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

To: DakotaGator

Cost of US regulation is certainly a factor.

But what I had read in previous discussion, before Shell even proposed this plant (they have two others in Qatar and Indonesia) was the strong Natural Gas Demand in the US compared to the production rate.


6 posted on 12/17/2013 5:51:47 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: thackney

Regulatory costs in the US are a drag, to be sure. But it seems to me the greater risk to their hefty $20B outlay was currency risk. In other words, how strong will the dollar remain over the life of the investment, and in the face of that, could they justify it to the shareholders.


9 posted on 12/17/2013 6:01:59 AM PST by Gulf War One
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: thackney

Indeed. I do not doubt the massive American demand for Natural Gas. But instinct is telling me that rational companies have decided the expense and uncertainty caused by Democrats’ hatred of hydrocarbon fuel preclude development of the source.

I suspect our irrational federal government has become the greatest risk for companies such as Shell.


11 posted on 12/17/2013 6:09:03 AM PST by DakotaGator (Weep for the lost Republic! And keep your powder dry!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

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