Energy Policy: Is the Obama Administration Changing Its Tune On Natural Gas?


Natural gas currently satisfies nearly a quarter of the country’s total energy needs. Gas is clean-burning and has less environmental impact than either oil or coal. We have a secure and abundant supply in North America, the technology to drill and produce it efficiently, and a robust distribution network to deliver it to market. Natural gas drilling could generate new, good-paying jobs by the thousands, and not two years from now, but now. At current prices, gas delivers the same energy as a barrel of oil at a third of the cost. What’s not to like?

Policy makers have conflated natural gas with oil and coal as “fossil fuels”, fuels of a bygone era. When candidates intone, “We must end our dependence on fossil fuels,” most of us nod and uncritically accept the notion. We project oil’s perceived shortcomings onto natural gas (“Peak Oil”, dependence on the Middle East, balance of trade deficits, and the environmental threat of spills), when none of those issues is relevant to natural gas. With the arguable exception of nuclear fission, the steady blue flame of natural gas represents the closest thing we have to an ideal fuel.

Until now, the Obama Administration’s “Green Jobs” rhetoric and the stated commitment to wind and solar had the future for natural gas looking mighty bleak, despite the obvious advantages. Just last April, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said that using natural gas as a transportation fuel “will put a strain on natural gas for industrial uses, for heating, and other things“.

Lately, however, there are signs that the Obama Administration might be changing its tune.

Six months of energy company-bashing rhetoric was red meat for the Greens and Watermelons, but somewhere there must be some grown-ups around who realize that they have a country to run. Brownouts and blackouts tend to be unpopular with even the Greenest of voters. At this point, the planners have figured out that it is impractical impossible to build a sufficient number of solar cells and windmills to take up the slack if we were to forsake traditional fuels. They also realize that, even though combustion of natural gas releases carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, per unit of energy it’s a third less than oil and half that of coal. Those who are serious about reducing atmospheric CO2 are starting to realize that they can have more impact, quicker, if natural gas to displaces oil as a transportation fuel. The alternative is to wait for solar and wind to ramp up from nearly zero.

NPC to study future transport fuels, N. American oil and gas

US Energy Secretary Steven Chu would like the National Petroleum Council to conduct studies on future transportation fuels and on prudent development of North American oil and gas resources, NPC members learned at their Sept. 17 meeting.

“It is the policy objective of the United States to protect our nation from the serious economic and strategic risks associated with our excessive reliance on foreign oil and the destabilizing effects of a changing climate,” Chu said in a Sept. 16 letter to NPC Chairman Claiborne P. Deming, who also is chairman of Murphy Oil Corp.

All energy uses and supply sources must be reexamined in order to enable the transition toward a lower carbon, more sustainable energy mix. Transitions in the energy sector will require the replacement of vehicles, more efficient buildings and industrial facilities, and large-scale deployment of new forms of energy,” the secretary continued.

For the future transportation fuels study, he asked the council to analyze US auto, truck, air, rail, and waterborne transport fuels prospects through 2030. “The study should address fuel demand, source, manufacturing, distribution, and infrastructure,” he indicated. …

For the North American resource development study, he asked NPC to reassess the production supply chain and infrastructure potential, and the contribution that gas can make in a transition to a lower-carbon fuel mix. [It sounds like he's been reading Vladimir. - ed.]

“Your study should describe the operating practices and technologies that will be used to minimize environmental impacts, and also describe the role of technology in expanding accessible resources,” Chu said. “Of particular interest is the council’s advice on policy options that would allow prudent development of North American natural gas and oil resources consistent with government objectives of environmental protection, economic growth, and national security.”

[emphasis added]

NPR has noticed, too. They’re running a three-part series on natural gas:

Rediscovering Natural Gas By Hitting Rock Bottom (Sept 22)

Who’s Looking At Natural Gas Now? Big Oil (Sept 23)

With Little Clout, Natural Gas Lobby Strikes Out (Sept 24)


Category: , ,

RSS feed

10 Comments Leave a comment

You can't trust anything these guys say

bk (Diary) Thursday, September 24th at 6:41AM EST (link)

For example, this statement implies nukes are on the table and we know darn good and well there will never be any ‘nookular’ permits issued under Obama’s watch.

All energy uses and supply sources must be reexamined in order to enable the transition toward a lower carbon, more sustainable energy mix.

The NRC is in the license reveiw on 30

JoeG Thursday, September 24th at 9:41AM EST (link)

9 are scheduled to complete in 2011. We’ll see the level of interference from above.

 
 

General

howardkiernan Thursday, September 24th at 6:43AM EST (link)

I believe it was over 20 years ago that an insurance company with which I had a with-profits life policy said that one of their investments was in some natural gas fields in Oklahoma. However, that company went into some form of wind-up process in which the investors in the with-profits policy would be able to continue if so desired. Because the prospects for returns did not look good overall, I simply abandoned the policy. It might have been worth continuing, however, if I had been close to the time of maturity. The reason for mentioning it now is to make the point that people have been talking about the potential for American natural gas for a long time, some may have been making a little money in this area, but for a foreign investor it would be, I believe, an investment involving calculated risk, not a “sure-fire success”.

Having said that, any developments on this front will be of considerable interest to me in the future.

 

Really? Is he now really following the platform and policy advice of that "irrelevant" woman. Where's the machismo of the Won then?

Rod_Patrick (Diary) Thursday, September 24th at 6:44AM EST (link)

LOLOL! That woman is really into the head of the Won, big time.

But if that happens, I will salute the Won. At least he has the nerve to admit that the Dems’ energy policies are nothing but a WACK JOB. The Won must outrightly give up his utopian Renewable Energy dream. It’s just a hallucination, after all.

Sadly, it will further embolden the early suspicion of many people. The Won has no official policy stand or belief. He just copies and does what others are dictating him.

The Won is really nothing but a low-class beta-male: A WEAKLING.

It’s just a shame that Bush2 didn’t pursue that energy policy path the way he pursued the Iraq war. Missed opportunities? [This is in relation to GC's different idea that giving tips to the Won is bad for conservatism].

Nevertheless, a vigorous natural gas industry will be a good thing for America, regardless of the affiliation of the President pursuing it. The irrelevant woman has proven the same to be quite true.

 

The Methane Administration

jeannieology (Diary) Thursday, September 24th at 9:32AM EST (link)

Natural Gas is something they should support as everytime the President opens his mouth the room is filled with methane

www.jeannie-ology.com

 

Even Bill Ritter has changed his tune.

NightTwister (Diary) Thursday, September 24th at 10:42AM EST (link)

Natural gas is where the Western Slope is going to sing

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. – Winston Churchill

 

Nice little dichotomy

mustango (Diary) Thursday, September 24th at 10:46AM EST (link)

Nice little dichotomy the Dems have set up for themselves. Somehow, there’s too much methane being generated for the health of the planet, yet not enough for it to qualify as a renewable resource.

“I just miss — I miss being anonymous.” — Barack Obama

I fully sympathize, Mr. President. I miss you being anonymous too.

 

Anybody seen T. Boone Pickens?

Cargosquid (Diary) Thursday, September 24th at 1:40PM EST (link)

He seems to have some influence with the administration. And GE. But, I repeat myself….

 

I heard there's new natural gas line

dsmurf (Diary) Friday, September 25th at 8:16AM EST (link)

going into GA. Any news that would help?

I like the technicals on the weekly charts for UNG, and that UNG was up on a distribution day for most indexes yesterday.

 

A Caveat

leehazel Friday, September 25th at 7:14PM EST (link)

Great article and right on with respect to the multi use fuel, Natural Gas.

All that was said about its being BTU wise as good as oil and price wise somewhat cheaper than oil is correct.

This can not be left alone. The environmental wackos will be all over this like stink. The bugaboo will be the Ubiquitous Carbon Footprint. It will be interesting to see how the administration will dance around this one.

We should have had the bulk of our commercial transportation running on natural gas for years. All it took was one very tragic urban explosion and similar to the hatchet job done on Nuclear Energy, Natural Gas became a pariah.

We really need to clean up education in this country so that the public is better informed and can see through the ridiculous claims of the truly uninformed, but hysterical, press (aka MSM, Old Media, Passe Media Systems).

PC is Thought Control
LEE