|
Post by Blitz on Feb 5, 2024 16:14:29 GMT -5
www.worldoil.com/magazine/2024/january-2024/columns/first-oil/John Kerry to switch roles. Last month, this editor profiled some of the buffoonery emanating from President Joe Biden’s climate envoy, John Kerry, during his participation in the COP 28 climate conference. One would have thought that we’d see a bit less of Kerry, early in the New Year, but not so. He has managed to stay in the headlines on a remarkably consistent basis. First, during the weekend of Jan. 13, word leaked out that Kerry will be switching roles later this winter. He will leave his climate envoy job to take a position as a climate champion in Biden’s re-election campaign. When that will take place is still uncertain. In the meantime, Kerry continues his jet-setting ways and made sure that he attended the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in its usual place in Davos, Switzerland, Jan. 15. At Davos, on Jan. 16, Kerry confirmed that he will be switching roles. Reacting to Kerry’s intended job switch, several industry friends told this editor that they’re happy to see that his zealous environmentalism will no longer “be screwing up U.S. energy policy.” As one of them said directly, “if Kerry has to mess up something, let it be Biden’s re-election campaign.”
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Feb 5, 2024 16:16:53 GMT -5
Team Biden not winning over friends in the energy biz... January 2024 - INDUSTRY & ANALYSIS - Craig Fleming / World Oil www.worldoil.com/magazine/2024/january-2024/columns/the-last-barrel/Since day one, the Biden Administration has set the U.S. on a path toward more reliance on foreign energy from countries with lower environmental standards. Caving to green activists, President Biden launched an overly aggressive environmental campaign, designed to phase out the U.S. hydrocarbon industry and the immense value it provides our country in terms of energy independence and employment opportunities. On his first day in office, Biden revoked the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline and rejoined the Paris Agreement. The move to block the $9 billion project was a clear signal that constructing a new pipeline in the U.S. had become a nearly impossible task. Now, after three years of failed energy policy, Biden’s drive to diminish U.S. hydrocarbon production has not subsided, despite the glaring failure of renewables to satisfy rising energy demand or deliver a satisfactory return on investment. New LNG projects targeted. Environmental groups are pushing for the Biden Administration to stop approving new LNG export projects entirely. The administration is reviewing the criteria that it uses to approve new liquefied natural gas export projects, a move that could significantly slow the fast-growing industry that has made the U.S. the world’s biggest shipper of the clean-burning fuel. The review into the process to determine whether a new project serves the national interest comes as Biden faces growing pressure from environmental groups to live up to his pledge, and the international climate agreement struck in Dubai at the COP28 summit, to transition away from fossil fuels. U.S. natural gas exports have increased four-fold in the past decade and become a sharp point of contention between climate activists, who say a surging industry will contribute to new carbon emissions. Although international buyers are eager to purchase U.S. LNG, environmental groups and Democrats have pushed Biden to reject further export licenses amid climate concerns. The construction of new multi-billion-dollar LNG export terminals and associated infrastructure will lock in decades of additional natural gas usage and discourage emission-free alternatives, they argue. However, national security experts stress that the cargoes are playing a critical role in replacing Russian gas deliveries to Europe. In the meantime, the drive to change how export licenses are approved could effectively stall permitting, as administration officials have warned industry representatives of protracted delays for approvals to broadly export LNG. Push-back. The Energy Workforce & Technology Council had a strong response to the Biden Administration’s review of criteria used to approve new LNG export projects. Energy Workforce President Tim Tarpley said, “any potential move by the administration to create new hurdles to permitting LNG projects is counterproductive and could send the industry into disarray, Fig. 1. The last thing that natural gas needs is more regulatory uncertainty. Already, the industry is forced to play a “will they, won’t they” game with stalled permitting reform. This proposal only exacerbates the problem by stalling new projects and halting an industry that is fueling not only our homes this winter but also those of our friends and allies abroad.” The U.S. natural gas industry produces gas more efficiently and with lower emissions than anywhere else in the world, and it is in need of additional investment to keep up with projected demand. Converting coal-fired power generation in the U.S. to natural gas has resulted in the country lowering its carbon emissions more than nearly any other country in the world since 2005. These actions from the Administration only discourage investors, who are drawn off by regulatory uncertainty. Natural gas is green! From an international perspective, Europe has already determined that natural gas is a “green” form of energy, so why wouldn’t the U.S. follow suit? We are economically handicapping ourselves to increase red tape on a resource that the world wants and desperately needs. Uncertainty created by this statement will encourage our allies to look for LNG from the Middle East, Australia and South America, who will be more than happy to fill the void we leave. Furthermore, this uncertainty threatens our national security and that of our allies. With Russia’s continued aggression in Ukraine and increasing instability in the Middle East, our allies are in dire need of a reliable and dependable source of energy, Tarpley concluded. American Petroleum Institute weighs in. Reviews of applications to broadly export LNG have increased to more than 330 days under the Biden Administration, up from 49 days under President Donald Trump and 155 days under President Barack Obama. API CEO Mike Sommers said “the signal this sends to our allies is very concerning, Fig. 2. Is the U.S. going to be a source of LNG and a reliable partner into the future? Our allies are going to start asking that question if they make this determination.” Senator Bill Cassidy (R-La.) called any bid to curtail U.S. LNG exports “shortsighted,” since it would discourage a shift away from coal-fired power to natural gas. “If we limit the export of natural gas, we limit the ability to substitute cleaner burning natural gas for coal,” he said at a recent API event in Washington. Battle over new LNG facility. Environmentalist Bill McKibben, who earlier pushed to block the Keystone XL oil pipeline, has taken up a campaign against LNG exports. He and other climate activists are planning a three-day demonstration at the Department of Energy in February. “So far, the DOE has refused to listen to thousands of letters and ignored petitions signed by hundreds of thousands of people. We need to go to D.C. to drive home how serious this crisis is,” a letter from the activists reads. It specifically calls out a proposed plant by Venture Global LNG in Louisiana that’s awaiting approval by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Venture Global says its proposed project, like other U.S. plants, will be key to the world’s push to move away from dirtier fuel sources, like coal. According to Venture Global V.P. Shaylyn Hynes, “American LNG is the best weapon in our arsenal to quickly displace global coal use and combat climate change. NGOs and their paid activists have continually misled the public, making up their own facts to fit their agenda, when the data shows otherwise.” Finally, a common-sense approach. Natural Allies for a Clean Energy Future released a video of former Congressman Kendrick Meek (D-Fla.) who asserts that America’s energy policy must be bipartisan, Fig. 3. The alliance said that natural gas is a vital partner in supporting communities, particularly those that have been historically left behind, creating job and investment opportunities that will allow Americans to compete on a global stage. According to Meek, “natural gas is going to make America strong in blue and red states. When it comes down to the bottom line economically in this country—it has to be a bipartisan issue. You can't have the Democrats on one side and Republicans on another. When it comes down to expanding natural gas—it will provide greater economic opportunities for individual families, for businesses and communities. It's going to take leadership to speak up on behalf of those communities that have been left behind. In this whole debate on energy, affordability, opportunity—you can’t keep doing the same thing, expecting different results. That's the reason why it's important that natural gas is a part of many solutions of getting us to a stronger economic standing,” Meek concluded. About the Authors Craig Fleming - World Oil
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Feb 12, 2024 12:52:46 GMT -5
Biden’s LNG export pause “unjustified,” should be reversed, Senator Manchin says Ari Natter, Bloomberg February 12, 2024 www.worldoil.com/news/2024/2/12/biden-s-lng-export-pause-unjustified-should-be-reversed-senator-manchin-says/(Bloomberg) – The White House’s pause on new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export approvals is unjustified and should be “reversed immediately” if a study of the shipments is only beginning now, Senator Joe Manchin said at a Senate hearing Thursday. Manchin also used a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing on the moratorium to cast doubt on the impartiality of the administration’s study of the effects of LNG exports on climate change, the economy, and national security, according to a written copy of Manchin’s opening statement. “Unfortunately, it seems the White House has already sided with climate activists determined to block any more LNG exports, and I am deeply concerned the White House will put its thumb on the scale at DOE to get the political outcome they want,” Manchin told the committee, which the West Virginia Democrat chairs. The hearing, which featured testimony from Deputy Energy Secretary David Turk, was called by Manchin after the Biden administration announced Jan. 26 it was halting approvals of new licenses to export LNG. The White House said part of the reason a new study is needed is because the government’s existing analysis doesn’t reflect evolving information about how much methane — the prime ingredient in natural gas — could warm the atmosphere. The study will also cover concerns about domestic natural gas price impact and global energy markets. Charlie Riedl, executive director of the Center for LNG, a Washington-trade group that represents exporters including Cheniere Energy Inc. and Sempra, said the administration’s rationale for pausing new approvals while conducting the review was flawed. “The administration is ignoring the facts,” Riedl plans to say, according to a copy of his opening statement. “This ‘pause’ is inconsistent with the DOE’s longstanding policy and precedent and the free-market principles that have allowed our country to remain the world’s most prosperous.” The administration’s pause has potential implications for more than a dozen proposals now awaiting review at the Energy Department, including ventures in Louisiana by Commonwealth LNG and Energy Transfer LP. The Senate hearing comes amid a growing chorus of criticism over the Biden administration’s freeze from not only industry, but also congressional Republicans as well as some moderate Democrats. “We just don’t agree with the president on this one issue,” Senator John Fetterman, a Pennsylvania Democrat, said in an interview earlier this week, referencing fellow Pennsylvania Democratic Senator Bob Casey, who has also voiced opposition to the export permit freeze. “Senator Casey and I believe energy security is national security and that it’s about jobs.” Still, it’s not clear how many Democrats would support legislation that would strip the Department of Energy of their role in approving LNG export permits and instead require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to deem the export of gas to be consistent with the public interest. The House may vote on the measure by Texas Republican Representative August Pfluger as soon as this week.
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Feb 13, 2024 5:41:46 GMT -5
Big Oil and Environmentalists Sue the Government Over Offshore Drilling Plans By Irina Slav - Feb 13, 2024, 3:00 AM CST oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Big-Oil-and-Environmentalists-Sue-the-Government-Over-Offshore-Drilling-Plans.htmlThe U.S. oil industry and climate activists on Monday filed lawsuits against the federal government challenging its lease sale plans for the Gulf of Mexico. While Big Oil is attacking the government for curbing the acreage to be made available to drillers, environmentalists are challenging the very existence of those plans. "Demand for affordable, reliable energy is only growing, yet this administration has used every tool at its disposal to restrict access to vast energy resources in federal waters," said Ryan Meyers, General Counsel for the American Petroleum Institute, which filed the first suit, as quoted by Reuters. In the other corner are climate activists from Earthjustice filed a suit on behalf of eight environmentalist organizations claiming the lease sale plans have not taken the impact of oil and gas drilling on local coastal communities into adequate consideration. The Biden administration released its new five-year plan for offshore leases in October, causing outrage in the oil industry because of intentions to hold only three lease sales over the whole period. This would be the lowest number of lease sales over any five-year period since these plans began to be published, back in 1980. The federal government also tried to stop a lease sale scheduled under the previous five-year plan that was to take place late in 2023. Despite its efforts, the lease sale was conducted, after the oil industry sued the Interior Department and won. The lease sale attracted $382 million in high bids, which made it the biggest lease sale for the past eight years. "In issuing a five-year programme with the fewest lease sales in history, the administration is limiting access in a region responsible for generating among the lowest carbon-intensive barrels in the world, putting American consumers at greater risk of relying on foreign sources for our future energy needs,” the API’s Meyers said as quoted by the FT. On the other hand, “The oil and gas industry is already sitting on 9mn acres of undeveloped leases. They certainly are not entitled to more,” Earthjustice attorney Brettny Hardy told the publication. By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Feb 16, 2024 8:39:05 GMT -5
House votes to overturn Biden’s LNG export approval ban Ari Natter, Bloomberg February 15, 2024 www.worldoil.com/news/2024/2/15/house-votes-to-overturn-biden-s-lng-export-approval-ban/(Bloomberg) – The House voted Thursday to pass legislation that would effectively undo the Biden administration’s freeze on new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export approvals. While the bill isn’t likely to be taken up in the Democratically-controlled Senate, its passage on a 224-200 vote, including nine Democrats, could embolden House Republicans to include language easing the pause in future government funding legislation. The legislation (H.R. 7176) by Texas Republican Representative August Pfluger would strip the Department of Energy of their role in approving LNG-export permits and instead require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to deem the export of gas to be consistent with the public interest. Similar versions have previously-passed the House prior to the administration’s announced pause in late January, but its passage as a standalone bill comes as the GOP seeks to elevate the matter as an election-year issue. While the effort to remove the Energy Department’s role in approving LNG exports isn’t seen as having enough support in the Senate, opponents of the pause have floated more moderate measures, including setting a firm deadline for the Energy Department to complete its study or adding nation’s such as Germany and Japan to the list of countries presumed to be in the public interest. In announcing the halt last month, the Biden administration said it would scrutinize how the LNG shipments — which have tripled in the last five years — affect climate change, the economy and national security. Notably, the White House argues that existing analysis doesn’t reflect evolving information about methane. The administration last published its report on LNG exports in 2019. The pause, which the administration has not put a firm timeline on, has left projects in limbo, including proposals by Venture Global LNG Inc., Commonwealth LNG and Energy Transfer LP. It comes amid fervent opposition to the projects from environmentalists and progressive voters who President Joe Biden will need to win reelection.
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Feb 23, 2024 8:04:35 GMT -5
How Biden’s LNG Export Pause Could Backfire By Robert Rapier - Feb 22, 2024, 5:00 PM CST oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-Gas/How-Bidens-LNG-Export-Pause-Could-Backfire.html- Biden's decision to halt new LNG export approvals aims to address climate change concerns and evaluate potential impacts on domestic energy prices and availability. - The pause may cause delays in pending or planned LNG projects, potentially affecting global energy markets and sparking political debate over climate and economic considerations. - Critics argue that the pause could prolong reliance on coal in other countries, potentially increasing carbon emissions, while supporters emphasize its focus on climate action and domestic energy security. President Biden recently announced a “temporary pause on pending approvals of liquefied natural gas exports.” This announcement comes on the heels of news that in 2023 the U.S. surpassed Qatar and Australia to become the world’s two largest LNG exporter. This decision has sparked debate and raised several key points. I will discuss the reasons behind the pause, potential implications, and next steps. Reasons for the Pause The key reason cited for the pause was climate change concerns. Natural gas, while much cleaner than coal, still emits greenhouse gases when burned. The administration believes expanding LNG infrastructure could lock in fossil fuel dependence and hinder progress toward climate goals. I have a different opinion on this, which I address below. Some have also argued that prioritizing domestic needs for natural gas should come before exporting it. The pause allows the Department of Energy to assess the potential impacts of increased exports on domestic energy prices and availability. But one significant reason for the announcement – recently acknowledged by White House climate adviser Ali Zaidi – was to address concerns of young and climate-focused voters. The administration needs these voters in the fall, and the hope is that announcing this pause will energize them to vote for Biden in the November election. After all, Biden has pledged to cut climate pollution in half by 2030, but the oil and gas industry continues to break production records during his administration. Potential Implications The U.S. currently has seven operational LNG terminals, predominantly located in Louisiana and Texas, and anticipates up to five more becoming operational in the coming years. President Biden’s action won’t impact the existing projects. However, it may cause delays for about a dozen pending or planned LNG projects, such as the significant Calcasieu Pass 2 project along Louisiana’s Gulf Coast. This project, if realized, would be the largest export terminal in the United States. In the long run, these delays might affect global energy markets, potentially leading to higher natural gas prices in countries that rely on LNG imports. The long-term economic benefits of expanded LNG exports are being evaluated. Some argue that exporting more gas would create jobs and boost the economy, while others contend it could drive up domestic energy costs and harm certain industries. The pause has ignited a political debate, with supporters of the decision praising its focus on climate and domestic energy security. At the same time, critics argue it stifles economic growth and undermines U.S. leadership in the global energy market. How the Decision Could Increase Carbon Emissions According to data from the 2023 Statistical Review of World Energy, over the past 15 years, the U.S. has experienced the largest decline in carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of any country. This reflects carbon dioxide equivalent emissions from energy, process emissions, methane, and flaring. The single biggest reason for this decline was natural gas displacing coal in power production. In 2007, coal had more than a 40% share of all power production, while natural gas held only a 20% share. By 2022, coal had significantly been displaced by natural gas. Coal’s share had fallen to 20%, and the natural gas share had increased to 40%. Because coal produces more than double the amount of carbon dioxide per unit of power production than natural gas (source), this resulted in a huge decrease in U.S. carbon emissions. Renewables were the second largest contributor to coal’s decline, but natural gas allowed coal-fired power plants to be switched to the lower-emission fuel. That would not have happened with renewables alone, at least certainly not as quickly as it did. It would be much more challenging to replace a large coal-fired power plant with renewables, for reasons of scale and reliability. In the process, U.S. carbon emissions decreased by 879 million metric tons, or 14%. Thus, natural gas can enable coal-dependent countries to slash carbon emissions much faster than could be achieved with renewables. India and China will continue to add renewable power, but if you expect them to shut down coal-fired power plants and replace them with solar plants, that’s not going to happen to any significant degree. However, they could replace that coal-fired power with natural gas – if the natural gas is available. Thus, the potential unintended consequence of this pause could be to keep countries hooked on coal longer than they need to be, and therefore increasing carbon emissions over a scenario in which these countries use LNG to displace coal. I would note that critics argue that if significant amounts of methane leak during the process of producing and transporting LNG, the carbon savings against coal may be lost. That is true but would require leaks far beyond the estimates of the Environmental Protection Agency. Further, the above emissions calculation from the Statistical Review includes estimates of associated fugitive methane emissions from the International Energy Agency. Next Steps The DOE will comprehensively review the potential impacts of LNG exports and update its analysis methods. This review is expected to take several months. The administration has invited public comments on the pause and the DOE review process. This ensures stakeholders have a voice in shaping the future of LNG exports. After the DOE review and considering public input, the administration will decide whether to lift the pause, impose permanent restrictions, or implement other policy changes related to LNG exports. Overall, President Biden’s decision to pause new LNG export terminals is a complex issue with various economic, environmental, and political considerations. The coming months will be crucial for understanding the full implications of this decision and determining the future of LNG exports in the United States. By Robert Rapier
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Feb 27, 2024 9:06:35 GMT -5
Oil trade groups file petition against Biden administration over LNG ban Jennifer A. Dlouhy, Bloomberg February 26, 2024 www.worldoil.com/news/2024/2/26/oil-trade-groups-file-petition-against-biden-administration-over-lng-ban/(Bloomberg) – Top oil industry lobbying groups set the stage for a potential lawsuit challenging the Biden administration’s pause in approving new liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. Employees look over an LNG facility under construction in Corpus Christi, Texas in December. (Photographer: Mark Felix/Bloomberg) In a petition filed Monday with the Energy Department, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and six other groups say the indefinite delay runs afoul of a legal mandate for the agency to issue permits to broadly export LNG unless there’s been a clear finding the shipments aren’t in the public interest. The petition calls the move “arbitrary and capricious” and says it violates administrative requirements in federal law — a prelude to potential litigation that could raise the same claims. The filing underscores deep industry concern over the Biden administration moratorium that threatens to disrupt plans for multibillion-dollar export projects along the US Gulf Coast — while potentially encouraging overseas rivals to boost their LNG output. Qatar on Monday announced plans to double down on its ongoing supply wave with a new project capable of liquefying and exporting 16 million tons of gas annually. Oil industry allies, including some moderate Democrats, have appealed to the administration to reverse course, and the House of Representatives passed legislation that effectively would preempt the pause. But the legislation is unlikely to pass the Senate — and even if it did, it probably would be vetoed. “At a time of geopolitical turmoil around the world, the Department of Energy’s arbitrary LNG freeze is not only unlawful, it cedes America’s energy advantage to hostile nations while jeopardizing thousands of American jobs,” Rob Jennings, an API vice president, said in a news release. “There is bipartisan recognition that this move is political, and we will continue to take any steps necessary to resume American leadership on LNG.” President Joe Biden last month ordered the halt in approving new licenses to export LNG to European, Asian and other countries that are not U.S. free-trade partners while the Energy Department scrutinizes how the shipments affect climate change, the economy and national security. Those studies are set to inform future Energy Department decisions about the path forward and pending export applications, including potentially prolonging the moratorium. Other groups signing the petition for rehearing included the American Exploration and Production Council, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas.
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Feb 29, 2024 12:28:58 GMT -5
US senators seek to reverse Biden LNG pause Proposed legislation would also restrict legal challenges to jurisdictions where export projects are located Under fire: US President Joe BidenPhoto: WHITE HOUSE Robert Stewart - North America Energy Correspondent | Baton Rouge - Published 29 February 2024, 10:51 www.upstreamonline.com/lng/us-senators-seek-to-reverse-biden-lng-pause/2-1-1605966A pair of US senators have filed legislation to weaken President Joe Biden’s pause on Department of Energy (DoE) approvals for new liquefied natural gas exports. Republican Senators John Barrasso of Wyoming and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana introduced the LNG Security Act to force the DoE to approve LNG exports to all countries that have imported or can import natural gas from Russia or Iran. The bill would also impose a 45-day deadline for DoE to approve LNG export applications once the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approves the development or construction of LNG infrastructure. You need a subscription to read this story
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Mar 4, 2024 8:50:43 GMT -5
Pennsylvania governor urges Biden administration to limit time on LNG export ban Mark Niquette and Skylar Woodhouse, Bloomberg March 01, 2024 www.worldoil.com/news/2024/3/1/pennsylvania-governor-urges-biden-administration-to-limit-time-on-lng-export-ban/(Bloomberg) – Democratic Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro said the Biden administration’s recent halt in liquefied natural gas (LNG) export licenses should be limited in time, stopping short of outright criticizing a pause that could undermine job creation in a state that’s relying on energy to drive growth. Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro Pennsylvania is the second-largest natural gas-producing state after Texas, with more than 123,000 jobs in the commonwealth supported by the sector, according to the Marcellus Shale Coalition and the Pennsylvania Independent Oil & Gas Association. “It’s my hope that that pause is limited and that their focus of whatever analysis they’re going to do is centered around making sure we create jobs in the energy space in Pennsylvania,” Shapiro said in an interview in Harrisburg, the state’s capital. The Biden administration in January halted new licenses to export U.S. LNG while it scrutinizes how the shipments affect climate change, the economy and national security. Administration officials haven’t said precisely how long the pause may be, but White House energy adviser Amos Hochstein said in an interview with Al Arabiya English posted on X on Feb. 16 it could last between 10 and 14 months. Pennsylvania Senate Democrats Bob Casey and John Fetterman have been more pointed in their criticism, saying in a joint statement last month “if this decision puts Pennsylvania energy jobs at risk, we will push the Biden administration to reverse this decision.” Shapiro said he’s an “all-of-the-above energy governor,” referring to developing and using a variety of energy resources while focusing on health and safety. He’s also singled out energy as a key driver of growth in a recently unveiled, multi-year economic development strategy, the first such comprehensive plan in almost two decades in the commonwealth.
|
|
|
Post by bjspokanimal on Mar 4, 2024 11:35:19 GMT -5
It's a shame that anti-fossil fuel interests have pushed the issue all the way to LNG restrictions, given that natural gas is the cleanest fossil fuel that the world uses. On balance, I think this export ban is beneficial to Transocean, however, since an increasing number of new gas fields discovered worldwide are offshore, including deep water, and U.S. gas production is comparatively more of an onshore industry.
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Mar 9, 2024 8:45:08 GMT -5
Biden’s Pause on New LNG Export Permits Could Last for Months By Tsvetana Paraskova - Mar 08, 2024, 8:30 AM CST oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Bidens-Pause-on-New-LNG-Export-Permits-Could-Last-for-Months.htmlThe U.S. Administration’s pause on approvals of new LNG export projects could last for several months until the U.S. Department of Energy reviews the grounds for authorizations, a DOE official told Bloomberg in an interview on Friday. At the end of January, the Biden Administration said it was pausing all pending decisions on U.S. LNG export projects until the Department of Energy can update the underlying analyses for authorizations. During the temporary pause – which is expected to affect four planned LNG export projects – DOE will carry out a new updated review on the impact of such projects on health and communities. The pause could persist until after U.S. presidential elections on November 5. During the pause, the Department of Energy will conduct new studies on the impact these projects have on health and communities. “We anticipate the analysis that’s underway now taking several months because this is an issue of such significant importance,” Brad Crabtree, Assistant Secretary for the DOE’s Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, told Bloomberg today. It will “take a significant period of time” for DOE to address comments and analysis “responsibly,” the official added. Natural gas production and LNG liquefaction for exports generate emissions, but these emissions are still 50% lower than compared to burning coal. The U.S. industry criticized the pause in permitting. The American Petroleum Institute (API) and other major industry groups, including the American Exploration and Production Council (AXPC), Center for LNG (CLNG), Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA), and LNG Allies, among others, slammed the Biden Administration’s decision to halt export project approvals. “Moving forward with a pause on new U.S. LNG export approvals would only bolster Russian influence and undercut President Biden’s own commitment to supply our allies with reliable energy, undermining American credibility and threatening American jobs,” the groups wrote in a letter to U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm. By Tsvetana Paraskova for Oilprice.com
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Mar 12, 2024 7:49:26 GMT -5
worldoil.com/magazine/2024/february-2024/2024-forecast-and-review/oil-and-gas-industry-in-for-a-tumultuous-year/Excerpt: WAR ON OIL & NATURAL GAS CONTINUES The Biden administration continues its assault on the O&G industries. Fig. 3. In late January, President Joe Biden “paused” the granting of new U.S. LNG export licenses in what appears to be an attempt to mollify certain voting blocs that he needs to win re-election in Fig 3. November. Image: Official White House photo. Notably, in January, the Biden administration “paused” approvals for pending and future applications to export LNG from new projects, an action that could defer decisions on new plants until after the November election, Fig. 3. DOE will conduct a review during the pause to assess the economic and environmental impacts of proposed LNG export projects and determine whether climate change should be considered when deciding projects’ approval. It will take months and will then be open to public comment, which will take more time. Biden stated "During this period, we will take a hard look at the impacts of LNG exports on energy costs, America's energy security, and our environment. The pause sees the climate crisis for what it is: The existential threat of our time.” This comes as DOE is deciding whether to issue a permit for a large LNG export plant in Louisiana—CP2. Indeed, CP2 is closer to becoming operational than nine other proposed LNG terminals, since it already has secured financing and customers and is awaiting federal permits. More generally, the review could have major implications for the O&G industry, for U.S. influence as an energy superpower, and for the credibility of Biden’s climate pledges and his re-election prospects. DOE reviews for LNG export permits have lengthened already under Biden to 11 months or more, from seven weeks under former President Trump. The last review of LNG export projects was in 2018, when export capacity was 4 Bcfd. That capacity has tripled and is scheduled to be higher by 2030—U.S. industry has planned $290 billion in new LNG investment over the next decade to increase capacity by 70%. The review troubles investors, who abhor risk and regulatory uncertainty. It jeopardizes new investment and will undermine efforts the U.S. has made towards energy independence. U.S. LNG growth generated protests from environmentalists and youth groups, and stopping expansion of LNG exports became a major priority for them. Activists contend that LNG projects harm local communities, lock in reliance on fossil fuels, and cause increased methane emissions. Predictably, environmentalists praised the review and canceled a February sit-in protest planned at DOE headquarters. The Vessel Project of Louisiana, which is opposed to LNG build-out, stated, "This is a milestone. It sets the stage for potential rejections and slows down progress of these projects." The youth-based Sunrise Movement stated that the pause would help Biden with young voters in November. "It needs to be seen that leaders are leading boldly and unapologetically to solve this crisis." Indeed, Biden is hoping the decision helps him win back young voters disenchanted by his approval of the Willow oil project. In announcing the pause, Biden stated, “We will heed the calls of young people and frontline communities, who are using their voices to demand action from those with the power to act.″ Industry was critical of the decision. CP2’s owner, Venture Global, stated, “It appears the administration may be putting a moratorium on the entire U.S. LNG industry. Such an action would shock the global energy market, having the impact of an economic sanction, and send a devastating signal to our allies that they can no longer rely on the U.S.” API stated, “No review is needed to understand the clear benefits of U.S. LNG exports for stabilizing global energy markets, supporting thousands of American jobs and reducing emissions around the world by transitioning countries toward cleaner fuels. Biden’s action is a win for Russia and a loss for American allies, U.S. jobs and global climate progress.'' Fig. 4. In January, the EPA proposed new methane regulations that API termed “an incoherent, confusing regulatory regime that will only stifle innovation and undermine our ability to meet rising energy demand.” Image: Public Domain; EPA Headquarters, William Jefferson Clinton Federal Building, Washington, D.C. Also in January, the administration proposed new EPA regulations that would impose fines on O&G companies for methane emissions—a de facto “natural gas tax,” that would be the first direct federal emissions tax, Fig. 4. Beginning in 2024, the regulations would require companies to pay a penalty of $900/ton of methane emitted beyond government-specified limits, with the cost/ton above the limits increasing to $1,200 in 2025 and to $1,500 in 2026. O&G producers criticized the regulations for adding complexity to the regulatory environment and increasing energy costs. The regulations complement a December 2023 EPA proposal for methane detection requirements, which independent O&G companies strongly oppose, because the increased compliance costs would put them at a disadvantage relative to the major firms. API criticized the proposal, stating, “While we support smart federal methane regulation, this proposal creates an incoherent, confusing regulatory regime that will only stifle innovation and undermine our ability to meet rising energy demand. As the world looks to U.S. energy producers to provide stability in an increasingly unstable world, this punitive tax increase is a serious misstep that undermines America’s energy advantage.” DOE also has published new appliance efficiency standards for consumer furnaces. They are scheduled to go into effect in late 2028 and require non-weatherized gas furnaces and those used in mobile homes to achieve an annual fuel utilization efficiency of 95%. The NG industry is suing DOE over these standards, citing cost and other concerns, and contending that it “effectively bans the sale of non-condensing NG furnaces.” The industry noted that DOE data verify that 30% of senior-only households, 26% of low-income households, and 27% of small businesses will experience higher costs, and 39% of households with mobile home gas furnaces would face higher costs. The National Propane Gas Association has a lawsuit pending against DOE that focuses on whether it should have established a separate product class for non-condensing appliances in its energy efficiency rulemakings. In addition, the Biden administration recently finalized a plan with the fewest offshore O&G leases ever contained in an agency’s 5-year plan and which represents a dramatic phase-down of O&G lease sales. That plan, covering 2024-2029, provides three chances to bid for rights to drill offshore and is the last offshore 2024 drilling auction that will be held. Companies will pay more than $380 million for the rights to drill on 311 tracts in the GOM—26 companies submitted bids. The sale was mandated by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. However, it required a contentious court battle in which environmentalists attempted to reduce the sale and add stipulations to protect Rice’s Whales. After environmentalists and the Biden administration agreed to restrictions on the sale and lease, Chevron, API, and the State of Louisiana filed a lawsuit, and the plaintiffs prevailed. The O&G industry supported the sale but was critical of the lack of future auctions. API stated, “Although today’s congressionally mandated lease sale is a positive step, the lack of any offshore sales in 2024 is a prime example of the administration’s failure to implement a long-term energy strategy. We urge the administration to reconsider its shortsighted approach and plan today for tomorrow’s energy demand.”
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Mar 17, 2024 10:22:18 GMT -5
Biden On Putin: 'For God's Sake, This Man Cannot Remain In Power' USA & EU on Biden's reliable energy policies: 'For God's Sake, This Man Cannot Remain In Power' This is so damn dumb. It's a near-useless effort for a few votes that does more harm than good. As Biden would say, "For God's sake man" ... NatGas is super clean by comparison to other reliable energy sources. This 'pause' makes 'zero' sense... Biden’s LNG export ban stalls projects and risks U.S. market share Ruth Liao and Stephen Stapczynski, Bloomberg March 15, 2024 (Bloomberg) – The Biden administration’s pause on new licenses for liquefied natural gas (LNG) exporters is already stalling progress for projects that were aiming to come online later this decade. Several LNG buyers have delayed signing new long-term contracts with U.S. producers until there is more clarity, according to people with knowledge of the matter. Malaysian state oil and gas company Petroliam Nasional Bhd. is in talks with Cheniere Energy Inc. and other firms, but is reluctant to commit until licenses are approved, said the people, who didn’t want to be named due to the sensitivity of discussions. Jera Co. in Japan and at least two China-based firms, are also scrutinizing U.S. projects more closely before moving forward with negotiations, the people said. Jera and Petronas didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. The U.S. — the world’s biggest exporter of the power-station and heating fuel last year — stopped approving new licenses in January to study the potential effects of increased gas production and exports on climate change, the economy and national security. The process could last months, a Department of Energy official said last week, making it tough for American producers who need to lock-in deals before they can get financing from banks. Venture Global LNG Inc.’s upcoming CP2 project in Louisiana doesn’t have the required approvals to move forward and is at risk of pushing back its final investment decision, a necessary step before major construction can begin, the people said. The “first LNG is expected in 2026, should the Federal government act without further delay to approve the project,” said Shaylyn Hynes, a spokeswoman for Venture Global, reaffirming the company’s previously stated target for commencing production. Sempra, meanwhile, has already deferred its investment decision on its planned Cameron facility in Louisiana, and Commonwealth LNG has delayed construction of an export terminal in the state. “The longer the pause lasts, the more problematic it is,” said Paul Varello, Commonwealth’s chairman and founder. Project developers aren’t able to secure an offered price from a contractor, and commitments to buyers for certain delivery dates could also slip, he said. Another issue is that U.S. exporters are unable to secure necessary debt financing commitments from banks unless they have been cleared by the Department of Energy. All of the delays are putting multi-billion dollar projects that are vying to grab a slice of booming global demand at risk. Other developments — in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates — are progressing rapidly and threatening to steal market share from the U.S. There haven’t been any major deals in the first quarter of 2024, except for a small agreement signed by Delfin LNG, which has all of the required licenses. By comparison, nearly 8 million tons per year of long-term deals were signed in in the first quarter of last year from projects in the US or Mexico.
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Mar 19, 2024 8:42:52 GMT -5
Press Release Published: Mar 18, 2024 oversight.house.gov/release/comer-fallon-higgins-probe-does-liquified-natural-gas-export-pause/Comer, Fallon, Higgins Probe DOE’s Liquified Natural Gas Export Pause WASHINGTON—House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Energy Policy, Regulatory Affairs Chairman Pat Fallon (R-Texas.), and Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) are today conducting oversight of the Biden Administration’s recent action to pause pending decisions on exports of Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) to non-Free Trade Agreement countries. In a letter to Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, the lawmakers request documents, communications, and a staff-level briefing to understand DOE’s role in executing the LNG export pause. “The Committee is concerned with DOE’s move to update its public interest analysis of LNG export applications without adequate justification, in an apparent attempt to appease liberal advocacy groups determined to destroy our nation’s traditional energy sector,” the lawmakers wrote. The Oversight Committee is conducting oversight of the Biden Administration’s all-of-government war on the domestic energy industry, including its drawdowns of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and day-one cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline. In addition to conducting oversight of possible collusion by DOE with radical environmental organizations, the Committee is also investigating the Biden Administration’s efforts to hide the influence leftist environmental groups had over U.S. foreign policy through Special Presidential Envoy for Climate (SPEC) John Kerry. “The timing of the decision, in an election year, raises the likelihood that political motivations drove the action—as in President Biden’s misuse of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) before the 2022 midterm elections and cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline on his first day in office. Further, reports indicate the Biden Administration’s action was taken at the direction of leftist environmental groups and climate activists who seek a permanent stop to all use and exports of LNG,” the lawmakers continued. “The Biden Administration appears to be weaponizing DOE’s public interest analysis and the administrative state to prolong new LNG export project approvals at the behest of leftist environmental groups.” Read the letter to DOE Secretary Jennifer Granholm here. Dear Secretary Granholm: The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is conducting oversight of the Biden Administration’s recent action to pause pending decisions on exports of Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) to non-Free Trade Agreement countries.1 American LNG projects—subject to the pause—face unprecedented hurdles for necessary permits, construction, and capitalization—all while “rivals have the approvals in hand.”2 The Department of Energy’s (DOE) determination to evaluate “whether additional [LNG] export authorization requests to non-Free Trade Agreement countries are in the public interest”3 will damage our nation’s national security and energy security should the pause continue or extend indefinitely.4 The Committee is concerned with DOE’s move to update its public interest analysis of LNG export applications without adequate justification, in an apparent attempt to appease liberal advocacy groups determined to destroy our nation’s traditional energy sector.5 The Committee is seeking information and a staff-level briefing to understand DOE’s role in executing the LNG export pause, whether there were political factors that led to this decision, and how DOE is interacting with other federal agencies regulating LNG. On February 8, 2024, DOE Deputy Secretary David Turk testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources that DOE’s public interest analysis would take “months, not years.”6 However, tasking DOE’s National Laboratories to perform economic and environmental analysis associated with the LNG export pause could take significantly longer7— jeopardizing the long planning horizons of LNG exporters and importers8—and breaks precedent for similar analyses.9 The timing of the decision, in an election year, raises the likelihood that political motivations drove the action—as in President Biden’s misuse of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) before the 2022 midterm elections and cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline on his first day in office.10 Further, reports indicate the Biden Administration’s action was taken at the direction of leftist environmental groups and climate activists who seek a permanent stop to all use and exports of LNG .11 The Wall Street Journal reports that leftist environmental group activism spurred the Biden Administration to initiate the pause—following billionaire donors’ and activists’ years-long campaign to influence the U.S. government to oppose LNG projects. The Natural Gas Act (NGA) does not define “public interest” in setting DOE’s authority to regulate LNG exports.13 But new calls to add “greenhouse gas emissions including carbon dioxide and methane, and other factors”14 to the public interest analysis significantly departs from DOE’s traditional practice of evaluating economic and national security factors in LNG public interest determinations. The Biden Administration’s “whole-of-government” approach combined with DOE’s LNG export pause raises concerns that other federal agencies with LNG duties will reduce their efforts to provide a transparent and efficient regulatory process for LNG projects and hinder further approvals. We’ve recently seen evidence of these changes as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued new guidance “to assess the impacts of natural gas infrastructure projects on climate change in its reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)” and the NGA.16 The Biden Administration appears to be weaponizing DOE’s public interest analysis and the administrative state to prolong new LNG export project approvals at the behest of leftist environmental groups. To assist the Committee’s oversight of the Biden Administration’s decision to pause LNG exports, please provide the following documents and information, covering the time period January 20, 2021 to present, no later than April 1, 2024: 1. All documents and communications between DOE and the White House, including but not limited to John Podesta and Ali Zaidi, referring or relating to the LNG exports pause; 2. All documents and communications between DOE and nongovernmental organizations referring or related to the LNG exports pause; 3. All documents and communications between DOE and the National Laboratories referring or relating to economic and environmental analysis associated with the LNG exports pause, including all drafts; 4. All documents and communications within DOE’s Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM) referring or relating to the LNG exports pause; and 5. All documents and communications between DOE and the following federal agencies referring or relating to the LNG exports pause: a. FERC; b. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration; c. Maritime Administration; d. U.S. Coast Guard; and e. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Additionally, please provide a staff-level briefing on this matter as soon as possible, but no later than March 25, 2024. Attached are instructions for producing the documents and information to the Committee. If you have any questions, please contact the Committee on Oversight and Accountability Majority staff at 202-225-5074. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the U.S. House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate, “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Sincerely, _____________________________ James Comer Chairman Committee on Oversight and Accountability
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Mar 21, 2024 10:47:14 GMT -5
One might wonder why USA LNG might not be a better alternative for India than coal... 21 Mar 2024 | 07:53 UTC Indonesia approves 2024 coal production quota of 922 mil mt: ministry www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/coal/032124-indonesia-approves-2024-coal-production-quota-of-922-mil-mt-ministryAuthor Srija Basu roy Shriparna Saha Editor Sarah Mishra Commodity Coal, Metals HIGHLIGHTS - Output quota higher than earlier set target - Participants unsure of achieving the quota - Rising domestic demand to be closely watched The Indonesian government has approved 922.14 million mt of coal production quota, popularly known as RKAB, for 2024, up nearly 30% from the targeted volume, the Energy and Mineral Resources ministry said in a statement March 20. Register Now Earlier, the government had set a target of producing 710 million mt coal in the ongoing year. Indonesia's total production hit a historical high of 775.20 million mt in 2023, exceeding the target at 694 million mt, S&P Global Commodity Insights reported Jan. 22. The development comes at a time when Asian thermal coal seaborne demand is expected to remain bearish or flat throughout the year amid slow economic activities in China, higher domestic production in India and efforts to curb usage of coal in power generation in several South and Northeast Asian countries. This has resulted in prices remaining rangebound so far this year. According to S&P Global data, the average price of FOB Kalimantan 4,200 kcal/kg GAR was $57.47/mt in January-February of 2024, as compared to $77.92/mt in the year-ago period. The grade was assessed at $56.75/mt on March 20. Even though the coal output in 2023 surpassed the announced target, market participants believe it could be challenging for the producers to achieve the approved RKAB for the current year. An Indonesia-based producer said the approved quota is the maximum production if all miners operate at full capacity, but most of the miners usually meet 80% of the RKAB quota. The ministry said out of the total 883 RKAB proposals, 587 mining companies received approvals, while 121 applications were rejected due to technical reasons. The government also approved 917.16 million mt of production quota for 2025, and 902.97 million mt for 2026. According to an Indonesia-based trader, the country does not have the infrastructure to generate over 900 million mt of coal at the moment. "If the producers want to increase their production by 18%-20% on a yearly basis, they will need to stock more excavators, dump trucks, barges, vessels and many more which will also add to their operating cost," the trader said, adding this could be possible if the demand outlook for 2024 was firmer. Indonesia does not have manufacturing capacity for some of these tools such as the excavators and they mostly import it from China, Japan and South Korea, the trader added. Sources said since China is the major driver of demand and currently the Chinese economy is barely showing any signs of recovery, the market does not see a significant rise in the country's overall import. A balance between demand and supply is required to stabilize the market prices, a second Indonesia-based trader said, adding considering the current outlook of the market, over 900 million mt production seems to be an oversupply which could impact prices. Weather keeps supply tight, domestic needs under watch On an average, Indonesia roughly produces 60 million-65 million mt of coal monthly. However, many mines, especially in Sumatra and South Kalimantan region, faced production loss in the first quarter due to unusually heavy rains that has kept supply tight. "Mines in the Jambi region are especially facing the adverse impact and currently producing 20%-25% of their normal production capacity," the second trader pointed out, adding under these circumstances it is highly unlikely to cross 900 million mt of output quota. Sources said higher approved quota could be government's attempt to stabilize the Indonesian currency by projecting chances of higher exports than last year. "Only after the first half of the year, we will get clarity on the production estimates and miners will likely revise their output quota mid of year as per the demand," another Indonesia-based producer said. The participants also said that the approval of higher RKAB could also be due to the rising demand of the nickel smelters. "The producers supplied around 60 million mt to the smelters in 2023, while this year the supply could rise up to 90-100 million mt as many new smelters will start operation in the country," the first Indonesian trader said. According to MINERBA One Data (MODI), Indonesia has produced 151.25 million mt of coal so far in 2024.
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Mar 21, 2024 12:02:35 GMT -5
Electric vehicle sales set to rise under new EPA tailpipe pollution rule Cathy Landry - March 20, 2024 www.ogj.com/general-interest/government/article/14310568/electric-vehicle-sales-set-to-rise-under-new-epa-tailpipe-pollution-ruleElectric vehicle (EV) sales are set to rise in the 2030s under a far-reaching climate regulation issued by the Biden administration on Mar. 20. Under the final rule, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set national pollution standards for passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles for model years 2027 through 2032 and beyond. While the new rules do not mandate that automakers transform fleets to sell more EVs by a certain date, those automakers could build more EVs to comply with stricter emissions standards. The new standards would prevent more than 7 billion tonnes of carbon emissions by 2055, provide nearly $100 billion of annual net benefits to society, and avert 2,500 premature deaths from auto pollution by reducing emissions of fine particulate matter from gasoline-powered vehicles by more than 95%, EPA said. The transportation sector represents nearly 40% of US climate emissions, the single is the largest source, EPA said. The proposed rule moves the Biden administration a step closer toward its goal to reduce emissions by 50-52% of 2005 levels by 2030. Unlike 2023’s stricter proposed rule, automakers are not required to dramatically boost EV sales until after 2030 and they can use plug-in hybrid gasoline-electric vehicles as well as all-electric vehicles to meet new standards. Automakers may choose to produce 30-56% of new light-duty vehicle sales as battery-electric vehicles, with the rest consisting of a mix of other clean vehicle technology, according to an EPA fact sheet. The rule would continue to allow for gasoline-fueled vehicle sales. The Biden administration eased the final standards after fierce opposition from the automotive unions, a key election-year constituency, and concerns about fueling infrastructure not keeping pace with EV growth. EPA projects US auto manufacturing employment to grow because of the new standards. “Moderating the pace of EV adoption in 2027, 2028, 2029 and 2030 was the right call because it prioritizes more reasonable electrification targets in the next few (very critical) years of the EV transition, said John Bozzella, president and chief executive officer of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a trade group representing Ford, General Motors, and Toyota, among others. “These adjusted EV targets – still a stretch goal – should give the market and supply chains a chance to catch up. It buys some time for more public charging to come online, and the industrial incentives and policies of the Inflation Reduction Act to do their thing.” Several Republican-led states and oil and gas industry representatives have indicated they will challenge the rule. “At a time when millions of Americans are struggling with high costs and inflation, the Biden administration has finalized a regulation that will unequivocally eliminate most new gas cars and traditional hybrids from the US market in less than a decade, the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers and the American Petroleum Institute said in a joint statement. “This regulation will make new gas-powered vehicles unavailable or prohibitively expensive for most Americans…[O]ur organizations are certainly prepared to challenge it in court.” Republicans in Congress are searching for ways to block the new regulations. The rule comes as sales of EVs are slowing as consumers opt for cheaper hybrids and plug-in hybrids. Fourth-quarter 2023 EV sales increased 40%, down from a 49% jump in third-quarter 2023 and a 52% spike in the second quarter, according to Kelley’s Blue Book.
|
|
|
Post by bjspokanimal on Mar 21, 2024 14:18:11 GMT -5
Re: Biden's handlers' tailpipe rule, freedom of choice in the matter will be restored for auto buyers if Biden loses the election. If that happens, and Bob Ferguson loses the the Governors race in Washington State, I'll consider that to be a successful moon shot, given how democrat-socialist rule over Washington State is pretty much institutionalized nowadays.
|
|
|
Post by kingrig on Mar 21, 2024 15:22:05 GMT -5
Re: Biden's handlers' tailpipe rule, freedom of choice in the matter will be restored for auto buyers if Biden loses the election. If that happens, and Bob Ferguson loses the the Governors race in Washington State, I'll consider that to be a successful moon shot, given how democrat-socialist rule over Washington State is pretty much institutionalized nowadays. please go to the political thread for your fascist political views
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Mar 21, 2024 15:40:09 GMT -5
Re: Biden's handlers' tailpipe rule, freedom of choice in the matter will be restored for auto buyers if Biden loses the election. If that happens, and Bob Ferguson loses the the Governors race in Washington State, I'll consider that to be a successful moon shot, given how democrat-socialist rule over Washington State is pretty much institutionalized nowadays. please go to the political thread for your fascist political views Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy. ///////// Is that what you meant by fascism? If so, it would appear to me team Biden is doing just that with his uneconomical and mandated money losing policies regarding EVs as well as unreliable energy policies… that very few besides the far left want.
|
|
|
Post by bjspokanimal on Mar 21, 2024 16:12:20 GMT -5
The forcing of EV adoption on Americans has a direct impact on oil demand and Transocean's future. I happen to have an opinion on that and the players, both in WA and in the U.S. in general, who are imposing those regulations on the industry that directly affects Transocean's industry.
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Mar 21, 2024 17:18:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Mar 22, 2024 5:21:42 GMT -5
Seems like more and more people are thinking it makes 'zero' cents to pander to the far-left's ESG policies. This is especially a head scratcher because our allies need our clean burning NatGas, planned on getting it, businesses planned infrastructure, workers were getting jobs to support it, and the USA said would be there to counter Poo-tin. And now this... 16 States Sue Federal Government Over LNG Permitting PauseBy Irina Slav - Mar 22, 2024, 4:40 AM CDT oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/16-States-Sue-Federal-Government-Over-LNG-Permitting-Pause.html16 states are suing the federal government for the decision to “pause” new LNG export capacity permitting. The plaintiffs, all Republican-led, include Texas and Louisiana, as well as Florida, claim that the suspension of new LNG export permits would affect the U.S. economy negatively and interfere with the supply of gas to allies in Europe that are trying to quit Russian gas. The states also argued that the decision to halt permitting puts billions of dollars in investments in jeopardy, Reuters noted in a report on the news. “The ban will drive billions of dollars in investment away from Texas, hinder our ability to maximize revenue for public schools, force Texas producers to flare excess natural gas instead of taking it to market, and annihilate critical jobs,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement. Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said that the pause on LNG permits would “disrupt the development and production of natural gas and gives us no choice but to turn to the courts to enforce the law.” President Biden effected what the White House called a pause on new LNG export capacity permits in late January under pressure from climate activists. Those claimed that LNG is even worse for the environment than coal and any new export capacity will aggravate what they see as an already grave situation with the earth’s climate. The news of the review did not put activists at ease, however. On the contrary, the attack continued, with calls for an end to the LNG industry because of its polluting impact on coastal communities in Louisiana, according to those same communities, and because it’s bad for the global climate, according to other activists, among them both the author of the study and several prominent green organizations. The energy industry meanwhile cried foul, with seven organizations led by the American Petroleum Institute filing a petition with the Department of Energy saying that the permit suspension violated the department’s mandate to permit capacity expansion in the absence of clear evidence that this would go against the public interest. By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com
|
|
|
Post by bjspokanimal on Mar 22, 2024 12:43:07 GMT -5
kingrig; You've questioned the transformation of the bulk of the democratic party to the democrat-socialist party. The answer to that is O.T. so please see the O.T. board for an explanation.
|
|
|
Post by pyromancer157 on Mar 22, 2024 18:03:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by kingrig on Mar 22, 2024 18:11:44 GMT -5
@ kingrig; You've questioned the transformation of the bulk of the democratic party to the democrat-socialist party. The answer to that is O.T. so please see the O.T. board for an explanation. interesting that my response was deleted
|
|