recess and so the chair will announce that the committee will stand in recess for ten minutes. and we're going to return promptly because we have many many more people to question and we're going to have votes on the floor. so the committee is in recess for ten minutes.

come to order and the chair is now very pleased to recognize -- mr. rush for five minutes. >> i want to thank you, madam chair, for this standing hearing. madam chair, the overall profits of the u.s. energy companies are the greatest profits ever recorded in the history of mankind. of the human species. let me be clear. it means profits are outrageous. madam chair, look at these profits. exxonmobil, in 2021, 23 billion

dollars in profits. sharon, 2021 profits, came in at 15.6 billion dollars. and last for now least, shell, show company profits, 19.3 billion dollars. these are outrageous profits. in the weeks following the russian invasion of ukraine, many western oil and gas companies listed themselves from russia including bp and exxon. miss watkins, the same with other companies announced that they would take a step back from russia, your company was

buying cheap russian crude oil. 700,000 barrels of russian oil 's, crude oil, for nearly $30 per barrel hard under the international oil prices. it managed to convert that oil into product that it sold at normal prices. that single purchase would represent over $20 million in profit. these profits are nothing short of war profits, blood money. so to the blood of innocent

ukrainian citizens. it seems to me like it is an institute sincere apology. are they sorry they didn't? or are they sorry they got caught? while doing it. miss watkins, let's have some truth now. some true facts. when was the decision made it to purchase that oil? >> congressman, i'm not sure when that decision was made. but i can tell you that we had walked -- away >> if you're not sure, who would have approved the purchase? >> well, our ceo and burden came out and said that he had

approved that and he had made a mistake and he has apologized for that. i can tell you the situation in europe at the time with such that attempting to fill -- >> chairman of the board also approved -- purchase? >> sir, i'm not aware of how the approvals work to be honest. >> typically purchase oil crude -- ? >> i'm sorry, i don't understand the question. >> -- >> yes, type of crew that we run out of european refineries and at the time that decision was made we are attempting to keep refineries running and keep gasoline at the pump for our customers. >> according to s&p, net

russian crude oil was supposed to arrive in -- on march 25th. has that crude oil arrived and taken possession of it has shell a process that oil through any of its refineries? >> yes, sir, i believe we have so that we can supply diesel and gasoline to our customers in europe. who at this point -- [inaudible] purchases of crude and we've -- purchases of lng from russia. we are doing none of that at the time. at this time. >> madam chair, i am running out of, let me ask one other. better sir, i'm running. out >> i think the chair, chair now recognizes mr. scalise for five minutes. >> thank you madam chair for yielding and for holding this hearing. i have some questions for the witnesses but first, before we

talk about why we're here, i think it's important to go back and look at how we got here. americans are furious that gas prices are so high. but they also know the president biden walked in the one with an agenda to kill american energy. and don't take my word for it. let's go back to candidate joe biden. wind joe biden was a candidate for president of united states he was very clear what he wanted to shut down american energy production. as a candidate, and here you see him to the left ironically bernie sanders. joe biden said quote no more drilling on federal land no more drilling including offshore. no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill period. that was joe biden. as a candidate. said he wanted to kill american energy. and i wish and their. but that's just where it got started. he then went on issued a

barrage of mounds of red tape from every one of his federal agencies to make it harder to drill in america. not in other countries, by the way. just in america. look at all the agencies that president biden used to go after american energy producer. the department of energy, the department -- federal energy regulatory commission. securities and exchange commission the department of agriculture. the council on environmental quality. the department of state. the environmental protection agency. the department of justice. the department of interior federal agencies. putting mounds of red tape on every american driller are making it harder to drill in america. look at a few of them. we all know keystone, day one, coming from the state department. killed the keystone pipeline. not against all pipelines, because he turn around and gave a gift to vladimir putin in green lighted north stream. so he made american energy less

secure but he said it's okay for russia to produce oil and send it to europe. making them addicted to russian oil. helping fuel by the way putin's war against ukraine. putin is getting before the invasion, was getting over $700 million a day selling his oil to america and to europe because president biden issued this assault on american energy. on american energy. now, again, go back to what biden said. he did say that he was going to do it. no more drilling, including now go back to what biden said about yielding a short. -- the price goes up. just look at. it didn't start when russia invaded ukraine. the price was going up from day one when biden took office, because he had carried out an assault on american industry. so if you want to solve the problem, you don't need to reinvent the real that we'll. how about you first get rid of this entire assault from every

federal agency i just mentioned on producing oil in america. none of these rules and regulations, by the way, apply to russian oil. none of them apply to iranian oil. none of them apply to venezuela. but yet that's who president biden is picking to produce more. stop begging dictators to produce our energy and turn to america, where, by the way, we do it cleaner than anywhere in the world. you get energy from russia? they have a much higher carbon footprint. i'd love to see the carbon footprint. maybe we could have a hearing on that. the carbon footprint of joe biden's anti-american energy policy. the good news is there is help on the way. republicans have filed more than 60 bills, by the way, 60 bills, to reverse this barrage and assault on american energy by president biden, more than 60 bills. our ranking member? kathy mcmorris wrote mike rogers, has a bill. there are bills to do all kinds of things to actually allow us to produce our resources. by the way, cleaner than anybody else in the world.

that's where we should be going with this. but have got some questions for our witnesses. and i'll start with mr. lawler. my question is, does this whole mountain of red tape by president obama make it harder for you to produce more energy in america? yes or no? >> >> mr. law? >> well in general, you know, regulations that are supportive of the industry are helpful. regulations that help the energy transition are helpful. >> so are these supportive? are these supportive of the industry? you see, that you know the. you have to comply with him. it's one of the reasons you can produce. and i talked to people who produce, and all in all parts of the country, and they tell me is these regulations that are stopping them. mr. wirth, with chevron, to these regulations make it harder for you to produce energy in america? >> yes, they do. >> [inaudible] ?

>> yes, they do, congressman. >> mr. sheffield yes, they do, so. >> mr. muncrief? >> yes, they do. >> miss watkins? >> congressman, certainly some regulations are necessary for our business, but as i say for -- >> disease? >> we've got outstanding permits that would, if approved, would be and, enable us to bring even more production on -- >> let's open up americas dot the assault on america. >> the gentleman's time, [inaudible] i yield back the balance of my time. >> into the chest now pleased to recognize the chair of a house subcommittee, miss as she, for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chairwoman, for holding this very important hearing today and for extending the legislative courtesy to me to participate. in response to russia's invasion of ukraine, over 50

american companies have pulled out of russia, including ppe america, exxonmobil, and shell usa. and so, to those that have, i salute you for that. those that haven't, that are with us today, do you plan to do so? no response. okay. one policy that congress is considering to address the soaring gas prices is suspending the federal gas tax, it tax holiday, so to speak, of 18.4 cents per gallon. and there is a serious debate over whether gas prices would

actually fall by this amount in the not too distant future. my question is, if your companies can pull out of russia, can you also commit to passing on the full savings of a gas tax holiday to consumers? so, we'll go through the panel, and it's a yes or no answer. >> [inaudible] -- >> are you refusing to say anything? it's a yes or no answer. >> congressman, a woman,, i'll start. this is [inaudible] i was waiting to see if somebody was going to go through the list. we can certainly discontinue the collection of that tax. prices move each and every day in both directions. and so i can't guarantee you that the price will go up or go down due to the of rioting of other factors that influence prices.

but we collect attacks on behalf of the government and submit it to the government. and if that tax was suspended we would no longer collected and pass it on to the government. >> so it would go, it would go to the government but with the consumers that are buying the gas trying to fill the tax, would they be the beneficiaries of that, direct beneficiaries? appreciate your question, congresswoman. let me try to be more clear. the consumers would no longer pay that tax. we would no longer pay that tax. that could be a separate issue, the price of gas pumps would go more than that. or he could go the other direction depending on a variety of other factors. there are a work in modern stock and every day. >> to the other gentlemen? >> and gentleman? >> yeah, so, congresswoman when i will share is that, similar comments in that it is a very complex market. then wipers of the cape increasing demand which could

also increase prices. and i just tell you that is very complex market based decision. >> can't you bring more clarity to this then, just saying that everything is so complex? you know, it, i know this is not pleasant. but the american people are really now with you. they're angry. they're angry. and, you know, when i think every american company owes something to america. to the american people. there is pain at the pump. and really would underlines my question is. what can you do to help alleviate that? if you don't plan to do everything or help to do something. then i think that becomes absolutely apparent.

but i think that it will just add to another layer of a deep anger and resentment of the american people. so let me go through the rest of the individuals that are testifying today. on my original question. >> congresswoman, darren was exxonmobil, i would just tell you that i think the point mike made as a function of the supply and unmanned. of the price drops off and demands picks -- the way to ultimately solve this problem is to increase the amount of supply available to american consumers. that's something that -- >> you are essentially saying no. if there were to be a tax holiday then at the consumer, at the pump. to fill up, would not get the benefit. >> no, what i'm saying is that tax holiday doesn't change the model supply and the question

is how to supply and demand balance out. which ultimately set the price. i think we are seeing is nobody knows exactly how that supply and demand balance would be struck. but that is what will ultimately determine supply. the weight influence prices to raise -- >> the gentlelady's time is expired. >> i think the gentlewoman. and i yield back. >> thank you. chair now recognizes mr. latta for five minutes. >> i want to thank the chair for allowing me to waive on today's hearing and think to our witnesses for testifying before us today. today we're seeing the blame game plan with maximum effort. by our colleagues. we have heard the other side of the aisle on the biden administration for their fingers every direction to seek a culprit for the residential prices. but the administration should be doing is pointing the fingers in the mirror. since day one of this administration, president biden has pursued policies that would restrict the ability to produce oil and natural gas in the united states.

he canceled the keystone pipeline, or issued a moratorium on leases for oil and gas exploration on federal lands. he was the minister -- administration say too bogged down the permitting process. for energy infrastructure projects. and pushed his financial regulators to squeeze investments in the fossil fuel industry. now he's trying to convince american people that this full court press an anti-american energy policies is not contributing to the rise of gas prices. instead they say it's entirely fought -- and the war criminal putin. i'm glad we are holding this hearing today so we can set the record straight and get the answers for the american people as to why they are hurting when they go to fill up their car at the pump. general mcmaster, if i could start my question with you and first i want to thank you for your service to our nation. in light of the horrible crimes discovered over the weekend ukraine project by the russian army, many western nations are

now catching up to the united states and recognizing the need to and the importation of russian oil and gas. lithuania has become the model for this. for that nation went from being fully dependent on russia for energy only a few years ago, to now having the ability to end any russian imports. general, will be the result of this decision by the western european countries that and russian imports and how will that impact gas prices here and around the world? >> congressman. the result in the near term will be to constrain the supply even further but i think the key is that we have to start racing now to catch up to be able to displace russian oil and gas in the market. as well as to pursue solid supply chains for the transition to renewables. i think what's really important about way europe is doing is to follow up now, infrastructure investment. so much of that infrastructure was designed to keep russia,

russia's coercive power over those economy so that big investments need to be made and infrastructure on our side of the it landed as well as in europe. and then also it's really important to recognize that we need a rational approach to energy security and climate in carbon emissions. germany made a leap, they made a leap away from nuclear and a leap toward renewables. without investing in high route carbon infrastructure and as a result, they left off a cliff and can keep the lights on. so it's very important for us to recognize that as we pursue reductions and carbon emissions, that we have a sensible approach energy security. >> thank you. mr. woods, there have been efforts to shut down pipelines across the country. including line five which serves ohio and michigan. and last, year we saw how grass prices impact the shutdown colonial pipeline. would you speak to the consequences for gas prices -- if anti pipeline advocates got

away and more have been operation were shut down? >> yes, thank you for the question, congressman. infrastructure plays a incredibly important role with respect to energy supplies and keeping reliable and affordable energy available for american people around the nation. you tend to find sources of supply, refining in the gulf coast is feeding the demand in the east coast. and so having those pipelines available is absolutely critical. as of stream production and you resources and natural gas are found and developed, the production to be connected to markets which are then going to have to move the pipelines for the most efficient and most of our mentally sound in the safest mode of transportation. stopping those lines of international gas to consumers or crude into refineries or from refineries and demand centers. ends up putting a destruction into the balance of the supply and a manned. and increases prices. and reduces the security for people and access reliable

affordable energy. >> thank you. miss law lure, in my last three seconds, will recognize his play in delivering cleaner staple fossil fuels and displacing responsibly oil a national gas from countries like russia? >> thank you for the question. i think the u.s. is on track to be a leader. and i think tv is participating in that. as i mentioned earlier, we're spending 2 to 3 billion dollars this year. we'll be spending four billion dollars around 2025 timeframe. and it is important that we keep our head on both topics right now. it's very important that we get near term supply up as we fall discuss and it's also important that we follow through on the clean energy environment fill. >> gentleman's time is expired. chair now recognizes the chair of the select committee on climate change crisis. congresswoman castro from florida, for five minutes. >> well thank you chair again

for calling this very important hearing on price gouging by the big oil companies. it's truly outrageous and we've seen since the putin's attack on ukraine a rise of at least 75% or 75 cents. and this is, i really feel the small business owners and the prince trying to get their kids to school every day. they have supported the ban on russian oil imports to america, so they are doing their patriotic duty. they are willing to help the ukrainian people. and now it's time for the big oil corporations to do the same. it's time for the big oil companies to have to lower prices rather than pat your bottom line. it is time for you to end the billions of dollars in american funded taxpayer subsidies that are going to support your businesses. it's time to stop your decades the obstruction of the transition to clean energy, which would provide lower costs to consumers, the cars and

trucks we drive, the way we heat our homes and cool our homes. it's really scandalous to see this profiteering at a time when the ukrainian people and freedom are under attack. and it's scandalous to watch your after your at you on the show lobbyists and the grand -- the grand oil party, to block action to get true energy security. and what can that look like? because america is already number one, the number one producer, of oil and gas. has that insulated us from the volatility and the price spikes? it hasn't. now, i want to remind everyone. it was just a few years ago that the congress and the big oil companies pressed to allow with the export of petroleum products from the united states, something that many of us opposed at the time. u.s. exports, they said, would allow us to become even more independent. this will work prices. has that happened?

no. and more than a half 1 million barrels of petroleum exports leave the united states for china every day. going down the line, i want to ask each of the ceos how much of your project produced in the united states does each of your companies export to china, largely being aligned with putting these days? mr. lawler? >> thank you, congressman. i can't speak to you -- -- >> just a quick numbers albany. mr. wirth? >> congresswoman, that's not a number that i have at hand but i'd be happy to follow up with your staff and make sure -- >>. >> mr. muncrief? >> yes, we export about 10% of our protection, predominantly to europe.

>> to china. i'm just asking about china? >> oh, i don't think we, hardly any kitchen. >> all right. mr. woods? >> i'm not aware of that number. i think it's a very small one, we can follow up with you -- >> mr. sheffield? >> eve very small number. >> mr. -- ms. watkins? >> i don't have the number, but i can also follow up with you with it. >> well, this is very important to know. because we are looking for a solution. so one of the solutions may be to ban the export of our petroleum products to countries that are a malign influence in the world. but that's not the real answer. the real answer, of course, is breaking this dependence and addiction on oil and gas. renewable energy, right now, is the cheapest form of energy. and it's getting cheaper every year. we've got to accelerate the transition to clean energy. it's more stable, it's more affordable, it's generated here

at home. the house has passed legislation. it's been blocked largely by lobbying lists along with the fossil fuel companies that would lower the cost of your gas bill, would lower your ac bills, would lower the cost of electric vehicles, and would provide -- i mean, this is the time we've got to provide relief to americans and not double down on the same old wretched thing where we are addicted to oil and we can't get off. this is a time we must pivot, especially because the world's top scientists, early this week, said we are facing a future catastrophe and much higher costs than with the pain we see at the pump right now, unless we make this break right away. our time is urgent, and we have a moral obligation to our kids and future generations to give them a livable planted and a healthy economy where everyone can thrive. and that's what we must do. i yield back my time.

>> thank the gentlelady. the chair now recognizes mr. castor for friends. >> thank you, madam chair. general mcmaster, as i have a couple of questions, and i've known you for 35 years now from this summer. and so i followed your career in all the time since we first but at west point. and i know your intellect, your academic, you are a straight shooter, and sometimes your straightening has taken you some lonely places. so we should find that your analysis and what you say to be very, very thoughtful, and something we should find very sobering. and in your testimony, you argue that energy security for saving the planet is not a false choice. energy security and hurting an american independence in cutting fossil fuels is not a false trust. in your book, battlegrounds, which i read since it first came out, you talk a lot about climate change and it's important to address climate change. you absolutely do not dismiss. it's so would you expand upon the question that energy security forces saving the planet is not -- always a false

choice? >> thank you, congressman guthrie. thank you for your service, and those flooded memories from many years ago at west point. i really believe it's a false choice. the problem is, congressman guthrie, the thing we have been doing is pursuing on solutions, and we can't afford to pursue not solutions anymore. and what i mean is this idea that we can have an energy transition and all of a sudden that all of a sudden move, from, you know, from fossil fuels directly to renewables without a bridge in place. and of course, this is where the u.s. can play such an important role by providing the bridge associated with natural gas and a displacement of coal in particular. if we want to save the planet, we have to get off of coal for energy generation. that was the largest reduction in sea co2 emissions ever in the history of the world is what we did in the united states, associated with the opportunity presented by, by -- natural gas. it's a stream lee imported recognize that whatever we come

up with, whatever exquisite solution we come up with, to crt emissions and climate change, it has to be applicable in developing economies. because they just won't do it. they're not going to compromise economic growth and whipping people out of poverty for some exquisite solution that isn't consistent with what the market will bear. so, affordable renewables, yes. huge part of it. but also a big part of it is relatively inexpensive natural gas, which we can get to with increased production and export. and then finally, its emerging capabilities like next generation nuclear, which can be combined with hydrogen to meet so much of this demand and to do it at the zero emissions level. so, it's a competition, congressman, and what's sad about it is we continue to pursue these non solutions and get the opposite effect of what we desire. for example, burning coal exports going up, co2 emotions going up, in large merger

because of our pursuit of these non solutions. >> thanks, i want to ask you another question. talking about, you said, in renewables, we are still going to be dependent on sunlight change and foreign countries. reportedly that we let three trillion dollars of minerals in afghanistan in their hands the taliban, and their new friends the chinese. would you comment on that? >> congressman, the competition with china occurs in places outside of the indo-pacific region. and in this case, your point about how important south asia is. but i would say it cuts across the middle east. it cuts across africa. and it's really important for us to recognize the importance now of resilient supply chains, especially those associated with renewable energy and energy transition. you know -- electric, ours i forget how many immigrants is in an electric car. it's a lot. of course a manufacturing, magnate manufacturing, the whole upstream supply associated with rare earth and

other critical minerals and the separation from -- all of that has to be resilient, and the only way we're going to get there is with on shoring and near showing. that's really, i think, has to be a major focus of this committee as well as the biden administration. >> i want to ask you another. question in your written statement, you argue that opec isn't expanding their production when president biden -- requests because of his interest in the iran and iran deal. also what's going on human. would you comment on that as well? >> well it is our -- whatever it characterized as a nonsensical middle east pelosi that has alienated what could be key partners in the coverage. and foremost among them, saudi arabia and the united arab emirates. and what they're upset about is another week iran nuclear deal that quintessentially just give the theocratic dictatorships in iran cover for continuing the nuclear and their missile programs, which are grave threat to all of them in the region, and obviously, a grave threat to israel. and also our failure to

designate or take off the designation from the committees in yemen as a terrorist organization even as they're firing on rockets, you know, into the emirates and into saudi arabia. so, we ask them for cooperation, part of, course they are not giving it to us because they are angry with us, and i think, in some cases, rightfully so, because of an unwise approach to the middle east and to iran. >> thank you. my time's expired. a yield back. i look forward to seeing you again soon. >> thank you so much, chair now mayor recognizes mr. sarbanes for five minutes. >> thank you very much, madam chair. i want to thank our witnesses for being here today. minutes.let me just say up front my cards on the table, i don't trust you. i don't mean that in a sense that that question your personal integrity, i don't. but i recognize your role. your role is to lead now for profit corporations that are looking to maximize the return

to your shareholders. so when i say i don't trust you, i mean i don't trust you to not take advantage of the situation to try to meet that goal. i think that there's clearly an opportunity to profit from this crisis that occurred in ukraine from the disruption to the global supply chain of oil and gas, and it's an opportunity that your seizing on, again. i understand why you want to satisfy your shareholders. i would speak to what it means for your executive compensation, but that's your impulse. and earlier we saw a pretty

revealing chart that congresswoman degette laid out, where she conceded, obviously, that the price of crude oil had spiked when the invasion occurred, initially, the described disruption. and predictably, the price at the gas pump went up as well. but then she showed how the price of crude is coming down but the prices at the pump have not come down. so i think what that reflects is this ability to kind of manipulate the situation. your industry can say, well, we expect that the quidel price may go up, so you can anticipate that by charging more to the retailers. and then if the price comes down, you can say, well, it's

coming down, crews coming down, but it's going to take a few days before that can be passed along, or maybe we can't pass it along yet, because we think the price may go up again. you've got a lot of latitude to manipulate and take advantage of the situation in ways that will boost your profits. and sometimes it's legitimate, so you use phrases like, there are a variety of factors in the marketplace, prices move up and down every day -- that's the industry, i understand that. but sometimes that can just be a good way to cover up what is a effort to, or an opportunity to price gouge. the fact of the matter is that your customers, not just the

generic concern at the pump -- these area customers, that these are your red blooded, patriotic american customers -- many of whom when interviewed are saying we are willing to take a hit, we are willing to pay a little bit more to try to address this invasion. so they are stepping up. so, if you realize savings, don't you think it's the patriotic thing to do to pass that savings along? let me start with you, mister lawler. if bp america's realizing savings because the price of crude is going down now, so your saving money on that and, isn't it the patriotic thing to do to pass that savings along to your customers at the pump? >> so congressman, as i before, we sell our crude oil into a market, and it's a competitive market, and we sell all of our

refined products into a competitive market, and we buy feat stocks for our refineries in a competitive market. and it is not something that bp controls. >> mr., i'm going to see if we can get a better answer from your. you have costs, costs go up, costs go down. if the price of crude is going down, that represents a savings to your operation, does it not? >> >> yes or no. >> the price of crude goes down, that -- cost to our savings. >> savings are refineries. >> coffee -- as it has happened, based on what congresswoman degette showed us earlier, is it the patriotic, corporately responsible thing to do to pass those savings along to your customers at the pump? >> congressman, no single company controls -- >> i know, i got it. my time is out. there's a lot of hocus poke of

language you can throw up here. i think you need to pass savings along when you realize, and you have done that recently, that can benefit the consumer again. your loyal devoted customer at the pump and i have back. >> the gentleman's time has expired. mr. bilirakis, you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you to the witness of our witnesses for coming to testify at this very important hearing. some of my democratic colleagues have four weeks, and especially during this hearing, lambasted american oil and gas companies for high prices at the pump. and attempted to deflect criticism from the president for his rhetoric and policies that have clearly sought to defer or to deter and reduce domestic oil and gas production. by my republican colleagues have talked about the negative impact it has had domestically because of the president green new deal policies. and that's what they.

are i want to highlight the biden administration that it isn't, in other words, is it jeopardizing the united states energy independent independence and security. i think it's [inaudible] intervening to stop foreign fossil fuel projects that empower our allies and reduce europe's dependence on russian energy. and i'll give you an example. i'm talking about the biden administration's recent reversal of the east met pipeline, which would have delivered natural gas from greece, israel and cyprus to southeastern europe. make sense? the parts in europe most dependent on russia. and die [inaudible] the president 2014, when he was vice president, approved of this project. after establishment of u.s. support in 2019 for our allies and energy independent projects specifically mentioning the pipeline, the biden administration recourse

reversed course. why? contra depicting u.s. policy and not following the law as -- a bill like all that and most of us voted for, that was signed into law. the eastern mediterranean act of 2019 we are seeing what happens when europe europe is in history and secure insecure right now in ukraine, no one can to. that even going back to 2006, the extended effect that that's had on our own national security and that of our nato allies. thank you for your service, general mcmaster, and i have a question for you. in your testimony, you talked about putin's long history of trying to coerce its neighbors to extend russia's influence. could you please briefly describe the positive impact the eastmed pipeline could have on reducing the energy dependence on southeastern europe countries, european

countries, and hopefully prevent a repeat, every bit of what's a tragically happening in ukraine and countries like romania, bulgaria, i could go on, moldova, let alone the nato allies. if you could comment on that, i would appreciate it, general. thank you. >> congressman, what you're alleging is a tremendous opportunity. a tremendous opportunity for international investment in infrastructure. the coated structure that is giving russia coercive power as to be corrupt circumvented. it has to be can circumvented in the numbers of weight. eastern mediterranean is the number one. it's a tremendous operative opportunity as well as structure as -- as an airport terminal. it's important to recognize that a lot of the interest right to the questions using his old soviet infrastructure for so forth, for example, in ukraine, where they're concentrating the offensive now in the donbas, that's the area in which about 90% of the energy infrastructure and potential in ukraine lights. and that's not a coincidence. ukraine is designed to export,

energy, not receive energy imports. so, these sources of infrastructure investments are immensely important, and of, course of people [inaudible] it's going to take a long time. when it takes a much longer time if you never start. and so i think in every crisis we should look for an opportunity. one of the opportunities here is renewed investment in energy infrastructure globally. >> you're right, general, common sense. let's just talking about the pipeline former national security perspective as well. from what i've been hearing my colleagues across the aisle and the president of the united states don't seem to understand or willfully ignore that their actions not only reflect current prices but heavily influences decision-making focused in the future like investment, of course, oil futures, and all price contracting. all of which feedback to the effect the current and future prices as well. so, mr. wirth, i know that

chevron, especially after your acquisition of noble energy, have significantly, you have a significant presidents and activity in the eastern mediterranean. if you please describe in your pack [inaudible] the administrations reversal on the eastmed pipeline as not only another public and pirate investments in natural gas project in the region, but specifically the eastmed pipeline, which is currently in the state of seeking investments and evaluating iowa viability. if you can answer that question, i would appreciate it, quickly. >> congressman, i appreciate you raising this [inaudible] it's an important. one of the eastern mediterranean has tremendous gas resources. that currently serve only local and regional markets. we are working on a number of options to try to extend that gas into other markets in europe in particular. the eastern mediterranean pipeline is one alternative. it is a complex, costly alternative but a real

alternative. we're looking at buying natural gas, floating liquid natural gas, we welcome dialogue with others that could help -- mobilize the capital and infrastructure to get that gas to --. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the chair now recognizes mr. welch for five minutes. >> thank you. and gentlemen, when we have -- this to issue. tier one is a debate about the long term energy and how quickly in my view we need to transition to him in renewables. but there's another issue that is immediate. and that is the impact of the war in ukraine, that brutal invasion of bloodthirsty putin has inflicted on the people of ukraine and how that has caused such disruption, pain, for consumers everywhere, from eastern europe to the united states. and the question that all of all of us have is what can we do to support the people of

ukraine in their effort to survive and what can we do to help citizens, everyday citizens, who are living paycheck to paycheck to pay the bills that have escalated, particularly at the pump at four home peaking oil? this is not for me a debate about the long term policy. i know we have disagreements here between me and my colleagues, and perhaps to be and some of you. i think we've got to get to clean energy as quickly as we possibly can. but here's what alarms me. in march 6th, 2020, just before we had to shut down as a result of covid u.s. crude oil production was 13.1 million -- thousand -- barrels per day. million barrels per day. yeah, 30, thousand thank you. on january 2022, it is declined to 11.4. so what we've seen in this time's production has gone down,

prices have gone up, and what we have seen, particularly since february and the invasion, is that profits have exploded. dividends have been raised, executive compensation is up, and shareholder stock buybacks are up, 41 billion dollars. so the question i have, you know, and i'll start with mr. wirth, is in the boardroom, there can be a decision about the allocation of the resources of the company, putting it into protection to bring it up to pre-pandemic levels, stock buybacks, and dividends. all of these have been increases. has there ever been any discussion about lowering the price at the pump to help folks who are helping to bear the burden of the u.s. and our european allies support for the people of ukraine?

>> congressman, i appreciate your concern. we share that concern for americans -- >> i'm not asking about your concern. i know concerted, right. i'm asking specifically, is there any discussion about, hey fellows, baylor's got to lighten on up on the stock buybacks, maybe ought to lighten up on the dividends, maybe we ought to lower the price at the pump, it'll be tough, less profit, but you know, that might help the cause here. hasn't been any discussion about that? >> congressman, we had a very lengthy discussion about capital allocation. protection in 2021 was the highest in history of our company, higher than it was pre-pandemic. i capital spending this year is up 60% versus what it was just -- >> to diss route my figures? do you dispute my figures about the u.s. production is less now than it was before the pandemic? >> congressman, -- tremendous through the economic contraction during the pandemic. you know, there's no need for -- if supply was -- >> that's right. you know, this is really pretty

simple. because you all have to make decisions. and it gets all complicated, and you've got your economic models, you've got your computer logarithms, whatever the -- you have. but bottom line, you have a decision with the profit. you put it into stock buybacks, that help shareholders. you put it into dividends and, that health shareholders. or you put it into production, and possibly, under these extreme circumstances, with a war, with people dying in ukraine, you say, you know what? maybe we'll lighten up a little bit on the stock buybacks, maybe we'll lighten up a little bit on the dividends, and maybe will lighten up a little bit to help folks in vermont who are getting hammered with the price at the pump. is that a discussion? >> congressman, it is a discussion. we're investing more capital in -- production. we can do that and return value to shareholders -- >> you do have the -- it is a world market. and you i -- agree with that. you don't have, even, [inaudible] our companies don't have total

control over what the price is. but they do have control over how they allocate capital between ill increasing attraction, between profits, the between stock buybacks, and between dividends. i yield back. >> the chair now recognizes mr. johnson for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. first of all, i want to thank our panel, some of the biggest names in oil and gas, for joining us today. and thank you all, for what you do to keep the lights on, the power of transportation and industry to create thousands of consumer products and millions of jobs, and quite literally, to fuel modern life as we know it in america. you deserve praise for that. what you produce has lifted billions of people out of poverty around the world. but there's a problem. many of you have big advertising budgets. why won't you tell that story? i'm not going to name names, but we've all seen the tv commercials from pink oil, filled with solar panels, green

climate messaging about how your diversifying your portfolio, and how your embracing liberal progressive values. what's been your return on investment with that effort? you've taken a shot liking today from democrats. do they seem impressed by your effort to show your allegiance to their anti fossil fuel agenda? do they give you any credit for your green overtures, your esg commitments, or carbon cutting plans? no, they do not. for heaven's sakes, they are blaming you for our gas prices, for inflation, for bad weather, and all the world problems that their failed policies are actually causing. your industry has a lot to be proud of. and americans know it. you just have to help us tell them. but if you continue chasing these radical green progressive values, these moving goalposts, over the real value that you bring to our country and the world, then the environmental

left and the esg investors will crush you and the millions of americans that support, that need your support. so today i want to give you a platform, ladies and gentlemen. first, mr. sheffield, these are yes or no questions, because i've got a lot of them. mr. sheffield, pioneer resources, are you and your employees still proud of the all-oil and gas that you produce, knowing that it goes into so many essential products and industries? >> yes, we are okay, thank you very. much mister muncrief, divine energy or devon energy, if i've got that. what are you proud of the great playing jobs to provide in americas oil and gas fields? >> yes the, answer is yes. >> thank you very much, that's a big. yet mr. wood, exxonmobil, are you proud that your company one, one of the world's largest, provides resources that quite literally lift billions of people out of property globally? >> absolutely. >> okay. mr. wirth from chevron, are you

proud that the jet fuel, diesel and gasoline that you sell plays such a vital role in americans getting to their jobs, getting their jobs done, taking care of their families,jobs, ge their jobs done, taking care of their families and keeping our economy moving. >> i am absolutely proud of our people. our product and see values. >> mr. watkins from shell, are you proud of your company's investments to export more clean abundant american-liquefied natural gas and are you proud of the cracker plant in pennsylvania that produces a raw material that goes into literally thousands of products needed in everyday life in america, are you proud that the gas that you produce, that our european friends and allies need so much right now that they are literally dying for it. are you proud that you produce that product? >> yes, congressman, i am. >> thank you, very much, mr.

lawler from bp, estimates say oil markets are going to be 3 million barrels a day shortly. with russian crude coming off the market, but the world needs that 3 million barrels that the russian market is going to collapse. would you be willing to help make up that deficit, perhaps from american resources? >> well i can tell you, congressman, we are focused on that. >> okay, that's a yes. i appreciate that. thank you very much. ladies and gentlemen, these are a few commercials that you folks could run. you've got a good story to tell. use these ideas to tell the american people the truth about what you do so they can quit being misled by the barrage of negative disingenuous false advertisement that you see coming from my democrat colleagues today.

i'm going to yield back a whole 18 seconds of my time, madam chair. >> i thank the gentlemen. chair now recognizes mr. carnus for five minutes. >> we see him online. >> okay, if mr. carnus isn't here, chair recognizes mrs. dingle five minutes. >> thank you chair for holding this hearing. times are tough right now, american and see my constituents are really feeling it in their wallets, gasoline prices in michigan doubled to tripled in the last couple years, this means families as everyone is talking about are forced to cut costs while they see the oil companies making record profits. i had a uaw worker who at christmas time told me he couldn't visit his family because he simply can't afford it anymore. another worker who used to visit

her mother every sunday said it's really hurting her so times like this underscored the importance of ramping up investments in manufacturing and clean energy and i'm going to say to my colleague, mr. johnson, look, i'm a car girl. i come from an industry that operates with the internal combustion engine and yet global climate change is real, we're 30% responsible for carbon emissions and coming together to work together. the oems, the workers and environmentalists to try to get to the next generation. that's what we're all talking about like this. we need to make this transformational shift to electrifying the transportation sector to reduce carbon emissions and our dependence on foreign energy sources while creating good-paying american jobs and strengthening clean energy supply chains. the fact of the matter is this is an economic and national security issue. i've heard each of you today

point to, thank you to our witnesses, but i've heard each of you today point to the complex global commodity market or describe your company simply as price takers. the way you talk about your business it's as if you have no control over anything and that you're just helpless participants in the global market. but i'm not sure that's true. your decisions on whether to increase, sustain or decrease production affect the price per barrel. but isn't it true that your product is the majority of the price that someone is paying, that the customer is paying for the cost of gasoline? so if the price of your product, crude oil, is high, then the price of gasoline at the pump is high. correct? i'll quickly go down the line, just yes or no. mr. lawler. >> yes, the price of crude does impact -- >> just yes or no, mr. worth? >> yes.

>> mr. monkrief. >> yes. >> mr. woods. >> yes. >> mr. sheffield. >> yes. >> ms. watkins. >> yes. >> but looking back at this chart, the same doesn't seem to apply on the downside. and that's why we want to understand this better, because the consumer isn't seeing the benefit at the pump. so what i want to understand is what it is that your companies can and should do and what congress can do to incentivize action so we can alleviate the pain at the pump for our constituents. global demand has been rebounding nearly a year and projected to exceed two dozen '19 levels this year, the demand is there but we still haven't reached prepandemic levels of production and while i understand you simply cannot

flip a switch or turn on a spigot we must be honest about the main reason some companies are choosing to ramp up production slowly. a survey of oil company executives by the dallas federal reserve found that nearly 60% of oil companies are restraining growth because of investment pressure. that same survey also found that for large firms like the ones you all sitting before us today, the price needed to turn a profit on a new well is somewhere around $50 a barrel on average, roughly half the current trading price per barrel. mr. monkrief let's start with you, you stated december 21st, 2021, investor call, that devon can officially sustain production at an ultra low wti, break even funding level of about $30 a barrel. is that still approximately your break even point? >> yes, it is.

it's slightly higher than that with the inflation we've seen but pretty close. yes. >> mr. woods, on february first, 2022, you stated on a call with investors that exon's break even price for a barrel of brent crude is $41 per barrel and expected to average $35 a barrel between now and 2027, is that accurate. >> for the projects that were developing, that's accurate. >> mr. lawler, the guidance you gave investors for the second half of last year was that your break even price was about $45 around a barrel for oil, is that still your break-even point? >> that sounds about correct, yes. >> mr. worth, your cfo told investors your break-even was around $50 a barrel to cover capitol expenditures and dividend, what is the break-even just to cover your costs without the dividend?

>> our dividend congresswoman is about $10 billion a year. that is divide by our production of about a billion dollars it would be about $10 less than that. >> ms. watkins, your company's break-even is about $30 a barrel, correct? >> yes. >> mr. sheffield your break-even around $30, as well, correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> so my friends, the price of oil today was $96 for wti and $101.51 for brent crude, given those prices and break-even costs it's no surprise the oil and gas industry is suspected to collect a wind fall of $126 billion in 2022 alone. and while you break even at as low as $30 per and selling above

$100, the oil industry is also taking subsidies for the american tax payer which are meant for struggling industries to stay afloat. with margins like this it's not clear to me you all are getting tax subsidies and tax payers are paying for it at the pump. so i'll leave it with that and yield back. >> i thank the gentle lady. chair now recognizes mr. bushan five minutes . >> thank you, madam chair, i want to say this. we are in a free market economy with publicly held companies that millions and millions of americans have as part of their portfolio and retirement accounts so i think we need to remember that, you know, this is a free market economy. and sometimes, i think some of my colleagues forget that. today, my constituents are paying record high gas prices, in evansville last month,

unleaded gas, over $4 while geesal over $5 a gallon. while putin's invasion on ukraine undoubtedly had impact on the prices, republican members of this committee have been sounding the alarm on rising fuel and energy costs for months. in fact, since january of 2021, because that's when it really took off. we've been sounding the alarm on rising fuel and energy costs well before the invasion of ukraine. yet, today, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are calling on the their usual play, it's price gouging, let's be clear, in my view this isn't remotely close to to why people can't afford to fill up their cars. it's been policies of the biden administration toward energy producers that helped to drive

up prices in the last year. instead of looking how to reverse course on these policies we revert to the ftc which has never shown that price gouging is the main culprit for decades, every time it's been approached to study this. not only are these misguided policies emptying out wallets of my constituents, they're also threatening my national security. as we should be learning from european allies those misguided energy policies have given significant leverage to putin and must prioritize energy security as a matter of national security. it just baffles me why the biden administration continues to pursue policies that domestic energy producers weaken the position of allies and ultimately place in the hands of adversarial states around the world who seek to weaponize access to energy, we must get back to american energy dominance. general mcmaster, you mention authorities use their power over energy supplies to coerce

opponents. the biden administration in my view is playing right into russia's hands by pursuing restrictive energy policies and negotiating with dictators in venezuela rather than producing american energy and getting our country back to prebiden administration energy dominance where we were net exporters then and some of this may be ground covered but general, can you explain what is at stake if the united states continues down this road and becomes irreversibly dependent on adversaries like russia and iran to meet energy needs? >> congressman, thank you, we all live and learn. i'm hoping the biden administration, all of us will learn from russia's use of energy for coercive purposes, should learn, obviously, our lesson in terms of investing in our own production and export which can help satisfy global ghand in a way that is to our benefit in terms of security and

prosperity and prosperity in the world broadly but as you're alluding to the danger of becoming overreliant on supply chains that go through china, especially those connected to renewables. renewables associated with, you know, with solar and wind power and the hardware and equipment but also the manufacturing of electric cars and the batteries that go into them and the magnets that go into them as well as the minerals and various materials. so i think it's, and by the way, the oil that goes into them. every electric car is about 1/3 made out of petroleum products so i think it's important for us to recognize an opportunity and i don't want to lay blame on anyone at this stage. as long as we learn our lesson and change the policies, we relax the regulations and permitting and be able to take advantage of the great promise of natural resources here and american innovation and

ingenuity. >> i'm particularly concerned about china's strong position in the renewables market as you just mentioned, especially as we have a rush to green energy agenda while still discouraging mining of critical minerals and energy production in the united states. so i think you did touch on this, by pursuing this, without shoring up domestic mining and processing capabilities, particularly for our battery situation, are we simply going to create dependence on china for renewables that will echo dependency on middle eastern oil in the 1970s . >> congressman, i think that's exactly the danger, there has been good work done on this at the hudson institute, that shows how vulnerable we are to these supply chains that are vulnerable because they're overly dependent on china. >> i'm out of time so i yield back. >> thank the gentleman, chair recognizes mr. carnus five

minutes. >> thank you, it's interesting that some people say we're rushing to green energy when it's been talked about seriously from the president's level, congress, and along all the analysts along the world for decades now. all of a sudden it's a rush to energy, i find that quite interesting. when it comes to clean energy, today the united states is the world's leading producer of oil and natural gas and this is undoubtedly brought our country numerous economic benefits including job creation, opportunities and trade, global competitiveness, nonetheless, russia's invasion of ukraine shined a light on how interconnected we are globally and i commend all the individuals in our countries, and heads of corporations for removing their operations, terminating operations with russia and i think it's important everybody understands of course we stand with ukrainian people and all peoples around the world who have been invaded by other countries and being decimated and atrocities occurring upon them. mr. monkery, prior to the crisis

at the pump, how have you worked on the transition to clean energy domestically? >> thank you for the question. our fundamental business is producing crude oil and natural gas production. the best thing we can do is be a strong, healthy company. we continue to explore new ways in the energy transition. we've actually made some investments along the lines of venture capital to develop some realtime emissions monitoring, things like that. so it's something we're continuing to look at, look for opportunities. the reality is, sir, these are very low-return projects and we have to be mindful of that. over a decade of challenging -- >> yes, thank you. and i understand you have a legal and fiduciary responsible to your shareholders first and foremost as an executive, i understand that and thank you for your frankness about talking about where profits interject in

your decisions on how much clean energy investments your company is going to make, that's not a criticism just an honest observation. mr. worth, as why work toward meeting energy independence, we can't ignore the on going crisis that is climate change which we know is a serious threat to our planet, national security, economic prosperity and the future of our people. on monday, the united nations interdevelopmental panel on climate change released a report on climate change which indicates global emissions have never been higher and we're on a pathway to nearly doubling the 1.5 degree limit that was agreed upon in 2015 in the paris climate agreement. with the current emissions trajectory, sciences forecast extreme climate change, unprecedented disaster and a world that is uninhabitable, as u.s. shifts to increase energy independence, what steps are you each taking to prioritize the

transition to cleaner, more sustainable energy to reduce ghd emissions? >> congressman, thank you for the question and thank you for your genuine appreciation for the contributions that this industry makes to american competitiveness and our economy and the responsibilities a to the leaders of these companies do have. our strategy is to decarbonize our existing business by reducing the emissions intensity of the oil and gas that we produce and the world still consumes and continuing to reduce that co2 intensity over time while the world is using traditional sources of energy and then to invest in new lower carbon forms of energy at the same time, in three areas, renewable fuels, hydrogen and carbon capture and storage. this year, will spend nearly $4 billion on renewable fuels alone and have many projects we're working on developing in the areas of hydrogen, carbon capture and storage and other technologies. >> thank you, my time is limited

and i'd like to also point out that without the respect the $4 billion you mention in investment, that's good, yet at the same time it was mentioned earlier some of your earnings, quarterly earnings are in upwards of 10 billion in one quarter so it's all relative as well, and i heard earlier, that it's about making sure your bottom dollar is met as well so maybe what we can see to the biggest country in the world when it comes to producing oil and fossil fuel production, maybe if we can get a little bit more aggressive and maybe be a better competitive to china so those economic forecasts don't play out if we're going to end up at the behest of china in the future, we all have a part to play. american industry is at the pump every single day in front of our folks like in california, prices have hit above $5.90 a gallon and all have a role to play in making sure we can do what we can to give some relief to the american consumer, the american families and american people. so with that, my time's expired,

i yield back, madam chair. >> i thank the gentlemen. chair now recognizes mr. robert for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. the title of this hearing today attempts, i believe, to skirt blame away from what i hope we all know, that despite recent statements, the biden administration's policies have always and will continue to push us away from energy security in favor of unrealistic climate goals, first day in office, order revoking the cross border permit for key stone pipeline, my colleagues pointed out the long list of policies implemented since that time, whether it's the unrealistic cafe standards, recent fcc rules or on going threats to existing pipe lines like line five in michigan, all create

inhospitalble environment for energy investment. meanwhile, constituents are suffering. recently, a constituent wrote to me, not far from my personal home, saying that someone had drilled a hole in their truck's gas tank overnight and stolen their gas. this is the environment that biden's inflation and president biden's energy policies have created. it could get worse. clearly, something needs to change. so gentlemen master, just a few months ago, sir, there were reports that the biden administration was actively exploring the possibility of terminating the line 5 pipeline in michigan, a u.s. canada pipeline which brings crude oil and natural gas to canada and our state and states across the midwest. doing so would cost thousands of jobs and further raise already record high costs for energy for

michiganders, what message does the biden administration send both at home and abroad when they talk about closer cross-border pipe lines? >> congressman, i think the message is we're continuing to pursue nonsolutions and i think this shows a high degree of strategic incompetence. it's important for us to reduce carbon emissions. it's important for us to remove rapidly toward renewables and zero emission sources of energy, but we have to also recognize the global energy demand is going to go up 45%, you know, by the middle of the century. so it's important for us to undertake a range of actions to ensure our energy security and ensure the prosperity for future generations and, you know, canceling pipelines, this is a nonsolution, it makes no sense. because this is a way to move energy in a way that's much safer, more ecologically friendly and again i think there's a certain kind of ideology that drives a lot of

this decision making and reveals that we're not displaying the degree of competence necessary to address these interconnected problems of energy security, national security, and carbon emissions. >> it pushes back against opec and russia's control of the gloenl energy market itself, doesn't it? >> yes, it does, especially if these pipelines can lead to export terminals that allow us to alleviate the supply restraints in the global energy market. >> thank you. ms. watkins, mr. woods and mr. lawler, line five services some of your refineries and i've been at some of those refineries. closing the pipeline, line five pipeline would mean thousands of additional trucks on the road, rail cars, tankers on the tracks, going through our communities, creating safety hazards and more emissions, actually, rather than a pipeline. do you agree that pipelines are

the safest and most efficient way to transport fuel, ms. watkins? >> yes, sir. >> mr. woods. >> yes. >> mr. lawler? >> when properly maintained, absolutely. >> and that is key. properly maintained and the line five in fact is more than properly maintained, they're attempting to dig a tunnel underneath the great lakes to totally encase it, keep it protects from any type of damage to bring it across. so the fact that we can't and it would be great to have had our energy secretary here before we all talked today, so we could ask those questions in the context of what it's doing in your industry. i appreciate your answers and with that, i yield back.

>> chair now recognizes ms. kelly for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair for holding this important hearing. i want to start by thanking general mcmaster for his service to our country and appearing for a witness today, however my questions are directed at the oil company executives who are before us today because my constituents want to know why they're paying outrageous prices to fill their cars up. they want to know why your companies, whose crude oil makes up some 60% of the price of gallon for gasoline are not doing anything for prices of the pump going through the roof. you all talked extensively about your companies and the global nature of oil prices that really aren't in your control. certainly, i understand how there are things that can affect prices in ways that are out of your control. one of the things seems to be opec and opec plus. mr. woods, can you or one of

your colleagues explain how opec affects prices on global markets? >> as we've talked about today, congresswoman, the main driver of price is the imbalance between supply and demand, and opec is basically gets together and decides on production and therefore supply in the market place which will then translate into that balance and then pricing. >> thank you, so it sounds like opec sets targets for production that have an impact on price. they restrict output and prices climb but i've also heard today how you and your companies are independently deciding not to invest in new supply or produce more to return value to the shareholder, so you don't control price but you do manage, or manipulate supply to restrict the amount of product on the market relative to rising demand we are experiencing. and you do that to create

scarcity which in turn, drives up prices for that product. and of course, that's what creates value to the shareholder. so i guess my question for anyone that wants to take this, isn't that exactly what opec and its affiliates have been doing to the detriment of the american people and the economy since the oil shocks of the 1970s? how is your behavior any different than that of opec if anyone wants to answer. >> congresswoman, i would say you mischaracterize the approach the industry takes in general, particularly the approach exon mobile has taken, through 2017 through 2021, have been extremely committed to improving production, increasing supply, and making sure that energy su sure that energy remains available and affordable for people all around the world. in fact, we did the hard things. when we weren't making money we continued to invest to ensure that the products that were

going to be needed for additional supply from available and are now producing. last year was 25% than before the permit. our oil -- is at the highest it has been this year than it has been for 15 years. this company has been working to make sure we are making the investments and thinking about the impact on people all around the world, including the consumers here who are struggling with high prices to make sure that products are available to immediate their needs reliably. >> i am glad to hear that you are trying to do something, but, again, more needs to be done. and the other thing is, if the oil -- if the price of oil set by global markets the american people want to know why we should continue to shower your incredibly profitable companies with special tax breaks and subsidies if you aren't working in the interests of american consumers. oil companies like some of those

testifying today get drilling tax breaks, percentage depletion allowance, tax deductions for tertiary injectant expensed, tax credits for producing oil and gas from marginal wells, tax deductions for income attributable to domestic production activities for oil and gas. and 70-year amortization periods for geological and geographical expenditures f. these tax breaks are not being used to increase supply and lower price for american consumers then it is time to consider whether tax dollars should just be padding our company's profits. thank you, i yield back. >> the chair now recognizes mr. mullen for five minutes. >> thank you madam chair. i appreciate all the witnesses being here today, and understand the difficulties that you face as a business. and so i kind of want to start

with mr. man reef w the onset of the pandemic in march 2020 we saw the global demand for oil drop and the price plummet. we are finally seeing the demand rise to prepandemic levels. can you explain the process of ramping up production to meet these needs? >> the process of ramping up production is you need to go out asked secure services, you need to make sure you have manpower, you need to make sure you have infrastructure and all the permits. and that is something that here at devin we have been doing. so if you look at 2021, we average 14 rigs as we sit her today we are at 19 rigs. so we have been ramping that up. additional ramping takes a lot of considerations. and quite honestly, it is very challenging. you heard some testimony today about the shortage of manpower.

we have a tight labor market. we also have tightness in rigs and services, and supply. so something that we really have to think about. but for our company, we are -- we not only increased activity. we are going to be bringing on 300 new wells this year. and that will have ana big implication not only on the back half of '22 but 2023 as well. >> from day won, president biden has been very vocal about being anti-gas and anti-oil. what kind of signals does that send to the industry when you are trying to plan your future for your company? >> well, for us, it's -- you know, we really need -- we need to have some dialogue. that's what we have been asking for is dialogue. for instance, congressman, with our company, about 20% of our activity or our acreage, excuse

me, is on federal lands. however, 50% of our activity and capital budget is also on federal lands. and the production is corresponding. so we are seeing some ramping of production primarily in southeast new mexico, in lee and netty counties, the two most active counties i believe in the nation. we are seeing good response there. but we have to think about not just getting existing permits -- or new permits for the drill, but as we talked about, we also need additional permits. so we have to think about the right ways to get the infrastructure built out and you need to think about the long haul pipes getting to the market. >> thank you, sir. general mcmaster, many of our allies in europe are reliant on energy from ruggs w. russia waging war on ukraine is it evident now more than ever that

europe needs energy from the united states? would you agree that energy independence creates global stabilization? >> absolutely, congressman. i don't know how else to say it. i mean, yes. yes. >> are there any geopolitical vulnerabilities from importing oil from venezuela, iran, and russia? >> absolutely, because we know it is the atm of oil exports that allows those oppressive regimes to stay ini power, to keep in place their criminalized governments. it is the income from the oil exports that allows them to continue their proxy war against the great satan, us, their arab neighbors, and against israel. >> president biden is pushing us away from fossil fuels. can you explain how this plays into the hands of communist china? >> well, it plays into the hands

of china because we cannot meet global energy demands without the u.s. being really a major player in the global energy market in the area of hydrocarbons and i would say natural gas in particular. but then also, trying to jump ahead to renewables before renewables are economically viable in terms of developing economies puts china in a position of control where china can restrict access to renewable sources of energy and gain coercive power us that is reminiscent of u.s. dependency on middle eastern oil in the 1970s. >> which brings me to the point i bring up all the time, american energy independence brings global stabilization. i had an opportunity to visit with a lot of our allies around the world. and they will tell you the same thing. they would rather buy oil from a friendly oil like ours than be dependent on buying from a country they know would rather

take them down than see them succeed. once again, global stabilization happens when we have energy independence for america. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes mr. mckeep a.m. for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. appreciate the opportunity to be with you today. i would like to start off by disabusing the american people about myths a. lot has been said about the keystone pipeline. the reality is that it would not be operational until at least next year. the notion that that's how adversely affecting the price of oil and the price of gas at the bump is to me to be somewhat mystifying how someone can look at the american people in the eye and make that argument. what is more on keystone xl was essentially a canadian export pipeline designed to take canadian oil to foreign markets. canadian officials have said

just as much. let me get to another myth that is going around the capitol, this notion if we were to create a federal tax holiday somehow the american people would feel it in their pocketbook. i would like to ask each of the major producer here starting with mr. lawler, if we decide to suspend the federal gas price, are you prepared to reduce the wholesale price of gasoline by that 18.5 septsds, sir? >> i can't commit to that again today. >> i appreciate that. how about you mr. riff? >> congressman, the way the market is we collect that tax on behalf of the government and submit it to the government. if it were suspended we would no longer collect it and would be passed through to the marketplace. >> your wholesale -- >> we add the tax onto our

wholesale price of gasoline. if the tax were suspended we would no longer add that on. >> thank you, sir. how about mr. woods with exxon? >> the wholesale gasoline market is set by supply and demand levels. we don't set the price on that. as mr. worth said, depending on how that market translatesed in the supply and demand affects the price it would set the fries. >> the 18.5 cents wouldn't number the price? >> would not be in the price. >> that's not my question. if we declare a federal tax holiday is your pleiss price going to go down 18.3 cents. >> we don't set the wholesale price. that's set by wholesale demand. we won't collect the tax, but then the market will set the price for the underlying fuel. >> all right. i appreciate that. let's see. ms. watkins. how about shell.

what will shell do if we declare a federal tax holiday of 18.5 cents. congressman, we are in a similar situation. we will no longer collect the federal tax. the price of gasoline will be set in the marketplace. and it is based on supply and demand. >> let me see if i have got this right. either one of the four that just spoke can correct me, please. what you are saying is that supply and demand is setting the price of wholesale gasoline, which obviously gets translated to retail, and ultimately to what my constituents pay for gasoline. so the 18.3 cents that we charge for a federal tax holiday really isn't affecting anything? other than the government's collecting some revenue? it is not affecting supply and demand? it is not affecting the price at the pump. is that correct? >> congressman, it is added to the price at which the wholesale

gasoline is sold through the value chain. if it is is spended, that component leaves the equation. the rest of the dynamics remain in the marketplace as they do every day. >> so there is no promise then that the price is going to go down by 18.3 cents, correct? >> congressman, it is impossible to predict how commodity markets will behave day to day. >> i appreciate the candor. what i am trying to do is disabuse the american public of this myth of if we do something like declare a federal tax holiday that the price of gasoline will go down. we don't know what will happen is what you are all saying because of the mysteries of supply and demand and this and that could have the wholesale price go up, sideways or just about any direction. madam chair, i appreciate this opportunity. let me say this. i think our solution ultimately ought to be we just need to give direct payments to the american people during this emergency so they have extra money to pay for gasoline that would be my

solution. i have said as much as on the record. i have said as much to leadership. i look forward to the continuing of this discussion and i yield back the balance of my time. >> i thank the gentleman. the chair is now pleased to recognize mr. carter for five minutes. >> thank you madam chair and thank you for allowing me to waive onto this committee and thank all the witnesses for being here. what i have behind me is a charlotte of receipts that i have asked constituents of my district to send in to us. what you will see here, first of all, there is an $80 to fill up a tank, $80 receipt to fill up a tank in brunswick, gentleman. $135 in weight cross georgia. one constituent pointed out they spent $334 just last month on gas. behind each of these receipts is a story. sam is having to cancel his veterans affairs appointment because he can't afford to get there. kayla summarized the pressure

facing the working class americans by saying, and i quote, i can't afford to go to work. but i also cannot afford not to go to work. unquote. we are forcing our seniors, our single parents, and our veterans to choose between groceries and gas. between a regular paycheck and regular fuel. it all comes down to the biden administration's refusal to recognize reality and instead rage wear a war on fossil fuels. i for one do not believe any of these assertions that have been made here, that it is putin's fault or that it is the big oil companies simply gouging the prices here. that is not what it is. this was happening before vladimir putin, his unprovoked invasion of ukraine. it has happened since the policies of this administration started taking place. general mcmaster, i want to ask you something. ukraine in theeio graphical area that they are in, they have the second biggest known gas

reserves. they also have a lot of natural gas. in your written testimony, general mcmaster, you said russian military incursions have focused on the 10% of ukrainian territory that is home to 90% of their energy. look, vladimir putin is evil. he is the devil himself. however, he ain't dumb. he knows what he's doing here. general mcmaster, i want to ask you, can you elaborate more on the notion that russia is weaponizing energy against the free world. >> congressman putin has been engaged in this behavior for quite some time, weaponized energy against moldova, gull bulgaria, romania, now against ukraine and europe prodbly and germany in particular to soften or weaken our resolve in connection with the response to this brutal invasion of ukraine. he wants more of it. he wants to gain more and more

access to oil reserves. in eastern ukraine where he can focusing this offensive and what one analyst called the ukraine heist associated with what russia is trying to do in the donbas region in particular. he has done the same thing in syria n. february of 2018 russian mercenaries attacked u.s. supported syrian forces in the euphrates river valley. they were going after the conoco oil facility because putin knew he didn't have the money he needed to help reconstruct the country he helped to rubble in syria. you see the same kind of adventurism in eastern libya for example, on the part of the russians. putin is trying to gain more coercive power, not less over the global economy through his control of hydrocarbon exports. it is in our interests to make sure he can't do that. >> let me ask you this general, because during the time, the week of the invasion of ukraine, i along with two other members

this committee representative walberg and representative curtis as members of the conservative climate caucus we were in brussels, we were in europe when this happened. we were there to look at what europe has been doing in the way of clean energy. and it became very obvious to us that europe has jumped the gun too much. and that they have -- they have closed down for instance -- they have shut down some of their nuclear plants. it is an important lesson i think for us to learn here in america. would you say it is realistic to imagine that europe or the rest of the world could become energy independence of russia on renewables alone in the very knew future? >> in, that's impossible, especially if you take nuclear out of the equation, which germany did zw as well. sadly, my home state of california is shutting down a

nuclear plant that generates 10% of the states electricity. it makes no sense to do that -- >> general, i'm sorry. one final thing. the american oil industry we can help with natural gas. is that not true? we could help europe here? >> that's absolutely correct. this is a solution that is important for energy security. also it is an important solution because everybody is burning more coal as a result of the constraints on the oil and gas market. we need to export more gas not only because it makes sense in terms of economy and energy security but also makes sense in terms of climb and co 2 reductions and getting off of coal and bridging into cleaner forms of industry. >> and by the way, natural gas here in america is cleaner than the russian gas, right? >> absolutely. senator kramer and i penned a long piece on that, a long essay on this, and maybe a policy solution that could help incentivize cleaner extraction and transport of natural gas

consistent the way we do it here in america. >> good. thank you, general. i yield back, madam chair. >> i thank the gentleman. the chair now recognizes ms. clark for five minutes. >> i thank the chairwoman for congress convenienting this critical oversight hear on big oil and the gouging at the gas station. it's very clear to most americans that big oil's shameless profiteering is taking place at the expense of the people and of our planet. at a time when democracy and democratic values are a threat, the people of ukraine are being massacred and the american people are suffering due to a historic spike in gas prices emergeing from a once in a century pandemic, your companies are making record profits. nobody is more impacted by your

actions than the low income and working class communities who spend the highest amount of their income on transportation and basic goods just to get by. these communities are suffering -- were suffering long before this current crisis, and now they are crying out for our help. and what is your response? you are enriching your investors with stock buybacks, and dividends, and lining your own pockets with millions after millions in additional executive compensation. many of my republican colleagues here in congress -- and i believe your companies as well -- are trying to take advantage this moment as an excuse to push for more oil and gas permits and less environmental regulation. this is not the first time that you have done this. you say we need to drill our way

out of this crisis. you say we need to hurry and approve more gas leases and more drilling permits, and build more pipelines. but, in fact, the very opposite is true. we have been trying to drill our way towards energy security for decades. we currently have more drilling permits and leases than your companies are even using. but no amount of drilling can change the fact that oil is an unstable global commodity that's completely out of our control. today is putin's illegal war that has shocked the market and initially sent price soaring. tomorrow it will be something else. and no amount of drilling is going to change this basic underlying reality that oil and gas are finite resources in the

marketplace that is largely controlled by dictators and autocrats. and let's also try to remember that the extraction and use this fossil fuel is pushing our planet to the very brink of climate disaster and is already destroying the lives and livelihoods of people of color and black and brown communities across the globe. now is not the time to drill more. now is the time to finally wake up to the reality that the only way out of this crisis and all future oil crises is by investing in renewable energy and a green energy work force at the scale needed to achieve a clean energy sector by the year 2035. today, we have the technology to combat the climate crisis, create high paying jobs and grow our economy all at once.

the only thing we are lacking is federal action to seize this moment and chart a new and bold path forward. this is why i have introduced the american renewable energy act with my friend and colleague, congressman peter welch. and this is why we need to immediately renew negotiations for climate centered build back better act that will unleash a wave of green energy investment across our nation. before my five minutes are up, i would like to ask you each -- each of our executive as yes or no question. number one, do you believe that we need a historic investment in renewable energy to combat the climate crisis and end our nation's reliance on fossil fuels? and do you believe that your company should play a key part in this transition? don't all speak at once.

>> congressman, this is dave lawler with bp. we have been the transition very important. we have moved forward. >> are you saying that's a yes, mr. lawler. >> yes, we are supportive of investing. >> mr. worth of chevron. >> congresswoman, i believe we could look to technology innovation and market -- >> is that a yes, sir, or is that a no? >> i believe technology innovation -- >> not a yes or a no. okay. i will take that as a no. mr. moncrief, is that a yes or a no? >> well, we have a lot of challenges. >> okay, i got it. >> that we will address. >> i got it. you are not ready to say yes or no. >> miss clark, your time has expired and we are trying to get everybody to the floor to vote. can we have the rest please supplement. >> let me thank you madam chair and i yield back. >> thank you. mr. country dan you are recognized for five minutes.

>> americans know they are paying much more for gasoline today than they were at the end of the trump administration and they know why, because of the policies of the biden administration. this hearing is a complete and total deflection by the democrats to distract from the energy crisis that president biden and congressional democrats have created. and they are trying to find someone else to blame. don't let them gaslight you. record high gas prices don't just lie at the feet of vladimir putin or of oil and gas prices. look at the dichotomy of their statements from the fall of 2021 and their attempt to lay blame here today. i am going to ask this article be submitted for the record. but this is an article dated april 5th, 2022. and it says that last autumn they were demanding -- house democrats were demanding the oil and gas companies produce less oil to reduce the global supply of crude. that was last fall. during the october 28th hearing,

khanna praised bp for reducing oil production and asked u.s. oil execs why they weren't doing the same. in his questioning he said do you plan to bring the oil production down. democrats wanted to bring oil production down. now they are trying to blame someone else. representative khanna goes on to say, no. are you prepared to lowering the production as the paris accords say, yes or no. if the democrats cared about climate they would support -- with lower environmental standards and higher emissions. in fact, california representative katie porter illuminated this when she chided the krochlts or opposing mr. biden's halt on new oil and lease uses on federal land. you can't have it both ways democrats.

you can't blame others for the rising prices of gasoline at the pump when last fall you were also blaming or at least the dichotomy of that, of trying to get oil and gas companies to produce less. so the day before putin invaded ukraine, gas prices were already up 55% from before the day biden took office. why? one reason was displayed by representative scalise that costly and burdensome regs that drive the cost of production up for oil and gas producers. in fact, he provided these regs that i would like to submit for the record, madam chair. the regs that are driving the cost of production up for american producers. we saw what problem -- candidate president biden said. i think scalise talked about that. but let's just look at his fy 2022 budget. in developing the budget,

consideration was given to advancing three objectives, one of which was not funding work that furthers the use of fossil fuels, including -- or raises the revenues obtained by producers of follow i will fuels. that was in joe biden's 2022 budget. you know, america is blessed with abundant natural resources. but we are cursed with global politicians who are causing these problems and causing american families to pay more at the pump. crisis wasn't created by vladimir putin. he's just capitalizing on it. he is capitolizing on it because the nord stream 2 project was greenlighted by president biden last year. that country sells oil and natural gas and oil pads his pocket and pays for his

imperialistic claims in ukraine and elsewhere. he is one of the richest men in the world. so i hope that we will just look at germany -- germany should serve as a warning signal to the united states. they solid out to the radical environmental ideology and now face an energy crisis. they simultaneously phased out nuclear power and coal and now import more of their natural gas from russian countries. they shut down 14 of their 17 nuclear plants. instead of prioritizing clean burning nuclear energy, they made a decision to subsidize enter mitten renewables. now they are buying more coal and coal plants are coming on line. hypocrisy of pushing climate change initiatives and being held out in the world as a leader in renewables. now all of a sudden they need power, so they are going to burn coal. if you truly are believers, they have been at the mercy of

vladimir putin turning the spigot on and off. you can't have it both ways. you can't encourage lower production and then blame somebody when the prices go up. i yield back. >> the gentleman's time expired. the jal ms. rochester is recognize ford five minutes. >> thank you for calling this hearing and also to the witnesses for your testimony today. we heard repeatedly americans are paying for gasoline prices higher than they ever have before. it truly underscores the imperative for our country to be energy independent. in my state the average cost of a gallon of gasoline is hovering above $4. which might not seem like a lot to some, but it was $2.70 a year ago. and this spike is directly impacting delawareans. i have heard from retirees on fixed incomes, veterans, and parents who are struggling to pay soaring gas prices. one constituent wrote me that the cost actually went up by 20% a gallon while he was standing at the pump.

we have seen president biden take action. we have seen many states, including delaware state lawmakers and governor carney working on legislation to alleviate some this burden. in delaware, leaders are planning to give $300 in direct payments to taxpayers to provide economic relief as delawareans struggle with rising prices at the pump. throughout the hearing we have heard from members of congress about solutions but i want to talk to you about the solutions that you are focus on and that we can tackle together. we know that gas prices are complex, and that the lingering economic impacts of the pandemic global markets and putin's unprovoked war are all factors into the costs. but people are hurting. they want to understand what's happening, why it's happening and how we are going to tackle it. they are seeing oil companies rake in record profits and want to understand where all the

money is going and why with these record properties they are paying so much at the pump. oil companies felt the pain of the covid pandemic. and they saw their demands for gas ehave been rate. and then the c.a.r.e.s. act provided generous bailouts to the oil and gas industry. and now, as prices continue to soar, it's time for the industry to step up and help the american people. we need to work together to create more financially secure future for all americans. we have heard a lot today about the sacrifices that americans are making. and i would like to hear about the sacrifices your companies are making now. and i want to be clear that i am asking this and i am just going to submit the questions for the record in the interest of time because in reading your testimonies many of you talk about the things that you have supported in the past and the things that you are going do in the future, but people are hurting right now, and i would like to hear from each of you

your commitments. so i will submit that, madam chairwoman, for the record. but specifically, mr. moncrief in a recent interview you highlighted your mission to give cash back to shareholders via dividends. your question to yourself is whether you are going to keep your promise or whether you are going to be patriotic. mr. moncrief is your company willing to forego getting cash back to shareholders in order to ease the burden americans are feeling at the pump? >> congresswoman, thank you for that question, over the last decade our company sent 110s of its operating cash flow, took on debt, and still issued new shares. that put us in a position to be where we are today, to be a healthy company. as i mentioned earlier, we are increasing our production. we are adding -- we have added -- gone from 14 rigs to 19

rigs. 300 new wells will be added this year. we are doing a lot. and we also are going to take care of our shareholders. and those are the shareholders that have stuck with us all these years. and when we weren't profitable. and we are finally turning a profit. so we are not going to forget them. as far as the patriotism, you would be hard pressed to find a more patriotic industry, i think, than the united states oil and gas companies. >> as a follow-up, given putin's tragic invasion of ukraine, do you still believe that returning cash to shareholders is your top priority? >> we have several priorities, and returning cash to our shareholders are absolutely one of our top priority, yes. >> okay. you answered the question. in your testimony, you state that even with constraints, devin's net domestic oil production reached a new record high. you also noted that both supply chain issues and the shortage of

workers are preventing you from additional drilling. but your company has also stated that it works to maintain a low investment ratio. is this approach preventing you from increaing production capacity? >> no, i think the -- the most important thing for us as far as additional capacity -- >> it is just a yes or no, because i am running out of time. i ran out of time. >> excuse me. then, can you repeat the question the way you had it framed? >> we will submit it for the record. again, thank you, madam chair, for your leadership. and i thank you for the focus on our constituents as well as the consumers. i yield back. >> i thank the gentlewoman. the chair will announce there are two votes on the floor at this moment. so we are going to be in recess, but for ten minutes.

i would like to call this meeting back to order. and now i would like to recognize the gentlewoman from arizona ms. lesko for her five minutes. >> thank you madam chair and thank you to the people testifying today. this chart hopefully we will wait for the camera to zoom in a little bit. but on this chart it clearly

shows how the prices for gasoline have gone up ever since president biden took office and the democrats took control of both the u.s. house of representatives and the senate. and, you know, in arizona, prices are even higher than this. gasoline prices in arizona are $4.65 a gallon on average n. fact, arizona has one of the -- in fact, arizona has one of the highest -- or the highest inflation rate in the entire country. so general mcmaster, i have a question for you. do you think it is a coincidence that gas prices started down here when -- after trump left office, and they have continually gone up even though the strategic oil reserves, to the war in ukraine. and now they are way up here. do you think that's a coincidence? or do you think it is partially

at least because of the biden and democrat policies and their war against american oil and gas? >> congresswoman, it is not coincidence. as you alluded to there are a number of packers at play, but it is not a coincidence. >> well, i totally agree with you. and that's why i call on president biden and by democratic colleagues to increase production of american oil and gas. i also think it's real interesting that biden, when asked, one of his answers to the high price of gas was, well, buy an electric car. buy an electric car. first of all, electric cars are very expensive. and so not everybody can afford one. but electric cars and renewable energy require a lot of critical minerals, and a lot of those critical minerals are actually processed in china.

and so, for instance, wind -- wind turbines, solar panels. they all require critical materials. electric cars require four times the amount of copper than do a standard car. yet president biden has closed down mines. there is a mine in arizona called resolution copper mine. under the trump administration, it was given the green light to go ahead and continue mining. when biden was in office, after two months, he closed it down. couldn't mine. i went to visit there, and that mine would produce 25% of all of the copper that is consumed in the united states, including for electric vehicles. so i guess what i am trying to say is, the policies that

president biden and the democrats have are hurting america, and they are causing the prices to go up. the other thing that i find very interesting is recently i was able to speak to a former secretary of state pompeo. he was at a meeting. and he expressed how whenever he went to meetings with foreign countries, he would use u.s. energy dominance and u.s. energy as a negotiating tool when dealing with foreign countries. general mcmaster, do you believe that the biden and democrats' war against u.s. oil and gas and their war on u.s. domestic mining hurts our national security? >> congresswoman, we have to do everything we can to increase energy security.

and as you already mentioned, make up for the complacecy in mining and minerals that are critical to the emerging global economy and the energy transition. so i agree with your broad point that we are behind and we have to make up for lost ground, much of itself inflicted. >> and i totally agree with you, general mcmasters. and let's hope the american people will realize that the democrat policies are hurting america, and they are hurting american's pocketbook. and with that, i yield back. >> chair now recognizes ms. barrett for five minutes. >> thank you for holding this hearing to hold the oil companies accountable for padding their pockets at the expense of the american people. mr. worth, public records show

your compensation went from $29 million in 2020 to 33 million in 2021. is that accurate? does that sound contract. >> the years are not accurate. the numbers are. >> but you got an increase of about $4 million. does that sound about right? >> no. my pay went down in 2021, ma'am. >> okay. do you have any idea what that was? >> that will be released in our proxy statement. >> okay. we have some information that's publicly available that shows you made $29 million in 2020, $33 million in 2021. mr. wood at exxon, the public information that i have shows that you went from $16 million in 2020 and 23. $5 million in 2021. bp executive, looks like your pay doubled in 2021, and the shell kraechlt made a 25% increase from 2020 to 2021.

why is this important? because the american people are not getting a $4 million raise. thisser not having their pay doubled. what is happening is they are feeling the pinch. they are feeling the pressure at the gas bump. and they are asking why is gas so high? and that is what this hearing is about today. it's about asking what is going on? big oil is lining their pockets with one hand and taking billions in taxpayer subsidies with the other. while the american people are getting ripped off. as these companies choose to keep production low so their profits can remain high. and people are hurting. and that's what they want an answer to. mr. sheffield, on a yes or no, do higher oil prices mean higher dividends for your shareholders? >> yes. >> thank you.

mr. moncrief, is that also true for you? >> yes. >> do you agree with that? >> yes. yes. >> and do both of your companies offer variable dividends? for those watching that means your payment to the shareholder goes up when earnings are high and that it goes down when earnings are low? >> that's correct. >> yes. >> okay. thank you, madam chair i would like to enter into the record an article on variable energy titled energy dividend trend is catching on. not everyone is on board. they use variable dividends to pay back more to their shareholders when oil prices are high and less when they are low. it goes on with rapidly rising dividends as profits come in from increased prices. a dividend of windfall to your

shareholders leaves room for expoitation. every company is doing this in their own way. stock buybacks, ceo raises, dividends, all of you are taking advantage of an oil subsidy. and you benefitted in different ways from the c.a.r.e.s. act. this was the first coronavirus relief bill passed to help communities respond to the pandemic. for example, devin energy received $105 million from the cair acts tax benefit. fossil fuel companies received tens of billions of dollars in subsidized loans and tax write-offs during covid relief period. and now that times are good for you, there is no return to the taxpayer. instead, americans are getting gouged at the pump. we need a dividends for the american people. that's why i support the wind falls profit tax. big oil's wind fall profit tax, to send big oil's windfall directly back to the american people through a quarterly

dividend. congress took this step in 1980 in response to the opec oil embargo. we should do it again to provide relief to the american people. what is happening to them is not right. and we need you to do your part in making sure that we are helping the american people. with that, madam chairwoman, i yield back. >> i thank the gentlelady. the chair now recognizes mr. pence for five minutes. >> thank you for allowing me to join this meeting today and thank you for the witnesses for being here. petroleum is the lifeblood of our economy. let me say that again. petroleum is the lifeblood of our economy. today, this hearing is an attempt by the biden administration and the democrats to help the chinese bleed us out of energy independence. with a backgrounds in the

petroleum distribution business, i can tell you firsthand that the misleading title of today's hearing does not reflect the reality of the domestic oil markets. as the national director of fuels for circle k i knew what the price for po terrell yum products from wholesale to retail were based to an variety of factors across the value chain, as our witnesses have discussed today. wrongly accusing oil companies of price gouging is only meant to cover up this ads administration's own anti-fossil fuel agendas is my peers on this side of the aisle have pointed out numerous times today. at every turn, the biden administration and my friends across the aisle want to make it harder to produce, distribute, and use fossil fuel for their chinese electrification agenda. for the hoosiers watching at home, that means higher gas prices, higher utility bills,

and less energy security. the situation in ukraine tragically has compounded the president's energy crisis, but make no mistake, this problem started long before march of 2022. house democrats have been pushing a complex equation for a green economy that's totally unattainable. can't get it done when they want to get it done. that's why the build back better backed off. this administration has been creating regulatory uncertainty and investor pressures on financing fossil fuel projects that have squeezed oil companies fuelling the volatile energy markets we see today. the president needs to reverse course and put our country back on a path towards long-term, durable energy independence. by accusing the oil companies of price gouing now, it will only

be a matter of time until the argument is pushed to the health care industry, the manufacturing sector, farmers, and the rest of the economy. they want everybody to be accused of price gouging to cover up their inflation. price koujing can't be a catch-all response to inflation, and an overwhelmingly regulatory environment that just keeps piling up every single day. the only answer coming from this administration has been a misguided use of our strategic petroleum reserve to lower gas prices. and of course, this hearing. but look at the past two emergency -- strategying petroleum reserve releases we fail to see meaningful effects at the pump for my hoosiers and my district. general masters, what is the purpose of this probe? >> sorry, i had to unmute.

the purpose of what, congressman? i'm sorry, the purpose of what? >> what is the purpose of the strategic petroleum reserve. >> it is meant mainly for wartime and to ensure that if there was an sbrupg in supply that we could compensate for that -- if there was an interruption in supply that we could compensate for that. >> thank you general. you know that the president's release wasn't announced in response to a supply disruns or a war. yet we are going to go to down to 40% in there. the price was $30 and now they are going the replace it at $100. does that help, releasing a million barrels a day? >> i defer to the other witnesses on this, but i would say it has a lot to do with

obviously supply and the ability to increase supply. >> mr. worth, can you comment on my question? is this going to affect lowering prices and stabilizing markets? >> congressman, in the short-term it can send a 12345g that suggests there is more supply available. it is not a long-term solution to the challenge. >> thank you, sir. it doesn't seem to be doing that. three weeks ago the price was about the same as it is today. so thank you. madam chair, i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman. chair now recognizes mr. soto for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. the pandemic, the war in ukraine, record oil profits, add them all up, and we see record prices at the pump for so many americans. but especially with record properties and record prices, americans are understandably

angry. of course our republican colleagues talk a big game but fail to admit their role in there. the republicans screwed up the pandemic response, covid ran rampant. the economy cratered and demand and production for oil nose dived. and it still hasn't recovered. add in the cozy relationship of some house republicans with russia voting against military aid for ukraine, voting against sanctions, and the conclusion is clear, our republican colleagues share plenty of blame here today. when oil prices were down because of covid-19 the fed wall government came to your aid with the c.a.r.e.s. act, and tax relief and subsidies, many of which were supported by bipartisan colleagues here. now we are getting more back to normal from the pandemic. and with the war in ukraine we stand set fast with the ukrainians against this violent

russian invasion. this also takes some time. yet in the face of these challenges, in the time of our greatest need, what did our oil companies do? did you increase supply to keep prices affordable? did you step up for us? for your country? for the american people? no. you kept production nearly the same and watched record profits roll in. i get you, you had a bad 2020 and you tried to make it up in 2021. we are in 2022. there should be no more excuses for record profits that are made on the misery of our nation. record profits for executive salaries, bonuses, and fancy offices, record profits for sake of our investors. you can see it right here in this chart. meanwhile, in central florida, family suffer. let me make it clear. we stand on the side of the american people. the irony is, this agreed may be of your own doing. because of you, americans get it

they understand we need to transition to electric cars as soon as possible. they think about it every time they see a tesla, an electric q-150 or a chevy volt driving down route 4. they think, why am i still paying for gas? this is why the senate must pass the climb change investments that this house already passed this year. in the short-term, turning back oil itself, it is at $103 today in the u.s., per barrel. back in march we saw when oil prices were around $1700. gas prices were 3.60 to 3.70 in central florida. i had my staff check today. in kissimmee, gas is up to $4.11. 40 to 50 cents higher than it was when gas was around this level just a few months ago. during world war ii, your company stepped up. from 1940, to 1945, overall u.s.

oil production increased by 30%. president biden has done his part by ordering a release of 1 million gallons -- excuse me, barrels per day for the next six months. my question to all of you is will you step up? will you increase production and commit to increasing production? and for how much during april? first, mr. woods, thank you for being here. will you commit to increasing production during april? and for how much are you willing to commit? >> we are producing -- increasing production. in fact, we started that effort several years ago and continued our investments through the pandemic when we were losing money. and that investment is now beginning to pay off. increased production by 25%. >> my time is limited. we appreciate you all stepping up. ms. watkins, does shell u.s.a. commitment to stepping up production to help meet this challenge our nation faces. >> we brought on stream in the

gulf of mexico a new field a week or ten days ago. which will produce about 20,000 barrels a day more. this morning be we announced another new welcoming on stream that will produce about 10,000 barrels a day. so we are in the process of bringing on new production. >> thank you -- >> this monday. >> mr. worth, will chevron step up and increase production during the month of april? >> congressman, i know the ironry, less than six months ago i was requested to reduce production. i resisted that request and pledged to increase production. i reiterate that pledge today. we will increase our production. >> thank you. my time is expired. >> i thank the gentleman, chair recognizes mr. crenshaw for five minutes. >> thank you madam chair. i certainly enjoyed watching my democrat colleagues convulse dramatically between two opposing stances, drill more, drill less, drill more, drill

less. u circumstances you remember being asked to drill less? >> i remember it well. >> today we wonder how did we get to this point where there is a mast mismatch between supply and demand and clear underinvestment in oil and gas production? what a mystery this is? what could have caused it? stopping federal leases? no delaying or outright cancelling pipeline purchases? no. impossible. or the president personally promising he would end the industry, and we wonder why capital isn't sprinting toward oil and gas increase. we need an investment of $225 billion globally by 2030 if we are to avoid an energy crisis. let me reminds you people die from lack of energy. in large numbers. i hope all of that green compassion i always hear about has some answers for that. so the question is, how did we

create the conditions so your investors want to spend this additional money. your companies are -- none of your companies are on track to make up $225 billion. why not? president biden is hiking up the cost. democrats over at financial services are helping them proposing to charge banks a surcharge for lendsing to companies like yours. then you have the distribute actions for democrats that help activist esg investors, is s.e.c. that puts its thumbs on the scales to promote investments in unreliable green energy instead of reliable oil and gas, the same s.e.c. who wants to use the proxy advisory process to force companies out of oil and gas. folks at exxon know what that's all about. my question, i want to start with mr. sheffield, this weaponization of the financial industry has had and will have

an impact on more oil production; is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. in the past, and in the future. >> mr. lawler, same question. >> yeah, thank you for the question. i think just from what i can gather from the markets at this point, bp has not had any issues tracking capital and maintains a low cost of capital going forward. >> mr. worth, same question. >> congressman, there are no shortage of efforts under way that appear to be intended to constrain access to capital for this industry. >> appreciate that. and i want to make some other points here. let's get some facts straight because the future depends on us getting this right. we can continue down this renewables only path and keep watching prices skyrocket, failing to meet demand and doing next to nothing to reduce emissions or we can face the facts. american oil production is cleaner than opec's and russia's

by lot. oil and gas is still expected to make up the loye on's share of the production. you cannot change these facts. the fact, is renewables will never immediate that demand. to meet the renewables only climate goals you would have to mine lithium 2,000% more. cobalt production will have to grow 8000s more, for a wind farm to produce the same amount of energy as coal, you need 50,000 tons of iron, concrete, and 900 tons of plastic fan blades which cannot be recycled. here's the most important fact, the american natural gas quadrupled in the next decade we would displace coal around the world. here's another fact. about half of global emissions are from foreign coal. displace that with cleaner gas

and you reduce emissions 60%. wow, just like that you solved the energy crisis. and by the way reduced emissions more than the foolish $10 trillion green new deal ever could. by the way, to our witnesses thank you for being here taking abuse. but that's the argument you should be making. instead of believing like you have stockholm syndrome like your serve illity to the radicals in this administration will get them to like you one day. they will never like you. stand up for your work, our employees and your consumers. speak the truth. don't pander to what they want on the left because americans need you. and billions around the world who want to rise out of poverty and live a life of prosperity need you. thank you. and i yield back. >> thank the gentleman. chair now recognizes ms. craig for five minutes. >> thank you so much, chairwoman degette, and chairman pallone for this hearing today. let me get this straight. the six oil companies testifying at today's hearings collectively

generated more than $76 billion in profit in 2021, and first quarter numbers look even higher for 2022. in the meantime, minnesota families are paying near record high prices at the pump and my republican colleagues are howling about energy independence when your industry has 9,000 oil leases given to you by the government that you aren't currently using. this is another dumb founding day in washington, truly. i don't fault you for making money. you are a business. but we've got a pandemic, and we've got putin, and you are using these crises to gouge the american people. you are using these crises to gouge my constituents. experts are predicting tens of billions of dollars in profit yet again this year for all of you. and that's on the backs of my constituents.

we all know that the price of crude oil has dropped in recent weeks, and yet minnesotans have seen very little relief at the pump. in fact, one of the only forms of relief right now from near record-high gas prices that my constituents have seen has come in the form of renewable biofuels. right now at fuel stations across my district, the blends of ethanol and gasoline, known as e 15 or unleaded 88, is saving my constituents as much as 50 cents per gallon compared with traditional gasoline. we could replace every barrel of oil from russia today with renewable fuels, which begs the question, with those record profits and a history of touting your desire to increase investments in renewable fuels, are you investing in strategies to reduce costs for consumers, like efforts to increase the availability of e 15? i would like to turn to mr.

worth first for my question. mr. worth, i would like to better understand your company's commitment to renewable fuels. given your record profits, how much is your company investing in biofuels research and development and expanded deployment? >> congresswoman, i don't have a research and development number but in terms of deployment this year we will spend $4 billion. we are growing renewable gas, renewable diesel, biodiesel, and are working with companies like bungee to integrate back into the agricultural feed stock chain to grow our renewable fuels business. >> thank you. i will have my team follow up to make sure we are aware of all of those efforts and we can learn more about the percentage of research you are putting into biofuels to drive down the cost of fuel for minnesotans. thank you mr. worth. i want to now turn specifically

to e 15. it was recently reported that bp began offering the 15% ethanol blends at terminals in eight states including minnesota. this will not only save consumers money, but it also will increase energy security and reduce carbon emissions with a domestically-produced product. mr. lawler, i appreciate this business decision from bp and hope that others in the industry will follow suit. unfortunately, due to a court case brought by refiners, consumers across the country will lose access to lower costs from e 15 without an emergency waver from the biden administration or immediate action. so, mr. lawler, let's start with you. i will give you each about ten seconds. but i want to ask you specifically, do each of you -- and please, yes, or no, do you support an emergency waver for e 15, year round sales? do you support a permanent resolution to the e 15 rvp issue

so that this lower cost, lower corps ban renewable fuel blend can be available to consumers year round? yes or no, mr. watkins -- excuse me. ms. watkins. >> i would need to understand the specifics of what you are talking about. but what i can tell you is that we are investing actually quite a bit of money in biofuels in particular. renewable natural gas. biodiesel, biofuels. >> ms. watkins. i appreciate that. it was a yes or no answer. mr. woods, do you support e 15 year round? >> there are challenges with e 15 going into the entire car fleet. >> mr. worth, do you support e 15 year round? >> subject to safety considerations with older vehicles, we blend ethanol at the maximum allowable limits into all of our fuel sells. >> mr. moncrief, year rounds? >> i actually don't know enough about that issue to really comment. >> oh, wow.

boy, you are all investing in biofuels. i can see that here today. mr. chieffield? >> we do not own retail. >> thank you. my time is up. so i will yield. and thank you for your time. >> thank the gentlelady. the chair now recognizes the ever patient the mr. armstrong who has been sitting here all day, for five minutes. >> thank you, madam chair. let's be clear what the title this hearing should be, it should be called gaslighting americans about gas prices n. july of 2019, when asked if there would be a place for fossil fuels in his administration, candidate biden responded, no, we would make sure it is eliminated n. january of 2020 when asked about stopping new pipeline infrastructure, candidate biden responded yes, yes. in february of 2020, candidate biden stated, we are doing to get rid of fossil fulsz. in march of 2020, candidate biden said no more drilling on federal lands, no more drilling, including offshore, no ability for the oil industry to continue

to drill, period. ends. in october of 2020, candidate biden stated, it has to be released, replaced by renewables over time. in october of 2020, candidate biden said no fracking, and or oil on federal land. and in order to prove that his words were not just campaign rhetoric on the day of his inauguration, president biden killed the keystone xl pipeline and halted oil and gas leading on federal lands. in february of 2021, president biden inflated the social cost of carbon to justify more reg laces of fossil fuel production. on march 2nd of 2021, democrats, including some on this committee, introduced a bill to increase the cost and time of oil and gas production on federal land. and on march 19th of 2021, democrats introduced a bill to place an excise tax on american energy companies who produce oil and gas. april 1st, 2021, democrats proposed a national carbon tax on oil and gas and their by

products. on june 1st, 2021, president biden proposed a budget that would increase taxes on u.s. energy producers by at least $35 billion. august 11th, 2021, president biden asked foreign operators in opec not domestic producers, to increase supply to address rising gas prices n. october 29th, of 2021, president biden and congressional democrats again some on this very committee proposed a methane tax on u.s. oil and gas product. november 17th, 2021, president biden tried to redirect the blame from rising gas prices by requesting that the ftc investigate oil and gas companies on trumped up accusations of illegal activity. on february 17th of 2022, president biden's ferc chairman pushed through changes making it next to impossible to build or upgrade pipeline notice of by requiring both upstream and

carbon mitigation plans before permits would be approved. on march 12th of 2022, democrats who seemingly missed the president's memo requesting energy companies increase production introduced a bill that would implement a massive new tax destroying any incentive for u.s. producers to produce more oil and on march 21st, 2022, the s.e.c., in an attempt to morph into the securities and environment commission, issued a proposal that would target carbon energy companies and empower them activist share holdsers. march 28th, 2022, president biden in the middle of an energy crisis once again proposed a tax increase on domestic oil and gas producers totaling nearly $45 billion. and just last week, in the middle of all of this, asking for more investment in this industry, the fdic chairman proclaimed that carbon emitting source of energy present risks to the safety of the financial sector furthering off capital to

domestic energy production that is needed n. short, this administration and democrats in congress have done everything they can to disrupt, delay, and defeat domestic energy production and then gaslight the american public by blaming producers for not immediately investing billions of dollars into the industry which you are trying to destroy. so i have a couple of questions for mr. mcmasters and then i will end. do you think our allies in europe would like cheap affordable american energy during what is going on right now? >> absolutely. >> do you know of any way -- do you know of any way to export renewable energy? >> yes. i mean, there are -- i mean, the actual -- you know, of course you guys know i am adviser to sem practice energy which has lng export capacity.

it is lng exports that allows us to escape the dilemma of energy security reductions and allows us to make up for the gaps in energy supply that russia is using for coercive purposes. >> i agree with you on lng. let me be more clear. do you know of any way to exported either winds or solar energy? >> no, no, not on wind or solar. but, you know, the question is going to be battery capacity, the ability to store it. and there are some advanced ideas out there about using cables that could go across the oceans and so forth. but those are very much -- very far into the future. >> i thank the gentleman. the chair now recognizes ms. fletcher for five minutes. >> thank you chairwoman degette, and chairman pallone for allowing me to wave on and participate in today's hearing. we are nearing the ends of a very long day. and i want to thank our witnesses for our time and your insights during today's hearing.

as the chairwoman needed this is an investigatory and overigt hearing not a legislaive hearing. we are here because we are looking for ways to help to ease the pain that inflation at the fump and elsewhere is causing for the people we represent. these are serious challenges for our people, for our economy, and for our policy making. that's why i am so disappointed that so much of the questions we have heard today has centered around scoring political points and blaming others rather than taking a serious look at the challenges we face, their tlifrs as opposed to how we can address them. the challenges in the energy economy around the world are complex as they are in the moment. how we finds our energy sources, extract them, and deliver them to consumers is vast, varied and complicated n. my district in

houston we are involved in every aspect of that work. we are proud to do it. we supply energy to the world. for us, that means working collaboratively to partner with the people who produce energy including our witnesses today, and with policy makers everywhere in charting a path for our energy future that understands the very real challenges of today from supply issues driving up prices to climate change threatening our communities to create a lower carbon future. i hope everyone here heard that from our witnesses todays. in the five minutes i have, i can't possibly respond to everything that's been said here today that i disagree with. but there are things worth remembering as we move forward. less than three years ago at the ends of 2019 the united states hit a new domestic production peak just under 1:13 million barrels a day. when the pandemic hit, demands for oil and gas collapsed, under unprecedentsed demand destruction. i cannot overstate the shock we

felt at home seeing oil trade for less than 0 dollars a barrel. by the summer of 2020 only about 20 hundred drilling riks rigs were active, production drops. in the u.s., 120,000 people, many in texas, lost their jobs. contrary to what we have heard from our friends on the other sides of the aisle, our current rig count is not the result of some policy change from the biden administration and democrat. the rig count in the u.s. today is up to 673. that's up 243 from this time last year. likewise, my colleagues know that i have been unequivocal in my support of new pipeline construction for energy infrastructure, but the claim that problem caused the high energy prices by rejoking the permit for the keystone xl pipeline are not true. the oil that keystone would have

transported is still making its way into the market through other transportation methods. my colleagues know i haven't always agreed with the administration's policy in this area but the administration has approved 34% more drilling permits than the trump administration did in its first year. 900 rigs. and approved -- of applications to drill. there is not a meaningful connection between leasing sales and prices at the pump today. we heard as much from industry reps from the senate committee on energy and natural resource. finally we heard a lot today about the record $76 billion in profits that these companies have made in the last year. the record loss of $77 billion that these companies posted the year before n 2020, which some of the witnesses mentioned, should not be discounted as some of my colleagues have suggested.

nor should the more than 100 oil and gas companies, both enp and oil field providers that filed for drups bankruptcy in 2020. it wasn't just 2020. it was 2014, 2015, 1982 n houston we have lived through it all, the boom and the bust. that is why we know we need sound forward looking durable energy policy that will help make more stable and predictable for businesses consumers alike. we heard today global demand for crude tops 100 million barrels a day. questions how we are going to meet this moment have caused the price to skyrocket. recovery from the pandemic isn't the only driver, nor is this only a domestic issue as we know other packers influence supply including russia's unprovoked and unjustified war in ukrainian. in this moment, president biden and the administration are using the levers we have to confront the crisis head on. the release from the spr of 180

million barrels will hope close the inventory gap. the federal government should be using every tool we have to address this crisis and should be doing it all the time. in 2020 i introduced a bill to purchase oil for the spr for when it was under $40 a barrel. if we had these reserves todays our country would be in a better position. as policy makers we need to take energy policy seriously and stop using it as a pill weapon. the stakes are too high. >> the gentlelady's time is expires. >> i yield back. >> we are coming into the homestretch now, people will be pleased to hear. i would like to recognize the ranking member if he has any final questions or thoughts. >> the words and deeds. white house have exposed a fundamental misunderstanding of the operations of an industry it seeks to dissolve. after russia's invasion of ukraine president biden stressed the short-term need to increase oil and natural gas output and expedite lng project

development. the oil and gas industry does not operate well on short-term proposals. due to the nature of the industry companies like the ones before us today need long-term certainty a. temporary greenlight to produce oil from the biden administration will not undo the layers of red tape and aggressive anti-fossil fuel policies driving gas prices to new highs. while president biden should have been working to encourage domestic energy production he went to opec to ask for more oil. since that failed the administration is reportedly considering lifting sanctions so iran and venezuela can increase production. it has become clear that president biden's anti-american energy policies embolden putin. president biden's rush to green agenda involves a whole of government approach that advises multiple federal agencies to play some part in making it more difficult for oil and gas production. for example, the administration has pressured companies to halt investments in possible i will fuels. there is no denying the fact that the biden administration has promoted an increasingly

complex and challenging regulatory environment for energy companies. mr. sheffield, your company is the largest oil producer in texas. you only operate on private land. you don't refine and you don't retail your product. but from your observations, what policy should the u.s. consider to truly unleash domestic oil and gas production? congressman, as i said in my testimony, i wish both parties would come together in a bipartisan effort to look at alternative energy, nuclear, and more pipelines, more lng plants. we need a combination of all of the above. they are all long-term solutions. they are not short-term solutions. >> general, what are your thoughts?

what do we need to do to get this ball rolling to truly unleash domestic oil and gas production in the united states? >> i think it was some of the fellow witnesses in the beginning just talked about an all of the above approach, right? there is no silver bullet solution to energy security, and the interconnected problems that we have been talking about. the critical aspect of this is to do all the above, invest in renewables and so forth, but also to unleash the tremendous power that we have here to meet our own demands but also to help meet the global demand and reduce the course and power of the authoritarian regimes. >> i appreciate that. madam chair, we heard from mr. crenshaw earlier when he went through all the different things that would have to be mined from around the world to continue produce and continue doing in the direction of green energy. we need to do more with green energy. but we need to do it in the united states. to do that, both for oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and for renewables, we need to make sure

that if we are going to have the product to be able to do it in the united states we need a better, a certain, regulatory scheme that lets companies know they can invest here in the united states for all of the above energy. and i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman. and i really do want to thank all the witnesses for appearing today. next time we hope we will see you in person. i think that the ranking member's comments and mr. sheffield, what you said in general, it kinds of shows what's been going on in this committee because we had a robust discussion about the different views of members of congress, democrats and republicans, about long-term energy policy. okay, clearly we need a long-term energy policy. in fact, for some years, mr. mckinley and i introduced legislation to come up with a long-term energy policy. from my perspective, what we need -- and i think, actually,

most of our witnesses would agree with this. we need a long-term energy policy that moves towards clean energy that will keep us independent from foreign oil. and that's what we need to do. but you know something? when my constituents went to get gas in their cars today, they paid $3.95 a gallon. and nationally, they are paying $4.16 a gallon. so we can have all the discussion we want about should we have increased leases, should we have more pipelines, should we eliminate regulations, those dog goning arelations? but as all of our witnesses today said, in their written testimony, and some of them verbally, all of those things aren't going to solve the problem, that my constituents are paying $3.95 a gallon. so what we are seeing today in a snapshot while we debate theeso

tearics of long-term energy policy, we are seeing product at existing wells going down, even though demand has gone up since the pandemic receded. we have seen profits exploding. we have seen shareholder buybacks up by 41%. mr. welch asked the question, did any of you, any of your kptsz companies, talk about reducing these buybacks by even a little bit to reduce the price at the pump? nobody had a response. and we heard ms. fletcher talk about the fact that we could increase output right now without all of these issues about wells and regulations and pipelines. we have the capacity right now. the reason why your companies aren't doing it as you freely and honestly admitted is because you are looking at your shareholder profits. bp in 2021, $12.8 billion. chevron, in 2021, $15.6 billion.

exxon, $23 billion. shell, $20.1 billion. devin, $2.8 billion. and pioneer, $2.1 billion. so at the very beginning in my questions, i asked everybody -- i told everybody i was going to ask the question, what can your company do to help my wentz is, mr. griffith's constituents, and all of our constituents be able to have the price of gas at the pump go down? and n.o.w. none of you could answer that question. now, i said i was going to ask that question again. but i realized, it's just going to be the same thing. none of you actually want to commit to going facebook your boards and your shareholders and saying, you know, along with everybody else, along with many other major corporations, we are going to take a hit to our

profits for now to help reduce the price of gas at the pump. so i am going to ask all of you, do that. go back and have that conversation. do it tonight, or tomorrow. because, in the meantime, everybody else is making sacrifices, but your profits continue to skyrocket. and so i want to remind members that pursuant to committee rules they have ten business days to submit additional questions for the record to be answered by witnesses who have appeared before the subcommittee. i asked that the witnesses agree to respond promptly to the questions if you received them, including the questions that i just asked. there are several documents we would like to put in the record w. nanoconsent i would request it. mr. duncan requested a number of -- rehled to government energy. and ms. bear gone requested an article from baron's regarding variable dividends published

november 3rd, 2021. without objection, these documents will be entered. with that, the committee is adjourned. hosting

a discussion about mental health and climate change.