Natural Gas Prices -Fall Through the Floor?

[theizzardking]

I

Natural gas tank? I don't know if I have heard of that before. What kind of pressure is that thing at for the 1500 gallons? Is that something you looked for when house shopping or just stumbled upon it? What is the actual cost of gas ($/Mcf) to fill it?

haha , sorry im an idiot!! i was thinking of propane, not the same duh!

 

[-JD-]

Wouldn't a growing opposition to fracking make the price of gas higher? I am confused and don't want to make assumptions about what you meant. The off-topic section and assumptions are a no no.

The consensus in the industry is that gas being as low as it is pushes renewables off the chart because they are no longer close at all to being feasible, economically. Not a good thing, but something I think everyone should think about.

With the growing opposition the only real hope of breaking into this market would be with low prices.

As, i think, someone else mentioned all fossil fuel prices will average out. If people start using more natural gas and less of another fuel type prices will adjust themselves. An unfortunate problem we will have until we establish some real renewable energy sources.

 

[BrianSD_42]

I wonder what the new price will be 6 months after Canada's oil pipeline is completed and they can move all their oil over US land (tariff free of course) into the Gulf of Mexico where it will be shipped out onto the global market (China) ?

Price of natural gas will go (up/down)?

:fishing:

 

[tbst]

Do you think Obama will approve it if he were to win election? I see no reason for him to approve it at that point. I think all his talk about it recently is rhetoric.

The Keystone is a terrible terrible idea.

 

[BrianSD_42]

Yes GW O8ama will approve it since his policies are just as pro oil lobby and pro bankers as his predacessor.

Obama has raised way over 100 million already right (Im not sure of the full figure) and yet I have not seen a single organizer on the streets of San diego, no flyers in front of houses, i havent even met anyone wearing an Obama 2012 shirt AND I live in a very large city. The only thing I have seen is internet ads. It seems clear to me that the X hundreds of.millions he will raise is going to come from big business and Wall street.

Mitt is no better of course, he is willing to say anything to appease his crazy @ss base and his fundraisers will be big business as well.

The pipeline really bothers me because (and I hope republicans are listening) it is really bad for America's economy and families. Since the oil will flow tarrif free from canada over US soil down to the gulf. This will allow Canada to pump its product onto the global market where it will be bought by China and other countries. It will raise the price US citizens pay for oil since presently Canada mainly sells that oil to the US, they have a large supply and we have relatively low demand (compared to China).

The #1 misconception most Americans seem to have about the planned pipeline is they wrongfull assume the oil will flow into the US to be used by the US. Wrong! It will flow unrefined into the gulf of mexico to be shipped oversees for refinement and then somewhere else to be sold.

A strong US leader would demmand that 50% of any oil flowing through the pipeline must be processed and sold in the US but we have no such leader. Both parties have been bought and international companies are now funding US campaigns.

 

[Atlanta_man]

Oil

We hear a lot about the XL pipeline these days. What you do not hear about is that Transcanada is already supplying the US with crude oil with their existing pipeline. The new XL is a larger, takes a bit of a short cut, and will triple the amount delivered. Their oil is going somewhere into the world supply whether we handle it or not.

 

[1engineer]

Oil

We hear a lot about the XL pipeline these days. What you do not hear about is that Transcanada is already supplying the US with crude oil with their existing pipeline. The new XL is a larger, takes a bit of a short cut, and will triple the amount delivered. Their oil is going somewhere into the world supply whether we handle it or not.

This is correct. Back to gas:

@the OP: It is simple supply and demand. We have gas stuffed into every storage facility, cave and anything else that will hold it. Yes, EVENTUALLY the demand will start but right now we can and have oversupplied it. Check out EIA.gov for a primer and factual information. @Brian: You really need to cite your sources.

 

[BrianSD_42]

Well I don't see any sources from you guys.

How do you know that the US supply will actually rise. As I mentioned before trans-Canada could just ship the oil to China since it is a global market. They also will be able to sell oil on the global market that they currently sell to the US because they don't have port access.

Don't just dismiss my statements.

Are you an American 1engineer? If so, then don't you agree the US should get some % of the Canadian oil?

 

[BrianSD_42]

Hmmmmm is Bloomberg news a good enough source? ... It's not a hippie commi site or anything.


Keystone Oil Pipeline Seen Raising Gas Prices in Midwest: Energy - Bloomberg

TransCanada Corp. (TRP)’s Keystone XL oil pipeline, a project backers including Republican Presidential candidate Rick Santorum say will create cheaper U.S. gasoline, instead risks raising prices as much as 20 cents a gallon in the Midwest, Great Plains and Rocky Mountains

“The Canadian plan was to use their market power to raise prices in the United States (UNG) and get more money from consumers,” Philip Verleger, founder of Colorado-based energy consulting firm PK Verleger LLC, said in an interview. Prices may gain 10 to 20 cents in central states, he said.

Producers including Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM), Suncor Energy Inc. (SU) and Cenovus Energy Inc. (CVE) may reap as much as $4 billion more in annual revenue if prices rise as expected following the construction of the 1,661-mile (2,673-kilometer) Keystone XL conduit, the 2010 report says.

Such a change would erase the cost advantage for refiners such as Marathon Petroleum Corp. (MPC) and HollyFrontier Corp. (HFC), whose Midwest plants profited on cheaper oil supply.

Completion of the entire pipeline would raise prices at the pump in the Midwest and Rocky Mountains 10 to 20 cents a gallon, Verleger, the Colorado consultant, said in an e-mail message.

The higher crude prices also would erase the discount enjoyed by cities including Chicago, Cheyenne and Denver, Verleger said.

 

[BrianSD_42]

Keystone XL: A Tar Sands Pipeline Through the United States, Not To It

Once constructed, for many years the pipeline would divert tar sands from the Midwest to the Gulf Coast to be exported. 2 Existing tar sands pipelines are not yet at capacity and mostly go to the Midwest, where tar sands is refined and sold to U.S. consumers. Keystone XL will take this tar sands and send it to the Gulf to be refined and sold internationally at higher prices.


:cry2:




Here is more on this subject from The Washington Post:


Will the Keystone XL pipeline lower gasoline prices? - The Washington Post

The Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry 1.1 million barrels per day, is specifically designed to deal with the fact that increased production of crude oil in Canada and the Great Plains has left a glut in that area — overwhelming refinery demand — and it is difficult to get the oil to the Gulf Coast, the center of U.S. refining. This has depressed the price of crude oil in the Midwest, though the Midwest refiners have not passed on the savings to consumers. (The price of gasoline in that area essentially is dependent on the global price because otherwise refiners would not ship the gasoline there.)

This is from an oil economist.


Philip Verleger: If gas prices go up further, blame Canada | StarTribune.com

Philip Verleger: If gas prices go up further, blame Canada

Who's behind the plan? Not OPEC.

It's Canada.

The Canadian oil industry, with the strong backing of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government, wants to build a pipeline to move crude oil from Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico.

The firms involved have asked the U.S. State Department to approve this project, even as they've told Canadian government officials how the pipeline can be used to add at least $4 billion to the U.S. fuel bill.

U.S. farmers, who spent $12.4 billion on fuel in 2009, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, could see expenses rise to $15 billion or higher in 2012 or 2013 if the pipeline goes through.

At least $500 million of the added expense would come from the Canadian market manipulation.

Of course, American consumers will pay the price of this highway robbery. Food prices will rise because they reflect farm operating costs.

In addition, millions of Americans will spend 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel as tribute to our "friendly" neighbors to the north.

The Keystone XL pipeline will move production from Canadian oil sands to a deepwater port from where it can be exported.

 

[RunninInGA]

Does this do anything good or bad to the industry or is it par for the course? Some opinions I've read say this is government privatization, but I've not read far enough into to yet to have a clear opinion. What do you guys think?:hiding:

Executive Order -- Supporting Safe and Responsible Development of Unconventional Domestic Natural Gas Resources | The White House

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release April 13, 2012
Executive Order -- Supporting Safe and Responsible Development of Unconventional Domestic Natural Gas Resources

EXECUTIVE ORDER

SUPPORTING SAFE AND RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT OF UNCONVENTIONAL DOMESTIC NATURAL GAS RESOURCES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to coordinate the efforts of Federal agencies responsible for overseeing the safe and responsible development of unconventional domestic natural gas resources and associated infrastructure and to help reduce our dependence on oil, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.* Policy.* In 2011, natural gas provided 25 percent of the energy consumed in the United States.* Its production creates jobs and provides economic benefits to the entire domestic production supply chain, as well as to chemical and other manufacturers, who benefit from lower feedstock and energy costs.* By helping to power our transportation system, greater use of natural gas can also reduce our dependence on oil.* And with appropriate safeguards, natural gas can provide a cleaner source of energy than other fossil fuels.

For these reasons, it is vital that we take full advantage of our natural gas resources, while giving American families and communities confidence that natural and cultural resources, air and water quality, and public health and safety will not be compromised.

While natural gas production is carried out by private firms, and States are the primary regulators of onshore oil and gas activities, the Federal Government has an important role to play by regulating oil and gas activities on public and Indian trust lands, encouraging greater use of natural gas in transportation, supporting research and development aimed at improving the safety of natural gas development and transportation activities, and setting sensible, cost-effective public health and environmental standards to implement Federal law and augment State safeguards.

Because efforts to promote safe, responsible, and efficient development of unconventional domestic natural gas resources are underway at a number of executive departments and agencies (agencies), close interagency coordination is important for effective implementation of these programs and activities.* To formalize and promote ongoing interagency coordination, this order establishes a high-level, interagency working group that will facilitate coordinated Administration policy efforts to support safe and responsible unconventional domestic natural gas development.

Sec. 2.* Interagency Working Group to Support Safe and Responsible Development of Unconventional Domestic Natural Gas Resources.* There is established an Interagency Working Group to Support Safe and Responsible Development of Unconventional Domestic Natural Gas Resources (Working Group), to be chaired by the Director of the Domestic Policy Council, or a designated representative.

(a)* Membership.* In addition to the Chair, the Working Group shall include deputy-level representatives or equivalent officials, designated by the head of the respective agency or office, from:

(i)*the Department of Defense;

(ii)*the Department of the Interior;

(iii)*the Department of Agriculture;

(iv)*the Department of Commerce;

(v)*the Department of Health and Human Services;

(vi)*the Department of Transportation;

(vii)*the Department of Energy;

(viii)*the Department of Homeland Security;

(ix)*the Environmental Protection Agency;

(x)*the Council on Environmental Quality;

(xi)*the Office of Science and Technology Policy;

(xii)*the Office of Management and Budget;

(xiii)*the National Economic Council; and

(xiv)*such other agencies or offices as the Chair may invite to participate.

(b)* Functions.* Consistent with the authorities and responsibilities of participating agencies and offices, the Working Group shall support the safe and responsible production of domestic unconventional natural gas by performing the following functions:

(i)*coordinate agency policy activities, ensuring their efficient and effective operation and facilitating cooperation among agencies, as appropriate;

(ii)*coordinate among agencies the sharing of scientific, environmental, and related technical and economic information;

(iii)*engage in long-term planning and ensure coordination among the appropriate Federal entities with respect to such issues as research, natural resource assessment, and the development of infrastructure; 
(iv)*promote interagency communication with stakeholders; and

(v)*consult with other agencies and offices as appropriate.

Sec. 3.* General Provisions.* (a)* This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(b)* Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)** the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)* the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(c)* This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
********* April 13, 2012.

 

[1engineer]

Well I don't see any sources from you guys.

How do you know that the US supply will actually rise. As I mentioned before trans-Canada could just ship the oil to China since it is a global market. They also will be able to sell oil on the global market that they currently sell to the US because they don't have port access.

Don't just dismiss my statements.

Are you an American 1engineer? If so, then don't you agree the US should get some % of the Canadian oil?

I posted that what Atlanta man stated was correct. I also posted a government site that deals almost exclusively in factual data with a lot of it available in raw form. Very seldom will I post my opinion as we all know what they are like. Regarding Keystone: It is fact that we currently already use Canadian oil in both refined and unrefined condition. Fact: The Keystone pipeline is to be used to transport oil from Canada to the Gulf. Some of it will get refined there and used by the US. Some of it will go to world markets unrefined. Will it initially supply the US with more Canadian oil than we are using now? I do not know and nobody else does either. It will depend on the cost and supply and demand. I do know that it has the potential to supply more as it will be readily available.

Yes, I am as "American" as they come, family going back to the late 1700's. I also belive in capitalism. Nothing is free in life. Whatever deal has been worked out with Canada should be honored.

You should notice I never said if we should allow the Keystone pipeline to go through. This is because my opinion means nothing. If Canada has it worked out with private landowners and our Government then so be it. As I do not own land there the only thing I can do if I agree or disagree is vote accordingly at the next election. In the end that is all any one of us mere citizens can do, other than trying to change public opinion.

Thanks for citing sources. It's nice to be able to see where someone is getting their information from and it adds credibility. Political talking points are useless as they are bent towards only getting someone elected and not so much in reality. When I am curious about an issue such as this I try to go to the sources as much as possible and raw data whenever possible. Census.gov and EIA.gov are two of the best places for historicial data and this is what led me to my first post agreeing with Atlanta man.

Also never forget this fact: In our society it is our job as citizens to work and make money to take care of ourselves and our family and pay a portion of it to our government in the form of taxes. It is our government's job to spend it. This is the way it works, not the other way around.

 

[BrianSD_42]

1Engineer, you make good points.

I dont know "for sure" that the price will go up but there seems to be a pretty good case that it might.

I definitely don't believe these "talking heads" in the mainstream media. I think most news sources have been bought off so as not to criticize big oil or gas.

There are a lot of Canadians on this site and this issues does boil down to global strategic interests. I can see why Canadian government and companies want it pushed through so badly. I am also an American with family dating back over 100 years here (although I think 1st gen Americans are pretty great as well).


RunninInGA,

I think that executive order might the one where this White House is trying to setup warltchdogs on Nat. Gas industry. I don't know much about it.but i bet TBST does.

 

[tbst]

Wow, we are having a civil thread. RunninInGa, your mother is a whore! Kidding.

In serious response, I haven't seen much about that, and I troll the interwebs everyday for information about natural gas and regulations along with price.

However, what I have seen about it, I think what that executive order is trying to do is make a central agency for information about natural gas and shale plays in general. There is a similar system for oil companies, the government is a large holder of this information. In the oil industry there is a lot of interconnected information transfer between companies and even between companies and the government (almost too much at times).

There are several problems I think (hope) that this order is trying to address. One of those issues is what issues should be addressed. I mean is methane in water really a large spread problem or just something in Gasland that the guy made several hundred thousand (million?) dollars off of.

A more realistic problem is the EPA in Dimock, PA recently tested the water and sent the results to the landowners saying the water was fine. They did not release the actual concentrations of chemicals found in the water. After some pressure they did.

The problem was that until fracking there was no threshold for "Chemical A" in the water, so they said it was safe without actually knowing/having tested for a safe level in drinking water. I am guessing somebody somewhere knows what is a safe level, however this agency/consortium would get that information in once place.

Numbers are the answer to a lot of problems, right now we have none. That is my interpretation of it.

 

[tbst]

I could in the big picture care less about where the oil goes, the 350 ppm is what I am worried about.

The climate change implications regarding the production and use of the bitumen is overwhelming.

 

[RunninInGA]

RunninInGA, your mother is a whore!

Couldn't stand it could you?