Posted on 06/21/2012 11:36:53 PM PDT by neverdem
It may not pique the public’s interest quite like finance or information technology, but it just could just save the U.S. economy.
Indeed, the natural gas industry supports some 2.8 million jobs — either directly through companies engaged in exploration and drilling or indirectly through manufacturers that use the fuel as a raw material, according to the American Gas Association.
The real potential for economic impact, however, lies in the vast reservoirs of shale gas that are newly accessible through hydraulic fracturing.
Better known as “fracking,” the process involves extracting natural gas from shale rock layers deep within the Earth using a highly pressurized mixture of water and chemicals.
“Energy is always a key player in the economy and because producers have been able to make these advances in technology and efficiency improvements, shale gas could be a very significant driver for the economy going forward,” says Rocco Canonica, director of energy analysis at Bentek Energy, an energy market research firm in Evergreen, Colo.
Over the last four years, fracking, along with traditional drilling, has unlocked a staggering 3,400 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in North America, enough to supply U.S. consumers at current demand levels for more than 100 years, according to business and economic research firm IHS...
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
We have much more than 100 years of oil in the U.S. So natgas is great in electrical generation and heating applications, but for motor vehicles petroleum is and always will be king.
Probably not.
The problems in the US economy are so large and so systemic, that there’s no single sector solution to the problem.
Nothing can save us until the government stops choking the life out of us.
Unfortunately every two years there is a chance that those chokers will take right back over.
And don’t forget the new oil found in NV and the huge Green River formation, with estimates of a trillion and more of recoverable reserves (more than Saudi Arabia)
It would help under a centrist to conservative Republican, it’ll do no good under a modern Democrat. No one thing will “save’ us from our decline. We need to shut down the public education system and switch to a homeschool/Internet/private/parochial system and redeploy the teachers and administrators to the private sector.
Green River info here: http://oilshalegas.com/greenriveroilshale.html
We are facing an entrenced idealogy (liberal education idealogy). Emapthy on the part of parents (send the kids to shcool {sic} so i have “MY” time) is a big part of the problem.
Vouchers.
No.
Agreed. No and nor should it.
A one commodity economy would suck.
That’s all well and fine.
It won’t reverse the US economic situation. Our problems are now very deep and systemic, and only some truly large, disruptive changes will turn this situation around.
[. . .only some truly large, disruptive changes will turn this situation around.]
Something on the scale of the disintegration of the Soviet Union?
I’m not sure I quite see your case there.
What I’m talking about are changes that need to be made that would be seen as heresy by the political class in DC:
- restricting immigration, both illegal and legal
- ending “too big to fail” in the banking system and declaring some forms of financial derivatives to be null and void
- ending the idiotic notion of “free trade” in a world of currency manipulation
and so on. These things won’t happen, much less be proposed, and as a result we’re on a glidepath forward and down.
I was thinking of cultural and economic upheaval's that change part of the world and ultimately benefit the U.S. From 1938 to 1942 a wave of financial assets moved from Europe into U.S. banks, markets and industries ahead of the Blitzkrieg. The economy was strengthened in spite of FDR's counter intuitive policies.
Don't look now, but the changeover has already started. The big fleets are swapping from diesel to natgas as fast as tney can, and spending big bucks to do so. This will drive the broad installation of refill infrastructure and enable the passenger car fleet to also switch.
Don't look now, but the changeover has already started. The big fleets are swapping from diesel to natgas as fast as tney can, and spending big bucks to do so. This will drive the broad installation of refill infrastructure and enable the passenger car fleet to also switch."We have much more than 100 years of oil in the U.S. So natgas is great in electrical generation and heating applications, but for motor vehicles petroleum is and always will be king."
. . . but are the big fleets you refer to long-haul trucks which can use LNG, or they short-haul, intermittent service vehicles for which CNG is the only practical NG option? Because of the size/weight of the tankage required, CNG is IMHO more more like battery power than gasoline-fueled power. Even LNG requires more volume of tankage than the energy-equivalent quantity of gasoline . . .I’m all for NG fuel, for fleet use where economy of scale can minimize the inconveniences involved. But for the personal car, IMHO it doesn’t really work. The fuel cost savings just won’t justify the inconvenience.
With a home refueling compressor, I don't see a lot of inconvenience.
That's likely to be true but freeing up the energy sector to drill on Federal lands could be the trigger that gets the machine starting up again.
If Romney acts quickly and decisively and has the backing of Congress that would be a big confidence booster for the business and investment communities and there is no doubt that jobs would be created in large numbers and rather quickly.
Resource extraction is not a one-trick pony. Drilling for oil, mining and logging are wealth multipliers.
Mining iron, gold, coal and copper fueled the industrial revolution.
Logging white pines built Chicago, St. Louis and other cities in the Midwest.
Just cleaning out the mess made by the loathesome eco-fascists in the national forests will employ millions of people for years.
I love how the media is stuck trying to "inform us" that fracking is "new", and thus unknown/mysterious/dangerous. We've been fracking in this nation since the 1940's.
My next new vehicle purchase will be a NG fueled truck and I will have a NG refueling station at home. My NG is cheap where I live.
I’m converting every practical appliance I have to NG,
so I’m making a “bet” on it as the fuel source of the future.
Of course, if 0bama’s ideology holds sway, there will be NO energy source that they’ll allow us commoners to use.
Chrysler, Ford, GM Introduce Natural-Gas Pickup Trucks
http://enr.construction.com/economics/quarterly_cost_reports/2012/0326-ford-gm-and-ram-introduce-natural-gas-pickup-trucks.asp
...
Responding to demands for cheaper, cleaner fuels than gasoline or diesel, Ford, General Motors and Ram have introduced new pickups that are designed to run on compressed natural gas (CNG) and gasoline.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
These are dual fuel vehicles. They can run on Natural Gas AND Gasoline. They have tanks for both.
The short answer: Yes.
A longer explanation: The U.S. economy is like a cork in a tub of water. Unless the heavy thumb of government pushes it down sufficiently it pops to the surface. Even when government does push the cork under water, it finds it difficult to keep it there. The cork twists (in this case due to fracking) and slips out from under the thumb.
Cheap energy always drives economic growth. It makes the production of everything else cheaper, and makes heating and cooling your home cheaper. This yields a two-fer plus. Not only are goods cheaper, but the amount households spend on subsistance goods (food, heating and cooling, transportation fuel) drops. This frees up the money for consumption or investment. Both of these further fuel economic growth by increasing consumer demand or increasing investment capital.
Since natural gas is becoming so cheap, electric rates will drop as well as consumer natural gas. So will plastics that use natural gas for feedstock. So will petroleum products, as there is less demand for petroleum in electrical generation and other places where natural gas can substitute for petroleum. (Note that if the price drops below that of production, some oil wells will stop producing, but eventually an equalibrium — at a lower aggregate price — is reached.
While gluts of other goods can harm a national ecomomy, energy gluts never seem to hurt a diversified aggregate national economy. (Texas got hurt by the oil glut of the 1980s, but it was boom times for the rest of the nation.) And many of the major energy-producing regions (Texas, Colorado, Pennsylvania) all have more diversified economies than they did in the 1930s or 1980s. (The Dakotas do not, but they still will benefit, even if there is an energy bust.)
Assuming that the Obama Administration (with its “All-of-the-Above-Ground” energy policies) goes poof in 2012, then the period from 2013-2023 could be like the 1980s for economic growth. Even if the American people repleat their folly of 2008, we should see solid growth, regardless — due to falling energy prices. I do not see how even Obama can recork the fracking genie.
With some education, some tooling and of course a source of biomass a person can make their own methane storage tank.
But one must be aware that the FEds will balk at every inch about touting NG as a transportation fuel, because enforcing the taxation will be a great big hassle.
If NG does take off then they will demand taxes by the mile through a black box or Onstar device.
Yep, I plan to become a methane and syngas hobbiest at my new “compound”.
It doesn’t have to be that way. Natural gas like propane can play a part in eliminating the imported oil strangling our economy. Check my tagline. If a farmer up the road can convert his own vehicles & a tractor and refuel them from a gas well on his property using a surplus high pressure oxygen compressor similar to a dive shop compressor, we’re not looking at rocket science. That’s a technology that’s been around for many decades.
The alternative is to continue importing the lions share of the world’s oil, 9 to 12 million barrels a day, and continue wearing OPEC’s shackles.
The real benefit of using natural gas is drastically cutting the cash flow to countries that aren’t working for our best interests. Do you think that might reduce the cash for terrorism or the nuclear program in Iran?
If you use a general purpose compressor to compress flammable Natural Gas, rather than the Class 1, Div 1 or 2 rated machines, you should expect some exciting results. Maybe not the first or second time you use it; but almost certainly eventually.
There is a very good reason the Natural Gas Industry is ONLY allowed to use electrical equipment rated for hazardous areas. It was an expensive and deadly learning curve for too many years.
Tiny leaks and arcing contacts, brush motors, etc don't mater much when compressing air. Natural Gas is another case.
We don't spend the extra money for no reason. And there is also a reason the electrical Hazardous Area Classification drawing are nearly always required to be stamped by a registered professional engineer.
IMO, I don't think that LNG is a viable option. CNG is the way to go, even for long haul.
The "inconvenience" is almost totally due to the scarcity of infrastructure. Once CNG "fillup stations" are as ubiquitous as current "gas stations", the inconvenience disappears. I'm well aware of the energy density issue, but if the sole inconvenience is that I have to fill up more often, I'll accept that.
I stand by my original assertions.....fleets will be first, and drive the installation of infrastructure, then passenger cars will switch. One datum pointing in this direction is that most fleet "fill up" points that are established also allow the general public (early CNG adopters) to use them.
Further, I think that the order of switchover will be large local fleets (UPS/FEDEX/and similar) first, then long-haul fleets with CNG added to truck stops, and then the general public. Pretty much inevitable given the supply/demand trends.
Several owners of long-haul operations disagree.
UPS turns to LNG, not CNG, for natural gas fueled long-haul trucks
http://knowledgeproblem.com/2011/02/25/ups-turns-to-lng-not-cng-for-natural-gas-fueled-long-haul-trucks/
LNG Vehicles Are In It For the Long Haul
http://members.questline.com/Article.aspx?articleID=20703&accountID=1863&nl=12731
Volvo Trucks First to Market LNG Powered Truck for Long-Haul Operations
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2011/05/31/534869-volvo-trucks-first-to-market-gas-powered-truck-for-long.html
Trucks Run On Natural Gas In Pickens Clean Energy Drive: Freight
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-29/trucks-run-on-natural-gas-in-pickens-clean-energy-drive.html
- - - - -
Helping to build the infrastructure, Clean Energy Fuels (T. Boone Pickens) is building 150 stations across many of US highways.
Natural Gas Filling Stations: Few and Far Between
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304707604577422252404819664.html
In my opinion, we will see a build up of both CNG and LNG retail, often at the same highway truckstop location.
LNG will become a fuel of choice for long-haul, marine and locomotive. CNG will be used more by residential and light commercial.
Shell is investing in LNG for Marine transport.
Shell to make LNG available as marine fuel, starting in U.S. Gulf market
http://www.marinelog.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1306:2011sep00072&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=195
Wärtsilä and Shell sign co-operative agreement to promote use of LNG as a marine fuel
http://www.wartsila.com/en/press-releases/wartsila-and-shell-sign-co-operative-agreement-to-promote-use-of-lng-as-a-marine-fuel
He did have one episode when the timing chain cover was blown off a truck. I wouldn’t hestitate to use the setup provided explosion proof electrical fittings were used along with locating and isolating the compressor like the dynamite magazines that used to be very common.
I would only use a C1D2 rated motor on the compressor as well. Hermetically sealed contacts on the pressure switches, etc.
BTW, I’ve been the lead engineer for up to 15,000 Hp Electric Motor driven Natural Gas compressor stations. I’ve done up to 42,000 Hp on Natural Gas turbine driven compressors.
But... but... how is the government going to be able to get “its share” of that?
These are dual fuel vehicles. They can run on Natural Gas AND Gasoline. They have tanks for both.
Yup. And they are trucks. Because where are you gonna put the extra fuel tank for CNG in a car?
Dual-fuel sedans are expected to follow in the 2013 model year.
I doubt we will see that in a little compact.
http://www.auto-exhausts.com/news/Hafei-Auto-to-make-cheap-clean-dual-fuel-sedan-38.html
I recall your previous posts. I have no doubts about your expertise. Nor do I minimize the potential for an explosion. I wouldn’t consider putting a home grown compressor setup behind block walls or even reinforced concrete walls. It’s just more shrapnel unless the concrete and reinforcing was specifically designed for overpressure. I would probably dig a pit for a small strucure including gas sensing and an explosion proof ventilation system.
I’ve been checking eBay for berylium tools.
I would be more comfortable in my personal use to stay with rated equipment rather than build for the eventual explosion.
my 2¢
Not true. We have enough oil to supply ourselves for hundreds of years, so why waste money converting to alternative fuels? Gasoline and diesel are far superior as motor fuels for vehicles and the infrastructure has been there for a century. Rebuilding the entire infrastructure to accommodate an inferior fuel is just another unicorn fart dream
I think in the long run, the need for cryogenics for LNG will be a a problem for highway usage. Of course, if you have LNG, then providing CNG is trivial. The reverse is "possible" but more difficult.
We'll just have to see how the market shakes out.
"LNG will become a fuel of choice for long-haul, marine and locomotive. CNG will be used more by residential and light commercial.
I certainly agree about marine and locomotive. I just see the split point at a somewhat different spot than you do. I certainly think that LNG is definitely not an option for passenger/light vehicle use.
Nuclear energy, shale oil and gas, crude oil, a huge supply of coal in the US could save it. It isn’t a matter of supply, it is a matter of liberal madness and control.
Government doesn’t produce anything but a goddam bill for worthless services most don’t need or can tolerate. Government Worker is an oxymoron in my book. Under control of Obama, this entire government is our natural enemy.
I used to think the same myself. Then I learned that the tanks on the trucks/vehicles are both insulated and pressure rated that they can remain closed up and not in use for a minimum of 5 days without venting or requiring refrigeration input. I now understand this has been the minimum design requirement for some time now and manufactures having been meeting this criteria. In the stationary facilities, it is easier to manage. I've done some work years ago for LNG refueling on Metro Buses. While the equipment requirements are specific and with cost, it has become routine for several manufactures.
You don’t have to rebuild the infrastructure. We’ve already got a distribution network in many parts of he US. You won’t see natural gas tankers on the road.
The current proposed legislation is a modification to the tax code to allow tthe necessary tax credits. Installing the infrasrucure is as simply as installing a fill unit and hooking it up to a natural gas line. Natural gas would serve as a competitive fuel for those cars and light trucks that fill the vehicles in the niche beween heavyr/medium duty vehicles and small cars for which a lower BTU content fuel would suffice.
Best of all it would remove support from global oil prices and eliminate the yo-yo gasoline price cycle typically seen during some times of the year. Natural gas is not subject to the ethanol lobby nor is it subject to disruption by global events. The price of natural gas is not going to sky rocket because of gasoline invenory levels nor will it change due to a refinery fire, hurricane, or a rumored attack on a foreign country.
It’s a game changer. Detroit has built the vehicles in the past and is doing so again. The best would be a multifuel vehicle that could run on either natural gas or gasoline. Do you think a retailer would try to temporarily jack up gasoline prices if his customers could flip him the bird and use natural gas instead. Especially if you bought one of the home fill stations.
As a fungible commodity, oil is always going to be subject to global events. Not so for natural gas.
My feeling is that the problem isn't related directly to temps and pressure, but in operator skill during fueling. With locomotive and marine, fueling is done infrequently, and by trained experts. With highway use, "not so much".
Admittedly, long-haul operators are more highly trained that the average smuck behind the wheel of a car, but is that difference enough?
It's a "human factors" thing.
Oil shale, from Green River or elsewhere, is not economically feasible, yet. With future technological adavnces, that may change.
Wrong again.
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.