Replies to This Discussion

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 24, 2009 at 18:46

Sesport, this is one of several possible measures required for the nation to meet greenhouse gas reduction objectives.

• ▶ Reply

landownerPermalink Reply by sesport on April 25, 2009 at 2:14

Thanks, Les. I'm understanding "10% cumulative ng savings by 2020 ...." to mean "reducing consumption of." I know power plants are being built to be cleaner (I can't find data yet on projections for ng powered plants), but I'm finding too much mention about "clean coal," renewables, hydro power. The only mentions I'm finding regarding ng are the ones that encourage development of the OCS, no mentionings of unconventional, onshore development.

I'm finding more info regarding electric hybrid vehicles than for ng powered vehicles. I just read that $10 million is to be earmarked for the development of electrically powered school buses, thus encouraging fleet changes toward that source of power. Both the ARRA and Republican' "Plan B" (my term for it) have very little wording about natural gas exploration & production or uses.

It just seems to me that the government is skipping over an ng transition to clean energy. One possibility could be that these decisions are based on information available before 2005, information that seems to be of the opinion that ng reserves are/were being depleted & are/were in decline. As the title of the document states, it is a discussion draft. Given what is now known about our reserves & new technologies for the unconventional plays, if ng E&P is going to receive the blessing & support of the government, IMO discussion about using ng should be inserted into this draft.

IMHO, with this kind of "discussion," where's the incentive to increase ng prices, produce the product, apply it toward new uses and stimulate our economy?

thanks again & best - sesport :0)

• ▶ Reply

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 25, 2009 at 4:15

Sesport, all the talk about "clean coal" is necessary to appease the coal states. Basically it says if you can economically sequester the CO2 emissions from your coal fired power plant then you are part of the solution. If not, then your CO2 emissions are going to incur significant cost that will remove coal's current cost advantage over natural gas. If this occurs the current fleet of natural gas power plants will have a much higher run factor and additional combined cycle power plants will be constructed to "firm" the new renewable power sources. Some new nuclear power plants will also be required for base load.

On the transportation side, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) are the primary solution for light duty personal vehicles (cars & small trucks). This increased use of electric power for transportation will result in additional natural gas demand because natural gas will be the primary fuel for power generation. Heavy duty trucks and buses will utilize natural gas (CNG & LNG) and biodiesel as alternative fuel sources.

The above increased demand for natural gas should support reasonable pricing and continued development of unconventional supplies.

I heard Representative Markey speak at the CERA conference earlier this year. He is well aware of the unconventional potentional and I believe to be a proponent of increased usage of natural gas as part of the climate change solutions.

• ▶ Reply

landownerPermalink Reply by sesport on April 25, 2009 at 4:29

Thanks again, Les. I AM rooting for the ng team, just having trouble finding the "game plan." And, as I stated, since this is a "Discussion Draft," perhaps ng can still find its way into it?

Best - sesport :0)

• ▶ Reply

landownerPermalink Reply by sesport on April 25, 2009 at 3:00

This is Steven Chu's powerpoint presentation as keynote speaker at the recent National Association of Regulatory Utility Commisions Forum.

Note page 4, tax credit for plug-in hybrid cars and the p. 7 map for Increased Transmission Capacity Needs. Notta whole lotta ng going on here. :0(

http://www.electricitydeliveryforum.org/pdfs/Chu_Grid_speech.pdf

• ▶ Reply

landownerPermalink Reply by sesport on April 25, 2009 at 5:13

I found the Apr. 22, 2009 Legislative Hearings regarding this draft. On Panel 3 of that day, Cicio of the Industrial Energy Cosumers of America did provide support for ng. That's one "cheerleader." ha, ha

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090422/testimony_cicio.pdf

From his testimony ... "CCS and nuclear will not be contributors over the next 10 years which
means the power sector will be dependent upon natural gas for power
generation. Expansion of renewable energy means electric utility
companies will be required to build natural gas fired back up plants."

• ▶ Reply

landownerPermalink Reply by sesport on April 26, 2009 at 22:49

bump

• ▶ Reply