The climate fear mongers are pressuring Biden to ban natural gas exports. Let’s discuss the ramifications. 
Climate Test for Natural Gas Exports
Politco notes Biden’s Aides Weigh Climate Test for Natural Gas Exports.
The Biden administration is launching a review that could tap the brakes on the booming U.S. natural gas export industry — a move that threatens to pit the president’s climate ambitions against his foreign policy agenda.
The review being led by the Department of Energy will examine whether regulators should take climate change into account when deciding whether a proposed gas export project meets the national interest, according to two people familiar with the action who were granted anonymity to discuss deliberations that have not yet been publicly acknowledged.
U.S. gas exports have jumped four-fold during the past decade as production has surged, turning the United States into the world’s largest natural gas exporter and helping Europe replace Russian shipments after Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. But Biden also faces growing pressure from environmental groups to live up to his pledge to transition away from fossil fuels — something the U.S. also promised to do at last month’s climate summit in Dubai.
Roishetta Ozane, the founder of environmental group Vessel Project of Louisiana, welcomed the news that the Biden administration may be rethinking how it determines whether a proposed project is in the public interest. Ozane is among a group of green activists planning to protest next month at the Energy Department headquarters to pressure the administration to change how it evaluates export proposals.
“We’re really hoping that DOE will pause any new permits for industry, because we know that the Biden administration really needs a climate win and in order for them to win” the 2024 election, said Ozane, whose hometown of Sulphur, La., is within an hour’s drive of three LNG plants. “If these politicians want to be elected or re-elected in this upcoming presidential election, they’re going to have to make some bold choices and some bold moves.”
Democrats have been asking the Biden administration for months to consider how shipping massive amounts of natural gas overseas affects greenhouse gas emissions. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) asked Granholm in a letter last year to review how DOE weighs whether a project is in the public interest.
Democratic Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith said it was a mistake to ignore the pollution produced by the LNG sector.
Climate Win For Biden?
“We know that the Biden administration really needs a climate win and in order for them to win.”
The public is more than a bit sick of the policies of this administration. Banning natural gas exports would hurt Biden’s elections chances.
Biden Threat
Natural Gas Math
91.2 million tons * 0.005367 MMBtu/ton * $10/MMBtu = $48.8 billion. If we look at oil exports (back of the napkin math) 3.99 million b/d (avg) * $80/barrel (avg 2023)* 365 days = $110.5 billion. That seems like a lot of revenue for a country $34T in debt to stifle…just saying.
But what is this really about?
Banning LNG exports would tend to lower prices.
My Guess
Biden will not want to give Trump another energy card.
Nor will he want to risk Pennsylvania.
Addendum
One of my readers noted a point I failed to mention: Russia will sell more natural gas as a result.
Bingo: Reducing exports does not change global demand. It will only shift the source of the supply.
Addendum
One of my readers noted a point I failed to mention: Russia will sell more natural gas as a result.
Bingo: Reducing exports does not change global demand. It will only shift the source of the supply.
How ?
But the net result for America will be lower natural gas prices.
What part of America First do you not get, Mish?
You’re starting to sound like a FJB apologist.
If you are serious, you sound like a Biden-Loving statist
Me?
I like free markets
We all know it ain’t Brandon, but he is as good a scape goat as any. Brandon and the whole Dem party are FREAKIN NUTS! And not just in the climate change debacle!
I believe Biden administration might decline to approve some new LNG projects, not ban all foreign natural gas sales. It would be illegal to ban sales after the businesses have been developed and contracts signed with buyers. We do NOT do business that way here, no matter what the environmentalists desire.
Natural Gas is responsible for the biggest reduction in plant food(CO2) since the evil of fracking was invented to make America more secure and less dependent. No one said the globalist agenda was going to make America great again.
I’m actually from the louisiana town mentioned in the article. All of our economic growth in the last few years has been natural gas exports. And the plants are far away from the city out in rural areas. The much older gasoline and chemical plants are very close to the town and are right off interstate 10.
link to oilystuff.com
Permian gassy oil wells becoming oily gas wells (rising GOR – Gas to Oil ratio ).
Natural Gas prices are now a bottleneck in the Permian
Exxon’s acquisition of Pioneer is going to make them the largestl…natural gas provider in the USA!!!!
Anybody know where Biden gets the power to ban natural gas exports?
He dreams it up based on some flimsy interpretation of an EPA regulation. I do not believe it would hold up in the Supreme Court.
Section 3 of the NGA (Natural Gas Act – federal legislation). DOE assumes position of “rebuttable presumption” that gas exports are in the public interest. If can prove that more exports/higher prices causing adverse impact on public welfare, or adverse impact environmentally, executive branch could pause but for substantive policy change, would need to revisit legislatively.
Lovely.
Is it in the public interest to let Russia sell more NG to China at the expense of jobs and revenue in the US?
No where.
“Reducing exports does not change global demand. It will only shift the source of the supply.”
True. But if Europe was buying more gas from Russia, it would encourage repairing Nord Stream (if you are buying gas from Russia, you might as well buy it cheaply). That would be better for European industry and Germany would be able to stop using coal plants as a stop-gap measure. So, overall, better for climate and better for Europe.
If you’ll allow me to say so…. Less expensive energy, sure. Politically, not wise at all, unless you’re OK with Russia having Europe by the you know what. How are you going to buy gas from Russia while still supporting the Ukraine? Can’t be done. I don’t think a Russian victory in Ukraine means Russian tanks are going to show up on the Rhine but a Russia-Ukraine unification makes for a much more powerful state than Russia alone. It worked for Stalin. Standard Oil in South America sold a lot of oil to the Third Reich until Roosevelt suggested that since the US was at war with Hitler that might not be a good idea and perhaps they should rethink which side of their bread was buttered.
Bottom line, time to suck it up and go renewables and nuclear. France gets about 50% of its electricity from nuclear, it’s not like it can’t be done. One can argue that that would make energy more expensive (yeah, those pesky environmental lawsuits), but how many trillions did the US squander in Kuwait and Iraq? Too bad those wars weren’t financed exclusively by a gas tax, that would have helped the average American get a better grasp of geopolitic’s effect on their wallet. Perhaps a little cross on the gas pump for every American who died would also make a point.
It would also put modest downward pressure on US electricity and heating bills.
Gas plants set wholesale electricity prices across most of the US. Reducing exports would lower US gas prices and therefore reduce electricity prices.
Wholesale electricity costs are about 15-30% of the typical residential electric bill, so the rate reduction would be modest.
It is tempting to think that a ban on US natural gas exports would result in increased natural gas supplies in the US, lowering gas natural prices for US consumers.
That may or may not happen. In the absence of the extra revenue and profit from exports, US natural gas producers may simply cut back on capex, exploration, and drilling, resulting in overall reduced supplies, negating any price drop.
The stock markets are down, but the 10Y is up to 4.1%.
NatGas plunged under $3. Biden wants to increase European demand by threatening to constricting supply in mid-year. Prices might rise in Oct/Nov 2024, for PA .
US is the biggest producer of carbon in the world : NGL, LNG, NG…oil. We produce more energy than ever before.
This sort of (delusional, anti-american) policy mistake SHOULD put Pennsylvania solidly in the Red camp, but…
…the Pa. GOP is a RINO hatchery & they will ignore all of this electoral ammunition… no attack ads, no billboards, no MAGA candidates, no interest in winning… the Pa. GOP (99% flunky lawyers) would rather lose than contradict their warmongering globalist Beltway buddies.
Another reason (think border) for Texas, et. al., to secede from the Union. The Republic of Texas could find plenty of buyers for its natural gas.
If they were independent they could conquer Mexico too. Which is sort of a border problem in reverse, for Mexico.
Or maybe this is another form of corruption. Manipulate the the price of something much lower, invest in it, and then rescind the proposal.
Or jawbone the possibility of banning gas exports and claim political victory when the price drops due to seasonal variations.
Just for the record, IDGAF about Europe. Nothing personal.
“Democratic Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith said it was a mistake to ignore the pollution produced by the LNG sector.”
Does the senator ignore frigid winters in Minnesota?
Years ago, a Socal Gas storage facility blew a safety valve, causing serious health issues for people in Chatsworth. Locals want the site shut down, but the state allowed the facility to store more gas for this winter, after heating bills doubled last winter.
Brilliant.
German industry already in rapid decline. Pretty soon it will be up to Italy and France to pay for the overpaid beaurocratic EU nannycrat monster currently run by a criminal put there by Merkel.
Good luck with that.
One positive development.
You have to wonder, with any of the Democrat policies, which voters are they chasing? They can lower energy prices, but simultaneously lower jobs… ?!?
Up ’til now, it seems like they have decided for the electorate what the correct policies are, and then have decided that the electorate are voting the wrong way, so they need to either remove the candidate that they electorate are incorrectly voting for, or import several million new voters to vote the way the Democrats deem correct.
The democrats are chasing the left side of the bell curve.
“If these politicians want to be elected or re-elected in this upcoming presidential election, they’re going to have to make some bold choices and some bold moves.”
Has Ozane made the bold move of not using natural gas to heat their home in the winter?
She wants to. But she’s afraid the Germans will outbid her for the gas, unless they are barred from the auction.
Biden needs nothing more to win than a sloppy moron opponent, and he has one. Prepare the tears and rigging accusations.
Agreed. Trump really has the republican party over a barrel. Trump can’t win, yet no other republican candidate can win without the support/votes from Trump’s moronic MAGA cult.
Good thoughts. Although, to nit pick, I think Trump has a good chance of winning. Trump supporters in 2016 hesitated to admit they were going to vote for Trump in polls, I’m guessing that Trump is farther ahead of Biden this time around for that reason…. A lot depends on how Nikki does in NH, the game might not be over yet. Although it is for DiSantis. Anyone who wears dad jeans and a sports coat and no tie is just too hip to ever be President. Or anything but a joke. It never killed anyone to wear a suit. Except at funerals.
I bet the Germans will really appreciate this. First Biden blows up Nordstream, then he cuts off LNG exports. Beside the hot war Biden instigated in Ukraine, he appears to be conducting an economic war on Germany.
BIDEN has to be seen as doing something . . . What do you expect . . . Its an Election Year and his Poll numbers are way down . . .
New Orleans flooded during Katrina because the fuel tanks for the gigantic pumps behind the levees were situated below flood level to save fuel-pumping costs I suppose, so all the pumps failed in sequence as soon as the flood started spreading. Stupidity. Ignoring basic facts.
The Fukushima disaster happened because the nuclear plant design engineers ignored (or didn’t know about) the stone monuments that were set in many places along Japan’s coastal region to record the extent of previous Tsunami flooding, and as a result the plant flood walls were too low and failed to protect their backup process power systems. Stupidity. Ignoring basic facts.
While our govt. debates exactly how to cripple our power supply, the grid is totally vulnerable to another Carrington event (or EMP attack), which is bound to happen sooner or later. Further, while enacting ever-more-stringent fuel economy standards on autos, there are no regulations to proof vehicles against such electromagnetic events. Various presidents have sought to correct this, with no cooperation from the deep state. Stupidity. Ignoring basic facts.
We are also Carrington-vulnerable in our building control systems, risking permanent destruction of our freight transportation systems, distribution systems, communication systems, everything down to our Social Security payments, sewer and water systems, none of which are hardened against space weather or EMP attack.
This is a sad situation as our govts. start to spend trillions on the AGW chimera to guard against nothing, and spend nothing to guard against a certain known future event. We have to stop voting for these jerks or we are doomed. They are dooming us to a catastrophic future though these and other oversights including our stupid worldwide doomed fiat money system and fractional reserve banking, nuclear weapons controlled by politicians and all the rest of human duncedom.
It’s almost like they planned it all this way on purpose
Trying to plan for Carrington events are a waste of time and resources.
Sure, if one happens it will be devastating. But no one knows when one might happen. Could be tomorrow or could be 100 or 1000 years from now. Hardening things that might already be obsolete/replaced before an event happens is a huge waste of time/money (see the military costs of things to get an idea of what it would take).
since there are parts of the electrical grid that are 100+ years old I don’t see much being replaced in the near future. Especially when we are so far behind on connecting some of the already built supply sources
Here in Florida large parts of the grid are being replaced and put underground so they aren’t destroyed in storms. What remains above is being replaced from wooden to concrete poles.
I imagine lots of new big transmission lines are being put in for renewables (windmills in Texas, solar farms out west).
In other words more than you’d expect is being replaced. It’s just a long slow process.
Read up on solar mass ejections frequency analysis. We’re already overdue on short and long term cycle based analyses major events. (This year or ‘25 is expected to have a non critical but significant event.). The sun has an 11 year cycle of low to high sunspot and solar flares activity. Solar flares are what can turn into solar mass ejections aka potential Carrington events. Analogy is rogue waves in the ocean.
Sure but ones big enough the matter occur how often? Every 100 years on average? Every 1000?
One second after we spent 1 trillion dollars hardening against a Carrington event someone is going to ask why we didn’t harden against the Super Volcano erupting in Yellowstone (also over due) or against an Asteroid strike (not one the size that killed the dinos, but more like the one in 1014 that caused a huge Tsunami in England and North America and would today devastate the coastal cities. Another happened in the 1300s etc)
And don’t forget we need to be better protected against another pandemic, a terrorist attack (both cyber and physical like a nuke or dam blown up), alien invasion…
In other words there is an endless series of hobgoblins we need to somehow protect ourselves against that require infinite money. Or we just deal with the effects as they happen much as we are going to do with climate change.
EMP attack is extremely unlikely. Large missle targeting America will bring instant retaliation from US overseas defence assets. Leave this to action thriller fiction.
New Orleans has always flooded but not as bad until the levee system. No man made anything would have kept that much water out. I was in the guard at the time. Pictures on the news didn’t capture the magnitude of it.
The only thing that would have slowed it some are natural barriers created by silt deposits which the levees ruined. The natural over flowing of rivers over time does increase the coastal landmass. When a storm hits land it starts dying immediately. Unfortunately we are stuck with the levees and an eroding coastline now. Too much development and not enough understanding of the function of silt.
Just like Obama did to coal. These people on the left are idiots. Destroy an industry until the next administration gets in.
I don’t see banning exports anywhere in the Constitution.
The export of natural gas has enabled the shale production of oil as many wells are co-producing. Block the export and natural gas becomes a waste product effectively, possibly it gets flared to enable the oil production, or oil production in the US slows and oil prices increase.
Forget doing it for climate change. We have finite resources in regards to fossil fuel sources. I would restrict exports with exceptions only for true allies. We will never eliminate every need for oil and natural gas so we should hold on to our domestic resources for the day global supply is depleted.
Our supply of crude oil was supposed to run out in the 1980s. We’re not very good at projecting real supply or real climate.
The energy market is international. Restricting exports to “true allies” just shifts where other countries get their energy to different providers.
gwp sums it up. This show is getting hilarious.
So, so hard on conspiracy theories. As soon as you blame the Ukraine war and the demise of Nordstream on the US knocking out a competitive supplier of gas, the US takes a U turn and screws itself and Europe over, big time.
This is all super easy to explain.
The CCP is behind it all. When Putin and Russia go down, too, China takes the resources of eastern Russia, made valuable by Global Warming.
Yessssss. Our plan proceeds perfectly.
Putin and Xi play the long game, they don’t need to be part of Iowa Caucuses and Super Tuesday Theater.
“IF” we could replace all coal with natural gas, it would do more to reduce emissions than the last 20 year build out (and $5 trillion spent) of renewables.
In those 20 years we have reduced fossil fuel use by just 1% to 81% of all energy use.
Coal is the worst fossil fuel. Its use is responsible for 40% of GHG emissions worldwide.
Natural gas emissions are roughly half of coal emissions (btu for btu). Switching all coal to natural gas could reduce emissions by half, or 20% of all emissions!
Keep building renewables and nuclear. Over time they will eventually make a difference.
But if you want to make a BIG difference quickly, produce as much natural gas as possible, and replace as much coal as possible.
Atmospheric carbon dioxide cannot and does not influence climate. The science is settled. Don’t be a science denier.
Lol! Believe whatever you want.
Yes, believe whatever you want. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” Global warming is a religion.
Citations please! Otherwise, you’re just puffing hot air. And go live on Venus for 5 seconds and your CO2 denialism will change quickly.
Coal is a very dirty fuel causing health problems for people who have to breathe that air. But doubt very much replacing coal with gas will do anything for the climate one way or another.
Agree. I don’t actually expect coal to be replaced in any significant way. But for those who care about emissions, replacing coal with nat gas would make a bigger difference than all the renewables built so far.
And yes, even a 20% reduction in emissions is not enough to make a big difference in global warming. It would merely slow the advance a bit.
If the power cuts off it sure is nice having hot water, a fireplace and stove to cook on. And if needed, a small generator can run run central fan to keep the gas heat on. Can’t do that with a heat pump. Heat pumps run year round so only last half as long as just an AC unit. A gas furnace will last a very long time.
I’m okay with this, but not because of climate change. Rather, exporting LNG drives up the cost domestically.
Yet again ***FJB*** puts America last for all the worst reasons.
And, I’m with PapaD. BTW, on climate change. It’s real and needs to be addressed. But, I don’t think we need to wreck our economy. The whole jump headfirst of the BEV cliff is a great example of DC having no clue how to manage the necessary change effectively.
Just a bunch of dumb bunnies.
The USA needs to provide products that the remainder of the world desires. Domestic NG prices are low. The world has strong demand for USA NG, a much cleaner fuel than coal. Banning NG exports is a crazy idea.
It’s a good idea if your goal is to reduce energy prices in the USA and further destroy Europe. With friends like us, . . .
That would be amusing. Encourage tensions between Ukraine and Russia, blow up the NordStream, switch Europe from Russian piped gas to US LPG and then stop supplying it.
The last step in destroying competition from European manufacturing
You nailed it.
President Trump offered a free trade deal to EU. EU prefers to hide behind high tariff walls, and leach military spending off the USA. Don’t forget the berries. EU swore off nuclear, coal, and natural gas power. Back to the stone age in ten years.
Hmm, so who else is selling gas to the Germans if not the US and the Russians?!
I guess they could get it shipped direct from places like Qatar – oh wait, China’s buying all that. So… er… what’s the plan man? Force Germany back to Russia?!