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

Skip to comments.

LNG Import Terminals Will Not Result in High Natural Gas Prices
ChronWatch.com ^ | April 17, 2005 | Wayne Lusvardi

Posted on 04/17/2005 6:06:19 PM PDT by WayneLusvardi

LNG Import Terminals Will Not Result in High Natural Gas Prices

Pseudictionary.com defines the term “pumping gas” as doing something airheaded. Thomas D. Elias, a Santa Monica based free lance journalist published in many California newspapers, must be pumping gas in his recent column “Decision means natural gas prices would stay high.”

Thomas Elias disguises his knee-jerk anti-business world view by sending out a false alarm that “natural gas prices will likely stay sky-high in California forever” if Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) operators are permitted to build facilities off the California coastline and ship gas through regional gas lines throughout the state. Elias frets that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has authorized the state’s gas companies to relinquish their reserved space in two of the largest natural gas pipelines serving California. In other words, Elias wants the vested natural gas companies (e.g., PG&E, So Cal Gas, SDG&E, Long Beach Dept. Gas & Water) to maintain their monopoly position by disallowing competitive users from access to regional natural gas lines. But, of course, Elias would never frame it that way in one of his columns. He wants you to believe that he is a consumerist looking out for the little guy.

(Excerpt) Read more at chronwatch.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; US: California
KEYWORDS: energy; energyprices; lng; naturalgas; pipeline

1 posted on 04/17/2005 6:06:22 PM PDT by WayneLusvardi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: WayneLusvardi

It is a small nuclear bomb, those sites. I would never live near one.


3 posted on 04/17/2005 6:27:00 PM PDT by SteveMcKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WayneLusvardi
offshore lng terminal site requested off salem or gloucester massachusetts is being opposed by our so called representative tierney and the local press. have not even bothered to discover jfk's opinion on the matter, why waste the time.

in massachusetts we kill these ideas off during the permitting process.

we have enough twigs to go around.
4 posted on 04/17/2005 6:48:37 PM PDT by mmercier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WayneLusvardi

I've always wondered about the term "Liquid Natural Gas"
It's either a liquid or a gas but not both.

Also you cant pump a gas but you can compress it.
You cant compress a liquid but you can pump it.

Maybe they should call LNG "liquified methane"


5 posted on 04/17/2005 7:11:13 PM PDT by 76834
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 76834

Ummm, LNG stands for 'Liquified' Natural Gas. LNG is stored under high pressure and very low temperatures.

It's only liquid until it leaves the storage container, when it is warmed up and de-compressed.


6 posted on 04/17/2005 7:19:42 PM PDT by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr

LOL
Understand, and now I think I will go pour myself a glass of liquified steam.


7 posted on 04/17/2005 7:22:53 PM PDT by 76834
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SteveMcKing

The proposed terminals are safe and about 22 miles off shore. The LNG would be decompressed and put into ordinary undersea pipelines to shore. More available gas lowers prices for consumers. Saying it would raise prices is an example of how liberals and environmentalists do not understand market pricing.


8 posted on 04/17/2005 8:14:27 PM PDT by RicocheT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RicocheT
The liquified "natural gas" comes to the terminals very cold, but it is stored at low pressure, near atmospheric. In the terminal, the liquid "gas" is pumped to pipeline pressure and heated to ambient temperatures where it re-gasifies.
9 posted on 04/17/2005 8:44:28 PM PDT by bricks4all@aol.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RicocheT

You convinced me... I'll vote for it, if I get the chance.


10 posted on 04/17/2005 9:19:03 PM PDT by SteveMcKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

They want to build one of those floating bombs in Long Island Sound (south of Guilford CT in NY waters) and there are all kinds of syrupy articles about how it's a good thing, and prices will drop (ha ha), and they generally equate it with the Second Coming.

Other articles state the reality that it will help screw-up the Sound even more (the lobstering and shellfishing industries in the Sound are taking a beating already) but provide an entertaining 'boom' visible to a hell of a lot of people when it finally 'goes'...


11 posted on 04/17/2005 9:46:18 PM PDT by solitas (So what if I support a platform that has fewer flaws than yours? 'Mystic' dual 500 G4's, OSX.3.7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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