From the Center for Liquified Natural gas:
LNG Exports Remain a Win-Win for U.S. Manufacturing
In light of today’s joint hearing held by the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power and the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade, entitled, “U.S. Energy Abundance: Manufacturing and America’s Energy Advantage,” it’s worth emphasizing that the American manufacturing sector will be bolstered by increased exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG).
In the past six months the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas (CLNG) has written extensively on how the United States’ wealth of natural gas resources, expert supply forecasts and widespread support of the U.S. manufacturing sector illustrate that expanded LNG exports will not harm chemical manufacturers. Industry experts, credible economic studies and top tier editorial boards across the country agree: Exporting LNG will only strengthen the U.S. economy. Some key points worth considering include:
CLNG:“First of all, claims that exporting LNG provides only a ‘one-time value’ add, are not true. Liquefying natural gas requires many highly-skilled workers to convert raw natural gas into a liquefied state. The resulting product – LNG – is thus a product in its own right.
“Secondly, the pipes, turbines, and other materials necessary to construct and operate a liquefaction facility must be manufactured, purchased, and installed. Companies like General Electric – oneof the largest U.S. manufacturers – provide a wide range of products necessary for LNG terminal operation, including gas turbines, pumps and compressors. In addition, all of these products require steel and other raw materials. This means a single LNG facility has a long manufacturing value chain, with significant economic gains – including jobs – at each step along the way.”
Letter from Caterpillar, Inc. to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE):“Some argue that by restricting exports, America would gain a competitive advantage over our international competitors by depressing U.S. natural gas prices while pushing LNG prices higher in other countries. We don’t agree.
“We believe LNG export restrictions would discourage U.S. energy exploration and economic growth. And the notion of restricting exports would be counterproductive to our ongoing efforts to keep other countries from embracing similar policies. The U.S. has – and should continue – to strenuously oppose export restrictions imposed by other countries as they seek to gain advantage over U.S. manufacturers and farmers by restricting products like rare earth materials, scrape steel, and food.”
Letter from General Electric to DOE:“GE supports free markets and free trade. As a global company, we have witnessed firsthand the economic vitality generated when local workers, local industry and local resources are unleashed to compete in world markets.”
Letter from the National Association of Manufacturers to DOE:“Proposals that seek to limit LNG or coal or any other product would have far-reaching negative effects on the United States and should be rejected. Such restrictions limit economic opportunities and stifle job growth rather than provide a source of increased economic growth.”
As numerous third-party analyses have confirmed –including DOE’scommissioned study, compiled by NERA Consulting – LNG exports will be such an economic driver that U.S. consumers and industry have nothing to fear and much to gain. Or, as Robert Samuelson, writing in the Washington Post, put it:
“The truth is that the United States needs domestic and foreign buyers for its natural gas. Supply is outpacing demand, leading to a collapse in prices and drilling activity. Gas rigs are down half from a year ago, reports the energy firm Baker Hughes. Prices can’t be held at artificially low levels. Companies won’t drill unless they can profitably sell what they find.
“A policy that discriminates against producers in favor of consumers by restricting foreign sales will hurt both. The gas boom will recede as an engine of growth. For years, Americans have complained about trade deficits. Now that we have something more to sell, we shouldn’t turn away customers.”
Read more about the benefits of natural gas exports at CLNG’s LNG initiative website: http://lnginitiative.org/
Chesapeake Energy Corp,the Oklahoma-based firm is the No. 1 driller in Ohio.
Rig Count Interactive Map by Baker Hughes, an energy services company.
Shale Sheet Fracking, a Youngstown Vindicator blog.
The Ohio Environmental Council, a statewide eco-group based in Columbus.
Earthjustice, a national eco-group.
People's Oil and Gas Collaborative-Ohio, a grass-roots group in Northeast Ohio.
Concerned Citizens of Medina County, a grass-roots group.
No Frack Ohio, a Columbus-based grass-roots group.
Fracking: Gas Drilling's Environmental Threat by ProPublica, an online journalism site.
Pipeline, blog from Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Marcellus shale drilling.
Allegheny Front, environmental public radio for Western Pennsylvania.