Energy Tomorrow Blog
Posted June 9, 2016
Competitive forces and industry innovation continue to drive technological advances and produce clean-burning natural gas, which has led to reducing carbon emissions from power generation to their lowest level in more than 20 years, making it clear that environmental progress and energy production are not mutually exclusive.
Posted July 17, 2015
Earlier this week Climate Central posted a story on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants noting that 41 states experienced reductions from 2008 to 2013, according to a study by Ceres, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Bank of America and four large utilities.
Posted October 22, 2013
Working in Washington D.C. big numbers (trillions and trillions) are thrown around casually, which can sometimes distort what these numbers actually mean in the real world. An example from yesterday’s Washington Post:
The shale-gas boom will provide a modest boost to the U.S. economy. On average, the models in the Stanford study predicted that the natural-gas boom would raise GDP by about $70 billion per year over the next several decades (in current dollars).
$70 billion a year! While, as the article notes, it is not an overwhelming percentage of GDP, ours is a big economy and $70 billion a year is nothing to be modest about. There is a great breadth of industries contributing to our great economy so for comparison let’s pick one, and since I’m a big movie fan, let’s look at motion pictures.
Posted March 15, 2013
Opponents of a free market for natural gas have been trumpetinga new study which purports to show that LNG exports would be an economic negative for the United States. This flies in the face of analysis done by the Department of Energy, The Brookings Institute, ICF International and others which showed that to boost economic activity open markets are the way to go. So we took a look at the study to figure out why their conclusions are not consistent with other industry or government projections. We found some serious biases and inconsistent assumptions added up to a fatally flawed report. Here are a few specifics.
The employment impact analysis is flawed because it assumes no incremental natural gas production.