Shale energy states are where the growth is

John Kemp:

Thanks to shale, energy-producing states have been the strongest economic performers in the United States over the past decade, sharply improving their position compared with the energy-consuming states.

Only 13 of the 50 states produced more energy than they consumed in 2010, the latest year for which comprehensive data is available, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

The other 37 were all net energy consumers, relying on some combination of interstate commerce or imports to meet the shortfall (Chart 1).

The shale revolution and the renaissance in U.S. oil and gas production have resulted in a stark contrast between the fortunes of the two groups.

Eight of the 13 energy-producing states improved their relative position between 2003 and 2013 when ranked by per capita gross domestic product (Chart 2). They accounted for almost half of the 18 states that rose in the rankings.

By contrast, energy-consuming states have fared poorly. None of the 10 states with the largest energy deficits has improved its relative economic position since 2003. Nine of them have fallen in the ranking, in some cases sharply ....

Energy producers also dominate in terms of raising real output per capita over the last decade, accounting for six of the 10 states with the biggest increases (Chart 4).

But none of them can rival North Dakota. Thanks to shale, the Peace Garden State has been (by far) the biggest winner, with per capital GDP up by more than 67 percent since 2003, compared with nationwide increase of just 7 percent (Chart 5).

Rapid income growth has catapulted North Dakota up the prosperity league. In 2003, state GDP per capita was ranked just 33rd in the nation, at just $41,000. By 2013, per capita GDP had soared to almost $69,000, putting it second only to Alaska.

In 2011, North Dakota's per capita GDP overtook California for the first time, and in 2013 it was more than $18,000 (29 percent) higher.

Other top-10 GDP gainers since 2003 include energy producers Wyoming (up 24 percent), Oklahoma (19 percent), Alaska (18 percent), Texas (17 percent) and Arkansas (16 percent).

Among the energy-producing states, only Colorado fell in the rankings, down seven places from 10th to 17th, with per capita GDP growing less than 5 percent since 2003.
...

States that looked to Big Green for energy were the big losers when it came to growth in jobs and income.  What should be clear is that if the US exploited its energy resources across the board, it would result in huge growth for the economy and jobs.  It is the Democrats' policy of artificial scarcity and the impediments to operations on federally controlled sites that holds this country back.