From there, the EIA provides up-to-date statistics on international oil production, consumption, and pricing (including historical and projected information), as does the International Energy Agency (IEA) via its monthly Oil Market Report.
US Oil Production
The Obama administration has countered accusations that it is responsible for rising gas prices by pointing out that US oil production has been climbing for the last three years after falling every year from 1991 through 2008; that crude oil imports have fallen to their lowest level since 1999; and that in 2011, the US was a net exporter of refined petroleum products for the first time since 1949.
All of that is true, but critics have parried those points by arguing that the Clinton and Bush administrations deserve credit for the leasing and permitting that created those conditions, and that recent growth in production has occurred on private rather than public land. They are valid points, but the conclusion that critics draw from them—that production has climbed in spite of Obama’s restrictive policies—is debatable. Unfortunately, the data that journalists need to inform that debate is rather opaque.
The EIA keeps a handy database of total crude oil production in the US going back to 1859, but nowhere online does the government publish a single, straightforward set of statistics about how much of that production is occurring on federal lands and waters. Worse still, in 2010, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report to Congress, which stated, “[The Dept. of the] Interior’s measurement regulations and policies do not provide reasonable assurance that oil and gas are accurately measured.”
After the EIA issued its Annual Energy Review report for 2010 in October, Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, sent a letter to the EIA criticizing its accounting methods for oil and gas production of federal and Indian lands. The congressman pointed out that EIA figures were based on sales volumes rather than actual production volumes. As a result, the EIA counted only oil produced from federal lands for which royalties were paid to the federal government, neglecting volumes for which no royalties were paid as well as volumes transferred to the country’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve. As a result, the EIA updated its numbers and issued a special appendix on March 15, which explained its methods and emphasized that all its data regarding fossil fuel sales came from the Department of the Interior.
Production data for federal lands and waters can be found at the Office of Natural Resources Revenue, whose figures are based on industry-reported sales volumes and royalty payments rather than actual production volumes. Data for different years, as well as royalty-revenue and non-revenue volumes, are all on different pages, though, so it takes a spreadsheet and a little bit of arithmetic to map out long-term trends. The EIA did the math in order to update its Annual Energy Review following Markey’s letter. The data in the report, which go back to 2003, show that there was indeed a large decline in oil production on federal lands and waters in 2011. But that observation belies the fact that federal lands and waters were exceptionally productive during 2010, outstripping any year’s productivity during the Bush administration. Indeed, the average productivity on federal land and waters during the four Bush years, 2003-2008, was 634 million barrels per year. During the three Obama years, 2009-2011, it was 676 million barrels. During the Bush years, federal lands produced roughly 33 percent of the national output on average. During the Obama years, they produced roughly 34 percent:

Critics might still argue that the production during the last few years was dialed in during the Clinton and Bush administrations, so it’s also worth looking at Interior’s leasing and permitting statistics. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) keeps both numbers for onshore activities. For offshore activities, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) keeps leasing stats and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) keeps permitting stats.

$4 gas is the result of the worldwide oil cartel of OPEC and its allies acting
to squeeze off oil supplies.
Here are two effective short-term remedies:
1. Require Iraq to start pumping more immediately. It is still producing at
the Hussein level of 2003. Iraq's reserves are near the top in the world.
2. Require Iraq to stop using its membership in OPEC to skyrocket oil prices.
As the ongoing occupying power in Iraq, the US has the power to direct ALL
activities of the Iraq government, including its participation in OPEC.
President Obama should issue the orders, and Congress should hold hearings. The
price of gas was $1/gallon in March 2003 when the occupation started. It should
go back there for the benefit of the American public.
Journalists should be reporting more about the US occupation powers and their actions over the Iraq government.
#1 Posted by Carl Olson, CJR on Fri 23 Mar 2012 at 01:20 PM
Follow the money is most important to track down the culprits. Do you have any good sources as to who of OPEC and its allies has been getting the trillions of dollars of cartel windfalls? Could easily include US big oil companies.
Gas was $1 a gallon (oil at $25 a barrel) in March 2003 when the occupation of Iraq was imposed. Gas skyrocketed and now is $4 a gallon (oil at $100 a barrel), even in the face of the worst recession since the Great Depression.
This reporting would be truly eye-opening and lead to a real debate.
#2 Posted by Carl Olson, CJR on Fri 23 Mar 2012 at 03:14 PM
Obama:Iraq, you have to pump more oil.
Iraq: No.
Obama:Also, you have to stop using your OPEC membership.
Iraq: No.
Now what? Invade again?
Madness.
#3 Posted by LikeThatCouldHappen, CJR on Fri 23 Mar 2012 at 04:50 PM
One nobody mentions is the wave of refinery closures when refiner profits were squeezed over the past few years. No new refineries in about 40 years, and Wall St. management by the quarter militates against keeping temporarily idle capacity intact.
There's a reason prices differ widely from place to place.
Both political parties and almost non-partisan outsiders like to say the country should have a long-trem energy policy, but as long as oil stocks and refinery stocks are traded on Wall St., it never will.
#4 Posted by Harry Eagar, CJR on Fri 23 Mar 2012 at 04:56 PM
Another resource: theoildrum.com, an old-school industry forum. It helped me understand shortages and price spikes in a particular region after Hurricane Ike, caused by the temporary shutdown of a specific pipeline.
It's also on Twitter as @theoildrum. As with any source, remember to bring your skepticism and judge contributors by track records.
#5 Posted by Andria Krewson, CJR on Fri 23 Mar 2012 at 07:53 PM
Harry Edgar had it precisely right. As long as energy resources are commodoties, the speculation by investors and the quarterly profits method will mean gasoline is at the mercy of a few.
#6 Posted by Dan, CJR on Sat 24 Mar 2012 at 02:03 PM
Dear LikeThatCouldHappen:
The US continues as the occupying power in Iraq. As such it can dictate anything for the Iraq government, including oil production its membership in OPEC.
Some people have the mistaken idea that the US has "left" Iraq. Some uniformed "combat" troops left a month or so ago. But tens of thousands of other uniformed troops, DOD security and other contractors, spy agencies such as NSA, CIA, FBI, etc., and others operate out of the largest embassy in the world in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq.
It's about time we in the American public got something out of this occupation. We've paid plenty of blood and treasure.
President Obama should issue the orders, and Congress should hold hearings.
#7 Posted by Carl Olson, CJR on Sat 24 Mar 2012 at 02:10 PM
So...
In order to "stop the spin," you're advising journalists to RELY EXCLUSIVELY ON FEDERAL GOVT SOURCES.
Are you serious?
#8 Posted by Dan A., CJR on Tue 27 Mar 2012 at 01:49 PM
"It's about time we in the American public got something out of this occupation. We've paid plenty of blood and treasure."
I know what you mean. Germany used to feel the same way about Poland.
Meanwhile, if you look into EIA findings you find:
PEAK OIL!
Which makes it a resource easily targeted by speculators and supply hoarders like you know who.
#9 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Tue 27 Mar 2012 at 02:16 PM
And the only person really talking about this, the only person who's gone out of his way to bring public attention to this issue in the past, is Bernie Sanders:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/28/opinion/sanders-gas-speculation/index.html
#10 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Tue 27 Mar 2012 at 02:26 PM
Speaking of things no one's really talking about:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=global-warming-close-to-becoming-ir
We're worried about the price of oil. In a hundred years, we're going to be worried about...
Ah who cares. If we are determined to cook the world, the world's gonna cook. The kids are going to write some real nasty history textbooks based on us.
#11 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Wed 28 Mar 2012 at 03:11 AM
The U.S. recently became a net exporter of gasoline for the first time in decades, as reported by McClatchy, Reuters and others.
From McClatchy's Kevin Hall on Feb. 21 (his article points to price speculation).
"WASHINGTON — U.S. demand for oil and refined products — including gasoline — is down sharply from last year, so much that United States has actually become a net exporter of gasoline, unable to consume all that it makes.
Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/02/21/139521/once-again-speculators-behind.html#storylink=misearch#storylink=cpy"
#12 Posted by SB, CJR on Wed 28 Mar 2012 at 10:52 PM
The fingerprint to watch for? According to the professor Krugenstein:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/oil-speculation/
"Oil speculation is back in the news. Last year I was skeptical about claims that speculation was central to the price rise, because what I considered the essential signature of a speculative price rise — physical withholding of oil from the market, in the form of high inventories — just wasn’t showing.
This time, however, oil inventories are bulging, with huge amounts held in offshore tankers as well as in conventional storage. So this time there’s no question: speculation has been driving prices up."
From the mcclatchy article linked above:
"Inventories of stored oil are also unusually high, the EIA said.
"At 339.1 million barrels, U.S. crude oil inventories are in the upper limit of the average range for this time of year," the agency said. "Total motor gasoline inventories increased by 0.4 million barrels last week and are in the upper limit of the average range."
Hence, no shortage to explain soaring prices.
In fact, U.S. demand and consumption patterns are so abnormal compared to recent decades that oil and gasoline are both now being exported to Europe, Asia and Latin America."
Speculators?! In my oil markets?! *rage face*
#13 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 29 Mar 2012 at 12:07 AM
The U.S. lately became a net exporter of energy for once in years, as revealed by McClatchy, Reuters and others.
#14 Posted by Jerald, CJR on Fri 13 Apr 2012 at 04:57 AM