So much to say about this decision, but I’ll keep this brief. There’s so much new LNG supply entering the global market over the next two years from the US, Qatar, Canada and perhaps Mozambique that this pause in new approvals is essentially irrelevant: no new US LNG projects will secure long-term customers or finance in a market that’s overflowing with surplus supply. It was an easy way to make headlines that placate the climate contingent of the electorate without endangering market liquidity. CP2 is the scapegoat but Venture Global, the project developer, has trashed its own reputation by defrauding its own long-term customers and selling contractually committed cargoes into the (higher priced) spot market. Buyers will not go near CP2 without cast iron assurances that this won’t happen again, and I expect a fair few executives in the LNG space will gleefully welcome CP2’s demise. You might say VG deserved a comeuppance and Biden is doing their bidding.
All in all, it is business as usual in the LNG world.
My pleasure. By the way, LNG is liquefied natural gas - not ‘liquid’. LNG is generally not very well understood outside of energy circles. That’s part of the reason why I write Energy Flux ;)
The most likely reason for suspending LNG exports is to put pressure on Texas in the border dispute because a high, if not the highest, number of LNG terminals are in Texas. This will put people out of work, causing tensions and pressure on caving in to the feds.
Biden and the rest don't give a flying eff about the climate or energy. Their empire is collapsing before their eyes and they're scrambling to keep the circus running.
I saw an analysis of this issue yesterday somewhere, with a map of LNG terminals. Can't remember where, so much stuff is coming in! I'll post the link if I remember.
I usually agree with much of what you write but not this time. Other than a tweet from Art you present no evidence that the backstory surrounding this decision is different than the front story.
To me the most significant aspect of this is the degree to which the climate test that will be undertaken is done in good faith. it’s a terribly complicated question to determine the long-term implications of the export of more natural gas depending upon how coal much it displaces, progress in minimizing gas leaks, stranded asset calculations, how much goes to Asia versus Europe, and on and on and on.
To the extent to which these terminals were being approved without a sophisticated climate test that’s Biden administration malpractice.
Look at Biden’s approval rating with the climate activist community and their demoralization given his overall dismal approval ratings provides enough of a rationale for their decision without invoking other reasons.
If he doesn’t have an army of young people social media and door knocking advocates he’s toast and so then the climate along with democracy decency and some semblance of equity.
Let’s give Credit work Credit is due to Bill McKibben, Climate Defiance and other social justice advocates
Art's essay wasn't a tweet, and his conclusions were drawn from data from the EIA website. You can see the graphs for shale gas production peaking in the hyperlink in the text.
I wasn’t trying to minimize or negate Art’s always fine work. Just to question the motivation behind the administration’s decision.
I was able after two years of lobbying to get my local government last year to require a climate assessment of all legislation- which I believe may be the first of its kind in the country- so I’m quite eager to see the assessment conducted on the proposed LNG terminals.
Rachael, I think you have understated your case. The number of people who will die from starvation and conflict this century because of decreases in energy deliveries includes almost everyone.
I believe the LNG pause is purely political. If CP2 and the other projects move forward, it spells planet wide disaster, with the poorest and indigenous on the front lines. However, it will hit all of us. The Louisiana coast is already deeply compromised. I offer a lot of detail on this supposed win for climate activists in this article, backed up by numerous sources. https://geoffreydeihl.substack.com/p/giving-pause-to-disaster
No, of course not. They are uniformly climate change deniers. However, the amount of methane release these terminals represent from source to end user is a disaster regardless of political party.
I am not a big fan of Biden. I have written at least four articles critical of his actions surrounding climate change and the killing going on in Gaza — in which 92 percent of the weapons are US supplied disgusts me. However, given the other choice, if it can even be called that, I will be supporting Biden. Scary times.
In terms of governments being more resistant to public pressure in current times, what do you think would be effective strategies that people can use to apply significant enough pressure on the ruling class, such that they actually enact positive changes?
Do you think actions like workers' strikes on large scales would be effective?
Hi Raveen, this was something Fabian Dablander and I discussed in a recent interview. I think general strikes are an excellent idea, and have a historical precedent for effectiveness.
For all the push and pull of each side bashing the other, what we lack for is getting ourselves organized. Simply. Like create a Coalition for the Good, with millions more participating that when we take to the streets. Nobody is calling for anything -- just railing at what we've got and spinning utopian dreams for how things could be. How to get from her to there is unexplored territory.
This contest is to ferret out ideas.
ESSAY CONTEST with Cash Prizes! Due February 14.
It’s January 1, 2050. How, in 2024, did we pull off saving the world?
So much to say about this decision, but I’ll keep this brief. There’s so much new LNG supply entering the global market over the next two years from the US, Qatar, Canada and perhaps Mozambique that this pause in new approvals is essentially irrelevant: no new US LNG projects will secure long-term customers or finance in a market that’s overflowing with surplus supply. It was an easy way to make headlines that placate the climate contingent of the electorate without endangering market liquidity. CP2 is the scapegoat but Venture Global, the project developer, has trashed its own reputation by defrauding its own long-term customers and selling contractually committed cargoes into the (higher priced) spot market. Buyers will not go near CP2 without cast iron assurances that this won’t happen again, and I expect a fair few executives in the LNG space will gleefully welcome CP2’s demise. You might say VG deserved a comeuppance and Biden is doing their bidding.
All in all, it is business as usual in the LNG world.
Wicked, Seb, thanks so much for this additional analysis.
My pleasure. By the way, LNG is liquefied natural gas - not ‘liquid’. LNG is generally not very well understood outside of energy circles. That’s part of the reason why I write Energy Flux ;)
The most likely reason for suspending LNG exports is to put pressure on Texas in the border dispute because a high, if not the highest, number of LNG terminals are in Texas. This will put people out of work, causing tensions and pressure on caving in to the feds.
Biden and the rest don't give a flying eff about the climate or energy. Their empire is collapsing before their eyes and they're scrambling to keep the circus running.
That's really interesting, Paul, thank you. Could you link me to some sources on this?
I saw an analysis of this issue yesterday somewhere, with a map of LNG terminals. Can't remember where, so much stuff is coming in! I'll post the link if I remember.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/bidens-bumbling-lng-ban-profits-putin-vexes-texas-and-unsettles-europe
If you are an American, this was quite obvious. Particularly in the timing.
http://www.usinpac.com/LNG-Initiative/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/US-LNG-page-map.jpg
I usually agree with much of what you write but not this time. Other than a tweet from Art you present no evidence that the backstory surrounding this decision is different than the front story.
To me the most significant aspect of this is the degree to which the climate test that will be undertaken is done in good faith. it’s a terribly complicated question to determine the long-term implications of the export of more natural gas depending upon how coal much it displaces, progress in minimizing gas leaks, stranded asset calculations, how much goes to Asia versus Europe, and on and on and on.
To the extent to which these terminals were being approved without a sophisticated climate test that’s Biden administration malpractice.
Look at Biden’s approval rating with the climate activist community and their demoralization given his overall dismal approval ratings provides enough of a rationale for their decision without invoking other reasons.
If he doesn’t have an army of young people social media and door knocking advocates he’s toast and so then the climate along with democracy decency and some semblance of equity.
Let’s give Credit work Credit is due to Bill McKibben, Climate Defiance and other social justice advocates
Hi Herb,
Art's essay wasn't a tweet, and his conclusions were drawn from data from the EIA website. You can see the graphs for shale gas production peaking in the hyperlink in the text.
Best,
Rachel
Hi Rachel,
Thanks!
I wasn’t trying to minimize or negate Art’s always fine work. Just to question the motivation behind the administration’s decision.
I was able after two years of lobbying to get my local government last year to require a climate assessment of all legislation- which I believe may be the first of its kind in the country- so I’m quite eager to see the assessment conducted on the proposed LNG terminals.
Herb
Congratulations! That's wonderful.
EIA has been notoriously wrong in their projections. I would recommend checking out Doomberg's work here on Substack.
Rachael, I think you have understated your case. The number of people who will die from starvation and conflict this century because of decreases in energy deliveries includes almost everyone.
see
Civilization's: "Running out of gas" story.
youtu.be/b5z5R6xqEG0. 9 min animation
Hi Jack, I'm aware of your work and watched the video with interest, thanks for sharing it.
I believe the LNG pause is purely political. If CP2 and the other projects move forward, it spells planet wide disaster, with the poorest and indigenous on the front lines. However, it will hit all of us. The Louisiana coast is already deeply compromised. I offer a lot of detail on this supposed win for climate activists in this article, backed up by numerous sources. https://geoffreydeihl.substack.com/p/giving-pause-to-disaster
Do you believe the Republican administration would deliver a more climate-friendly result?
No, of course not. They are uniformly climate change deniers. However, the amount of methane release these terminals represent from source to end user is a disaster regardless of political party.
As an outsider, I am simply crossing my fingers for lots of non-GOP votes and would feel better with fewer 'do not vote for #Biden voices'. :-)
I am not a big fan of Biden. I have written at least four articles critical of his actions surrounding climate change and the killing going on in Gaza — in which 92 percent of the weapons are US supplied disgusts me. However, given the other choice, if it can even be called that, I will be supporting Biden. Scary times.
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/a-field-of-dreams-fantasy
In terms of governments being more resistant to public pressure in current times, what do you think would be effective strategies that people can use to apply significant enough pressure on the ruling class, such that they actually enact positive changes?
Do you think actions like workers' strikes on large scales would be effective?
Hi Raveen, this was something Fabian Dablander and I discussed in a recent interview. I think general strikes are an excellent idea, and have a historical precedent for effectiveness.
For all the push and pull of each side bashing the other, what we lack for is getting ourselves organized. Simply. Like create a Coalition for the Good, with millions more participating that when we take to the streets. Nobody is calling for anything -- just railing at what we've got and spinning utopian dreams for how things could be. How to get from her to there is unexplored territory.
This contest is to ferret out ideas.
ESSAY CONTEST with Cash Prizes! Due February 14.
It’s January 1, 2050. How, in 2024, did we pull off saving the world?
https://suzannetaylor.substack.com/p/an-essay-contest-its-january-1-2050
How about my being a guest on your podcast -- soon? My Substack is all about ideas. I have a lot of them. That's also what we'd talk about.