Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Snowshoe who wrote (259223)	7/25/2008 7:41:19 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793820

build LNG project I don't have any details handy, but I know the Greens are very much opposed to building any LNG ports in this country. All sorts of excuses, but it's really just their opposition to any kind of energy use.

To: Snowshoe who wrote (259223)	7/25/2008 7:49:22 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793820

Why is it silly if the Asians are willing to pay more for our LNG than Americans? That ain't gonna fly. The lower 48 is going to be importing more LNG in the future and the feds are not gonna go for importing LNG from Qatar while Alaskan LNG goes to Japan. Just being realistic there. The federal government hasn't allowed Alaskan crude (except for a very small amount in the '90's) to go to Asia. So I'm not expecting they'll let Alaskan gas go there either. there's a huge boom in "tight" shale gas plays right now, such as the Barnett Shale in Texas. This natural gas is much closer to market than the Alaska gas, so why the hurry to build an Alaska gas pipeline? I don't detect any urgency on the part of the big oil companies. I don't know about the hurry part and can't speak for any oil companies - not even the one I work for - but I do KNOW that despite the increased ability to get gas out of shale, we are gonna need more natural gas in coming years than we can produce in the US. Increasingly we're going to become bigger and bigger importers of LNG - some of it from the ME. Billions are being spent right now (and billions more spending is planned) to build the infrastructure for increased LNG imports. Two terminals are being built in Pt Arthur - I believe they're right across the Pt Arthur ship channel from one another and literally within eyesight of one another. Other terminals are planned both on the Gulf coast and in the NE. The difference is the Gulf coast LNG terminals are onshore and are welcomed by the local public while the northeast terminals are going to be 20 miles out (so the locals can't see them) with the gas piped to shore. The LNG business is gonna get a LOT bigger. Both here and in Europe. What I wrote above about the US is true of Europe too. New terminals are under construction there too - in the Adriatic, in Spain, England ... Ironically, environmentalists and alternative energy proponents are part of the reason for this. Everytime people kill off a coal plant or prevent a nuclear plant, they're making more demand for natural gas. Subsidies for wind power also mean more demand for natural gas. Wind works, even in the best places like W Tx, only about 30% of the time and the downtimes are unpredictable. Natural gas is the ideal backup fuel cause you can ramp up or down quicker with gas. So wind power is really natural gas generated power with wind added on. (This tells a lot about Boone Pickens plan btw.) And subsidizing hybrid and electric vehicles, that will produce demand for natural gas too. The electricity has to come from somewhere and if they're not letting the utilities build new coal and nuke plants, they're gonna have to go natural gas.