CEPR - Center for Economic and Policy Research

Multimedia

En Español

Em Português

Other Languages

Home Publications Blogs Beat the Press NYT Claims European Firms Make Location Decisions Based on Spot Energy Prices

NYT Claims European Firms Make Location Decisions Based on Spot Energy Prices

Print
Saturday, 29 December 2012 08:35

Everyone who pays even casual attention to energy prices know that they fluctuate dramatically. The price of a barrel of oil soared from around $40 in 2004 to a peak of $150 in 2008, then fell back under $40 briefly in the wake of the economic collapse later that year. While this run-up and crash was extraordinary, large fluctuations are not. This is why it is surprising to see the NYT tell us that many European manufacturers are planning to move their operations to the United States based on the lower cost of energy in the United States.

This claim is especially bizarre for two reasons. First, the large differences in prices will almost certainly not persist. The fracking boom in the United States has pushed gas prices down to a level that is roughly half of its level four years ago. At current prices much fracking is not profitable and producers have already slowed their rate of drilling.

In addition, producers have plans to export liquid natural gas. While it takes time to build facilities, it is likely that the U.S. will soon be exporting large amounts of natural gas. This will have the effect of equalizing prices between Europe and the United States in the same way that trade equalizes the price of oil in Norway, a huge oil exporter, and Italy, which imports almost all its oil. While there will still be differences in price due to transportation costs and also tax rates, most of the current gap in prices would be eliminated. Presumably the people who run major companies in Europe understand this fact and take it into consideration in their decision to locate factories that may be operating for 30-40 years.

The other strange aspect to this piece is that it implies that Europe can't compete with the United States due to differences in energy costs. The Commerce Department would seem to strongly disagree with this view. It reports that the United States trade deficit with the European Union was $94.8 billion through the first eight months of 2012, an increase of almost 20 percent from the deficit in 2011.

This seems like a clear case of who are you going to believe, the NYT saying that energy costs have made Europe uncompetitive or the Commerce Department telling us that its trade surplus is growing.

Comments (3)Add Comment
What's missing from the energy conversation
written by Wayne Harris, December 29, 2012 8:28
With drought ravaging crops in the Midwest and rendering the Mississippi River unnavigable, it would be interesting to see an analysis of the water cost per BTU of various energy sources, including fracked oil and NG, nuclear, wind and solar. Irrigating large scale monocrops was already taking a toll on aquifer reserves. Fracking surely has made a bad situation worse.
Widespread story
written by Bob Spencer, December 29, 2012 9:03
By coincidence, or maybe not, I have seen the same reasoning in other publications. For example, I saw that low energy prices are a major reason why GE is moving an appliance factory back to the US.

At the same time, I read an analysis saying that the natural gas producers have a cash flow problem and are doing various financial investment maneuvers to raise cash.

Hummmm---Should I suspect that the natural gas producers are pushing this story to stimulate confidence in their future and gain more Wall Street funds for their operations?
discounting tax effect
written by Melissa, December 30, 2012 6:40
You dismiss taxes almost in a parenthetical as being not significant. But in the US, the taxes on basic unleaded gas is about $0.50 per gallon, compared with about $8 per gallon in Germany. Those were just the energy figures that it was easy for me to find. If the tax rates on other more industrial-use sources of energy are comparable, this factor alone could be a strong incentive. Of course we know that "right to work" laws are probably a bigger one, but still I don't think you dismiss the argument without offering us at least some data about the taxes.

Write comment

(Only one link allowed per comment)

This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comments.

busy
 

CEPR.net
Support this blog, donate
Combined Federal Campaign #79613

About Beat the Press

Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He is the author of several books, his latest being The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive. Read more about Dean.

Archives