• 3 minutes e-car sales collapse
  • 6 minutes America Is Exceptional in Its Political Divide
  • 11 minutes Perovskites, a ‘dirt cheap’ alternative to silicon, just got a lot more efficient
  • 7 days The United States produced more crude oil than any nation, at any time.
  • 6 days How Far Have We Really Gotten With Alternative Energy
  • 17 hours e-truck insanity
  • 7 days China deletes leaked stats showing plunging birth rate for 2023
  • 8 days The European Union is exceptional in its political divide. Examples are apparent in Hungary, Slovakia, Sweden, Netherlands, Belarus, Ireland, etc.
  • 5 days Bad news for e-cars keeps coming
Dan Doyle

Dan Doyle

Dan Doyle is president of Reliance Well Services, a hydraulic fracturing company based in Pennsylvania.

More Info

Premium Content

A Biden Presidency Could End The U.S. Oil Boom


To talk about a Biden-Harris administration let's first talk about the Obama-Eric Holder/Loretta Lynch administration. Back in 2015 and 2016, when Holder and Lynch were President Obama’s Attorney Generals, my frack company was beset with an IRS audit, an International Fuel Tax (“IFTA”) audit and a Department of Labor investigation. Not to be excluded, I was also personally audited by the IRS. Fortunately, me and my company cleared the IRS audits without penalty (other than paying our accountant). The Department of Labor audit got us for something less than $250, based on some arcane back of the book calculation on arbitrarily given bonuses. But the IFTA audit did some damage with a $40,000 paperwork related fine even though all our taxes were paid at the pump. All three agencies and all four audits were federal, and all came at roughly the same time.  When I asked the Department of Labor attorney how she even found our little basement office, she kept mum. There was no point in her answering—we both knew why she was there. Her 18,000-employee strong department, like the IRS and IFTA, had been weaponized to undermine the oil and gas industry. AGs Holder and Lynch, likely with President Obama’s blessing, were picking and choosing and me and my industry got picked. 

On March 1st, in 2016, I came home from work and told my wife I was worried about Aubrey McClendon, the founder of Chesapeake Energy and American Energy Partners. The following morning, he was to be arraigned in Oklahoma for violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Aubrey and I had emailed each other a few times over the previous weeks and I meant to send him a message of support but never got to it. Kids and dinner and school projects got in the way. The following morning, on his way to the arraignment, Aubrey was instantly killed when the SUV he was driving hit a concrete bridge abutment at a high rate of speed. Whether or not it was an accident or suicide, I don’t know. Either way it was just horrible. Now I can only hope his family is at peace, but I am not. Attorney Generals Holder and Lynch, in their zeal to disrupt the American oil and gas engine, set their sights on McClendon and dusted off some old claptrap, the Sherman Act. Never mind that no one had been convicted under its laws since the 1930’s, or that McClendon was infamous for driving lease prices up, not down, by conspiring with competitors. This was just a witch-hunt, a word we have become all too familiar with since the more recent Trump administration and the unprecedented attacks that have come along with it. McClendon’s sin was being incredibly effective at deploying fracking to free up natural gas. He was a risk taker and that put him and his investors at risk, but to our federal government he was the face of fracking, and that made him a target of convenience for Obama’s AGs.

Related: The Secret Behind America’s Most Valuable Energy Play

Oddly, during the 2012 State of the Union, President Obama stated that he supported fracking – “We have a supply of natural gas that can last America nearly 100 years…and my administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy.” That was what was said, not what was done. Under his watch the resistance was born. Study after study of the Keystone and Dakota Pipeline projects were commissioned with the hope that one would finally yield the predetermined answer of “no.” Activist federal judges ruled in favor of lawsuits stopping natural gas pipelines from crossing federal waters. Discredited and now forgotten Josh Fox’s anti-fracking documentaries were accepted as the gospel truth even though his truth was manufactured. So much glowing press until he was debunked and no one bothered to cover that. In general, the industry was tarred and feathered in a groundswell of animosity directed at the people keeping the lights on. Now, we have Vice President Biden saying he supports fracking when he swings through natural gas rich Pennsylvania, but we all know that is just politicking. His previous anti-fracking statements, all of them inconveniently caught on imperishable video tape, suggest some double speak here.

So where does Joe Biden truthfully stand on fracking? That depends on who he’s talking to. In the old days they called it “waffling” and it was a disqualifier. Not so any longer. If there is any sort of pushback, the 2020 method is to simply just deny that you have multiple positions on the same subject. When no one pushes back, why not? They call Joe a fair-minded moderate, a congenial and thoughtful friend to both sides of an argument. I’m sorry, I just don’t see it. A moderate doesn’t choose a San Francisco prosecutor with an anti-fossil fuel record as a running mate. A moderate also wouldn’t choose socialist New York Congresswoman Ocasio - Cortez to co-chair his climate task force. During the recent Harris-Pence debate, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez Tweeted “Fracking is bad, actually”. So, I guess we at least know where she stands, a breath of fresh air given the chicanery of the Biden-Harris oil and gas platform. Now rumors of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo as a Biden administration Attorney General are being reported. True or not, it knocks the wind out of the rest of that moderate argument. Remember, Governor Cuomo was the guy who ordered his own state regulators to study the health and safety of fracking. When their study qualified fracking as environmentally safe, Mr. Cuomo outlawed it anyways. So much for open minded moderation, Mr. Biden. These aren’t “across the aisle” sorts of people that Biden’s handlers would want you to believe are open minded to US Energy Policy. Moderates simply don’t choose vehemently anti oil and gas lightning rods as successors, advisors and top cops. 

In a recent Rasmussen Reports poll, 59% of respondents didn’t think Joe Biden would serve-out a full four-year term due to health-related issues. That would leave us with Senator Harris as president. And where exactly would that leave us? I would argue, uncertain at best. When President Trump won the 2016 presidential election, the oil and gas industry immediately turned on after a punishing two-year downturn. Oil and gas prices didn’t rise as a result of his victory, but business confidence did. Operators teed up new drills and completions and service companies like mine were immediately called back to work. We finally had an administration that was supportive of extraction rather than vaguely duplicitous about it. Four years later, having a new Commander and Chief who is well known as anti-fracking isn’t going to do much for industry confidence. Investment will dwindle, jobs will be lost and the environment will suffer. Natural gas power plants are the reason for the considerable drop in CO2 emissions in US air over the last decade. Fueling these plants is the gas from fractured horizontal shale. Stop fracking and natural gas stops flowing—right away. 

Related: Democrats Want Permanent Ban On Offshore Oil Leasing

Should a Biden presidency prevail in the upcoming elections, my own experience tells me that our oil and gas industry will be facing regulatory headwinds that will far exceed the blow back I personally faced during President Obama’s time in office. As the owner of a frack company, this has me worried. We want to continue to grow and prosper so I don’t at all want to give up. Instead, I’ve considered giving in. In fact, I spent a considerable amount of time during the slow days of the Covid pandemic researching renewables as a means to offset possible declines in oil and gas activities. We are an energy company so why not consider all things energy? 

Wind was my first thought as I live on the Great Lakes and wind over water is every bit as good as an oil and gas lease with good porosity and rich oil saturation levels. But wind is a NIMBY issue. The very people that demand it are also staunchly aligned against it when it lands in their own backyards—see Massachusetts Bay. That and the cost of windmills—far beyond my limited means—turned me to solar. You can scale solar, maybe not cost effectively, but phasing it in was my plan so I began casting about for advice. An acquaintance in a nearby state had participated in a solar farm on a brown field—as has become a good and common though heavy on regulation practice. His group did not include a battery bank installation, allowing storage and passive use, but it was still expensive, about $20 million all in to permit and build it out. Of that cost, his state picked up a third, the federal government covered a third and his group added the last third in straight equity, though they ended up being a 100% owner. Now that his project is up and running, his group will also benefit from better rates for renewables vis a vie consumer choice and a production tax credit. I’m in favor of renewables being in the energy mix but this is not an “economic” project. Should a Biden-Harris administration start to restrict oil and gas development, sound reasoning says energy prices will rise and then, at that time, a move into solar may make sense. Because I have to answer to my banks and my employees, I didn’t see how I could participate in solar in a way that would cover my bills. Maybe someday, but not until solar stands on its own, particularly in the Northeast. Just like all the current credits, though, the renewables buildout will be built on the backs of consumers through higher taxes, public debt and much higher energy costs—all three of which are disqualifiers for me.

Curtailing our oil and gas production won’t be immediately covered by renewables. That’s impossible. It would take decades. Instead, what will happen will be the opposite of the intent (as is typical with bad policy). The US would be forced to infill shortages with heavy and highly polluting tar oils from Canada and sulfur-rich grades from the Middle East Gulf States or from Mexico, and maybe even from socialist Venezuela. That’s really too bad because shale oil is light and low in sulfur and is clean compared to most other grades of oil. Gone too would be the enormous gains our industry has provided in terms of national security. We don’t have to go begging to despots, dictators and bad guys anymore. Kill oil and gas and we’ll be beholden once again to the same policy that got us into wars. We have our own energy now. We are no longer desperate for anyone else’s.

America is finally energy independent. Granted, this is a squishy phrase as we’re short on oil but far, far ahead in natural gas. But on a BTU basis we are there and then some. This has been a wish in the making for decades and decades yet suddenly, over the last few years, a movement has emerged that finds this abhorrent, a scandalous privilege, a raping of the earth that must be undone. Equally baffling is a major candidate, one-half of a bifurcated democracy, is supportive of it. 

Equally puzzling in the rush to embrace green energy is the fact that there has been so little regard for embracing the truth. Look into the waste stream of battery production and disposal. It is as dirty as any old school oil and gas project, only more so. Look into nickel smelting and lithium mining. Look up Sudbury, Canada’s superstacks and acid rain. All these inconvenient truths have been brushed aside as irrelevant, or simply covered up, in the name of progressive energy policies. People need to know that there is no panacea, that everything has an environmental cost, even renewables. But somehow the truth doesn’t make it into the anti-frack argument. 

Should a Biden-Harris presidency act to derail our unprecedented efforts, we’d be giving up all our gains, including environmental gains for nothing in return. Why? Shale is a treadmill that requires constant investment. A shift in public policy will quickly stop the flow of private money needed to maintain and grow production. America will quickly fade away into brownouts. A disproportionate burden will fall on working men and women and the poor. And trillions of dollars will be spent on negative returns. Good public policy would be geared towards conservation which can be turned on like a light switch. To my knowledge not a single green hero has been made out of advocating for better door and window seals, or insulating attics with R 30 insulation, or keeping those car tires at 32 psi. 


Expect the obscuring of the truth and duplicity to continue. A Biden-Harris administration will continue to claim they’re for fracking—except on public lands—where 300,000 oil and gas jobs are at risk along with oil production equaling roughly one million bbls/day per the Department of the Interior. We probably won’t hear much about rare earth minerals—essential to solar panel production—and the fact that the market for them is 70% supplied by China. In fact, if the two-way position of their campaign is any indication, we likely won’t know what exactly their policy is until it is written into law or mandated on day one by executive order. Lawsuits will abound and there will be much gnashing of teeth. But through permit delays, studies and regulatory measures, this administration could claim they are only being thorough while the intent all along was to see us wither and someday be blown away by one of those idle windmills I keep driving past.

By Dan Doyle for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:

Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • Maxander on October 16 2020 said:
    Also, one can not ignore or just forget the Bill passing the great Oil & Gas drilling Ban by US congress in 2019 which was in fact unanimously cleared by Democrates.
    The bill issuing a complete ban for Oil & Gas drilling in the areas of Artcic & Atlantic seas for clean water requirement , oil & gas drillibg ban in Wild Life areas to protect the wild animals & again a complete ban seeking oil & gas drilling in Gulf of Mexico waters for clear water, passed.
    This removes around 20-30% of proven oil reserves im US from drilling & producing.
  • Scottstanford on October 16 2020 said:
    FINALLY.....a powerful article that’s right on cue with the real life of what we are experiencing and have experienced
  • Pekka Lehtikoski on October 16 2020 said:
    Starting with a joke: The election, like World War I, is "the war to end all wars". Important enough that politicians must keep on fighting to the last citizen standing. Victory is worth any sacrifice or suffering of the average joe. The core leaders on both sides do have their bunkers, the important part of society is safely out of harm's way.

    It is easy to agree with the article's --Curtailing our oil and gas production won’t be immediately covered by renewables. That’s impossible. It would take decades-- and with --not a single green hero has been made out of advocating for better door and window seals, or insulating attics with R 30 insulation, or keeping those car tires at 32 psi---. The whole concept of going after producers, not consumers (with energy taxes, etc) is populistic. Demand creates production, not vice versa. Strangling production and leaving the demand will just move production out of reach of the stranglers.

    If society wants to increase the share of the renewables to become a significant energy source in a few decades, we need plentiful cheap natural gas. That means fracking, banning fracking would be the de facto end of the wind/solar. Reasoning: Currently we produce ~3% of US energy (or ~7% of electricity) by solar/wind. Since these are intermittent sources, either energy storage or backup power is needed. For now, we do not have large scale energy storage technology, lithium batteries do not scale up. Consequently, we need backup power. Nuclear power cannot be used as a backup, it is base power always producing at a constant rate (cannot be turned off as needed). We are left with natural gas, oil, or coal backup. Coal is being phased out, and importing oil to burn it for electricity doesn't make sense. This leaves natural gas as the only possible way to continue on the slow path to renewable energy for the next decades.

    Since natural gas cannot be killed by political decisions or green policy without destroying solar/wind and moving back to coal/nuclear, a decision to do so seems unlikely. Politicians understand this as well, even they say what people want to hear. This doesn't prevent the future government, for example, Biden or Harris, from giving hard times to the fracking industry. The reason to do so would be to buy votes. If it happens, new costs will gradually move to end customer energy prices and damage to the industry is limited. Same political reason can lead to giving up energy independence and increase oil imports from OPEC, out of sight is out of mind even it doesn't really impact on CO2 emissions.
  • Peter Farley on October 16 2020 said:
    I am sure your company is most reputable and maybe the solution is simply to insist that everyone follows the rules as you do while the industry winds down. But wind down it must like asbestos, tobacco and coal. Whether that takes 15 years or 50 is not clear but it has to shrink by 90% or more if human society and nature ass we know it is to survive.
  • Lee James on October 17 2020 said:
    Bully for oil industry professionals battling the relatively high cost of shale oil and gas extraction. Talk about fortitude! Borrowing rates could climb from almost nothing to lots, anytime now. Who needs the government to show us the way? Honest profit-loss statements and trend analysis should provide plenty of insight about unconventional oil as compared to alternatives.

    I just burned fossil fuel today to drive by hundreds of wind turbines in Idaho. They seemed to be turning just fine. Kind of interesting to see wind and solar at work in Red states.

    Our country will arrive at a good energy solution just fine, without government intervention. It just might take a little longer.
  • One Second on October 22 2020 said:
    Sometimes one has to whonder in which world the likes of Dan Doyle live. In case he hasn't noticed, the US oil boom HAS already ended and with no doing of Biden or Harris causing it. Most people will be quick now to point out that this is all COVID's fault and the mishandling of the pandemic by the Trump administration, but this is actually not true.
    The simple truth is that fracking as a whole has failed to earn even a single dollar. Let that sink in. The fracking industry was and is unprofitable and even without a pandemic a lot of banktruptcies in the shale sector were bound to happen in 2020 as investors are finally running out on patience because they are not seeing any return on investment. Of course some companies are in better shape than others, but if prices do not recover, the shale sector won't recover in a meanigful way. Some companies will cling on, but high profits will be made elsewhere and not in the shale sector. Further oil cuts from OPEC+ may throw shale a lifeline when it becomes clear that OPEC+ can't live with the current price level either. But that is totally independent of a Biden or Trump win. Otherwise oil prices will only recover if unprofitable oil drilling finally stops. So Biden's probable bans of new fracking on federal land will be actually good news for the shale sector as a whole since finally new unprofitable fracking will be banned even if someone finds a bank daring enough to lend further money. To sum it up, I think this article makes as much sense as "Trump saving coal". Trump can't save fracking either and Biden also can't outright ban it. It is the oil prices that will decide the fate of the fracking industry, plain and simple, and not the election. So the more important question should be, when the economy will finally stabilize and when the pandemic will finally not be a major drag on demand anymore.
  • George Kafantaris on October 26 2020 said:
    Texas can still be an energy leader, but not with oil. Rather, it’s with hydrogen that can be made from natural gas using carbon capture. This requires new thinking, while President Trump is stuck on oil. But Texas doesn’t have to be stuck there with him. Instead, it should take a page from Canada’s playbook -- as well as from Europe’s and Russia’s -- to turn its abundant gas reserves into blue hydrogen. This will not only revitalize the Texas economy, but it will also set it on the right path for exponential growth in the near future.

Leave a comment

EXXON Mobil -0.35
Open57.81 Trading Vol.6.96M Previous Vol.241.7B
BUY 57.15
Sell 57.00
Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News