Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on June 3, 2009 at 4:39

Also concerning, and I think related to your post, is whether the Obama administration will decide label natural gas as an industry that falls under the Cap and Trade program.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on June 3, 2009 at 5:10

H - IMO, it's okay only if they're thinking of giving it a Mr. Haney hat so he can trade with Olivah & Eva (or is it Ava?) Gabor down on Greenacres. lol

Oops, sorry Skip. Won't happen again. I'll do detention and go see if I can find info for Keith. :0)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on June 3, 2009 at 12:01

Okay, I found this. See paragraph 3.

http://www.aga.org/Newsroom/news+releases/2009/WaxmanMarkeyCapTrade...

"In recognition of the achievements that natural gas customers have shown over the past four decades in terms of increased energy efficiency, the Waxman-Markey legislation does not bring residential and commercial natural gas customers under the cap-and-trade system until 2016."



Is that sufficient to get out of detention? lol :0)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on June 3, 2009 at 12:04

Yes, sesport. You are out of detention. But on probation. LOL!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on June 3, 2009 at 5:03

How will cap and trade do any more than drive US manufacturing jobs over to countries who won't have it like China?
Things are bad enough now without that nonsense.
With the price parity difference between Petroleum and NG, considering the two sources could be competing with each other for the same markets, someone is dropping the ball, be it the NG industry or the government. What we need to be doing is putting pressure on our representatives to get the infrastructure up and running for CNG as a transportation fuel..
Consumers do not need more taxation!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on June 3, 2009 at 6:35

PG - I think a lot of manufacturing is already in China and other Asian countries. One bright note is that the Chinese won't be moving the Hummer production to China. Now to start planning for what's next if they discontinue the line.

If you look around for some of the other topics (I think buck has a few currently on the main pg.) Okla. either has or is in the process of getting that 50% credit/incentive passed, N. Carolina is doing the same. I haven't checked recently, but we're waiting to see what Baton Rouge accomplishes with Jane Smith's bill and a few others. Things are on the move. But you're right, there's still more to be done. It's kind of like being a kid who just had a birthday and is already anticipating the next one a year away. Seems to take forever.

best - sesport :0)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on June 3, 2009 at 5:07

Thanks, Skip. It seems natural that he would take this position given that he's the Kinder in Kinder-Morgan. But from all I've read & discussed, I've got to say I agree with him with the exception of his opinion on nuclear insofar as it being economical and fast-track to build. There does seem to be a lot of nuclear waiting to be permitted in the SE region of the US, though.

You got any feel for how much pull he has in DC?

BTW, did you look at the link on the bottom left of your link?

http://www.reuters.com/article/GlobalEnergy09/idUSTRE5524HS20090603

Best - :0)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on June 3, 2009 at 5:30

You are welcome, sesport. I like Richie's tone. I think that the natural gas industry has done a poor job of forging alliances with other players in the energy debate. And that lumping natural gas in with wind and solar is a mistake. I said so early on that T. Boone was undercutting the case for natural gas by tying it to wind. I am not adverse to nuclear power but would prefer for that discussion to take a back seat to natural gas at this time. Once a comprehensive national energy policy takes natural gas seriously and makes it the preferred "bridge", other energy sources can be debated as adjunct energy sources. And, no, I didn't look at the other link. Ground water contamination is a concern but one that I think can be successfully addressed. I suspect that the concern is much greater in shale plays other than the Haynesville. I would think that the shallower the shale, the more the likelihood of contamination problems.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on June 3, 2009 at 6:36

T. Boone is now eyeballing China for an ng market.

http://www.stockinterview.com/News/07242007/China-CNG-Natural-Gas-C...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Checkmateking on June 3, 2009 at 14:57

There is now no evidence of man-made global warming, that is why the leftist fools who forward this ridiculous propaganda have conveniently converted to the term "climate change". The earth has been in a cooling cycle since 2000. Anyone who believes in man-made global warming is a useful idiot.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Checkmateking on June 4, 2009 at 3:59

Anytime you want to debate me publicly or on this forum feel free to send me a message.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on June 3, 2009 at 17:02

CMK - So, if there's no global warming, and we don't need to produce & use more ng to reduce emissions, etc., would you mind giving me whatever minerals you have rights to? I'll be more than happy to take them off your hands, do you a favor and unburden you. lol

best - sesport :0)

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page