A week ago, the Estonian Prime Minister, Kaja Kallas, said she believed gas should be included in the seventh package of sanctions the EU, which for now hypothetical but likely to become an actual package soon enough.
Is there no semblance of reasoning or rationale ? An interaction with elementary school children quickly outlines demand and supply with agreeable terms for existence. We, U.S. and also EU, seem to ignore the obvious and are leading to complete oblivion.
Small to medium truck driving companies that I am closely aware of, in my region of the U.S. are going out if business-the cost of fuel is prohibitive. Guess what these 6 companies transport across the country ? Food. If this micro sample is multiplied ever slightly-
We in the in the U.S. probably EU will not enjoy the luxury of basic necessities any longer. We that for so long have lived fat and comfortable-ah and what if we begin to have power outages also?! What no internet ? Air conditioning? Pardon my ranting.
These Bankster overlords are Malthusians. They want us ignorant serfs to live in poverty and to be mostly exterminated. They've stated it many times. This is deliberate. It was the real purpose of the Corona Plandemic.
Marcellus and Haynesville are not the only gas plays in the US. Too many times too many folks forget about Texas RRC District 4! There’s not much activity now but only because 1) the core activity of business shifted in 2013-2014 towards Shale; 2) because of the shift and demand for services in Permian, Eagle Ford and Haynesville, that coupled with low gas prices and an abundance of gas production coming from E’Ford, STX has become forgotten; 3) the gas is still there and reserves are equivalent or greater than the Haynesville/Marcellus, it just needs to be exploited...additionally I see the Utica Shale making a comeback as well given the gas prices currently. STX will make a comeback also, born of necessity, but it will. Problem is that conventional isn’t sexy right now and most companies are geared for unconventional, meaning that E&P’s will need to start looking like Hilcorp with a mixture of people capable of exploiting Conventional and Unconventional assets.
I appreciate your connecting related news stories. Two weeks ago Deutsche Welle, German state TV, had a segment on the dangers of fracking and drilling for gas in the EU. Its OK to use gas fracked in other countries but no fracking in Germany. https://www.dw.com/en/europes-hunt-for-natural-gas-who-stands-to-lose/av-61911663
They wouldn't need the gas if they stayed with nuclear. In fact they've already spent enough on wind and solar to have replaced all of their electricity supply with zero emissions nuclear rather than still having one of the highest emissions in Europe, 12X that of France. And could have supplied all of their building heat from NPP waste heat, or district heating. Similarly California would now have a zero carbon electricity supply instead of 4X the emissions/MWh of France. And could have produced vast quantities of desalinated water from surplus nighttime electricity and the waste heat from the NPPs.
yeah i don't mean new ones. most NG plants are converted old coal plants. maybe not most but certainly some, certainly in my home country (Israel). so how fast can the power source be reversed (can it? ) back to coal?
You can easily run gas power plants on methanol which can be made in vast quantities from coal or any biomass. And methanol, unlike gas, can be stored in large quantities on site. And can be transported in gas or oil pipelines, without the spill risk, at 4-12X the energy flow rate of gas. Big oil has always had a hatred of methanol and actively tried to block its usage.
thanks! didn't know that. but i'm guessing this will require processing of coal on a massive scale - probably cannot be done on site. my question is simple: is coal a leverage play on NG? the Asian utilities are not nearly as sensitive to coal as the Europeans, and coal is abundant (although dry bulk shipping might tighten up) - can they reduce their LNG demand and replace it with coal in a span of a few months? i'm pretty big on coal, and i'm wondering whether this could be a further catalyst.
The idiots like to dismantle shutdown coal power plants (& NPPs) rather than mothball them for emergency situations like we are currently in and facilitate their conversion to nuclear by replacing the coal boiler with one of the high temperature pebble bed, molten salt or liquid sodium reactors now being developed (or operational now in China). This stupidity is not an accident.
Very rational analysis - but rationality fails in the wake of delusion.
The fossil-fuel based district heating and cooling or combined heat and power (CHP) or cogeneration and industrial waste heat recovery systems are ideal in Europe by virtue of its geography and size. Many countries in Europe might still have the infrastructure for district heating and cooling. These decentralized systems have a thermal efficiency from 70% to 80% compared to the large-scale plants that tend to be 30-35% efficient. They also reduce GHG emissions by 50% or more as they are using the fuel twice. Some large university campuses here in US are still run by these small plants (50-MW to 100-MW) that power the entire campus and surrounding neighborhoods with electricity throughout the year, heating with steam in winter, and chilled water in summer for A/C. Some of these plants peak at 80% efficiency with 90% capacity factor, providing reliable power to anywhere from 50,000 homes to 120,000 homes. US had this infrastructure in the early 1900s but now New York city still operates this system. Other cities have gotten rid of it. This is a very good solution for the world going forward. Please check Tom Casten (Entrepreneur) who wrote the book "Turning off the Heat", he was an entrepreneur who built several companies here in Mid-west. Unfortunately, this green-renewable-solar-wind-battery hysteria is killing these innovative design solutions that could be achieved with this existing hydrocarbon. After all, we are humans made of carbons and we consume "carbohydrates" to survive. It is disconnection from this reality and one's adherence to global domination theories that has hijacked the minds of these elites who are caught in this web of delusion. Yes, China, India, and Russia all have these technologies and they are using it. Furthermore, recently Ireland is also looking at this under the guise of "Low-Carbon" instead of "De-Carbonize"....
You cannot de-carbonize the system - we are part of a carbonized system. This is total delusion. We can control the diet but cannot stop eating or get rid of the liver.
You can easily decarbonize with nuclear and you can also use carbon neutral or green methanol/DME as a replacement for fossil. District heating works very well with nuclear. As well of desalination with waste nuclear power plant heat and surplus nighttime electricity. The surplus nighttime electricity is also the ideal time for charging BEVs. It is utterly moronic to charge EVs in the daytime on solar electricity or intermittently whenever the wind happens to be blowing.
Agreed! Forgot to mention nuclear! works well with district heating. There are lot of energy solutions with nuclear and low-carbon energy conversion systems. But green renewable hysteria needs to end....in order for anything to happen.
The politicians and government agencies just can't be this stupid. And simultaneously worldwide, idiotic policies in Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Canada, US, Europe, Australia. All the crony capitalist countries subservient to the Malthusian Bankster Psychopath Parasites.
Energy agencies been warned for a long time about the need for energy supply diversity, which they laughed at and ridiculed anyone who was so audacious to suggest such a thing. Lot's of quotes from Big Oil execs about how there was no foreseeable problems and more than sufficient oil & gas supply. Don't need coal, don't need uranium. Shutdown perfectly good nuclear power plants and demolish the coal industry. Instead, lots of publicity on useless wind & solar installations, agrofuels, hydrogen, biomass burning and the ITER scam.
Beside a rapid expansion of nuclear energy, a big move to methanol and DME could easily have been done. Methanol being an excellent replacement for gasoline and DME for diesel, which are much cleaner burning, more efficient, less expensive and can be made in unlimited quantities from any biomass, including forest overgrowth which just ends up being burned in massive forest fires. Or made from coal, stranded or flared gas, flue gas(i.e. from cement plants), seawater CO2 or carbonaceous waste.
The DOE built a demo IGCC coal power plant that could coproduce methanol for 50 cents/gal. And the NREL forecasts methanol from biomass large scale production at 50 cents/gal or 13 cents/liter. A substitute methanol spark ignition engine can substitute for a diesel engine at 1.5X torque/liter displacement, 40% more compact, a higher efficiency as well as much lower emissions. And methanol burns at higher efficiency than natural gas in gas turbines. Methanol being the easiest fuel to store, with spills having minimal environmental effect.
This energy crisis and all we here about is more crap about wind, solar and hydrogen. Zip about nuclear, methanol or DME = the real clean substitutes for oil & gas.
I don't know how much it is per cu ft but according to one energy lecturer who reads this newsletter, liquefaction, transport, and regasification together add $0.05 per kWh of energy.
Alternatively, per Mmbtu, the cost of liquefaction is $2.6. The second biggest cost addition is transport, ranging between $1.1 per Mmbtu and $1.5 per Mmbtu.
Thanks. I will do some calculations. I am trying to understand how high much higher the US price FOB port can rise to reach the world price considering the liquidification cost and transit.
That's a lot unless you mean $0.05 per kWh of electricity. $0.05 per kWhth would be ~$0.09-$0.15 per kWh of electricity. A prohibitive cost. You would be far better off with nuclear, coal or methanol. I've been thinking about comparing the cost of ocean transport of methanol vs LNG and I'm interested in the energy content of a large methanol tanker vs a large LNG carrier. The methanol tanker being much, much safer and easier to build than the LNG carrier. And the cost of gas-to-methanol vs gas-to-LNG. No regasification needed for methanol. I've read that the Luigi Megamethanol plants can convert NG --> methanol for 6 cents/liter, which is 1.4 cents/kwhth. Methanol being much more flexible than the NG, it will substitute directly for gasoline in ICE vehicles, with minor modifications.
kWh(e) is for electricity (th) is for heat. So that would depend on whether it is burned in a CCGT or OCGT power plant. EIA puts the heat rate of avg CCGT 2020 @ 7604 btu/kwh and OCGT @ avg 11069 btu/kwh. Likely that cost is CCGT so that would increase the wholesale cost of CCGT by ~double, at least using USA prices. Add a carbon tax to that (Canada is min CA$170/tonne CO2 in 2030) would add another 6 cents/kwh to CCGT making it far more expensive than nuclear.
Thank you again Irina. I think the joke here is that Europe is quitting Russian gas to stop financing the war, e.g. for moral reasons.
That didn't stop Europe from lapping up US shale gas (this technology is forbidden in Europe) or bidding LNG cargoes away from poorer Asian countries (and pushing them into an energy crisis not of their own making).
Japan replaced much of their nuclear generation with LNG imports. I'm not sure how much, nor how many reactors remain to be restarted.
An interesting bit of research would be how much LNG capacity (supply and transport) could be freed up if Japan would restart their remaining reactors.
With EU's leadership doing everything it can to discourage nuclear in Europe, it would be the height of irony if EU nations paid Japan to restart their nuclear reactors to free up LNG resources. The deal would probably look more like an LNG repurchase from Japan with drop-ship delivery.
Is there no semblance of reasoning or rationale ? An interaction with elementary school children quickly outlines demand and supply with agreeable terms for existence. We, U.S. and also EU, seem to ignore the obvious and are leading to complete oblivion.
Small to medium truck driving companies that I am closely aware of, in my region of the U.S. are going out if business-the cost of fuel is prohibitive. Guess what these 6 companies transport across the country ? Food. If this micro sample is multiplied ever slightly-
We in the in the U.S. probably EU will not enjoy the luxury of basic necessities any longer. We that for so long have lived fat and comfortable-ah and what if we begin to have power outages also?! What no internet ? Air conditioning? Pardon my ranting.
Great point! Thanks for sharing Mauricio.
These Bankster overlords are Malthusians. They want us ignorant serfs to live in poverty and to be mostly exterminated. They've stated it many times. This is deliberate. It was the real purpose of the Corona Plandemic.
Thanks again, totally agree.
Marcellus and Haynesville are not the only gas plays in the US. Too many times too many folks forget about Texas RRC District 4! There’s not much activity now but only because 1) the core activity of business shifted in 2013-2014 towards Shale; 2) because of the shift and demand for services in Permian, Eagle Ford and Haynesville, that coupled with low gas prices and an abundance of gas production coming from E’Ford, STX has become forgotten; 3) the gas is still there and reserves are equivalent or greater than the Haynesville/Marcellus, it just needs to be exploited...additionally I see the Utica Shale making a comeback as well given the gas prices currently. STX will make a comeback also, born of necessity, but it will. Problem is that conventional isn’t sexy right now and most companies are geared for unconventional, meaning that E&P’s will need to start looking like Hilcorp with a mixture of people capable of exploiting Conventional and Unconventional assets.
They're not the only ones but I gather they are the biggest ones. Someone should make conventional gas sexy again, I guess.
Absolutely!!
my head hurts every time i read your biased prognosis
with each ridiculous article one puppy and panda dies
i especially laughed at this one
"Empty pride seems to be going around like herpes in Europe"
Yes her bias toward common sense and market dynamics over emotional petulance comes through every time.
Glad I made you laugh. Sorry about the headache, though. You should look after yourself.
If we leave emotions and wishful thinking aside, you would actually find her articles very logical.
You must enjoy hurting yourself I guess.
If it's painful to you, just don't read it. Simple as that!
Enjoy
I appreciate your connecting related news stories. Two weeks ago Deutsche Welle, German state TV, had a segment on the dangers of fracking and drilling for gas in the EU. Its OK to use gas fracked in other countries but no fracking in Germany. https://www.dw.com/en/europes-hunt-for-natural-gas-who-stands-to-lose/av-61911663
Well, of course it is. Not in my backyard and all that. A sentiment I actually share to a degree and I know it's hypocritical but there it is.
They wouldn't need the gas if they stayed with nuclear. In fact they've already spent enough on wind and solar to have replaced all of their electricity supply with zero emissions nuclear rather than still having one of the highest emissions in Europe, 12X that of France. And could have supplied all of their building heat from NPP waste heat, or district heating. Similarly California would now have a zero carbon electricity supply instead of 4X the emissions/MWh of France. And could have produced vast quantities of desalinated water from surplus nighttime electricity and the waste heat from the NPPs.
how flexible is Asia with switching gas power plants back to coal? seems the logical way to do if possible?
Good question. No idea but I know they are building a lot of new coal capacity, China and India, that is, the big ones.
yeah i don't mean new ones. most NG plants are converted old coal plants. maybe not most but certainly some, certainly in my home country (Israel). so how fast can the power source be reversed (can it? ) back to coal?
You can easily run gas power plants on methanol which can be made in vast quantities from coal or any biomass. And methanol, unlike gas, can be stored in large quantities on site. And can be transported in gas or oil pipelines, without the spill risk, at 4-12X the energy flow rate of gas. Big oil has always had a hatred of methanol and actively tried to block its usage.
thanks! didn't know that. but i'm guessing this will require processing of coal on a massive scale - probably cannot be done on site. my question is simple: is coal a leverage play on NG? the Asian utilities are not nearly as sensitive to coal as the Europeans, and coal is abundant (although dry bulk shipping might tighten up) - can they reduce their LNG demand and replace it with coal in a span of a few months? i'm pretty big on coal, and i'm wondering whether this could be a further catalyst.
The idiots like to dismantle shutdown coal power plants (& NPPs) rather than mothball them for emergency situations like we are currently in and facilitate their conversion to nuclear by replacing the coal boiler with one of the high temperature pebble bed, molten salt or liquid sodium reactors now being developed (or operational now in China). This stupidity is not an accident.
agreed, but this foolishness is a western phenomena i'm guessing Asia isn't that dumb, i just don't know :)
Very rational analysis - but rationality fails in the wake of delusion.
The fossil-fuel based district heating and cooling or combined heat and power (CHP) or cogeneration and industrial waste heat recovery systems are ideal in Europe by virtue of its geography and size. Many countries in Europe might still have the infrastructure for district heating and cooling. These decentralized systems have a thermal efficiency from 70% to 80% compared to the large-scale plants that tend to be 30-35% efficient. They also reduce GHG emissions by 50% or more as they are using the fuel twice. Some large university campuses here in US are still run by these small plants (50-MW to 100-MW) that power the entire campus and surrounding neighborhoods with electricity throughout the year, heating with steam in winter, and chilled water in summer for A/C. Some of these plants peak at 80% efficiency with 90% capacity factor, providing reliable power to anywhere from 50,000 homes to 120,000 homes. US had this infrastructure in the early 1900s but now New York city still operates this system. Other cities have gotten rid of it. This is a very good solution for the world going forward. Please check Tom Casten (Entrepreneur) who wrote the book "Turning off the Heat", he was an entrepreneur who built several companies here in Mid-west. Unfortunately, this green-renewable-solar-wind-battery hysteria is killing these innovative design solutions that could be achieved with this existing hydrocarbon. After all, we are humans made of carbons and we consume "carbohydrates" to survive. It is disconnection from this reality and one's adherence to global domination theories that has hijacked the minds of these elites who are caught in this web of delusion. Yes, China, India, and Russia all have these technologies and they are using it. Furthermore, recently Ireland is also looking at this under the guise of "Low-Carbon" instead of "De-Carbonize"....
https://www.seai.ie/data-and-insights/national-heat-study/
You cannot de-carbonize the system - we are part of a carbonized system. This is total delusion. We can control the diet but cannot stop eating or get rid of the liver.
You can easily decarbonize with nuclear and you can also use carbon neutral or green methanol/DME as a replacement for fossil. District heating works very well with nuclear. As well of desalination with waste nuclear power plant heat and surplus nighttime electricity. The surplus nighttime electricity is also the ideal time for charging BEVs. It is utterly moronic to charge EVs in the daytime on solar electricity or intermittently whenever the wind happens to be blowing.
Agreed! Forgot to mention nuclear! works well with district heating. There are lot of energy solutions with nuclear and low-carbon energy conversion systems. But green renewable hysteria needs to end....in order for anything to happen.
The politicians and government agencies just can't be this stupid. And simultaneously worldwide, idiotic policies in Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Canada, US, Europe, Australia. All the crony capitalist countries subservient to the Malthusian Bankster Psychopath Parasites.
Energy agencies been warned for a long time about the need for energy supply diversity, which they laughed at and ridiculed anyone who was so audacious to suggest such a thing. Lot's of quotes from Big Oil execs about how there was no foreseeable problems and more than sufficient oil & gas supply. Don't need coal, don't need uranium. Shutdown perfectly good nuclear power plants and demolish the coal industry. Instead, lots of publicity on useless wind & solar installations, agrofuels, hydrogen, biomass burning and the ITER scam.
Beside a rapid expansion of nuclear energy, a big move to methanol and DME could easily have been done. Methanol being an excellent replacement for gasoline and DME for diesel, which are much cleaner burning, more efficient, less expensive and can be made in unlimited quantities from any biomass, including forest overgrowth which just ends up being burned in massive forest fires. Or made from coal, stranded or flared gas, flue gas(i.e. from cement plants), seawater CO2 or carbonaceous waste.
The DOE built a demo IGCC coal power plant that could coproduce methanol for 50 cents/gal. And the NREL forecasts methanol from biomass large scale production at 50 cents/gal or 13 cents/liter. A substitute methanol spark ignition engine can substitute for a diesel engine at 1.5X torque/liter displacement, 40% more compact, a higher efficiency as well as much lower emissions. And methanol burns at higher efficiency than natural gas in gas turbines. Methanol being the easiest fuel to store, with spills having minimal environmental effect.
This energy crisis and all we here about is more crap about wind, solar and hydrogen. Zip about nuclear, methanol or DME = the real clean substitutes for oil & gas.
Reality Check: This is the progress report on US Infrastructure from ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers), a respected body of engineers:
C- for US Infrastructure Overall: C- for Energy Infrastructure
(https://infrastructurereportcard.org/)
No more questions! This speaks volume about the real intentions of our leaders! This was not caused by any bogey man abroad!
Irina what is the transit cost per CF across the Atlantic and cost for liquification?
I don't know how much it is per cu ft but according to one energy lecturer who reads this newsletter, liquefaction, transport, and regasification together add $0.05 per kWh of energy.
Alternatively, per Mmbtu, the cost of liquefaction is $2.6. The second biggest cost addition is transport, ranging between $1.1 per Mmbtu and $1.5 per Mmbtu.
Thanks. I will do some calculations. I am trying to understand how high much higher the US price FOB port can rise to reach the world price considering the liquidification cost and transit.
You do a great job. Ignore the idiots.
Yes, I find this sort of information very useful for getting the actual picture of costs. Thank you!
That's a lot unless you mean $0.05 per kWh of electricity. $0.05 per kWhth would be ~$0.09-$0.15 per kWh of electricity. A prohibitive cost. You would be far better off with nuclear, coal or methanol. I've been thinking about comparing the cost of ocean transport of methanol vs LNG and I'm interested in the energy content of a large methanol tanker vs a large LNG carrier. The methanol tanker being much, much safer and easier to build than the LNG carrier. And the cost of gas-to-methanol vs gas-to-LNG. No regasification needed for methanol. I've read that the Luigi Megamethanol plants can convert NG --> methanol for 6 cents/liter, which is 1.4 cents/kwhth. Methanol being much more flexible than the NG, it will substitute directly for gasoline in ICE vehicles, with minor modifications.
It said 0.05 per kWh(e), which I imagine is equivalent?
kWh(e) is for electricity (th) is for heat. So that would depend on whether it is burned in a CCGT or OCGT power plant. EIA puts the heat rate of avg CCGT 2020 @ 7604 btu/kwh and OCGT @ avg 11069 btu/kwh. Likely that cost is CCGT so that would increase the wholesale cost of CCGT by ~double, at least using USA prices. Add a carbon tax to that (Canada is min CA$170/tonne CO2 in 2030) would add another 6 cents/kwh to CCGT making it far more expensive than nuclear.
Thank you again Irina. I think the joke here is that Europe is quitting Russian gas to stop financing the war, e.g. for moral reasons.
That didn't stop Europe from lapping up US shale gas (this technology is forbidden in Europe) or bidding LNG cargoes away from poorer Asian countries (and pushing them into an energy crisis not of their own making).
Oh I'm sorry, this isn't a joke either.
Yes, it's a real sitcom. A dark one.
Welcome to this timeline, where clowns run the show and the electorate is cheering them on.
Japan replaced much of their nuclear generation with LNG imports. I'm not sure how much, nor how many reactors remain to be restarted.
An interesting bit of research would be how much LNG capacity (supply and transport) could be freed up if Japan would restart their remaining reactors.
I would say a lot. Until last year, Japan was the world's biggest LNG importer.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=52258#:~:text=In%202021,%20China%20imported%20more,according%20to%20data%20from%20Cedigaz.
With EU's leadership doing everything it can to discourage nuclear in Europe, it would be the height of irony if EU nations paid Japan to restart their nuclear reactors to free up LNG resources. The deal would probably look more like an LNG repurchase from Japan with drop-ship delivery.
The height of arrogance, too.