Insight and inspiration in turbulent times.
The natural gas industry promised Americans an endless abundance of gas. There’s lots of gas (for now), but it’s increasingly going elsewhere and that spells less gas and higher prices for Americans.
It’s simple economics really. When you have less of something for which there is high demand, the price will go up.
When Zulene Mayfield testifies next week against plans to build a $6.8 billion liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in her Pennsylvania hometown, she will be facing off against some of the most powerful fossil fuel interests in the United States.
Deutsche Bank and other German lenders have poured finance into gas export terminals on the U.S. Gulf Coast since Russia invaded Ukraine, a report has found, sparking anger among residents who say the megaprojects are devastating their communities.
The Conference Board report appeared two weeks after the publication of a highly-detailed analysis by energy expert David Hughes that said the math on LNG did not add up in terms of economics, climate change, jobs or royalties.
So there is one rule of law in Canada for insolvent resource extractors, and another law for First Nations, rural municipalities and landowners.
Fortunately, the Wet’suwet’en respect laws that are thousands of years old.
They plan on upholding them. So should we.
Oregon’s Supreme Court has handed a major victory to Portland, upholding the city’s right to greatly restrict fossil fuel infrastructure.
If you want to understand how global economics killed British Columbia’s risky liquefied natural gas gamble and the government’s promised riches and jobs, then you might want to hear out Eoin Finn. The failure of B.C.’s LNG strategy, symbolized by last week’s death of the $11-billion Pacific NorthWest LNG terminal, is really a story about government deceit or ignorance.
Politicians who advocate for more bitumen pipelines and LNG exports are making a "have your cake and eat it too argument" because there is no way Canada can meet its climate change commitments under such a scenario
The window of opportunity to capture Asian gas markets has eluded proposed liquefied natural gas projects in British Columbia, and as a consequence it is unlikely that any LNG projects will likely be commissioned or economic for another decade.
Not long ago, I wrote Ten Reasons Why High Oil Prices are a Problem. If high oil prices can be a problem, how can low oil prices also be a problem? In particular, how can the steep drop in oil prices we have recently been experiencing also be a problem?
Let me get this straight: you want to flood a pristine valley in Canada to generate power so you can ship natural gas overseas to keep Asia’s lights on?
