Tag Archives: Barack Obama

President Obama seeks new energy path but fails to recognize what the path is made of

In his State of the Union address, President Obama outlined his plans for a clean energy strategy to meet environmental goals.

I have often stated here on HRN, that we all can agree on a clean energy future, but the facts are that the road to get there is paved in carbon energy, and natural resources – more specifically rare earth elements.

Wind turbines, solar panels etc. are dependent on rare earth elements that are indispensible in nearly all clean energy products and technologies. Without these rare earth elements, clean technologies are non-existant. To get these elements, takes a huge amount of energy to mine, extract and refine. Heavy diesel equipment, huge energy hungry processing facilities, chemicals etc. its an energy intensive process. Then there is the process to build, manufacture, transport and assemble these cleantech products which also takes a huge amount of energy.

President Obama’s plan is to drop tax credits to oil and gas companies and pass this along to the cleantech sector. Is that really going to acheive anything? No. Those lost tax credits will increase costs that are passed along to consumers – you and me – AND the cleantech companies through increased costs in the energy used to build the cleantech industry. Its stupid.

Istead, we should recognize that to build the “green economy” it takes a lot of current energy from reliable sources. However, there is one source – natural gas – that provides a affordable, lower carbon source of energy and its abundent throughout North America. However, in their wisdom what is really happening with natural gas? Its going to be shipped to Asia where they are smart enough to recognize their energy needs, and smart enought to use natural gas to full extend of its value. Oh, and they are likely to be the biggest manufacturers of wind turbines, solar cells and other cleantech products as well. The US will be twice beaten.

The way things are going it might just play out that the US stays dependent on oil, sells their domestic lower carb natural gas to China, and loses the innovation and manufacturing market for cleantech products to China as well.

Obama got one thing right, China is moving forward and fast. Their graduating millions of students a year in sciences and engineering. They are investing heavily in cleantech and high tech, and securing the energy sources and resources that it takes to build the products in these sectors.

Its getting to the point that the inability of the US politicians on both sides to get something done is determining the outcome of the game before its finished. The race has started, China’s up and runng and the US politicians are still trying to determine where they should put their starting block down. Stop it! Drop the block and get moving.

I know what some are saying… shale gas is environmenttaly damaging. That the hydraulic fracturing process poisons the water basin. The risk of this is low, but the industry listened. The great thing about capitalizm is that it rewards those that provide solutions to problems. If you have a solution to improve something. Your going to do very well for yourself, your family and your shareholders.  Point here is that the answer is not to shut something down when there is a problem and debate about it… the right thing to do is to develop a solution to solve the problem.

Oh, and in the case of hydraulic fracturing… take a look at Gas Frac Energy Services. A Canadian company based in Calgary, Alberta. They have a new fracking process that virtually elliminates the environmental risks that have everyone in New York upset. They took advantage of the situation, provided a solution, and are reaping the rewards.

China and India are really living the “American Dream”. They are living in hope. Hope for their future and recognizing that the problems around them provide opportunity. Opportunity innovate and create solutions to improve their lives. Their getting educated and taking responsibility for their future. They are building new energy sources in wind, solar, nuclear etc to meet their future needs in a green economy. They are shutting down environmentally damaging mines, and factories, and securing resources from around the world. And they are buying lots of natural gas. They are using is in transportation and power generation. Is filling a natural gas powered car inconient in China? No. They built the fill stations and made it convenient. Natural gas is at nearly every petro station in major cities. Meanwhile, as Canada and the US, still debate about natural gas as a via transporation fuel, natural gas producers pipeline companies are building pipelines and facilities to export natural gas to Asia – more specifically China – from Kitimat BC, and Louisiana.

The HornRiverNews has tried to get the message out. The abundance of natural gas in North America is not a problem carbon fuel. Its an opportunity. An opportunity to help in lower carbon emissions on the path to a cleaner energy future.

 

New York halts shale gas drilling

New York Gov. David Paterson has signed an executive order this past Saturday, that puts a temporary halt to the hydraulic fracturing process involved in drilling for shale gas. The memoratorium is until July 1, 2011, and prohibits horizontal hydraulic fracturing in New York until the state Department of Environmental Conservation completes a comprehensive environmental review.

Read the full story on CNN.com “New York Governor pauses “fracking”

US to provide affordable clean energy to China

Its sounds a bit ironic that the US – largest consumer of energy in the world -  would be exporting affordable low carbon energy to China. That is exactly what a Houston-based subsiduary of Cheniere Energy Inc. is planning to do when it announced it is working on a deal to export liquefied natural gas (“LNG”) from Louisiana to one of China’s largest independently owned natural gas companies.

Cheniere bills itself as “North America’s LNG Gateway” and like other LNG facilities in North America, they were orginally intended to import LNG from natural gas suppliers like Quatar. However, with the boom in natural gas production due to shale gas these LNG facilities are looking to now export natural gas to China and other countries in Asia.

The financial model is quite compelling. Demand for natural gas in Asia is increasing and most Asian contracts are price-pegged to oil.  That means that natural gas bought in Louisiana for ~$4 can be sold in China for nearly three times as much or $12. Providing enough margin to cover the processing and shipping to Asia.

Exporting US natural gas is nothing new. Alaska has been exporting natural gas to Japan for years. And many Americans that read the recent story in the Wall Street Journal, may think its a positive economic opportunity to finally be selling and exporting gas rather then importing it when in fact it is a lost opportunity.

The US is still the largest consumer of energy in the world – more specifically – it is the largest consumer of oil in the world. And a good portion of this oil is imported from some countries in the Middle East that use the profits from oil sales to pay for political movements that oppose the US. As T. Boone Pickens once said about the Iraq war when he stated “we’re financing both sides”.

HRN has continually pointed out that North America needs to leverage natural gas to its full benefit. Its abundant, affordable and cleaner then oil and coal. In the US, T. Boone Pickens has been tiredlessly lobbying to use more natural gas in the country’s transportation network, and less oil derived products like gasoline and diesel. His main point is that buying oil from the Middle East is a massive-cost to the American economy, and the US dependency (or as some may say “addiction”) to oil is not sustainable. Natural gas offers a domestic lower cost alternative. (President  Barack  Obama really needs to revisit the Pickens’ Plan)

The lower carbon advantage that natural gas offers should not be over looked. Though US and global economies have taken front page headlines, the issue of climate change is not going away. The lower carbon footprint of natural gas is not only better for the ecnvironmnet, but offers a potential competitive advantage to Canada and the United States if and when the international community agrees to a carbon tax. The end result is that those countries that can produce and distribute products and services in a lower carbon economy will have an advantage over higher carbon producers.

The bottom line here is that Canada and the US need to use more natural gas in transportation and power generation before they export the benefits and advantages of natural gas overseas. This does not mean stop the export plans that are underway. Its a free-economy. Just use more before its too late and the opportunity is lost.

Wall Street Journal: Firm Would Export U.S. Natural Gas to China

T. Boone Pickens supports Obamas drilling plans

T. Boone Pickens is well known for his support of renewable energy sources and natural gas. Last week be also put his support behind President Barack Obama’s recently announced plans to open up offshore drilling in the U.S. No surprise here.

Mr. Pickens’ is quoted as stating:

“President Obama’s plan to promote more offshore drilling for oil and natural gas is an important step in achieving true energy reform. We should be taking full advantage of every available American resource to help decrease our crippling dependency on foreign oil—a dependency that is slowing our economic recovery and jeopardizing our homeland security.”

Pickens continues to promote his renewable energy program – the Pickens Plan – which states the U.S. can reduce its dependence on foreign oil by investing in wind and solar power and by using natural gas for transportation fuel. Mr. Pickens points out that in February the United States imported 59% of its oil; approximately 322 million barrels at an estimated cost of $24.6 billion. In the first two months of the year, America has paid about $50 billion for foreign oil.

Mr Pickens continues;

“As the U.S. economy continues to struggle, demand for oil continues to be weak. But our dependence is also slowing the economic recovery. Every new barrel we add to our demand has to come from a foreign country, and that means money leaving our own economy.”

Of course, it is important to point out that Canada is the number one provider of energy to the U.S., and the two countries are massive trading partners. Canada is should not be lumped into the “foreign” category and that Canada’s energy sources are part of providing energy security to the U.S. and itself.

Putin lobbies for strong gas cartel; Should Canada join?

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin continued his efforts to formalize a natural gas cartel when he hosted Qatari officials this week in Moscow. Russia, Qatar and other leading natural gas producers had their first ministerial meetings for the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (“GECF”) in Tehran in 2001. The forum was established to increase cooperation among member similar to OPEC.

Putin told visiting Qatari counterpart Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem bin Jabr al-Thani; “It’s very important for us to coordinate joint work.” And Sheikh Hamad responded in kind quoted as stating; “We are very interested in cooperating with Russia, investing in Russia.”

Historically, natural gas has been a regional commodity but with increased distribution infrastructure and Liquefied Natural Gas (“LNG”) processing, natural gas will become more of a international commodity. Joining a cartel that works together in coordinating production certainly seems like a good idea. Producers in North America seem to struggle with their efforts to increase and curb production as demand is effected by the economy and weather. A coordinated effort amoung North America producers has been contemplated but has not been formally implemented. The preference is to leave it to the free market.

In an international market in which all producers are fully integrated into an international distribution system (not there yet), some sort of cartel may be tempting. But look at OPEC. Does it really work? Despite production quotas, OPEC members often exceed production quotas to meet domestic financial requirements. When prices fall many members don’t wait to see if cutting production will boost prices. Instead they increase production to make up for the price decline in volume.

An international cartel of natural gas producers is only as strong as its members. Some of the  current participants in the GECF do not have the history that would provide the confidence that a natural gas cartel would ever work. The concept may have merits but free market forces alone may provide a better structure then a cartel that has members that do not meet their commitments or obligations. If one member is not doing so, the intent of the group falls short. Regardless, this group is not a group that Canada associates with and for that reason alone will not join. However, taking an “observatory” role like Norway may be warranted.

There are a number of initiatives that North American natural gas producers could take in order to provide a better coordinated management of natural gas assets in North America. This may become more apparent and necessary as the North American market deals with how shale gas has lead to a fundamental shift in the natural gas supply outlook. We will attempt to cover these initiatives in a subsequent article.

AFP: Putin urges Qatar to coordinate gas trade with Russia

Top Obama economic adviser notes importance of natural gas

Top Obama economic adviser, Lawrence Summers

In a speech to energy industry elite, top White House economic adviser Lawrence Summers,  discussed the importance of a comprehensive energy legislation that will encourage investment, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil. s

During his address, Mr. Summers acknowledged the important role natural gas should play,  and commenting “the remarkable opportunities created by all the natural gas we didn’t know we had five years ago.”

There is an abundance of natural gas in North America brought about by shale gas discoveries. It will take time, but both the U.S. and Canada must encourage increased usage of natural gas in electricity generation, and transportation in an effort to reduce carbon emissions. It is quite alarming that there are only about 11,500 natural gas vehicles in Canada, and around 150,000 in the U.S., while countries like Brazil have over 1.5 MM. There is no compelling reason why natural gas could not be used more in transportation. The first and likely target are fleet vehicles with central filling stations and lots.

Mr. Summers also stated that future energy policy must include a price on carbon emissions, but did not specifically mention cap and trade. A price on carbon could work if it is calculated equally among fuel sources and does not provide special treatment or credits for any single source and provide an unfair carbon comparison.

Houston Chronicle: Obama adviser calls for energy diversity

China surpasses US as top importer of Saudi Oil

In past articles on HRN, we have talked about how shale gas will change the geopolitical landscape of the world. A very interesting milestone has changed the geopolitics of oil. Saudi Arabia’s oil exports to the US last year dropped below 1 million barrels a day for the first time in two decades. At the same time, exports to China have increased above 1 million barrels per day.

For the most part this is attributable to a slow U.S. economy creating a lower demand for oil in the U.S., while continued economic growth in China has increased demand in that country. An improved and expanding U.S. economy would obviously bring back higher demand, but there is still a very important transition taking place that will change the geopolitical landscape of energy.

Ever since President Jimmy Carter declared an end to dependence on foreign oil in 1979, the U.S. has recognized the economic challenges of being dependent on foreign oil. But this dependence is given low priority when oil prices are low or relatively affordable. Only when oil gets expensive – or more precisely -  appreciates rapidly in price and increases costs faster then can be adjusted for, does oil traditionally come into the spotlight. And when it does massive amounts of capital get invested in to alternative energy forms. Historically, the economy goes into recession, oil demand goes down, and oil prices decline.

However, there are a few factors that have changed this cycle. In the past the U.S. was the primary buyer of oil. But now China is just as big of a customer and is planning long term for continued growth. This provides more price stability on the downside and upward demand/price pressures when both the U.S. and China are growing.

The other factor at play is the real need to decrease carbon emissions. This means that capital will continue to be invested into alternative energy sources, and provide new and competing sources of energy to oil. By reducing consumption of oil and coal, or at the very least offsetting a sizable portion of future energy demand with alternative, and low carbon sources, the U.S. – and other countries – can move in the right direction in meeting lower carbon goals. The best place for the U.S. to start is to reduce oil consumption that is imported from countries that basically do not like them.  The U.S. wants  “energy security” and wants to avoid exporting billions of dollars to enrich countries that target U.S. interests on the battle field.

At the same time, Saudi Arabia has an interest to preserve “demand security”. Demand for Saudi oil is no longer coming primarily from the U.S. They have an equally important customer in China.

Its interesting to note, that China and the U.S. are heavily dependent on each other. Its not in the best interest of China or the U.S. to needlessly fall over each other to buy Saudi oil. It also important for both countries to develop clean renewable energy technologies, as well as improve and build upon technologies that make fossil fuels cleaner and more accessible. This was apparent when Barack Obama signed a shale gas initiative with President Hu Jintao of China (see HRN: Obama announces shale gas initiative with China). Natural gas will be a key energy source to meeting energy demand while reducing carbon emissions.

It is this cooperative approach and economic dependence between the U.S. and China that may ultimately change the geopolitical landscape. While the U.S. and China have been looking at ways to share technology and develop resources, the U.S. has encouraged Saudi Arabia to sell more crude to China. The U.S. understands that China is no less interested in seeing a nuclear-weapons free Iran. If is less reliant on Iranian oil they are in better position to support tighter sanctions on Iran.

Yes, securing energy sources is very competitive and each country will do what it believes to give it an advantage. But at the same time, both countries recognize it is in the best interest of both countries to have a healthy, growing economy and energy supplies from secure non-threatening sources.

Financial Times: Oil geopolitics shift as China taps Saudi crude

Is Obama looking to end shale gas drilling in the US?

President Barack Obama

As the U.S. Congress begins an investigation to explore the environmental impact and risks associated with hydraulic fracturing – or “fracking” – of shale gas formations, growing concerns that the administration will put some sort of moratorium on shale gas drilling.

Will President Obama side with Waxman and call for a drilling ban for natural gas? Where would that leave the U.S. or for that matter, the opportunity to use natural gas to reduce carbon emissions and reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil supplied by countries that are basically enemies of the U.S. The stakes here are huge, and given the falling approval ratings of Obama how can the president afford to risk such a great opportunity. The one thing we know for sure is that going back to the way things use to be done is not sustainable. In the case of the U.S. they must find a practical way to reduce their dependence on foreign oil from states that hate them, and they – like every country – also needs near immediate  and practical means for reducing carbon emission through proven resources. The massive amount of natural gas that has been unlocked from shale resources in North America provides this solution.

However, many have raised concerns that Obama may just place a all out ban on shale gas while the congressional committee conducts there investigation or puts regulation into place that will make the drilling process for shale gas economically unfeasible. In his article, Obama’s Determined to Derail Nat Gas, Real Money Columnist, Jim Cramer, states:

The single biggest detriment to natural gas as a bridge fuel remains the president of the United States, and the only question I have is whether he will put a moratorium on further drilling until the EPA can launch a multiyear study of the hazards of natural gas drilling to the nation’s water supply. That will allow nuclear and clean coal to catch up to the fuel’s use and keep the focus on anti-carbons or sequestration.

I have never seen anything like this. This president is determined to frustrate natural gas.

It is very important to point out that the U.S. Congressional investigation is based on a few isolated incidents of concern – see HRN “U.S. Congress to investigate shale gas “fracking” process”. Calmer heads need to prevail here, and it is important to focus on the fact that technology has and will continue to improve and do so with minimal environmental impact. Successful solution always evolve and improve. Its what makes commerce work.

If Obama does ban shale gas drilling (not likely, some form of regulation is more likely which may prove to be just as disastrous for the U.S. natural gas  industry and economy) the economic and geopolitical opportunities and impact are significant and far reaching.

First, the shale gas boom in North America has been made possible because of technology development in horizontal drilling and fracking. Like any technology it has been improved over a number of years, and continues to be improved. Today, the technology has reached some point of standardization whereby others are also able to incorporate it into their drilling processes and it is being exported and used in other markets. It is only a matter of another year or so when we will start to hear about massive shale gas plays being discovered in other countries providing cleaner domestic natural gas resources to those countries. HRN has discussed how these new discoveries will have significant geopolitical impact. Specifically in the EU where new supplies of natural gas within the EU will reduce the political clout that Russia uses as a tool to influence the eastern EU. A reduction in this Russian influence should not go unnoticed by the U.S.

However, it is the economic impact – or perhaps lost opportunity – that should be of greater concern to the U.S. Last year nearly $265 Billion left the U.S. economy to purchase foreign oil. This unsustainable dependence on foreign energy and massive export of capital is simply the key point behind T. Boone Pickens’ Plan. This critical problem is magnified when the price of oil increases, and all indications are that prices will appreciate over the long term. Cheap oil energy is a thing of the past. New energy sources from renewable technologies like solar, wind, geothermal etc are required. But all these sources require energy to build, and that energy comes from fossil fuels. What the U.S. and others need to consider, is using the cleanest fossil fuel available… and that is natural gas. By increasing the amount of natural gas used in the overall energy mix, and reducing oil and coal, Canada and the U.S. will reduce carbon emissions while meeting their energy needs from domestically available resources.

“Another year went by, another $265 billion siphoned out of America’s struggling economy, and we still haven’t adopted a real energy plan to reduce our dependence on foreign oil”. -  T. Boone Pickens.

For the most part, T. Boone Pickens  is pleased with the support that Obama has provided him and his Pickens’ Plan. According to recent quote in U.S. Today Mr. Pickens stated a press conference at the National Automobile Dealers Association meeting in Orlando “They haven’t done anything but support me”. Mr. Pickens believes the legislation he is driving  to offer $65,000 tax incentives for conversion of 8 million 18-wheel long-haul trucks from diesel fuel to natural gas, has a good chance of bipartisan support in Congress. He also believes truck-st0p operators will be willing to invest $1.5 million or more per station to install natural-gas fueling equipment. But the Pickens’ Plan will not work without shale gas production.

While a ban on shale gas drilling in the U.S. would have huge negative implications for the natural gas industry there it would certainly lead to a economic boom in Canada’s natural gas industry – especially in Alberta – where drilling activity is down considerably. A U.S. ban would dramatically increase U.S. imports of natural gas and Canada is the largest exporter of natural gas to the U.S.

One of the key factors in fracking is the shale’s thickness. In areas where the formation is thick there is a greater opportunity to provide a buffer of rock that contains the cracking fluids within the formation. Fortunately, the Horn River basin enjoys a very thick shale formation that is up to 75 meters thick in parts.  In addition, shale gas drilling in Canada was completed with the benefit of the more advanced technologies.

Shale gas represents a global opportunity to reduce carbon emissions and provide a bridge fuel. The industry should be supported, technology should be improved (and history dictates that it will be), and North America should move forward with using cleaner natural gas as a bridge fuel to reduce carbon emissions and become more self sustaining with meeting their energy needs. Shale gas has provided a game-changing opportunity to meet these objectives.

The Street.com: Obama’s Determined to Derail Nat Gas

“Go back to sleep, America; the oil crisis is over” – T. Boone Pickens launches new TV ad

The ad opens to a black background and Arabic music. White text fades in stating “Go back to sleep, America; the oil crisis is over”. Mr. Pickens declares, “I don’t think so!”

T. Boone Pickens has launched a new commercial in the United States to stress the national security concerns and economic importance of reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil. The solution is simple. Convert America’s transportation network of heavy load trucks from diesel to natural gas.

The key points that Mr. Pickens continues to hammer out are hard to ignore. Based on the latest figures from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. imported ~63 percent of its oil, or 4.35 billion barrels in 2009, sending nearly $265 billion, or $502,473 per minute, to foreign governments. With long term oil prices likely higher rather then lower this transfer of capital is simply not sustainable. Add to this fact, that many of the governments that sell oil to the U.S are the same governments that are financing and supporting various terrorists organizations. The U.S. is effectively funding both sides of the “war on terror”.

Watch T. Boone Pickens’ latest TV ad here.

The Pickens’ Plan (which has been revised since it was started) is simply to use more natural gas and less oil by transitioning the U.S. heavy transportation network (18-wheelers etc) from diesel to natural gas. There is no battery technology that can meet the heavy load capacity of 18-wheelers. Its diesel or natural gas. Technology has opened up natural gas found in shale rock formations which makes it abundant throughout North America… its cheaper, its proven and it burns more efficiently, and it emits less carbon then gasoline and diesel.

The Pickens campaign was temporarily suspended back in October when Mr. Pickens believed health care was taking all the attention and energy policy was not. With the recent attempt of the “Christmas Bomber” Mr. Pickens believes the national security concerns will move the U.S. energy policy back to the top of the government’s agenda.

Mr. Pickens is quoted;

“We’re infidels with most of these people and they have no use for us. We’re getting more and more dependent on the wrong people.”

President Obama is quoted as stating: <!–

–>

“And for the sake of our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, I will set a clear goal as president: In 10 years, we will finally end our dependence on oil from the Middle East.”
Natural gas is a key component to a cleaner energy mix and key to the U.S. reducing their dependence on foreign oil.

International interest grows in China’s shale gas potential

International interest in China’s shale gas potential continues to grow, Sinopec and BP are in discussions to collaborate on the exploration and development of shale gas in China. Back in November, a joint development agreement was signed between Royal Dutch Shell and PetroChina for a shale gas project  in Sichuan, south-west China.

According to a the Financial Post, Sinopec stated in a company newsletter that talks with BP were going “smoothly” and that any agreement would help China use foreign technology to speed up the development of its potentially large shale gas reserves.

No details have been disclosed by Sinopec or BP, but reports indicate an agreement between the two companies would might include two blocks it has charted by Sinopec consisting of  a 2,000 square kilometre area in Kaili, in southwestern Guizhou province and a 1,000 square kilometre block in Huangqiao, Jiangsu, a province in eastern China

A major shale gas discovery – like one in Europe – would have considerable implications for the natural gas market. Natural gas provides China a cleaner alternative fuel source to oil and coal and the Chinese government is eager to develope their natural gas resources. Back in November, when President Barack Obama visited China,  the US and Chinese governments signed a co-operation initiative to promote investment and joint studies of China’s shale gas potential.

Coal-fired electric power plants are a major contributor to CO2 emissions in China, who is well aware of the effects of these emissions on air quality and health for China’s population. China is moving in the right direction and has reduced coal consumption in the last year. A good portion being offset by increasing nuclear power generation by approximately 75% last year with new state-of-the-art nuclear power facilities (and more to come). And despite its own domestic production potential China continues to secure natural gas sources including a deal announced with Russia back in October 2009. It is apparent that China clearly sees natural gas as an important and growing part of their energy needs within a lower carbon energy mix.

Anyone who has traveled to China’s major cities has seen, and tasted the pollution in the air. It is obvious that no one understands the importance of reducing the carbon emissions better then China and they are moving in the right direction with natural gas as part of the solution.

Financial Times: BP and Sinopec join forces in shale gas talks