Posted on 04/05/2014 6:20:53 PM PDT by thackney
Opinion: 4 reasons why exporting natural gas is the right thing for America
Americans opposed to the export of U.S. natural gas give many reasons for their position. But almost all of them are wrong.
The problem is that people underestimate the amount of this country’s natural gas and the potential effect exports could have on the world market.
Russia has swallowed parts of Georgia and Ukraine. No one is proposing that America send soldiers to defend those countries, even though we guaranteed Ukraine’s sovereignty in 1994 under the Budapest Memorandum. Instead, we can help our allies by diminishing Russia’s economic power over them. And that power rests on oil and gas.
America is overtaking Russia as the world’s largest oil and gas producer, and we could be exporting natural gas abroad, cutting into Russia’s markets. Two dozen applications to export natural gas, some dating to 2011 and 2012, are awaiting approval by the Energy Department. Potential exporters face political barriers because many believe the U.S. should keep all its natural gas rather than export it.
Here are four reasons for not exporting natural gas, and why they are wrong.
Myth 1: Exporting natural gas will increase prices. According to Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, exporting natural gas will increase prices by $2.50 per thousand cubic feet. He said in a press release: “U.S. energy consumers could be facing as much as $62 billion per year in higher energy costs as a direct result of exporting.”
That is misguided because America has a massive capacity to expand natural gas. Over the past decade, exports have increased and prices have declined...
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
Dear leftist ignoramuses: Exporting natural gas makes Obama look and makes Putin look bad. But y’all just keep to your witchcraft and mother Gaia crap.
catch that? substantially? so it WILL raise prices. That's all I need to read. Liars all of them.
I don't want as-is prices, I don't want this year's or last year's prices. I want dirt-cheap prices, so that those prices can drive, not hinder, American productivity.
Keep our resources at home to improve America.
What would Reagan or Goldwater do, in a heartbeat?
We must not allow our producers to freely sell their product. That would be something like freedom.
I don't want as-is prices, I don't want this year's or last year's prices. I want dirt-cheap prices
No kidding. What else do you want to take from the producers? Obama, that you?
Keep our resources at home to improve America.
Our resources? Da, comrade!
It is foolish to believe in economics the demand curve rules without limits while the supply curve can just be ignored.
You want to KEEP lower prices? Increase the supply by allowing more demand.
It’s not so much that people are opposing it as pointing out how infeasible it is. There is a difference.
You’re exactly right. I’ve yet to see an industry from paper, trucking, etc. where in the face of demand they didn’t over expand capacity/supply to the point the competition didn’t end up in lower prices.
You want to KEEP lower prices? Increase the supply by allowing more demand.
this is what the lefties do not understand. the keystone pipeline is another example. they all say none of the oil will be used in the US.
my comment is it doesn’t matter. the more supply there is means a lessor amount that we will pay.
the only way we could ever attempt to pay our national debt is by exporting our rtesources
we're not talking tinker toys. We're talking a singular product that affects the bottom line of every single American business and home, and, a product closely tied to national security. Apples and oranges.
Our resources? Da, comrade!
yes, ours. Oil/gas producers obtain their product through permit and/or lease, issued by the citizens of the USA. They don't own the product free of obligation. A permit or lease is issued based on expectations that the product brought from the ground will be of benefit to Americans. Not the world's and then we get what's left over at even more expensive prices "because gringos can afford it." So how is that communism?
I don't give a damn what country wants to buy truckloads of tinkertoys or oranges or rice, or pipecleaners. But when it comes to the lifeblood of America, is it wrong to expect shareholders to make sure the hand that hands them the same permit that enables their own wealth, stays as economically stable as they are?
It's capitalism based on naked greed and false assumption that America's oil and gas is free for the drilling that drives the liberals to cry for socialism.
as for me, I'll be happy when the shareholders remember where their permit came from.
Is their anything else you'd like, to help your bottom line, that restricts the freedom of someone else?
Maybe airlines should have to sell you cheap tickets, because more expensive ones would hurt your bottom line?
What about drug companies? Should they have to sell you cheaper drugs, to help your bottom line?
yes, ours. Oil/gas producers obtain their product through permit and/or lease, issued by the citizens of the USA.
What about the leases on private land? You deserve a cut of that too?
as for me, I'll be happy when the shareholders remember where their permit came from.
And if they don't, we can kill the greedy kulaks, eh comrade?
The question isn’t should we sell natural gas but HOW can we. AFAIK there ain’t a pipe accross the Atlantic. LNG tankers will never be allowed. What port would take them?
Airline tickets to see Aunt Martha aren’t critical to national security and the economy.
as for drug companies, which ones? I think America has about 3 left. Let’s see, there’s Bayer and E. Lilly and Merck and that’s about it. I have no complains on the cost of asprin, tylenol or penicillin. And I don’t think any of the three are related to national security and the american economy.
*And if they don’t, we can kill the greedy kulaks, eh comrade?*
as for private land? Drill baby drill. But even private land drilling requires permits, including a permit to place a rig to begin with. No blood required.
Private gas drilled on private land can't be sold for a higher price abroad, because it impacts your bottom line.
Anyone else you want to steal from, for national security and the economy?
well, there it is, isn't it? The argument has changed from supply and demand creating cheaper product for everyone and diamonds will fall from the sky, to being able to extract a resource from the ground of the USA and then sell that product for higher prices abroad than what can be had in the USA currently, at the expense of national security.
How does that keep the price in the USA down, btw? By definition, it doesn't, does it? Because it's not even meant for the USA, is it? hmmm.
My bottom line doesn't count, but the bottom line of the American economy counts a great deal to me and so does national security. We've already spent ourselves out of the space program, and millions of jobs in America, so what should we spend ourselves out of next just so some shareholder can make a few dimes off some two-bit country and possibly draw us into armed conflict in the process?
The entire premise of this article is in the closing paragraphs. Oh sure, it starts off with the old supply and demand myth - which doesn't work in a world economy because there will never ever be enough supply for a multiplying world population. But it wraps up with childing America for not putting all efforts towards sending their gas to Ukraine for a cold war against Russia. Lovely.
my momma didn't raise any fools and I can see a red herring argument a mile away. Comrade.
Who made that argument? Where?
to being able to extract a resource from the ground of the USA and then sell that product for higher prices abroad
I know, freedom. Shocking!
than what can be had in the USA currently, at the expense of national security.
If we need cheaper energy, for national security, we should build Keystone and take the money we're wasting on green energy, and spend it on something useful, like next generation nuclear. Maybe thorium?
the argument the article tries to make in “Myth 1”, along with your comment about selling it overseas for more than domestically. If I took too much license, I apologize.
I agree on building out Keystone, and doing it now, because it augments our national security (and Canada’s) instead of China’s. I also agree it’s about time we quit dickering around with solar and wind, and put in some state of the art nuclear stations. I mean, talk about good jobs for people, and a boost to the economy, let’s get it done. I’m 100% in.
Notice how this is never part of the discussion? So far the largest non nuclear explosion has been Ammonium nitrate in Galveston. can you imagine what one of these going off would do? Before you reply “never happen” think “Murphy’s Law”.
We live with dangerous stuff around us far more than we know. Chlorine used to be, and for all I know, may still be used at some water plants. Large numbers of truck transport fuels on nearby roads every day. Pipelines occasionally rupture and ignite such as in CA, NJ and most recently in WV.
When you consider the number of miles and amount of product moved, pipelines are extremely safe. Millions routinely travel by air when aircraft occasionally crash. Life always points to death. You can be safe but you can also be ridiculous.
Have you ever read about an explosion at an LNG facility? Have you ever read about an explosion at any of the natural gas compressor stations in this country?
The risk associated with operating LNG facilities is miniscule compared to the costs and loss of freedom associated with defending against terrorism and the issues associated with Russia and our other enemies now and in the future if we do not act.
LNG gives us an economic lever to work for a better world without getting the military involved. It’s not the time to parody chicken little.
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.