Posted on 02/25/2020 9:05:55 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The U.S. Energy Information Administration just announced some spectacular news that should be banner headlines across the country: The price of natural gas has fallen to its lowest February level in 20 years. The data shows that natural gas prices fell to $1.77 per million British thermal units. In inflation-adjusted terms, the price of gas has plunged by some 80% since its high of $13.60 12 years ago. The price is down 90% since 2005, when prices hit nearly $20. (Quick: Can you think of anything else that now costs one-tenth of what it did 15 years ago?)
The Energy Information Administration also reports that U.S. natural gas production has hit an all-time high this year.
The shale oil and gas revolution keeps rolling on -- but no one is talking about it. This boom in production has affected the economy of every state, from Ohio and Pennsylvania to Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado and the Dakotas. By the way, oil prices have also fallen considerably, bringing gas prices at the pump to nearly $2 a gallon in some states. Prices are so low now that the drillers aren't making any money and are starting to shut down wells. They are victims of their own success.
Today's bargain-basement prices are partly due to moderate temperatures on the East Coast this winter, but this has been a long-term trend of cheaper and cheaper energy. America is now the Saudi Arabia of natural gas, and we are exporting more throughout the world than at any previous time in our history. It's hard to believe that a decade ago, we were importing natural gas. Thanks to fracking and horizontal drilling technologies that keep getting more and more efficient, we now have hundreds of years of supply of this fuel.
This spectacular tumble in natural gas prices has been a multibillion-dollar godsend to consumers, homeowners, manufacturers and other businesses. Just last week, a major Texas utility announced it would be sending homeowners cash-back checks because electricity and home heating costs are falling so rapidly. Expect more to do the same in the coming months.
Meanwhile, the United States continues to reduce its carbon emissions into the atmosphere at a faster pace than virtually any other country in the world. This is because natural gas is not just cheap. It is one of the cleanest ways to produce scalable and dependable electric power for a nation of 329 million people. We don't need brownouts in America as we saw in California, and natural gas is an excellent way to make sure the lights don't go out.
It would be hard to find anything NOT to like about this great American success story. We've achieved energy independence; reliable and inexhaustible supply; low prices; reduced power of the Middle East, Russia and other OPEC nations; and cleaner air than at any other time in at least a century.
Yet liberal environmentalists are grousing about this good news. A recent Bloomberg news story exclaims in its headline: "Cheap Gas Imperils Climate Fight by Undercutting Wind and Solar."
"Gas is such a bargain that it's being viewed less as a bridge fossil fuel, driving the world away from dirtier coal toward a clean-energy future," the story tells us, "and more as a hurdle that could slow the trip down. Some forecasters are predicting prices will stay low for years, making it tough for states, cities and utilities to achieve their goals of being zero-carbon in power production by 2050 or earlier." Ravina Advani, head of renewable energy at BNP Paribas, complained: "The fact that there's an abundance of it makes the move to complete decarbonization much harder ... (Gas is) reliable, and it's cheap."
And that is bad news, why, exactly? It's like saying a cure for the coronavirus is bad for hospitals and doctors.
Maybe it is high time we admit we have found, for now, the great energy source of the next few decades and celebrate that America is endowed with a vital resource that is abundant and affordable -- just like our best-in-the-world farmland. The left talks about eradicating "poverty," but "energy poverty" is a primary source of deprivation around the world. Now, there is an obvious solution: Natural gas could easily be the primary source of power production for the world as a whole, slashing costs for the poor everywhere on the planet, from sub-Saharan Africa to Bangladesh. Instead, politicians and government bureaucrats around the world are trying to force-feed the world expensive, unreliable and unscalable wind and solar power. The African Development Bank, for example, is only financing "green energy" projects, not coal or natural gas. It is substituting a cheap form of clean energy for a costly "green" alternative. Why?
In the U.S., this foolishness is happening every day as the federal government, in addition to state governments, is massively subsidizing wind and solar power -- even though they are, in most places, only niche sources of fuel. With more than $100 billion spent already, less than 10% of our energy comes from the wind and the sun, with most of the other 90% coming from good old-fashioned fossil fuels. For all the talk about the falling costs of solar and wind power -- and yes, they are falling -- without billions of dollars of cash subsidies and tax breaks for the "renewable" energy sector, along with mandates requiring utilities to buy the power at any cost, wind and solar energy would be hopelessly expensive in most areas of the country. As a result, they would quickly surrender market share to natural gas and clean coal. (Don't look now, but coal prices are falling, too.)
It's time to get smart about energy and climate change and throw asunder taxpayer subsidies doled out to all forms of energy production. Let the market, not politicians and environmental groups, choose the safest, cheapest and most reliable energy source. Everyone is making a big bet on battery-operated cars and trucks. But who's to say that trucks and buses fueled by natural gas won't be the wave of the future? No one knows what makes the most sense or where the future will lead us. Nuclear power has great promise. But for now, the markets are shouting out for natural gas on a grander scale.
Fifteen years ago, no one would have thought we would have a superabundance of this wonder-fuel today. But we do. No one is more surprised than politicians. Why do we let them keep betting the farm on the wrong horse?
People such a Greta and Al Gore are against any “fossil fuels”, so they will protest development of natural gas.
An irony is that natural gas is a clean burning fuel, producing virtually no pollution, yet the enviro activists protest.
Similarly, they protest nuclesr, when nuclear produces no greenhouse gases.
producing virtually no pollution,
you and I may know better but they are convinced.
The left doesn’t care. They want to return the USA to pre-industrial times.
I never knew Stephen Moore was a hoaxer.
The left doesn’t care. They want to return the USA to pre-industrial times.
—
They want to return the earth to pre-Roman populations.
Ping.
RE: An irony is that natural gas is a clean burning fuel, producing virtually no pollution, yet the enviro activists protest. Similarly, they protest nuclear, when nuclear produces no greenhouse gases.
_________________________________________________________
OK, for the purposes of discussoon, I will play devil’s advocate for the greenies:
1) NATURAL GAS: Burning natural gas does produce nitrogen oxides (NOx), which are precursors to smog, even if at lower levels.
* Fracking for natural gas uses huge amounts of water, which must be transported to the site at significant environmental cost.
* As well as earth tremor concerns, environmentalists say potentially carcinogenic chemicals may escape during drilling and contaminate groundwater around the fracking site.
2) Nuclear Energy:
* Problem of where to store the nuclear waste material
* Remember Fukushima, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl? All we need is one earthquake and tsunami.
(I am just echoing what I hear from the Greenies for the purpose of discussion. Go ahead and refute them ).
Here in Kentucky, NG is really giving coal a run for its money. I’m in the industry.
We have country property where a NG line passed, and we hooked up. Dirt cheap heat, no eyesore tank, and, best of all, no chimney to wick half the heat up and away and occupy space on all three floors.
No one shows the huge disposal site for windmill props. Lifetime limited.
“This boom in production has affected the economy of every state, from Ohio and Pennsylvania to Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado and the Dakotas”
Meanwhile, in New York state the economy is floundering. Especially, down along the PA border. NY banned fracking. Across the border in PA, things are good. Yet, they wonder why people continue to leave New York.
There is so much natural gas in western and central New York that it literally leaks out of the ground in spots:
This was about a mile from where I grew up.
This simply isn’t the case when you’re dealing with energy derived from natural sources like wind and sunlight. This is why those forms of energy always require a backup source of energy — which is invariably fossil fuel based — for all the times when the wind doesn’t blow and/or the sun doesn’t shine.
For years I’ve said that I would live long enough to see the windmills dismantled.
Little did I know that the windmill blades were the weak link.
I think I’ll live long enough to see my prediction come true.
Converted to natural gas two years ago. Kicking myself I didn’t do it sooner.
2) Nuclear Energy: Problem of where to store the nuclear waste materialThe answer is simple: don't store it, use it up in liquid-salt reactors. I'm told by people who claim to be "experts" that liquid-salt reactors are not ready. Interestingly, the Hanford people has a working reactor more than fifty years ago. No, it wasn't perfect, but neither were fission reactors when they were first brought up.
(Reason for abandoning liquid-salt reactions using thorium? No Plutonium.)
Bttt.
5.56mm
For every gigawatt of solar or wind power generation that is put into operation, an ADDITIONAL gigawatt of natural gas power generation has to be standing by as backup power, both for when the demand goes beyond the baseline already going out on the grid, and for when either or both solar and wind fail.
Why not just build the natural gas power generation, and dispense altogether with the (subsidized) solar and wind power schemes?
Because it is written into law in many venues already, that’s why. This requirement ends up INCREASING the cost of power generation, even if most of the time they are underperforming. And neither solar nor wind power generation escapes the need for constant maintenance.
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.