#LNG

[supplyside]

LNG tanker at the breaker yard

[rjzimmerman]

This is "interesting," (to use a mild word), because it shows us how trump and his minions are manipulating our thinking toward their imperialistic goals. In this case, the threat to impose tariffs globally on any country that impose tariffs on the US are not intended to generate revenue, but rather are intended to generate increased exports of fossil fuels, in particular, liquified natural gas, from the US to the rest of the world. Who benefits? The fossil fuel industry. Unfuckingbelievable, yet very believable when one considers the source, methodology, motivation.

Excerpt from Bill McKibben's Substack, The Crucial Years:

In the last few days, Taiwan, India and Japan made clear they will be buying exported American LNG in the months and years ahead. Why? Entirely in an effort to hold off tariffs from the Trump administration. As the Japanese prime minister put it,

“We will cooperate to strengthen energy security between the two countries including increasing exports of United States liquefied natural gas to Japan in a mutually beneficial manner.”

Here’s how Bloomberg described the Indian decision-making:

Indian importers are under pressure from the government to reach deals that could smooth relations with Trump, the people said, but they will be looking for the best possible terms before signing any agreements.

Meanwhile, as Sing Yee Ong reports from Taipei

Taiwan is preparing to buy more liquefied natural gas from the US to reduce its trade surplus and potentially avoid higher tariffs.

Oh, and more to come

South Korea, Vietnam and the European Union are among energy buyers trying to appease President Donald Trump — and reduce the threat of tariffs — by looking to increase purchases from the biggest exporter of the super-chilled fuel and largest producer of crude.

I want to highlight these shakedowns, which have mostly been lost amidst the thousand other terrible things the Trump administration has loosed upon the world, because I know that before long Big Oil will be holding them up as evidence that the world needs and wants more fossil fuel. In fact, the world wants to move in entirely the opposite direction: 85% of new electric generation in 2023 came from renewables, and the numbers for 2024 will almost certainly be higher. That, of course, terrifies the fossil fuel industry—which is why they spent record amounts on November’s election. As fracking baron Harold Hamm explained, “We’ve got to do this because it’s the most important election in our lifetime.”

And now they’re getting the payoff: Trump threatens tariffs, and offers to make them go away if they buy some LNG. It’s akin to a protection racket. Pay up, or your windows get broken. It’s not criminal—it’s all entirely legal. It’s just wrong.

This particular protection racket makes no sense for America at large. Forget, for a moment, that LNG is a huge driver of the climate change driving fire and flood (by the time you’ve shipped it overseas it’s��far worse even than coal); exporting it in huge quantities also obviously drives up the price for Americans still reliant on fracked gas for heating and cooking. The Energy Information Administration just predicted that natural gas prices will rise 21 percent in the year ahead. Politico did the math

Paul Cicio, president of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America trade association, said U.S. LNG exports are pushing natural gas and electricity prices higher. Every “dollar increase in natural gas costs consumers $34 billion plus about $20 billion in higher electricity cost,” Cicio said in a statement Tuesday. It's “only going to get worse from here as LNG exports increase.”t of the Industrial Energy Consumers of America trade association, said U.S. LNG exports are pushing natural gas and electricity prices higher.

As the Sierra Club points out, Trump’s strategy “makes no sense.” And they’re right—as long as we’re talking about the future of the planet or the cost to American consumers. But that’s not who Trump is thinking about. He’s got one constituency and one only: the Big Oil execs who bankrolled his campaign. For them, this is sweet payback, a 100-1 return on their investment.

And it’s a stark reminder that we have to fight back on the only turf we have: the fact that the sun and wind can deliver the same product as LNG, only more cheaply and much more cleanly. We can’t threaten tariffs to get our way; we can only make the case in such persuasive terms that we start to change the zeitgeist. That’s the point of SunDay project I described last week and that you are going to hear a lot more about. Many thanks to those who went to sunday.earth to help us draw some suns as we prepare for the official launch of this big effort. So many of you took part already. Here’s a beautiful example from the effervescent Ayana Johnson (whose book What If We Get It Right is a document for this tough moment)

[allthecanadianpolitics]

A controversial pipeline meant to transport natural gas across northern British Columbia has passed a major milestone. On Monday, TC Energy announced it has finished installing pipe on its Coastal GasLink pipeline project. "That means that all 670 kilometres of pipe has been welded, coated, lowered into the trench, rigorously tested, and backfilled," the company said in a release. First planned more than a decade ago, the pipeline will carry natural gas from near Dawson Creek in the province's northeast to a massive LNG Canada processing facility in Kitimat on the West Coast, where it is to be liquefied and shipped to Asia, opening up new markets for Canadian producers. [...] While the pipeline has buy-in from several elected First Nations bands along its route, it has faced high-profile opposition from a group of hereditary chiefs who assert that Wet'suwet'en territory has never been ceded to the federal government and that pre-colonial governance structures are still responsible for the land. In November 2021, 29 people were arrested over two days of police action in Wet'suwet'en territory as RCMP moved in on a resistance camp, known as Coyote camp, that had been occupying a key work site for Coastal GasLink, a number of whom are now facing charges of criminal contempt.

Continue Reading.

Tagging: @politicsofcanada

[yukacchi]

i drew these stickers for the #Worlds2024 quarterfinals matches i went to last week its a bit late and semis have already started lmfao but i only got back a couple days ago so im getting around to posting now! gl to the remaining teams!!!! (t1 pls t1 im begging)

[awesome-casuallyfamouscollector]

China has not imported any liquefied natural gas from the United States since early February, data from Kpler cited by Nikkei has shown. The last LNG cargo that left the Gulf bound for China set off on February 6, the data showed.

The Chinese tariffs on U.S. goods, including energy products, and the broader trade war between the world’s two biggest economies could have long-term consequences on the ability of new U.S. LNG export projects to attract anchor offtake commitments, analysts have warned.

The United States was never a major supplier of LNG to Chinese buyers, but after Beijing slapped retaliatory tariffs on U.S. energy imports, the flow ended completely. Following the tariff exchange, Chinese LNG buyers with long-term supply contracts with U.S. producers started reselling the cargos to Europe, Bloomberg reported in March, citing sources from the trading world. What’s more, Chinese traders have grown cold towards new long-term commitments for future supply from the United States, instead seeking long-term deals with gas producers in the Middle East and the Asia Pacific(..)

[evilhorse]

Captain America #252

[fantabulisticity]

We have one last chance to demand that President Biden's Department of Energy (DOE) stop the massive LNG buildout harming the Gulf Coast of Louisiana, Texas, and beyond, putting our future at risk. Six proposed LNG terminals or expansion projects are already approved by another federal regulator and are now seeking a license from the DOE to export fracked gas to other countries in Asia and Europe. Approving more fracked gas LNG export licenses, or leaving the decision to the incoming Trump Administration, means sacrificing more Gulf lives and the destruction of local economies, often in predominantly Black and Brown communities. It means higher domestic energy prices across the country, and it means more devastating destruction from climate change. Already, clean energy like solar and wind is more affordable than fossil fuels. Economists and climate scientists agree that the world does not need more gas. DOE Secretary Granholm has all the information and analysis she needs to determine that more LNG exports are not in the public's interest. Take action now before it's too late: Urge DOE Secretary Granholm to deny LNG export licenses now.

[yetisidelblog]

Last month, the Biden Administration released its long-awaited analysis of the environmental, economic, and public health impacts of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports.

This study makes one thing clear: approving more LNG exports will drive up costs for families and supercharge global climate pollution.

Now, we’re halfway through the 60-day public comment period on this pivotal report — and with the Trump administration itching to ditch the export pause, we have no time to waste. The Department of Energy (DOE) says it won’t revise the analysis itself, but it will use our feedback to guide decisions on future LNG export approvals.

Submit your comment now to demand the DOE reject new LNG export permits. We can’t afford to let this crucial analysis be ignored — or buried.

Here’s why your voice is urgently needed:

Climate devastation: Projects like CP2 LNG in Louisiana could emit 190 million tonnes of CO2e per year—equivalent to the pollution from 51 coal-fired power plants. We can’t let these carbon bombs move forward.

Health impacts in vulnerable communities: LNG facilities are concentrated in areas already suffering from pollution and climate change. This leads to higher rates of cancer, asthma, and heart disease for people who’ve suffered enough.

Environmental destruction: Heavy dredging and construction for LNG facilities damage ecosystems, devastate local economies reliant on fishing and tourism, and threaten biodiversity.

Higher costs for families: LNG exports raise energy bills for Americans while padding the profits of oil and gas CEOs. We need policies that protect people, not corporate profits.

National security risks: With LNG demand in Europe declining, U.S. rivals like China are increasingly buying up American LNG, using our resources to strengthen their power.

We’ve seen how public pressure can stop fossil fuel projects in their tracks. If enough of us speak out, the DOE can’t simply turn a blind eye — every comment becomes part of the public record. Even if the Trump administration tries to rewrite the narrative, this study will stand as powerful evidence that LNG expansion is a terrible deal for our climate and our communities.

Let’s show the DOE that we refuse to let Big Oil and Gas profit at our expense. Make your voice heard: Submit your comment today!

@upontheshelfreviews

@greenwingspino

@one-time-i-dreamt

@tenaflyviper

@akron-squirrel

@ifihadaworldofmyown

@justice-for-jacob-marley

@voicetalentbrendan

@thebigdeepcheatsy

@what-is-my-aesthetic

@ravenlynclemens

@thegreatallie

@writerofweird

@anon-lephant

@bogleech

@mentally-quiet-spycrab

[tomorrowusa]

The Biden administration is pausing new projects, for environmental reasons, to increase the export of liquefied natural gas (LNG) overseas.

Natural gas by itself is the least bad fossil fuel. But gas cannot be shipped – so it needs to be liquefied. This process causes it to become more damaging to the climate.

There's also the matter of methane leaks associated with natural gas.

Donald Trump has already stated that on Day One of his dictatorship that he will "drill drill drill". Trump is an existential threat to the planet.

[tianslawyer]

Zika exchanged jersey with Doran 🫂

[supplyside]

Artic Voyager

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from Inside Climate News:

For the second time, a federal court struck down a regulatory agency’s authorization of two controversial, multi-billion-dollar gas export projects in far South Texas, one of which is already under construction. 

In an Aug. 6 opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Washington, D.C. Circuit cited “the nature and severity of the flaws” in reviews by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission of the two proposed gas liquefaction and export complexes, Rio Grande LNG and Texas LNG, along with the associated Rio Bravo Pipeline. 

“Although we do not take this step lightly, the circumstances here require it,” the ruling said. “We appreciate the significant disruption vacatur may cause the projects. But that does not outweigh the seriousness of the Commission’s procedural defects.”

The court wrote that FERC failed in its analyses of environmental justice and climate impacts, air pollution modeling and procedural obligations. FERC and the developers now have 45 days to seek a re-hearing.  

The two complexes in question plan to pipe in Texas shale gas, condense it and load millions of tons per year onto tanker ships for sale overseas as liquified natural gas, or LNG. Each complex costs billions of dollars, spans hundreds of acres and makes up part of an ongoing boom in gas export projects along the Gulf Coast of Texas and Louisiana. 

Rio Grande LNG parent company NextDecade said in a statement it was “disappointed in the Court’s decision and disagrees with its conclusions.” 

The company added that construction continues on the first three liquefaction trains and related infrastructure at Rio Grande LNG near Brownsville and it will examine what impact the court’s order will have on future plans for added infrastructure.

The company announced last July it had secured investor funding to begin construction on its 750-acre, $18 billion facility. 

A spokesperson for Texas LNG, a smaller, adjacent project on the Brownsville Ship Channel that is yet to secure sufficient funding, said the ruling was a procedural decision to correct a technical deficiency, which they were still studying. 

“We have full confidence FERC will address this matter judiciously and efficiently and look forward to working with them on this important issue,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

Three small surrounding cities and the local water district have passed resolutions opposing the projects, situated between national wildlife refuges and atop wetlands. 

[postcard-from-the-past]

French forces at the Colonial Memorial in Lạng Sơn, northern Vietnam

French vintage postcard

[notwiselybuttoowell]

In a significant win for the Puyallup Tribe, Puget Sound residents, and health and conservation groups who had opposed an expansion of a liquified natural gas (LNG) terminal in Tacoma, Puget Sound Energy announced that it is abandoning its permit from the City of Tacoma for the project.

While the LNG terminal has been operational since February 2022, the proposed expansion would have allowed new vessels and “bunkering barges” to load LNG to power their own ships or to transfer fuel to other ships. This risky new use of the terminal would have significantly altered the activities allowed at the terminal, essentially allowing LNG barges to act like floating gas stations, refueling other ships in the Salish Sea and beyond.

Because the City of Tacoma processed the project as a permit “revision” rather than a new permit, there was no public process or environmental review. Many Tacoma residents and Puyallup tribal members were unaware of the project until after it had been approved. Tribal members and residents expressed concerns about increased safety, health, environmental, cultural and climate impacts that would result from the expansion.

The appeals filed in December by the Tribe and Earthjustice argued that the city’s authorization violated the Shorelines Management Act, Tacoma’s city code, and the Washington State Environmental Policy Act.

This is good news, though I've always been appalled that it was approved and built in the first place. But I'll certainly take it, and be doubly glad that it was followed a few days later by the biden administration "pausing" the construction of any other new facilities (though again, not the best case scenario, is it?)

[stealingpotatoes]

happy neil banging out the tunes day to everyone who celebrates

[intelligentchristianlady]

Pay attention--this really matters. Whatever you think of Biden himself, his administration is doing great stuff. Please vote blue.

Don't usually share work stuff but I do work in climate policy and nearly every memo I write includes some variation of "government funding for this obscure but necessary area of climate mitigation research has been multiplied (sometimes by like, 1000x) under the Biden Administration" and while I know the oil permitting stuff is much splashier news there's a whole world of work that needs to be done under the surface that Biden is doing. And if he doesn't win in 2024 all that progress goes away and the climate is absolutely fucked