Archives

Search Archives

Transforming Secondary Education: New $100 million initiative to improve education quality across the nation.
Learn More »

Recent Spotlights »

View all Archives - Environment and Development »

Competition in the U.S. Energy Industry







for the future—would be technological advance in producing synthetic gas from coal. Finally, a sign of expansion in market scope is the increase in exports of coal, especially to the steel industries of Europe and Japan.

Uranium. Enriched uranium is a highly valued product, and transportation costs represent a minor part of its costs. Consequently, the trading area for uranium fuels, by nearly anyone's analysis, would be at least national in scope and, no formal application of the Hogarty methodology was conducted.

Footnotes
Footnote :

e For example, if we combine Texas and Louisiana, then we find that only 63 percent of total shipments of crude oil from these states is destined for refineries within these states.

Footnote :

f Texas, Louisiana, Illinois, Oklahoma, and Indiana.

Footnote :

g In addition to the five cited in the previous footnote, we had Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kansas, and New Jersey.

Footnote :

a These states (in order of importance, 1971) were Texas, Louisiana, Illinois, Oklahoma, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kansas, and New Jersey.

Footnote :

b Producing Area I comprised the states Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Kansas.

Footnote :

c Denominator includes imports.

Footnote :

d These states (in order of importance, 1971) were California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, Wyoming, Utah, Montana, Michigan, New York, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.

Footnote :

e Area II comprised shipments of crude oil from foreign sources plus all producing states except the 5 in Area I.

Footnote :

f Producing Area II failed to meet even the weak form of the test, hence a test involving the strong criteria was not conducted.

Footnote :

a Complete descriptions of these districts may be found in the source cited below. In some cases the districts comprise entire states (e.g., District 5 is Michigan); in other instances only part of a state is included (e.g., District 2 is Western Pennsylvania).

Footnote :

b Comprises Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, Michigan, Eastern Kentucky, Virginia, Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia.

Footnote :

c Comprises Western Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Arkansas, and Oklahoma.

Footnote :

d Comprises Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, Utah, North and South Dakota, Montana, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska.

Footnote :

a Denotes distinct geographic market area.

SELLER CONCENTRATION: LEVELS AND TRENDS

Measures of seller concentration in the production of crude oil, natural gas, coal, and uranium are presented below. It should be emphasized that concentration levels mean little by themselves, but are of interest because they allow an inference about the degree of interdependency among sellers in a market. In addition, concentration measures do not reflect seller interdependency due to factors other than the existence of only a few sellers, i.e., institutional factors.

Crude Oil

The petroleum industry in the U.S. encompasses: (1) crude oil production, (2) transportation by pipeline or tanker, (3) refining, and (4) marketing of refined products. The industry comprises a large number of firms, but a relatively small number of very large, fully integrated companies, often referred to as majors, dominate economic activity at each production stage. In general, independents are small firms and are not fully integrated across the different functions. In 1967, crude oil production accounted for some 63 percent of profits earned by integrated companies; in addition 6 percent came from transportation, 21 percent from refining and marketing, and 10 percent came from petrochemicals. This book is primarily concerned with crude production because events at the crude level are a major determinant of market conditions in downstream markets.

Concentration measures for domestic crude oil production are reported below. Obtaining a consistent set of data has been complicated by substantial variation in the definition of crude production as reported by individual firms. Some firms report net crude production defined as total crude production less royalty oil production. Royalty oil is oil produced and usually controlled by the company but in a legal sense owned by the landowner. In other cases, companies report gross production defined as net production plus royalty production. In terms of determining the extent of dominant firm control over production, gross production is obviously a more relevant statistic. Where net production is used, the resulting figure is biased downward, the general size of the bias being indicated by Cookenboo's estimate that royalty oil was equivalent to about 18 percent of total production and de Chazeau and Kahn's estimate of 12.5 percent. Other sources of inconsistency in the data are the manner in which natural gas liquids are treated and, in limited cases, the inability