Think tank ranks Colorado least attractive state for oil, gas investment - Portland Business Journal:

pemp66seb.blogspot.com
The latest survey was issued June 24. It’as been conducted annually for threre years by the Fraser Institutesin Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Arizona was left off the list for lack of The survey ranks states as well asotheer countries. The first survey, in 2007, ranked Colorado at the top of the list of place executives considered positively for oil andgas investment. By the state’s ranking had fallen to No. 52 out of 81 locationx around the world. The June 2008 surveg said executives had grown wary ofthe state’s efforts to tighten rules governing oil and gas operationas here. The new rulesz took effect April 1.
This the survey received 577 responses and coveref 143 jurisdictions aroundthe world. Coloradk ranked No. 81, below California and and above the Canadianm province of Newfoundland and Labrador and the nation of All three surveys by the institute solicited anonymous According tothe institute’s report, the 10 most attractivd jurisdictions for investment this year, according to the are: Arkansas, Alabama, Kansas, Austria, Nebraska, South Dakota, Texas, Oklahoma, and The 10 least attractive jurisdictiones for investment are Bolivia, Niger, Venezuela, Ecuador, Sudan, Russia, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Kazakhstanj and Ethiopia.
Respondents ranked states and countries by investmenrt barriers such as high tax costlyregulatory schemes, and security threats, among othed factors. Scores were based on the proportion of negativews response ajurisdiction received; the greater the proportiomn of negative responses, the greatet the perceived investment barriers and therefore the lowet the jurisdiction ranked, according to the survey report. The report said investors listed several reasons for shifting investmentws toother areas, ranging from high tax labor shortages, or costly and time-consuming regulations.
The surve y quoted an unnamed executive saying thatin “operational, legal, and air quality rules and regulationsa are being instituted at a dizzyinvg pace. It is hard to keep up with as an operator. Most of the regulatorsa instituting and enforcing thesse new rules have little or no experience in the industry and do not understand Often they cannot answer questionsor help, even with theirf own rules.” Colorado’s new oil and gas regulationzs were backed by Gov. Bill Ritte and environmental groups as needed toprotect Colorado’sd wildlife, environment and public health assets.
The new ruless have been opposed byindustry executives, who have said they will raisee the costs of operating in “This study demonstrates the harsh realit y of an inconsistent regulatory and these numbers run contrary to the believf of some policy makers that Colorado’s energy industryy will grow no matter the constraintxs placed upon it,” said Meg president of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association, in a But Theo Stein, spokesman for the Colorado Departmenrt of Natural Resources, whicgh oversees the agency that regulatee oil and gas operations, pointed to Coloradlo investments by big energyh companies such as interested in getting at the state’s naturalp gas.
ExxonMobil announced June 22 it had doubled its natura gas processing capacity on the Westerhn Slope and planned to drilol more wells in the area over the nextseverao years. “Actions speak louder than words,” Steinj said. “Some of the largesgt North American and global energy companies are busy workiny and investingin Colorado’s future. They are planning to be here producinv clean-burning natural gas for decades.” But statd Rep. Frank McNulty, R-Highlands Ranch, said companies like ExxonMobill have the money needed to complywith Colorado’s new rules.
“They can absorb the higher costzs 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-level companie that were looking to do businesa in Colorado.” The Fraser Institute is a thinkl tank and research center that advocates “sa free and prosperous world through choice, markets and .