Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by P.G. on December 31, 2008 at 3:40

Probably not enough of the right people who would be making the money here yet like there is in Russia and Saudi Arabia. I mean how many happy landowners are there in those countries?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on December 31, 2008 at 5:00

If we have too much Nat Gas, then why are we a net importer??

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on December 31, 2008 at 5:01

For imports:

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/ng_move_impc_s1_m.htm

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on December 31, 2008 at 5:01

For exports:

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/ng_move_expc_s1_m.htm

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on December 31, 2008 at 5:05

We imported 242,416 more million cubic feet than we exported in October 2008.

Why?

Because we can not economically move gas around our own country. We need a comprehensive plan to moderize our interstate pipelines.

It is a shame that wells in NW LA are being shut in or choked back because there is no way to get the gas to the areas currently importing gas from canada and mexico.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 31, 2008 at 12:06

Baron, gas production capacity from US wells is still less than natural gas demand in the US. That is the reason for imports from Canada, not lack of pipeline capacity. The only areas with interstate pipeline capacity limits (Rockies & Northeast Texas) have new projects under construction and being placed in service in 2009. Additional pipeline projects are being proposed for the Rockies and will be in service as the production increases.

Any shut-ins of NW Louisiana wells are likely related to local gathering systems or economics rather than interstate gas pipeline capacity.

Gas imports will continue for at least the next 4-5 years until US production is sufficient to meet demand. By the way the US is a net gas exporter to Mexico, not importer.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dion Warr, CPL on December 31, 2008 at 10:55

Group:

It would be important to consider that if you are not a member of the House of Saud, or a relative of a contractor or owner of a company working for one of the major companies (like Saudi Aramco), you would be a relatively poor Arab, like many of the rest of them.

The concentration of the wealth in these countries is amongst the very few.

Also, in many countries in the world, there is no private ownership of minerals. The sovereign (aka the government, the dictator, etc.) owns and controls any and all mineral rights. Even in Canada, where private individuals can own the surface, the minerals rights are by and large controlled by the provincial or federal government, except in the freehold areas. Thus, the individual's right to receive bonus and share in royalties is... none.

The society may benefit in whole from the natural occurence of minerals within their national borders and their capture, but we all know what happens when the government gets their hands in the pie.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by intrepid on December 31, 2008 at 14:45

How easy would it be for the U.S. govt to nationalize mineral rights in America?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by olddog573 on January 1, 2009 at 5:13

I think the South would rise again if that happened!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on January 1, 2009 at 5:53

That's kind of a trick question!
Are you talking about before or after they confiscate our guns?

• ▶ Reply