Posted on 02/22/2020 8:15:00 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
With low liquid natural gas (LNG) prices making U.S. exports an increasingly attractive option for other nations’ electricity generation, industrial processes, and space heating, a string of LNG infrastructure projects around the world are indicating where the LNG market could develop in the coming years.
Indeed, if the Trump administration’s LNG policy of facilitating the development of pipelines and export terminals continues to be mirrored by the construction of corresponding port, storage, and regasification infrastructure internationally, a host of new markets could open up for American fuel products.
Surviving Reduced Demand and Low Prices It remains to be seen, however, whether U.S. gas companies can weather the storm of historically low prices exacerbated by a mild winter across Europe and Asia and a fall-off in Chinese demand as a result of the coronavirus.
Shares in several U.S. LNG firms fell this week, with supply-side gluts and suspended orders driving prices down. Stocks in companies such as Cheniere Energy Inc. and Tellurian Inc. fell Thursday as major LNG importer China National Offshore Oil Corp. suspended a number of delivery contracts, citing force majeure.
Low prices in recent months, however, have piqued the interest of potential customers around the world and spurred investment plans in LNG terminals and regasification infrastructure.
Long-Term Outlook Positive A report (pdf) from fossil fuel giant Shell this week was overwhelmingly positive about LNG’s prospects. Shell’s Integrated Gas and New Energies Director Maarten Wetselaar said: “Record supply investments will meet people’s growing need for the most flexible and cleanest-burning fossil fuel. While we see weak market conditions today due to record new supply coming in, two successive mild winters, and the coronavirus situation, we expect equilibrium to return, driven by a combination of continued demand growth and reduction in new supply coming on-stream until the mid-2020s.”
(Excerpt) Read more at theepochtimes.com ...
Lower regulation, lower taxes plus cheap, abundant energy means prosperity for now and the future ... so long as Democrats stay out of power.
No problem here. Once burknee sanDUHs wins in Novembuh, all that natural gas will be trapped in the ground forevuh. :-)
We have PROPANE in our neighborhood. It is about $300 more per month to use propane than to use natural gas - water heater and Central heat and stove top. It was $20 a month on the Texas gulf coast in the summer and $50 to $60 in the winter - per month. It is ridiculous! The lady who sold us the house, she worked for builder, we had it built... said Propane is cheaper than natural gas. LIAR! My husband is retired chemical engineer. He knew she was lying. So we keep the heat LOW and use electric space heaters. we unplug them when not in use!
Going to need to consider subscribing to Epoch Times. This is a well written article.
Until hydrogen can be extracted and distributed in a similar manner, and in a cost-competitive manner, Liquified Natural Gas, primarily methane, is a most useful and highly versatile fuel for the industrial complex, with clean burn, relatively high caloric potential, and as a liquid, somewhat more safe for handling.
No wonder the Democrats want to choke off its production. TOO much prosperity is the bane of their existence. They are only able to use the politics of scarcity and envy, and plentiful cheap energy destroys their whole argument.
Eliminating fracking and reducing natural gas production would be the biggest thing the US could do to aid Russia and Putin. Which candidates wants to do that and could be accused of being Russia’s puppets? Which current President and candidate wants to continue drilling so is Putin’s worst nightmare?
Gee, who knew hydrocarbons work as an efficient supply of fuel?
Only see one problem with this.....On my home heating bills for natural gas, the charge for the gas is very small, but all the various added charges, taxes, etc., etc. added up to a $100 monthly bill. What I need to know is what it actually costs my gas company in comparison to what they are charging me. Seems I must be paying for a lot of blue sky here. What it seemed to be showing me is that my total bill would still have been about $85 even if the gas was free. So...I seem to spending a lot on nothing more than service charges & taxes. This makes no sense to me.
Cheniere is cruising for a bruising. $30b in debt on a revenue base of $9b.
There is a considerable amount of infrastructure required to deliver that gas to your home. It’s not cheap to build and it requires regular maintenance.
L
Meanwhile, construction is in process in lots of places in Louisiana and Texas preparing export facilities for the LNG
Ditto South korea except import facility
Shouldn’t we be keeping our oil gas for us? Shouldn’t we keep our reserves for us to keep domestic demand satisfied and keep our prices low? Why give our oil and gas to foreigners? We are 100% energy independent we keep it here and we do not need the Middle East.
/s...for those who don’t get it...
sounds like my outrageous monthly water bill here in MA..
I you are thinking of extracting hydrogen from the ground for use as a fuel, that is never going to happen. There is no source of free hydrogen in nature. The closest we can come, and it is very common, is a water well, or even a river, which are plentiful sources of "pre-burned" hydrogen -- already combined with oxygen.
The next best source is oil and gas wells which deliver hydrogen combined with carbon -- useful fuels that we already exploit.
The idea of a "hydrogen economy" always involves manufacture of hydrogen from something else.
Potential source of hydrogen - the production of “syngas” by shooting jets of water into coke, derived from either petroleum or coal, while the coke is heated to incandescence. This breaks down the water into a molecule of H2 gas and CO, carbon monoxide, when it comes in contact with the heated carbon atom that makes up the coke.
This requires heat from the coke burning, which it is already doing if incandescent and in the presence of forced induction oxygen.
The syngas, mixture of molecular hydrogen and carbon monoxide, are the feedstocks for the Fischer-Tropsch process, produced from coal, natural gas, or biomass in a process known as gasification. The Fischer–Tropsch process then converts these gases into a synthetic lubrication oil and synthetic fuel.
The carbon monoxide, by itself, is a reasonably good fuel, and if separated from the hydrogen molecules, the hydrogen molecules are another commodity, and also a very good fuel. This is probably one of the more efficient ways to produce free hydrogen, which, unlike electrolysis of water, actually results in MORE energy than what is lost in the process.
Of course, if electricity were cheap enough, it would not matter how the hydrogen was produced.
Yup, the mixture of hydrogen and CO was called "synthesis gas" when I learned about if back in the mid 1960s, and it had been in use for decades, maybe a century.
But this is a manufactured hydrogen source, not an "extracted" one like your original post talked about.
There are no extractable hydrogen resources on this earth.
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.