IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/diw/diwwpp/dp1548.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Lifting the US Crude Oil Export Ban: A Numerical Partial-Equilibrium Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Lissy Langer
  • Daniel Huppmann
  • Franziska Holz

Abstract

The upheaval in global crude oil markets and the boom in oil production from shale plays in North America have brought scrutiny on the export ban for crude oil in the United States. This paper examines the global flows and strategic refinery adjustments in a spatial, game-theoretic partial-equilibrium model. We consider de- tailed supply chain infrastructure with multiple crude oil qualities (supply), distinct oil products (demand), as well as specific refinery configurations and modes of transport (mid-stream). Investments in production capacity and infrastructure are endogenous. We compare two development pathways for the global oil market: one projection retaining the US export ban, and a counterfactual scenario lifting the export restrictions. Lifting the US crude ban, we find significant expansion of US sweet crude exports. In the US refinery sector, more heavy sour crude is imported and transformed. While US producers gain, the profits of US refiners decrease, due to reduced market distortions and a more efficient resource allocation. Countries importing US sweet crude benefit from higher product output, while avoiding costly refinery investments. Producers of heavy sour crude (e.g. the Middle East) are incentivised to climb up the value chain to defend their market share and maintain their dominant position.

Suggested Citation

  • Lissy Langer & Daniel Huppmann & Franziska Holz, 2016. "Lifting the US Crude Oil Export Ban: A Numerical Partial-Equilibrium Analysis," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1548, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp1548
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.526951.de/dp1548.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Huppmann, 2013. "Endogenous Shifts in OPEC Market Power: A Stackelberg Oligopoly with Fringe," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1313, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Severin Borenstein and Ryan Kellogg, 2014. "The Incidence of an Oil Glut: Who Benefits from Cheap Crude Oil in the Midwest?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    3. David Hackett & Leigh Noda & Susan W. Grissom & Michal C. Moore & Jennifer Winter, 2013. "Pacific Basin Heavy Oil Refining Capacity," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 6(8), February.
    4. Brown, Stephen P.A. & Huntington, Hillard G., 2015. "Evaluating U.S. oil security and import reliance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 9-22.
    5. Philip K. Verleger Jr., 2015. "Structure Matters: Oil Markets Enter the Adelman Era," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Adelman S).
    6. Grossman,Peter Z., 2013. "US Energy Policy and the Pursuit of Failure," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107005174, December.
    7. Daniel Huppmann and Franziska Holz, 2012. "Crude Oil Market Power—A Shift in Recent Years?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    8. Philipp M. Richter, 2015. "From Boom to Bust? A Critical Look at US Shale Gas Projections," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    9. Grossman,Peter Z., 2013. "US Energy Policy and the Pursuit of Failure," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521182188.
    10. Olufolajimi Oke & Daniel Huppmann & Max Marshall & Ricky Poulton & Sauleh Siddiqui, 2016. "Mitigating Environmental and Public-Safety Risks of United States Crude-by-Rail Transport," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1575, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    11. repec:aen:journl:eeep4_1_richter is not listed on IDEAS
    12. James L. Smith, 2015. "Valuing Barrels of Oil Equivalent," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Adelman S).
    13. Huppmann, Daniel & Egging, Ruud, 2014. "Market power, fuel substitution and infrastructure – A large-scale equilibrium model of global energy markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 483-500.
    14. Aguilera, Roberto F., 2014. "Production costs of global conventional and unconventional petroleum," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 134-140.
    15. Ferris, Michael C. & Munson, Todd S., 2000. "Complementarity problems in GAMS and the PATH solver," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 165-188, February.
    16. Roberto F. Aguilera & Roderick G. Eggert & Gustavo Lagos C.C. & John E. Tilton, 2009. "Depletion and the Future Availability of Petroleum Resources," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 141-174.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nida Çakir Melek & Michael Plante & Mine K. Yücel, 2017. "The U.S. Shale Oil Boom, the Oil Export Ban, and the Economy: A General Equilibrium Analysis," NBER Working Papers 23818, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Nida Cakir Melek & Michael D. Plante & Mine K. Yücel, 2017. "The U.S. Shale Oil Boom, the Oil Export Ban, and the Economy: A General Equilibrium Analysis Nida," Research Working Paper RWP 17-10, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, revised 01 Nov 2016.
    3. Olufolajimi Oke & Daniel Huppmann & Max Marshall & Ricky Poulton & Sauleh Siddiqui, 2016. "Mitigating Environmental and Public-Safety Risks of United States Crude-by-Rail Transport," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1575, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    4. Ansari, Dawud & Holz, Franziska, 2019. "Anticipating global energy, climate and policy in 2055: Constructing qualitative and quantitative narratives," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 1-23.
    5. Ansari, Dawud, 2017. "OPEC, Saudi Arabia, and the shale revolution: Insights from equilibrium modelling and oil politics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 166-178.
    6. Berk, Istemi & Çam, Eren, 2020. "The shift in global crude oil market structure: A model-based analysis of the period 2013–2017," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    7. Ansari, Dawud, 2017. "OPEC, Saudi Arabia, and the shale revolution: Insights from equilibrium modelling and oil politics," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 166-178.
    8. Samuel D. Barrows, 2020. "Did the US Shale Oil Revolution Ruin Oil Industry Stock Market Returns?," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(4), pages 1-8.
    9. Berk, Istemi & Çam , Eren, 2019. "The Shift in Global Crude Oil Market Structure: A model-based analysis of the period 2013–2017," EWI Working Papers 2019-5, Energiewirtschaftliches Institut an der Universitaet zu Koeln (EWI).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    energy system model; crude oil market; US crude export ban; refining capacity; infrastructure investment;

    JEL classification:

    • Q41 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • Q47 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy Forecasting
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp1548. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bibliothek). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.