Cheniere Energy (LNG) says it's on schedule to start its natural gas export facility by 2015,...

This news story has 8 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »

bigbenorr Comments (477)
 
Isn't that what these companies are hoping for??
25 Feb, 06:21 PM Reply Like

davidbdc Comments (2990)
 
I see, since we import some of it we can't export any?

I guess we need to shut off wine exports as long as we import some French and Italian wines?

If folks want to spend billions to build export facilities and billions more to run them - be my guest! American drillers will earn more money - we'll employ more "blue collar" oil field workers - our drillers might keep innovating to find and extract more of it - and the whole cycle happens again.

What is the logic of burning off NG because the price is so low its not worth transporting???

Its called a market and if folks in Europe will pay more for NG to heat their homes then lets sell it to them!
25 Feb, 06:24 PM Reply Like

Poor Texan Comments (3489)
 
Our imports are from Canada and some of what we export would be Canadian.
25 Feb, 06:36 PM Reply Like

Bonanza959 Comments (4)
 
Reply to Kurt Cobb's post: Your article simply puts lipstick on a pig of a case. For instance, on 1 hand you say we import from Canada and Mexico and that's bad. On the other you say we export to the Canada, and that's good. You know the reason is due to pipeline location and little else. You also should know that gas is not being drilled now because there is a 100 year glut. Way too much gas is being flared (burned, wasted) at the well site because all our storages are full. Do you believe it's better to waste a resource than find a profitable market for it that reduces our balance of trade and increases income for federal and state taxation? Also, you mention a "fleet" of export terminals. You should know only one (Cheniere) has been approved, and it seems unlikely more will be so until the first one proves out. Since only Cheniere is under construction, and all the rest of the "fleet" are mired in the endless regulatory (42 permits required) and political approval process, and they would take decades to build out if ever approved, the scenario you predict is way into the future, if ever. The smart money is it's "never." Basically, your underlying motive in this argument is that gas is an ethane and even though it creates less carbon when burned, it's still carbon and therefore shouldn't be burned...period. While the Left in this country has fooled themselves into believing this, I don't recall that China, India, Japan, and Europe have signed on to that belief. It's really better to tell the truth than twist facts to suit your purpose.
25 Feb, 06:56 PM Reply Like

jpmj4847 Comments (331)
 
Thanks Bonanaz595, very inform comments, one that I we file away and "use". I was put on the chopping block about Cheniere (LNG) being the only one with permit in hand (approved). I'm from South Louisiana and owned LNG for many years and will remain long. Thanks again.....GO LNG! jpmj4847
25 Feb, 11:18 PM Reply Like

jpmj4847 Comments (331)
 
Thank, I really enjoyed reading your knowledgeable inputs on CNG. I called LNG a first mover and was really hammer. Their approved permit already in hand!!!,,,,Come on. I am from South Louisiana....own LNG....long and will remain. With your approve, my I quote you from time to time. I now follower,also made a comment @SA.jpmj4847
25 Feb, 11:56 PM Reply Like

Hendershott Comments (1061)
 
We're going to have higher prices eventually,since it uneconomic to drill much for NG at these prices. Meanwhile the Canadians have approved three LNG export facilities for BC.
25 Feb, 09:51 PM Reply Like

Michael Bryant Comments (3508)
 
To not export natural gas would be foolish, since we are not taking advantage of the profits that could be made.
25 Feb, 11:48 PM Reply Like