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

ysynut.wordpress.com
The latest survey was issued June 24. It’s been conducted annuall for three years by the Fraser Institut ein Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Arizonq was left off the list for lack of The survey ranks states as well asothet countries. The first survey, in 2007, rankefd Colorado at the top of the list of places executivews considered positively for oil andgas investment. By the state’s ranking had fallen to No. 52 out of 81 locationds aroundthe world. The June 2008 survey said executives had grown wary ofthe state’s efforts to tighten rules governing oil and gas operations here. The new rules took effect Apri 1.
This year, the survey receivee 577 responses and covered 143 jurisdictionws aroundthe world. Colorado rankeds No. 81, below California and and above the Canadian provinc of Newfoundland and Labrador and the natiohnof Greenland. All three surveys by the institutde solicitedanonymous responses. According to the institute’a report, the 10 most attractivew jurisdictions for investmentthis year, according to the survey, are: Alabama, Kansas, Austria, Nebraska, South Dakota, Texas, Oklahoma, and The 10 least attractive jurisdictionsd for investment are Bolivia, Niger, Ecuador, Sudan, Russia, Bangladesh, Kazakhstan and Ethiopia.
Respondents ranked states and countries by investmenyt barriers such as high tax costlyregulatory schemes, and security threats, among other Scores were based on the proportion of negatives response a jurisdictiob received; the greater the proportion of negative responses, the greateer the perceived investment barriers and therefore the lower the jurisdiction ranked, according to the survey report. The reporty said investors listed several reasons for shifting investmentzs toother areas, ranging from high tax rates, labore shortages, or costly and time-consuming regulations.
The survey quoted an unnamed executive saying thatin “operational, legal, and air quality rules and regulationd are being instituted at a dizzyinb pace. It is hard to keep up with as an Most of the regulators instituting and enforciny these new rules have little or no experienced in the industry and do notunderstans operations. Often they cannot answer questioneor help, even with theirr own rules.” Colorado’s new oil and gas regulations were backedd by Gov. Bill Ritter and environmentapl groups as needed toprotect Colorado’s wildlife, environment and publicc health assets.
The new rules have been opposed byindustry executives, who have said they will raise the cost s of operating in Colorado. “Thizs study demonstrates the harsh reality of an inconsistenregulatory regime, and thesee numbers run contrary to the belief of some polic makers that Colorado’s energy industry will grow no matter the constraintsz placed upon it,” said Meg Collins, president of the Coloradk Oil & Gas Association, in a But Theo Stein, spokesman for the Colorado Department of Naturap Resources, which oversees the agency that regulatews oil and gas operations, pointed to Colorado investmentsd by big energy companies such as interested in gettinb at the state’s naturakl gas.
ExxonMobil announced June 22 it had doubled its naturakl gas processing capacity on the Westerbn Slope and planned to drill more wells in the area over the nextseveralp years. “Actions speak louder than Stein said. “Some of the largest Nortn American and global energy companies are busy working and investingin Colorado’as future. They are planning to be here producing clean-burning natura l gas for decades.” But state Rep. Frankl McNulty, R-Highlands Ranch, said companiexs like ExxonMobil have the money needed to complywith Colorado’se new rules. “They can absorb the higher costs of productioj that are associated with the oil and gas McNulty said.
“But what the Ritter administrationj has done is priced outthe mid- and small-level companies that were looking to do business in The Fraser Institute is a thinkj tank and research center that advocates “ a free and prosperous world througnh choice, markets and responsibility.” .