Why isn’t Biden being tried in court for kneecapping American producers of natural gas and contributing to global warming?

Snappy title OilFieldAce. Hope you don't mind that I've borrowed it more than once.

From a White House press release today:

FACT SHEET: Biden-⁠Harris Administration Announces Temporary Pause on Pending Approvals of Liquefied Natural Gas Exports

....Today, the Biden-Harris Administration is announcing a temporary pause on pending decisions on exports of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) to non-FTA countries until the Department of Energy can update the underlying analyses for authorizations.

....As Republicans in Congress continue to deny the very existence of climate change while attempting to strip their constituents of the economic, environmental and health benefits of the President’s historic climate investments, the Biden-Harris Administration will continue to lead the way in ambitious climate action while ensuring the American economy remains the envy of the world.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-...authorizations.

More lunacy from the political class. The USA emitted 6 billion metric tons of CO2 in 2007. In 2022, that number was 4.9 billion tonnes, down almost 20%. This was even though during the same time period, U.S. real (inflation adjusted) GDP was up 30%.

Now was that because of renewable energy? Well, partly. But natural gas played a much larger part. We've substituted a lot of clean burning natural gas for coal in power generation over the last 15 years. Natural gas emits a lot less CO2 per kilowatt hour than coal.

Furthermore, American LNG has substituted for Russian gas production in Europe. Without our LNG, Russia would be in a stronger position in Ukraine. In the winter of 2022 and 2023, Europe had to re-start coal fired power capacity to stay warm. Coal that, again, generates more CO2 than natural gas.

U.S. natural gas production provides jobs and income in our country and contributes to our energy security. If we don't sell the LNG, other countries will instead buy more coal, and other countries like Qatar and Russia will sell more LNG and natural gas. That will be the effect of preventing the construction of more LNG plants.

Finally, why should this be the decision of the federal government anyway? If Texas and Louisiana want to stop construction of new LNG plants, then I believe they should be able to do that. But they don't.

To be fair, the Biden Administration may just be using this as a sop to environmentalists and allow new plants to proceed after the election assuming Biden wins. Hard to say though, as the EPA and other federal agencies have been slow walking LNG approvals since Biden was elected. And yes, improving regulations to cut back on methane emissions from production and processing of natural gas makes sense. Still this move by Biden is concerning, to say the least.

It's so reassuring to see the adults are back in charge of making these decisions!

https://dailycaller.com/2024/01/25/b...nfluencer-cp2/

To be fair, the Biden Administration may just be using this as a sop to environmentalists and allow new plants to proceed after the election assuming Biden wins. Originally Posted by Tiny

If that's true, then it's even more of a scandal. These decisions are supposed to be based on what is in our national interest and enhances our national security, not pandering for votes from 25-year-old TikTok twerps.

It's so reassuring to see the adults are back in charge of making these decisions!

https://dailycaller.com/2024/01/25/b...nfluencer-cp2/ Originally Posted by lustylad

If that's true, then it's even more of a scandal. These decisions are supposed to be based on what is in our national interest and enhances our national security, not pandering for votes from 25-year-old TikTok twerps. Originally Posted by lustylad

Fuck! It's insane! Even if this is only a political tactic. Delaying projects in the USA costs millions and puts competitors in places like Qatar in the driver's seat.

This is payback for Governor Abbot telling Biden to go pound sand.

Biden and the TikTok Anti-LNG Crusade

His ‘pause’ on export permits may be his most destructive climate act—damaging to the economy at home and U.S. influence abroad.

By The Editorial Board
Jan. 26, 2024 5:52 pm ET


Americans received a preview of a second Biden term on Friday when the President halted permits for new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export projects. Climate politics has become the tail wagging this Administration’s economic, national security and foreign policy. President Biden isn’t running for re-election. Climate lobbyist Bill McKibben and his TikTok army are.

“This pause on new LNG approvals sees the climate crisis for what it is: the existential threat of our time,” Mr. Biden said. “We will heed the calls of young people and frontline communities who are using their voices to demand action from those with the power to act.” Didn’t he campaign in 2020 by promising to be the adult in the room?

Now he’s letting TikTokers dictate U.S. policy. Press reports say Biden adviser John Podesta pushed for the “pause”—which tees up an outright ban—after TikTokers and Mr. McKibben made stopping LNG exports a cause celebre. Mr. Biden’s advisers at the White House even met with a TikTok climate “influencer.” The Administration hopes its climate gesture will boost the President’s flagging political support among young people.

Who cares about the real-world impact, or the signal to allies and adversaries that the U.S. isn’t a reliable partner? Europe and Asia should plan to import their gas from Qatar, Russia or even Iran. Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin now know they can exploit the Administration’s climate obsession to undermine U.S. interests.

During the pause, the Energy Department will conduct an environmental and economic review of LNG exports. “Today, we have an evolving understanding of the market need for LNG, the long-term supply of LNG, and the perilous impacts of methane on our planet” and “pollution from new export facilities,” the White House statement says.

Mr. Biden’s views sure have evolved. As Vice President, he boasted about the benefits of U.S. LNG exports. “The United States is now a net [gas] exporter,” he proclaimed at the 2016 CAF conference. “There are even greater opportunities to supply the energy needs of our partners in Latin America and around the world.”

He was right. Global demand for natural gas is expected to increase 46% by 2050 as countries industrialize and shift from coal. Most developing Asian economies still rely on coal for power, including India (71%), Indonesia (59%), Vietnam (57%) and the Philippines (55%). Global coal exports and power generation last year hit a record.

China was the biggest coal importer, followed by India, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Demand for LNG has outstripped supply especially as Europe tries to wean itself from Russian gas. A Bangladesh energy official complained last year that Asian countries couldn’t buy gas because of skyrocketing prices. Instead, they burned coal. How will this be good for the climate?

The climate lobby also doesn’t care that some 2.3 billion people in the world still cook with open fires or stoves that burn heavily-polluting wood, coal, biomass or kerosene. Developing countries want and need gas to escape poverty, which is another reason demand for LNG is expected to exceed supply for decades.

Hence, Russia, Iran and Qatar are expanding their export capacities. By the way, Russia last year supplied Europe with almost as much gas as the U.S. The White House says its pause won’t jeopardize supply to Europe, but energy officials across the pond disagree. Germany accounted for a third or more of the contracted capacity of a large planned Gulf Coast LNG project.

Nobody in the White House seems to understand that countries sign long-term contracts years in advance so they can plan their energy infrastructure and needs. They won’t build new gas plants or import terminals without supply locked in—or they will turn to more reliable sources. Russia now looks like a more reliable energy source than the U.S.

Much of the supply from LNG projects in the works is slated for Asia. They would strengthen U.S. relationships and influence in the region to counter China. Xi Jinping no doubt is elated by the Administration’s pause, which will do more damage to U.S. strategic interests than blocking the Keystone XL pipeline.

Re-election imperatives have partly restrained the President’s attack on fossil fuels in his first term, but don’t expect the same in a second. Recall how the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in early 2022 backtracked on a plan to conduct greenhouse-gas analyses for natural gas pipelines and export projects after West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin raised a ruckus.

But Mr. Manchin is retiring, and Mr. Biden won’t need to worry about him in a second term. Nor will he have to heed voters in states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. Mr. McKibben will lead a no-holds-barred children’s crusade against fossil fuels. Is Mr. Biden trying to give Americans another reason to vote for Donald Trump?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-l...bben-3efb5287?

Here's the TikTok twerp in charge of Senile Joey's US energy policy decisions:

This is complete irrationality in energy policy.

The LNG "pause" will make global carbon emissions HIGHER. How is that a win for the greenies? It's not!

We're giving Europe the choice of either freezing to death or buying more gas from Russia, enriching Putin with more money he can use to kill Ukrainians. How is that a win for US foreign policy? It's not!

We're killing jobs at home, reducing our future exports and inflating our trade deficit. How is that a win for the US economy? It's not!

Senile Joey just demonstrated how "competent" he is - at finding & choosing the biggest LOSE-LOSE-LOSE solution to every problem!

Helluva job, Joey!!!


Biden’s LNG ‘Pause’ Will Hurt the Environment

When the U.S. exports liquefied natural gas, it’s better for America’s allies and the climate.

By Chris Barnard
Jan. 26, 2024 6:02 pm ET

The White House announced Friday that it ordered a “temporary pause” in permitting new liquefied natural gas export terminals. The move came after climate activists criticized President Biden for his decision to approve the Willow oil-drilling project in Alaska. The president likely thinks he’s throwing a bone to a key part of his base in a crucial election year. But Mr. Biden’s misguided attempt to assuage climate extremists won’t help tackle climate change. It could make carbon emissions worse.

The environmental risks of the Biden permitting pause are tightly tied to its geopolitical ones, which could be disastrous themselves. If America exports less LNG, our adversaries will fill the supply gap. China is rapidly permitting new coal-fired power plants—the country’s coal-power capacity has more than doubled in the past few years—while monopolizing supply chains for critical minerals and renewable energy. Meantime, Russia still exercises energy dominance over Europe in the wake of its 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

The more our allies rely on Beijing and Moscow to keep the lights on, the greater sway these bad actors will have over those allies’ policymaking. Iran also gains geopolitical power from a U.S. permitting pause, as energy insecurity fuels instability and conflict in the Middle East.

Along with the real geopolitical risk, these energy exports from totalitarian countries also carry a much larger carbon footprint. The U.S. produces natural gas more safely and cleanly than almost any other country. The LNG that America exports to Europe is significantly cleaner than the natural gas that Russia exports. China also produces dirtier energy, with more than 300 new coal plants in the permitting pipeline.

If Mr. Biden were serious about reducing carbon emissions, he’d double down on American LNG. Since 2005, the U.S. has cut more carbon-dioxide emissions than the next eight countries combined, in part because of its gradual transition from coal to natural gas as an energy source. Exporting cleaner American energy to countries that still rely heavily on coal is one of the most important tools the U.S. has to reduce global emissions.

Natural gas isn’t a perfect energy solution: Using and exporting LNG is associated with methane emissions, a challenge that policymakers must address. But until a perfect fix arrives, it’s a critical tool to achieving a cleaner tomorrow. Most Americans recognize that a mix of energy sources, both renewables and fossil fuels, will be needed for the foreseeable future. An all-of-the-above strategy is the only path to ensure both energy security and economic growth.

Instead of acknowledging this, the Biden administration has sent mixed signals on American energy—on the one hand shutting down the Keystone XL pipeline, on the other approving the Willow project. Now, with a pause on permitting LNG export projects, the administration is risking American energy security and potentially contributing to higher global emissions.

More U.S. natural gas is better—for America and the planet. It’s not anti-climate to champion a pro-American energy agenda, and it’s not anti-American to champion pro-climate measures. The Biden administration must recognize this and dismiss the idea of halting permits on new LNG export terminals.

Mr. Barnard is president of the American Conservation Coalition.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-...risk-76dbcc99?

I have a put and lomgs on natural gas I going up or down.

This is complete irrationality in energy policy.

The LNG "pause" will make global carbon emissions HIGHER. How is that a win for the greenies? It's not!

We're giving Europe the choice of either freezing to death or buying more gas from Russia, enriching Putin with more money he can use to kill Ukrainians. How is that a win for US foreign policy? It's not!

We're killing jobs at home, reducing our future exports and inflating our trade deficit. How is that a win for the US economy? It's not! Originally Posted by lustylad

Very true! And great links, thanks!

More reporting on this issue. Here's an excerpt from a Wall Street Journal editorial about Biden's freeze on new LNG projects. Leave it to Joe to come up with a plan to simultaneously

increase carbon emissions,

kneecap American gas producers, pipelines, and processors,

make our allies more dependent on natural gas from Russia and the Middle East

take away jobs that would have gone to Americans

run up our trade deficit


Biden’s Worst Energy Decision
His LNG export permit ban looks worse the more you examine it.

Congress this week will hold hearings on the permit freeze for new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export projects that President Biden announced two weeks ago. The closer one looks, the more harm this raw political payoff to the climate left will do to U.S. national security and economic interests.

The White House has been whispering to its European allies not to worry about its moratorium’s impact on LNG supply even as it crows to the climate lobby. Progressives are celebrating because they know the putative pause will shrink investment in LNG. Merely read the plaudits from climate potentates on the White House website.

“The Biden administration is listening to the calls to break America’s reliance on dirty fossil fuels,” Sierra Club executive director Ben Jealous proclaimed. “It’s undeniable that LNG export projects are simply not in the public interest and we are confident that if this review is done right, that would end the rubber-stamping of these projects.” Got that, Mr. President?

....The White House says the pause will only affect a handful of projects that are currently seeking Energy Department permits, but this is dishonest. It will also freeze about a half a dozen projects seeking Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approvals and could halt another dozen or so that have been permitted by previous Presidents.

That’s because the Energy Department in December announced that projects not yet operating will have to reapply for permits if it’s been seven years since they were authorized. So projects in the works could get deep-sixed—even if they have billions of dollars in committed capital and contractual agreements with customers.

The Administration is deliberately creating uncertainty about permit approvals and extensions to chill investment and discourage foreign governments from signing long-term contracts. Why risk investing in or signing a purchase agreement with a Gulf Coast project that may later be killed? Smarter to link up with the Qataris.

That’s what some are already doing. Japanese trading house Mitsui & Co is considering buying a stake in a major Qatar expansion project to ensure stable LNG supply, according to a Reuters report last autumn. Japan’s largest power generator is in talks with Qatar for a long-term supply contract. These are hedges against unreliable U.S. energy policy

While the Administration downplays the national-security risks of its self-embargo, U.S. allies worry it will make them more vulnerable to geopolitical disruptions. About 20% of the global LNG supply travels through the Strait of Hormuz. LNG cargoes to Europe are now being diverted from the Red Sea because of Houthi missile attacks.

Russian and Iranian proxies could cause LNG prices to spike by attacking one or two large Qatar export facilities. Some countries in Asia might then burn more coal as they did in 2022 when LNG prices shot up. But Europeans are planning to retire coal and nuclear plants in the coming years on the expectation that they will have ample LNG from the U.S.

As for America’s economic interests, a single LNG export project will produce about $600 billion in revenue over its lifespan and create thousands of jobs, including in steel manufacturing and fracking—no government subsidies required.

Venture Global’s Gulf Coast CP2 could supply about 5% of the world’s LNG by 2026 and would have a bigger impact on the U.S. economy than any green energy project. It would also reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by 140 million tons a year—about as much as all container ships in the world produce. But it still needs an Energy Department permit.

We look forward to hearing Administration officials explain to Congress how this remarkably destructive ban is in the public interest.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-l...ec77997?page=1

Executive privilege dah