Potentially Powerful Pipeline Precedents

Fracking (horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing) has unleashed bounties of US oil and natural gas, dramatically reduced energy prices from their historic 2008 peak, saved families and industries billions of dollars annually, helped create and sustain millions of American jobs, made the United States stronger militarily and turned it into a net energy exporter.

Those fixated on alleged climate dangers from fossil fuels don’t care. In fact, they are aghast and angry about this oil and gas renaissance. Unable to stop all production, they have focused on blocking pipelines. If companies can’t get oil and gas to markets, they reason production will dwindle, companies will go bankrupt, and the case for supposedly renewable energy will grow stronger.

Acceding to their demands, tunnel-visioned federal judges recently blocked theAtlantic Coast Pipeline, told operators to shut down and drain the fully operational Dakota Access Pipeline, and mandated still more studies for Keystone XL and 75 other pipelines.

The judges issued these decisions in the name of preserving wetlands, preventing stream siltation, protecting endangered species, safeguarding scenic views, stopping greenhouse gas emissions, and protecting other environmental values.

They effectively deemed it irrelevant that fossil fuels still provide over 80% of all the energy that powers American industries, homes and living standards, and that virtually invisible underground pipelines replace much more dangerous alternatives.

TheDakota Access Pipeline alone replaces some 255,000 oil tanker railcars going through our towns and cities, or 730,000 semi-trailer tanker trucks on our highways, every year!

The activists and judges said even short-term scenic, stream sedimentation and ecological impacts during pipeline construction are unacceptable.

Even after aUS Supreme Court decision reversed the ACP decision, the company sponsors cancelled the project anyway, due to threats of more costly lawsuits and delays ad infinitum.

Even more extreme, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris want no fossil fuels, and net-zero carbon dioxide emissions, by 2050. They claim this will lead the world in eliminating climate and environmental catastrophes. In reality, the impacts on US and global environments would be monumental.

In 2018, coal and natural gas generated 2.6 billion megawatt-hours of America’s electricity. Natural gas also provided the equivalent of 2.7 billion MWh of fuel for factories, businesses and homes. Internal combustion vehicles used over 2.0 billion MWh equivalent of gasoline and diesel.

Under the Biden-AOC Green New Deal, all those 7.3 billion megawatt-hours of electricity would come from “clean, green, renewable, sustainable” sources. Wind and sunshine certainly fit that description.

However, harnessing this intermittent power definitely does not. That would require unimaginable numbers of wind turbines and solar panels, and warehouses of huge batteries to provide backup power for just week of windless, sunless days – especially since the more wind and solar we demand, the more we must put turbines and panels in low quality locations. Without them, we would be hit by hundreds of rolling blackouts every year, like the ones that have been clobbering California.

A recent analysis suggests that generating all that electricity would require some 17 billion sun-tracking solar panels; or 25 billion fixed thin-film panels; or 3.5 million 1.8-MW onshore wind turbines; or 260,000 monstrous 10-MW offshore turbines; or some combination of those facilities. We’d also need nearly 2 billion half-ton Tesla battery modules, and thousands of miles of new transmission lines across America.

Building and installing these massive facilities would require tens of billions of tons of concrete, steel, copper, aluminum, cobalt, rare earth elements, fiberglass composites and dozens of other materials.

Getting those raw materials would require mining, processing and smelting hundreds of billions of tons of ore, from all around the world, but mostly from companies owned or controlled by China – almost all with fossil fuels; without regard for US pollution control, wildlife protection or workplace safety laws; and all too often using child and near-slave labor.

The turbines and panels would sprawl across hundreds of millions of acres of crop, scenic and habitat lands. Construction would scar landscapes, remove mountaintops, rip through forests, destroy scenic vistas, obliterate wildlife habitats, fill streams with sediment during construction, and displace or kill endangered plants, animals and birds.

Dominion Energy alone plans to construct solar panels in rural Virginia on lands totaling eight times Washington, DC, to serve a small fraction of the state’s electricity needs. Multiply that times 50 states and thousands of communities in a 100% electric economy, and you can begin to envision the ecological devastation from this “clean, green, renewable, sustainable” energy.

The 600- to 850-foot-tall wind turbines would slaughter millions of raptors, other birds and bats annually, completely eradicating them in many areas. Residential, business, hospital and school electricity rates would skyrocket. America’s economy and job market would never recover from Covid.

A few landowners – and a lot of utility company officers and investors – would get rich. But other people would suffer from infrasound and light flicker, watch their beautiful landscapes disappear forever, and get no compensation whatsoever.

The turbines, panels and batteries have short life spans, and are generally non-recyclable. Most would end up in enormous landfills.Vast rural areas would be turned into energy and trash colonies for politically powerful urban centers.

But on one positive note, years of pipeline lawsuits, human rights campaigns, and battles over mining and US and global air and water pollution have set powerful legal precedents.

Landowners, citizen groups, human rights defenders and environmentalists not fixated on climate change will be able to use them to delay, block, bankrupt and scuttle many or most of these destructive pseudo-renewable energy projects. They will also demand that wind, solar, battery and electric vehicle metals, minerals and components be responsibly sourced – in accordance with all US laws and ethics.

Utilities think they hit a buzz saw over pipelines. Radical greens think they won this war. It could be a Pyrrhic victory if those laws, regulations, EIS rules and judicial decisions are applied to wind and solar. In fact, they are potentially powerful pipeline precedents.

And if regulators, politicians and courts apply double standards – one for fossil fuels and one for pseudo-renewables, akin to one for rioters and another for churchgoers – the situation could become extremely troublesome, to say the least. It could turn into real resistance, rebellion and conflict.

It’s time for civilized debates, with no cancel-culture interference, on all these issues, before that happens.

We used to send half a trillion dollars a year out of the country, into other countries’ treasuries and employing other countries’ workers to get our energy. Now that money gets spent here and puts our own people to work.

Until it happened, energy independence, probably no one thought it possible. Until it happened. Well, I used to say it was possible, but even to me it was almost like science fiction to say it.

What we have done with energy production concerning the final cost to the customer for gasoline is truly extraordinary.

A gallon of gasoline purchased in 1959 for $.30 should cost on an inflation adjusted basis $2.67 and while I can only speak for where I live (SC) we are paying $1.89 per gallon (regular).

Look at the chart. Biden and Harris’ promises are pure lies and political pandering. It is sheer fantasy to believe that “renewables” will take anything more than a tiny share of total US energy demand

People can’t envision it yet, but the USA is heading towards another energy crisis and much higher energy prices. Coal-generation plants are being shut-down through the USA. US nuclear capacity is also declining. Natural gas has taken a much larger share of US power generation, but new drilling activity has declined to multi-decades lows.

Renewables are a highly subsidized energy source, and as the article points out, they have extremely low energy density compared to other sources. If you believe oil/gas have been subsidized by cheap money and low interest rates, the same is true for “renewables” by many multiples. Unless renewables drastically improve economic efficiency, the US can’t afford to increase their use greatly.

“..but new drilling activity has declined to multi-decades lows.”

New drilling has declined due to a slackening of demand which has been brought about by the China Virus shut down. This will change as the country gets back to work.

New drilling has declined due to a slackening of demand which has been brought about by the China Virus shut down. This will change as the country gets back to work.

Perhaps, but I think you don’t grasp the extent of the crash in oil/gas that has taken place over the last year - and especially with Covid19, as you point out.

total national Rig counts as of 2 weeks ago are at 244. Prior to 2020, In the last 40 years, this figure has never been below 600. 200 oil and gas companies have gone bankrupt and the industry (and their banks/bondholders) have lost $300 billion in the last year. Yes, the market will respond, but there’s a significant lag to re-start drilling activity, and its going to take A LONG period of much higher prices to convince investors to put their money back into this sector.

And Much higher prices for everything will definitely be coming.

'TheDakota Access Pipeline alone replaces some 255,000 oil tanker railcars going through our towns and cities, or 730,000 semi-trailer tanker trucks on our highways, every year! '

That seems like a less efficient, but more 'jobs' producing system than a set it and forget it pipeline. The amount of jobs in a trucking ecosystem is large, especially at those rates.

“And Much higher prices for everything will definitely be coming.”

Perhaps but when and how much are very difficult to assess.

As I pointed out previously a gallon of regular gasoline today is actually over 20% less than it was in 1959 on an inflation adjusted basis. The reason for this is our ability to extract oil where none could be extracted before and to do this in a very efficient way. Currently fracking companies need oil prices in the low $40’s for them to break even. This is a huge decline from just a couple of years ago where they needed oil prices to be in the $90 range.

There are many reasons for this but mainly it is the fine tuning of technology and the rule of supply and demand pushing the tech advances.

Decent piece here for more info.

www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-04-14/an-oil-price-slump-won-t-set-back-the-fracking-industry

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.