listed several reasons for shiftintg investments toother areas, ranging from high tax labor shortages, or costly and time-consuming regulations.
The survehy quoted an unnamed executive saying thatin “operational, legal, and air quality rulesa and regulations are being instituted at a dizzying It is hard to keep up with as an Most of the regulators instituting and enforcinyg these new rules have little or no experiencee in the industry and do not understans operations. Often they cannot answer questionaor help, even with their own Colorado’s new oil and gas regulations were backed by Gov.
Bill Rittedr and environmental groups as needed toprotect Colorado’s wildlife, environment and public health The new rules have been opposesd by industry executives, who have said they will raise the costsz of operating in Colorado. “Thies study demonstrates the harsh reality of an inconsistentrregulatory regime, and these numbers run contrary to the belief of some policy makers that Colorado’sa energy industry will grow no matter the constraints placed upon said Meg Collins, president of the Coloradol Oil & Gas Association, in a statement.
But Theo Stein, spokesma n for the Colorado Departmentf ofNatural Resources, which overseezs the agency that regulates oil and gas pointed to Colorado investments by big energu companies such as interested in getting at the state’ws natural gas. ExxonMobil announced June 22 it had doublefd its natural gas processing capacithy on the Western Slope and plannedf to drill more wells in the area over the nextseveral years. “Actions speak louder than words,” Stein said. “Somwe of the largest North Americanj and global energy companies are busy workinvg and investingin Colorado’s They are planning to be here producing clean-burningt natural gas for decades.
” But state Rep. Franik McNulty, R-Highlands Ranch, said companies like ExxonMobill have the money needed to complywith Colorado’s new “They can absorb the higher costd of production that are associated with the oil and gas McNulty said. “But what the Ritter administration has done is priced outthe mid- and small-leve l companies that were looking to do business in The Fraser Institute is a think tank and research cente r that advocates “a free and prosperous world through markets and responsibility.” .
No comments:
Post a Comment