Tag: natural gas

Posted on

Obama Calls for “All of the Above” Energy Strategy for America

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

In President Obama’s third State of the Union address, he devoted more time than before to covering energy issues, calling for an “all-out, all-of-the-above” approach to boosting production of every kind of domestic energy, fossil as well as renewable.

Obama also asked the country to imagine “a future where we’re in control of our own energy,” which seemed to be a call for energy independence, a goal set out by all U.S. presidents going back to Nixon.

He also said he supports opening up more offshore areas for exploration and development of oil and gas. The president of Shell Oil said it seems the federal government has increased its pace of issuing permits for deepwater drilling.

He also expressed support for shale gas, saying the country had natural gas supplies that could last “nearly 100 years.” However, a new analysis by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) said the country may only have about half as much shale gas as the EIA’s 2011 estimate held—and the most extensively drilled shale area, the Marcellus, was downgraded by about two-thirds. For any drilling on public lands, Obama will require companies to disclose the chemicals they use.

The result was a variety of aims that could conflict, since boosting production of fossil fuels could stymie renewable energy and boost greenhouse gas emissions.

Climate change only showed up in the speech once, when Obama blamed partisan division in Congress for delaying climate legislation. He indicated there is no reason Congress shouldn’t at least set a “clean energy standard”—the kind of effort that could sharply cut emissions at low cost, according to an analysis last year by the EIA.

Changes to Taxes and Trade

Another theme in Obama’s speech was an “economy built to last,” calling for a resurgence of U.S. manufacturing. A key part of this would be clean tech, as Obama said, “I will not walk away from … clean energy.” He also touted a wind turbine manufacturer as an example of a U.S. company creating domestic jobs.

To help protect domestic jobs, he announced the creation of a Trade Enforcement Unit that will investigate “unfair trade practices in countries like China,” apparently a reference to recent scuffles over China’s support for solar panel manufacturers.

Obama also argued companies should not get tax breaks for moving jobs overseas. There has been some criticism of green stimulus money supporting jobs overseas and now Evergreen Solar, the United States’ third-biggest solar panel manufacturer, announced plans to shut down its main U.S. factory and open another in China.

Obama also called for an end to tax breaks for the petroleum industry. “We have subsidized oil companies for a century,” he said. “That’s long enough.” Obama has urged such a move several times before, as has Fatih Birol, chief economist of the International Energy Agency, who said cutting fossil fuel subsidies would get the world halfway to reaching ambitious goals for cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

However, fuel price hikes have sparked protests—as when Italy raised taxes and Nigeria lowered subsidies.

Oil Market Ratchets Up

Meanwhile, the European Union adopted a ban on importing Iranian oil, to be phased in by July 1, to try to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

In retaliation, Iran is considering immediately ceasing oil sales to Europe, and again threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most important oil chokepoint, leading the International Monetary Fund to warn rising tensions could cause oil prices to spike, joining a chorus of earlier warnings.

In case of a shut-down, Saudi Arabia’s leaders said oil could continue flowing through alternate routes, and make up for much of the loss of Iranian oil—also admitting a preference for oil prices to remain around $100 a barrel.

In case of such oil or gas price spikes, six Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives introduced the Gas Price Spike Act to apply a windfall tax that would capture most of the revenue that goes beyond “a reasonable profit.” The money raised would help fund fuel-efficient cars and mass transit systems.

Regardless of acute geopolitical turmoil, high oil prices are here to stay, since oil’s “tipping point has passed” and the “supply of cheap oil has plateaued,” argued an article in Nature.

The Climate Post offers a rundown of the week in climate and energy news. It is produced each Thursday by Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.

Posted on

U.S. Rejects Tar Sands Pipeline from Canada—For Now

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

Under pressure from Congress to make a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline, planned to connect Canada’s tar sands region with the U.S. Gulf Coast, the Obama administration has decided to reject the pipeline proposal.

“This announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline” that did not allow enough time to finish the environmental impact assessment, said President Obama. Republicans who supported the pipeline say they will continue to fight for it, and have asked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to testify before Congress on the decision.

The company that wanted to build the pipeline, TransCanada, said earlier this week it was moving ahead with its plans despite the political wrangling. Also, the government of Alberta, the province at the center of Canada’s tar sands activity, had been urging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to ignore greenhouse gas emissions and climate change impacts when evaluating the pipeline, according to newly released documents.

But with the decision issued by the U.S. State Department, now the company will have to start over and reapply, and the government might not offer an expedited review. TransCanada may reapply within weeks proposing a new route avoiding Nebraska’s ecologically sensitive Sand Hills region, above a portion of the vast Ogallala Aquifer.

Obama reportedly called Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper to explain his decision, and Harper said he hoped the pipeline would eventually be approved. Harper is also supporting another pipeline to Canada’s Pacific coast that would facilitate exports to Asia, in particular to China. However, pipeline approval is more difficult in Canada than the U.S., and there is considerable opposition to a Pacific pipeline, a Reuters analyst said.

The decision was a “brave” call, said Bill McKibben, branded in the Boston Globe as “the man who crushed the Keystone XL pipeline.”

However other commentators—even those who took the decision as good news—argued it won’t stop Canada’s tar sands from flowing, and thus won’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Others called the decision “a gift” to the GOP.

Shale Gas Versus Alternatives

Although world oil prices and U.S. gasoline prices were at all-time highs in 2011, in the U.S. natural gas prices have been plummeting, reaching their lowest in a decade in a “classic case of oversupply.” The price has dropped lately because of a mild winter requiring less heating, a boon to consumers and businesses; the longer trend has been driven by the advent of shale gas drilling techniques, which now account for about a quarter of U.S. natural gas production.

There has been limited shale gas development outside the U.S., and prices in most of the rest of the world have remained much higher.

Although several years ago the U.S. was planning to import large amounts of liquefied natural gas and built ports to receive it in tankers, now the country is considering exporting natural gas. But such a move would have wide-ranging impacts that are difficult to unravel, according to a new report from the Brookings Institution; the U.S. Energy Information Administration said exporting natural gas would likely push domestic prices up.

And an MIT study simulated the impacts a steady supply of cheap shale gas would likely have on the U.S. economy and found it would in many ways benefit the economy over the next couple of decades, but that it could boost greenhouse gas emissions and stunt the growth of renewable energy and other alternatives.

Renewables Reach New High

Global investment in renewable energy hit a new record in 2011, reaching $260 billion, up 5 percent from 2010. Wind investment fell 17 percent from 2010, while solar investment grew by a third, so spending on solar was twice the spending on wind. The growth of solar was attributed in large part to plummeting photovoltaic panel prices.

Meanwhile, manufacturers of both solar panels and wind turbines are being squeezed by oversupply, leaving them with low profit margins.

In the U.S., renewables investment grew by a third, to $56 billion, helping the U.S. to reclaim the title of world’s biggest clean energy investor. However, in 2011 the country also saw the end of “green stimulus” money and federal loan guarantees, and its Production Tax Credit will end at the close of 2012, so future investment onward may drop unless new support for renewables is brought in.

With the drop in wind energy investment, Vestas, the world’s largest turbine manufacturer, is laying off more than 2,000 employees globally, about 10 percent of its workforce. It said it may layoff another 1,600 in the U.S. if the Production Tax Credit is not extended.

The Climate Post offers a rundown of the week in climate and energy news. It is produced each Thursday by Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.

Posted on

As Eurozone Crisis Deepens, Fight to Save Emissions Trading Scheme Begins

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

Editor’s Note: The Climate Post will not be circulated next Thursday in observance of the holiday. Look for it again on January 5.

Prices in Europe’s carbon emissions trading scheme have collapsed this year, in part because there were too many allowances in the system starting off, threatening the future of the whole market.

“Without intervention … Europe’s climate policy is over,” one analyst said. Some of Europe’s biggest energy and manufacturing firms also wrote a letter to the European Commission that called for Europe to take “decisive action now” to raise the price of carbon and fix the scheme.

The European Parliament’s environment committee voted in favor of temporarily cutting the number of emissions permits to be issued.

This year, the price of permits has fallen about 50 percent. Emissions allowances are now about 6 euros per ton—a four-year low, and about half what they were when the market began. Denmark, which will take over the presidency of the European Union in 2012, said the current carbon prices are “not sustainable” and vowed to help fix the problem.

Part of the problem is that Europe’s economic crisis is escalating, risking a slump like in the 1930s to which no country will be immune, said Christine Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, in a speech at the U.S. State Department. Also, a new energy efficiency effort could also cut the number of permits needed, another reason to issue less in the future.

Paving the Way for De-carbonized Energy

The European Commission presented its long-awaited “Energy Roadmap 2050,” aiming to point the way to meet the European Union (EU) goal of cutting emissions at least 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

The report considered various ways of reaching these targets, and concluded that relying heavily on renewables would be no more expensive than boosting nuclear, or fossil fuels along with carbon capture and storage.

A de-carbonized energy system could be cheaper than “business-as-usual,” although de-carbonization would require large up-front spending. The report also said natural gas will be a “critical” fuel during the transition.

The EU soon needs to set renewable energy targets for 2030, said EU Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger.

Pollution Crackdowns

The European Union moved earlier this year to expand its emissions trading scheme to include flights in and out of Europe, and now the European Court of Justice has backed that law despite protests from the U.S. and others. The new decision, which goes into effect Jan. 1, may trigger a trade war.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Environmental Protection agency unveiled its first limits on emissions of mercury and several other toxic pollutants from power plants. The limits were 20 years in the making, and cover a variety of toxic compounds including arsenic, nickel, selenium, and cyanide.

The new standard gives companies three options: install systems to scrub their emissions, switch to natural gas, or shut down their plants. Some of the nation’s oldest—and generally dirtiest—coal-fired power plants may be forced to shut down, which could also benefit the climate.

Climategate Investigation Widened

The U.S. Department of Justice is apparently working with law enforcement officials in Britain to investigate who leaked climate researchers’ e-mails.

In the U.K., police raided the home of one climate skeptic blogger and confiscated two of his computers.

Flipping the Switch on Incandescents

A ban on the sale of incandescent light bulbs of 100 watts or more in the U.S. is supposed to go into effect Jan. 1, but an emergency spending agreement in Congress removed funds from enforcement of the ban, at least until October 2012. Experts say the lack of enforcement will likely have little effect, since light bulb manufacturers have already retooled and moved on.

The Climate Post offers a rundown of the week in climate and energy news. It is produced each Thursday by Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.

Google Subscribers: The Nicholas Institute is transitioning away from sending The Climate Post via Google Feedburner. If you are receiving our new posts Thursday’s at 5 p.m. via Google, please unsubscribe from the feed by clicking the link at the bottom of the e-mail. Forward the e-mail on to nicholasinstitute@duke.edu to re-subscribe using our new service. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause, and appreciate your interest in our weekly write-ups.

Posted on

Ailing Economies Push Richer Countries to Tap Emergency Oil Reserves

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

In a move that caught many by surprise, the world’s richer oil-importing countries will soon tap into emergency oil reserves, the International Energy Agency (IEA) announced, arguing: “Greater tightness in the oil market threatens to undermine the fragile global economic recovery.”

In total, over the next 30 days, IEA member countries plan to release 60 million barrels of crude—less than one day’s worth of global consumption. Half that oil would come from the U.S., and the rest from a dozen other countries, including many European Union members, Turkey, Korea, and Japan. The IEA has coordinated a release of oil from its members’ reserves only twice before, in response to the 1991 U.S.-Iraq war and to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005.

U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu said, “We are taking this action in response to the ongoing loss of crude oil due to supply disruptions in Libya and other countries.” However, the Obama administration began considering tapping the strategic oil reserve in January.

Speculation of Motives

Reactions to the oil release ran the gamut, with the chairman and the managing director of oil analysis firm IHS CERA saying the new release is “an unprecedented use of strategic reserves as an economic stimulus.” Some said the move is symbolic, to boost market optimism and to give the sense that the government is doing something about high gasoline prices while others said the real motivation was to hurt oil speculators by catching them by surprise.

Some speculators, it seems, may have gotten a jump on it: oil started trading suspiciously in the hours before the IEA announcement, driving prices down and prompting an investigation by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. In fact, oil prices fell more than 5 percent in the day of the IEA announcement, but the following day rebounded, in part because of fears about supplies getting tighter later this year.

Spare a Barrel

Many members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) criticized the decision, saying the IEA had not given them time to boost their production. In late May, OPEC countries decided against formally raising their production quotas, but some members—in particular Saudi Arabia—signaled they would boost production anyway.

OPEC members in the Persian Gulf—such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait—are widely considered to hold most of the world’s spare capacity for oil production. But oil expert Euan Mearns noted that despite a sharp rise in drilling activity in Gulf nations in February 2011, their production hasn’t risen much. He interprets this as a sign of goodwill, and as an indication that “usable spare capacity does not exist”—or that it must be of relatively undesirable heavy, sour crude.

A Natural Gas Bubble?

In the U.S., “fracking” to get natural gas out of underground shale has been booming—but the vast majority of fracking wells are “inherently unprofitable” and the fast-growing industry is a “Ponzi scheme,” according to industry e-mails obtained by the New York Times. Much of the shale gas activity has been financed by a rush of investment money into the sector, rather than by profits from production, the e-mails say.

In a companion article, the New York Times reported e-mails from the Energy Information Administration reveal internal doubts over their forecasts of shale gas production, such as projections it would triple from 2009 to 2035.

California Carbon Cap Stalled

California’s legislation for a cap-and-trade system for many of the state’s largest greenhouse gas emitters had faced a legal battle—but the court hearing the case ruled the state can go ahead. The project was scheduled to start in January 2012, but Air Resources Board Chairwoman Mary Nichols, who oversees the program, announced enforcement for major polluters would will be delayed until 2013.

Efficiency from Detroit to Afghanistan

The Obama administration is trying to cut demand for oil by boosting vehicle efficiency. In closed-door talks with Detroit’s big three—General Motors, Ford and Chrysler—officials called for average mileage for cars and light trucks to reach 56.2 miles per gallon by 2025.

Meanwhile, Obama announced plans for troop withdrawals from Afghanistan, prompting renewed discussion of the costs of the war—including NPR’s report that U.S. military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq spend an estimated $20 billion a year on air conditioning.

The Climate Post offers a rundown of the week in climate and energy news. It is produced each Thursday by Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.

Posted on

Is Natural Gas All It’s Cracked Up to Be?

The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University

Natural gas has a reputation as the least environmentally damaging fossil fuel, but a new study from Cornell University paints a slightly different picture. Study leader Robert Howarth told the BBC that, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, gas from shale rocks—undergoing a boom in production in the U.S.—is “quite likely as bad [as] or worse than coal.”

Why? Methane, the main component of natural gas, is a far more powerful—albeit shorter-lived—greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, and shale gas production is leaky. For each watt of energy released, the emissions from producing shale gas would cause about 20 percent more warming than the emissions from coal over a 20-year period. This is about the same amount of warming as coal over a 100-year period. 

The study received criticism from a variety of groups, including the gas industry and the industry group Energy In Depth. Even The Clean Air Task Force argued it was flawed in several ways.

Meanwhile, shale gas is being hailed as a savior by many, with Time magazine proclaiming on its cover, “This rock could power the world,” and President Obama talking up shale gas production in a recent energy speech, saying “the potential for natural gas is enormous.”

But as the Time magazine article points out, shale gas has also won many detractors. Getting it out of the ground requires a technique known as hydrofracking—fracturing the shale rock by pumping millions of gallons of high-pressure, chemical-laden water into each well. Some fear this fluid is contaminating their drinking water—either underground, or when it is stored in pools on the surface. There is little reason to think fracking is inherently unsafe, argued Michael Levi with the Council on Foreign Relations, but a new study launched by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency could help sort out the evidence.

Regardless of the environmental impact, shale gas production could continue growing, according to a report commissioned by the U.S. Energy Information Administration. EIA estimates that there are “vast” quantities of technically recoverable shale gas in 32 countries (besides the U.S.), which amount to nearly 5,800 trillion cubic feet, or the equivalent of 1 trillion barrels of oil—a volume roughly on par with official estimates of proven oil reserves.

Some news articles put these resources in terms of current consumption—with Obama saying U.S. holds “perhaps a century’s worth” of shale gas.

Move Over Hybrids, Electric Vehicles

Many are talking about big boosts in natural gas consumption, including oil billionaire T. Boone Pickens, who hailed natural gas as “the only resource we have in America that can replace foreign oil.” Plans to replace oil for fueling fleets of trucks may get a boost from the NAT GAS Act, recently introduced in the Senate.

Chrysler this week announced it will start selling natural-gas vehicles in the U.S. by 2017. But Honda may beat them to it. 

But is there enough of this resource? In areas with abundant shale gas, power plants are using it as a replacement for coal, reports the Centre Daily Times from the shale gas heartland of Pennsylvania. If these plans for increased natural gas consumption pan out, however, the remaining resources could be used up considerably faster than many estimates suggest.

A Little Competition

Meanwhile, efforts to boost domestic energy production may bring another potentially environmentally damaging practice to the United States, since a mining company has qualified for a permit to open the country’s first tar sands mine in Utah.

As one of the Bush administration’s parting shots in 2008, it loosened the rules on development of oil shales—which have to be heated underground to break them down and yield oil—but the Department of the Interior has now said it is ready to launch a new evaluation of the regulations. Europe, on the other hand, is taking a much dimmer view of these unconventional fossil fuels, with the European Union mulling a ban on importing oil made from tar sands, and France considering banning shale gas wells.

Climate Talks Aim at Impossible Goal

The latest round of UN climate talks wrapped up in Bangkok, with no major breakthroughs. The World Wildlife Fund said there was “little to show for the weeklong session,” although countries did agree to a roadmap for moving forward. Tosi Mpanu Mpanu, chair of the Africa Group, told Reuters: “Thank god we came up with an agenda. It’s a pity it took so long. What does it say for the rest of the year?”

China has earned new clout in climate negotiations, IPS news reports, as a result of its new five-year plan for the country. The plan is still under development, but draft versions set out large boosts for clean energy. But even with such relatively ambitious goals, it is nearly impossible to reach the goal of limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial temperature.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Congress hashed out deals on spending, with clean energy and efficiency research relatively unscathed. However, a proposal was killed that would have added the Climate Service at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Like a Fish Needs a Llama

In other news, a few headlines made it hard to sort fact from fiction this week. One (apparently true) news story reported that, in the U.K., fish were transported by llama to new locales, to help them cope with climate change. And the Associated Press reported that energy giant General Electric decided to return its $3.2 billion tax refund to the U.S. Treasury. (That was a hoax, it turned out, perpetrated by the activist group The Yes Men.)

The Climate Post offers a rundown of the week in climate and energy news. It is produced each Thursday by Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.