Energy Tomorrow Blog
John D. Siciliano
Posted December 18, 2019
At the recent U.N. climate talks in Madrid, former Secretary of State John Kerry kicked off a new bipartisan climate campaign that includes natural gas as part of the answer in an interesting marriage between political campaign and real-world energy solutions.
The campaign, referred to as World War Zero, will fan out to key battleground states next year to educate voters on climate change policies in the run-up to the November presidential election.
Kerry, a longtime senator and America’s top diplomat under the Obama administration, told the New York Times ahead of the Madrid talks that the campaign wouldn’t endorse one policy over another, and that members are free to support any number of climate solutions, including natural gas.
Posted December 12, 2019
News that the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. is bringing attention to the need for a natural gas pipeline to serve an impoverished area near Chicago makes a lot of sense. No person should be preparing for the approaching winter without clean, reliable heat, which natural gas provides.
Unfortunately, people living in the Pembroke Township area south of Chicago near the Indiana state line don’t have natural gas and are facing just such a challenge. The area’s median income is about $16,000 a year, it suffers from 30% unemployment and has a 33.9% poverty rate. ...
The plight of Pembroke Township, like others we’ve noted, is a reminder that access to affordable, reliable energy is critically important not only for comfort and convenience, but also for health, particularly among low-income Americans.
John D. Siciliano
Posted November 26, 2019
The transition to cleaner natural gas-fueled electricity generation is creating new momentum for building out the nation’s energy infrastructure – specifically, new pipeline capacity needed to accelerate the changeover from coal and other older resources.
Not doing so has proven to be detrimental to consumers and clean energy goals alike.
Posted November 22, 2019
Our newest video reminds everyone how much the United States has gained from the energy revolution – record-breaking, world-leading production of natural gas and oil – with clips of presidents from both political parties over the years, urgently calling for lower oil imports. They knew America’s national security was tied to increasing the nation’s energy security. …
Presidents since Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s recognized that ever-increasing oil imports meant increasing dependency on others for energy. … That changed with the energy revolution. …
The question, as we’ve posed in recent posts (see here and here), is why anyone would erase these gains by banning hydraulic fracturing, as some candidates for president have advocated. Why would America reject its own natural gas and oil abundance and go back to an era of energy scarcity?
Posted November 21, 2019
Some important data points from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) on the country’s emissions of carbon dioxide, a critically important greenhouse gas and a key to U.S. progress on climate goals:
First, as we noted in this recent post, EIA projects U.S. energy-related CO2 emissions this year will go down from the previous year. Broader context: Our nation’s CO2 emissions haven’t been this low since 1987. Second, EIA says the overall carbon intensity of the U.S. economy – the amount of carbon dioxide that is emitted per unit of energy consumed – declined in 2018.
This is especially important in electricity generation, a major source of emissions. EIA says that switching fuels for generation, from coal to natural gas, has played an important role in reducing U.S. carbon intensity.
Posted November 1, 2019
The U.S. as a global leader in natural gas exports is underlined by a new government report showing that through the first six months of this year, U.S. net natural gas exports averaged 4.1 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) – more than doubling 2018’s average net exports. This follows analysis that the U.S. became a net exporter of natural gas on an annual basis for the first time in 60 years in 2017.
These figures are significant for a number of reasons:
First, they attest to the strength of domestic natural gas production, which continues to set records – largely thanks to shale production enabled by safe hydraulic fracturing. … Second, expanding markets for U.S. natural gas helps support more domestic production – which means jobs, investments and other economic growth.Third, growing exports of clean natural gas means other nations may realize the environmental benefits from increased use of natural gas.
Posted October 28, 2019
America’s natural gas and oil industry continues to work for Americans – with revenues from production on federal and Native American-owned lands and offshore areas driving $11.69 billion in federal disbursements back to the states, counties, tribes and reclamation and conservation programs. That’s $2.76 billion more than the previous fiscal year and nearly double the disbursements in FY2016, the Interior Department said.
Recipients included: $2.44 billion to states and counties, $1.76 billion to the reclamation fund, $1.14 billion to Native American tribes and individual mineral owners, $1 billion to the Land and Water Conservation Fund and $4.9 billion to the U.S. treasury.
Posted October 25, 2019
Energy analyst Michael Lynch has a couple of charts in his recent article for Forbes that do a good job of showing the stark repercussions of banning hydraulic fracturing – as a number of Democrats have advocated on the campaign trail.
First, understand that modern, technologically advanced fracking is used for 95% of new wells today. Shale and tight sandstone formations, which need hydraulic fracturing to be economically feasible, accounted for about 69% of total U.S. dry natural gas production in 2018 and 59% of total U.S. crude oil production, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. So, yes, a fracking ban or something approaching it would put a major dent in U.S. production.
Posted October 16, 2019
Hydraulic fracturing – the technological breakthrough that launched the U.S. energy revolution – has taken a beating during the Democratic presidential derby.
The Washington Post ran a graphic recently, showing that the entire field would ban fracking altogether or restrict it in some capacity. Here’s the portion of the graphic showing the candidates who would ban fracking completely. The group includes some top-tier candidates, U.S. Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris. Sen. Warren tweeted last month that she would ban fracking everywhere, while Sen. Sanders told the Post that safe fracking is a “pure fiction.”
Not fiction are the negative impacts throughout our society that could result from banning hydraulic fracturing: millions of job losses, trillions lost to the economy, significant increases in household spending on energy.
Posted October 14, 2019
Looking over EPA’s new Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) data on methane emissions, let’s consider two overarching points:
First, energy from natural gas and oil power and empower America’s modern way of life – better health, greater comforts and conveniences and opportunities for Americans and their families to prosper. No other energy comes close in terms of accessibility, reliability, affordability and useful adaptability across an economy and nation as large and diverse as ours.
Second, as America’s natural gas and oil industry produces the energy we count on every day, it also must continue to capture as much methane as possible from that production, to help the U.S. meet its climate objectives. On both of those leading priorities, our industry is on it.