Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Natural gas boom projected to fuel job growth
Fuel Fix ^ | December 6, 2011 | Jennifer A. Dlouhy

Posted on 12/06/2011 5:27:41 AM PST by thackney

A nationwide boom in natural gas production is set to fuel nearly 900,000 jobs and add roughly $1,000 to annual household budgets by 2015, according to a new industry study released today.

The boom in shale gas production nationwide – exemplified by modern-day drilling boom towns that have sprung up in Pennsylvania, North Texas and western states – is a bright spot in the U.S. economy, said the study’s lead author, John Larson, vice president of IHS Global Insight, an energy research firm based in suburban Denver.

“Shale is really proving to be a very big job creator. It really stands in sharp contrast to many sectors of the economy,” Larson said. “During a significant economic downturn – the most significant since World War II – that’s pretty remarkable.”

Broader look

Although previous reports have focused on the economic boosts in specific regions where natural gas production has surged, the IHS analysis commissioned by America’s Natural Gas Alliance is the broadest look at nationwide effects. The alliance is an industry group that promotes increased use of natural gas.

Roughly one-third of the natural gas produced in the U.S. is extracted from dense shale rock, such as the Marcellus formation in the Northeast and the Barnett in North Texas. But government and independent energy analysts widely expect that volume to grow as shale production costs drop below those for conventional gas wells.

IHS predicts that shale gas will make up 60 percent of domestic production by 2035, with much of it extracted using horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques that involve blasting water, sand and chemicals deep underground to break up rock and release the fossil fuels trapped inside it.

According to the IHS report, capital expenditures tied to shale gas production amounted to $33 billion in 2010 and will total $1.9??trillion over the next 25 years.

The firm also concluded that shale gas production supported 600,000 jobs in 2010, including oil field workers directly employed by the industry, as well as indirect pipe fitting, steel manufacturing and other jobs.

Multipliers at issue

Some lawmakers have been critical of multipliers used to predict the add-on jobs tied to workers directly employed by the industry. Larson defended IHS’ accounting techniques as conservative.

The assumptions underpinning the study, for instance, discount potential shale discoveries that haven’t been made. IHS also assumed that there would be no new production after 2010 in New York state, where policymakers are considering a broad natural gas drilling ban.

Natural gas backers such as America’s Natural Gas Alliance have widely touted a 100-year supply of the fuel in U.S. borders.

But environmental concerns about the techniques used to extract natural gas are one possible check on growth. Conservationists warn about the high water demands of hydraulic fracturing and have raised concerns about disposal and treatment of wastewater.

There also are risks that methane could escape from wells and contaminate groundwater supplies.

Fears about those problems are feeding the possible drilling ban in New York state and have spread to regions that have long histories with the industry. For instance, Southlake, Texas, just imposed tough drilling rules that Chesapeake Energy cited in deciding to abandon production in the town.

Other findings

Among the study’s other findings:

Shale gas production contributed $76 billion to the U.S. gross domestic product in 2010, but IHS predicts that will jump to $118 billion by 2015 and $231 billion in 2035.

Tax revenue from shale gas production, which accounted for $18.6 billion to federal, state and local governments last year, is projected to hit $57 billion annually by 2035 – or $933 billion total over the next 25 years.

Benefits also include cheaper power bills for consumers. Savings from lower gas prices are projected to add an annual average of $926 per year in disposable income to U.S. households between 2012 and 2015.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: energy; naturalgas; shale; shalegas

click to enlarge
1 posted on 12/06/2011 5:27:42 AM PST by thackney
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: thackney

...obama will do his best to stop any growth.


2 posted on 12/06/2011 5:30:14 AM PST by Doogle ((USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

The Obama administration is already trying to take away the ability of the states to regulate hydraulic fracturing. If they can do that, then the feds will shut down gas production like they have drilling the Gulf of Mexico. 2012 can not come soon enough.


3 posted on 12/06/2011 5:48:58 AM PST by SailormanCGA72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

I was recently given an opportunity to obtain a formerly producing gas well (it produced for 18 months before its pipe caved in under extremely high pressure). During its operation, it had revenue of $1 Million. The operator (like many in the “patch,” believes it has demons) does not want to put any more dollars into it. He knew that he had thin, inferior pipe when it was completed, but got the pipe on a trade-out, and thought he would use it out of respect for his partner.

But, after consulting with clients of mine in the oil/gas industry I decided not to promote. The most compelling recommendation was from a man that said that with the falling price of gas, and $100/bbl for oil, most rigs are being shifted to drilling for oil. They can charge more!

Yes, gas is available. But oil is more profitable now. Gas will have its time. It reminds me of a question I ask my clients occasionally: Would you rather have $1,000 or $100? They all choose correctly.

Gwjack


4 posted on 12/06/2011 5:52:34 AM PST by gwjack (May God give America His richest blessings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gwjack

As we can see from the charts linked below, most of the growth in the active rig counts has been in oil for the last 18 months.

http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/BHI/1553720654x0x524040/8307F3E1-697E-4963-8E8E-9409B0087B17/na_charts_12211.pdf


5 posted on 12/06/2011 6:03:35 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SailormanCGA72

Amen to that, bro.


6 posted on 12/06/2011 6:06:36 AM PST by jdsteel (Give me freedom, not more government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Propane costs are killing me. Why can’t a liquid fuel be made from cheap nat gas?


7 posted on 12/06/2011 6:16:28 AM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle
...obama will do his best to stop any growth.

He will probably try and placate his Envirowhack base just like he did on the Keystone Pipeline. This will create tremendous fractures within the Democrat Party though. Most Democrat officials at the state and local level are near-orgasmic at the thought of the revenue streams that fracking is liable to generate.

8 posted on 12/06/2011 6:34:27 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

besides, does Obama now want to go to Ohio and tell them that they AREN’T going to get those 200,000 new jobs after all?


9 posted on 12/06/2011 6:37:13 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: thackney
The Obama admin looks on in horror as the growth in energy jobs will not be in the practically worthless and unworkable green sector as he and his leftist minions had been hoping and prayin... er hoping for but in the (ugh,brrr,shudder) "fossil fuel" sector. How best to quash this movement in "fossil fuel" jobs. Obama is such a bonehead that he's trying to stop something that would boost his vote totals in 2012.

The amusing thing is a great percentage of his most fervent admirers, like my three lib sisters, are completely oblivious to the fact that he's willing to suppress jobs, and the national product, to keep his propers with a tiny segment of the American populace---the leftist, green, enviro-nutjob.

10 posted on 12/06/2011 6:42:34 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Where’s the “Frackerator”?... The household device that separates the gas from drinking water. Water and heating fuel from contaminated wells...


11 posted on 12/06/2011 6:44:39 AM PST by StraightDave (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

Natural gas is the fuel of the future,
but of course, since the left seeks to remove the use of energy from the masses, they will block it however they can.

For now, though, I’m going to take steps that recognize that the nat gas grid is actually MORE STABLE than the electric grid and hook up a natural gas standby generator.

I’d recommend this step to anyone that has nat gas piped to their residence.

Energy is life. Restrict energy availability and humans die. No two ways about it. And the left knows this fact as well. Their “father” wants it to happen.


12 posted on 12/06/2011 6:45:36 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: thackney

That’s an unfortunate title.


13 posted on 12/06/2011 6:45:58 AM PST by Jagermonster (TANSTAAFL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

The goal of Gang Green is NO ENERGY USAGE by the masses.
The reason they are pushing for “green” energy is that they know it is incapable of providing cheap and highly available energy to everyone.

And as for your three libs, keep in mind the whole point, for sheeperals at least, is to feel good about themselves for caring. Perhaps a “I’m glad you feel good about yourself for supporting this policy, but it does no good for everyone else” line of “reasoning” would be in order.


14 posted on 12/06/2011 6:51:48 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Yep, the lefties will do what ever they can to stop drilling, making up lies about fracking and judges, too stupid to actually study the issues first hand, will take their word for it, just as they did with the fickin’ spotted owl and shutting down the lumber industry in the US, which has cost us thousands of jobs, not to mention it has driven the cost of lumber up and the quality down.


15 posted on 12/06/2011 6:55:34 AM PST by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Some lawmakers have been critical of multipliers used to predict the add-on jobs tied to workers directly employed by the industry.

It's rather stunning when Zero makes claims about how many jobs will be created through “green energy”, yet when you have an mature industry telling you how many jobs will be created they question the numbers.

16 posted on 12/06/2011 7:05:18 AM PST by Recon Dad ("The most important rule in a gunfight is: Always win and cheat if necessary.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad
Simple we pass a law saying the industry has to provided the jobs are pay a fine twice the amount, not produced over say a thirty year period. This will be after tax payment, ie non deductible. Nothing like a little truth in advertising. for both sides.
17 posted on 12/06/2011 7:58:43 AM PST by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by "AMNESTY" Newt, Willard, Perry and his fellow supporters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SailormanCGA72

States need to tell the feds and all of the job killing and jackas epa crap to go to hell! Rebel! How dare they rob people of their God given rights to be employed in some cases!


18 posted on 12/06/2011 8:02:47 AM PST by fabian (" And a new day will dawn for those who stand long, and the forests will echo with laughter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SailormanCGA72

States need to tell the feds and all of the job killing and jackass epa crap to go to hell! Rebel! How dare they rob people of their God given rights to be employed in some cases!


19 posted on 12/06/2011 8:03:14 AM PST by fabian (" And a new day will dawn for those who stand long, and the forests will echo with laughter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Why can’t a liquid fuel be made from cheap nat gas?

They can, but the process isn't cheap, at least not yet.

Shell: world's biggest gas-to-liquids plant to start soon
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2731066/posts

The better hope on the nearer horizon is developing fields like the Utica Shale will have more natural gas liquids providing more propane and helping to lower prices.

20 posted on 12/06/2011 8:06:32 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: StraightDave

Natural Gas has existed in most of those water wells long before they started hydraulic fracturing in the area. Some of the water wells actually drilled into shallow gas fields not related to the shale development.

Data Confirm Safety Of Well Fracturing - JULY 2010
http://www.aogr.com/index.php/magazine/frac-facts

...Since that fateful day in 1949, hydraulic fracturing has done more to increase recoverable reserves than any other technique. In the more than 60 years following those first treatments, more than 2 million frac treatments have been pumped with no documented case of any treatment polluting an aquifer.

...

Studies conducted by governmental agencies and respected authorities have unanimously concluded that hydraulic fracturing is safe. The Environmental Protection Agency, the Ground Water Protection Council and the Interstate Oil & Gas Compact Commission all have found hydraulic fracturing nonthreatening to the environment or public health.

As displayed on the Energy in Depth Web site (http://www.energyindepth.com/), the GWPC’s survey of state energy regulatory agencies found no documented cases of contaminated drinking water linked to hydraulic fracturing. The GWPC also concluded that state regulations were sufficient to ensure the integrity of the water supply. A 2002 study conducted by the IOGCC confirmed the GWPC’s conclusion that no evidence could be found of contaminated drinking water related to hydraulic fracturing.

more at link


21 posted on 12/06/2011 8:09:33 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MrB
My own view is that if you could them to admit it, most female libs, like my sisters, vote Dem to support abortion. My sisters tacitly have said as much when at different times I've asked them why they were going to vote for a certain Dem candidate. They all replied, separately from one another, that they were worried that a teenage girl wouldn't be able to get an abortion. They know diddly squat about most major issues. Or history or a lot of other things. For them, abortion "rights" trumps everything including national defense, the economy, all issues.

They do however know all the movie stars and latest movies, tv shows, fashion, etcetera. Like most people who vote for Dems, they have scant knowledge of why and how the free-market system has created the conditions which have allowed them to live such grand lives. They certainly wouldn't want to live the green/Occupandia lifestyle.

22 posted on 12/06/2011 10:15:56 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: fabian
I agree. What would happen if the states told the EPA or NLRB to stuff it? Would Obama send in federal troops? Would the troops fire on its own citizens? It is time to resist the bureaucrats from Washington.
23 posted on 12/06/2011 11:11:01 AM PST by SailormanCGA72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

And further, if you pressed them, they’d say that they’d accept the fact that many girls are pressured into abortions by boyfriends or child molesters

as long as it remained available “for those who need it”.


24 posted on 12/06/2011 11:13:31 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SailormanCGA72

Yes! Tell them to go to hell...we want our country back and we are willing to take it back! How dare they...


25 posted on 12/07/2011 8:17:46 AM PST by fabian (" And a new day will dawn for those who stand long, and the forests will echo with laughter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: thackney

thackney —

Thanks for the link on rig activity. It is certainly telling.

Gwjack

P.S. My apologies for my slow response.


26 posted on 12/10/2011 5:20:19 PM PST by gwjack (May God give America His richest blessings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: gwjack

More info at:

North America Rotary Rig Counts – Current Week Data
By State, type and Historical data
http://investor.shareholder.com/bhi/rig_counts/rc_index.cfm

Interactive Graphical Current Rig Data
http://gis.bakerhughesdirect.com/RigCounts/default2.aspx


27 posted on 12/11/2011 5:58:43 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson