Infrastructure Necessary for Energy Independence
By Paul Diego Craney
President Trump recently declared, “we are now an exporter of energy to the world.” Yet due to shortages this winter, Boston was forced to import Russian natural gas to ensure people had the fuel they need to heat their homes.
President Trump is right. Right now, American oil and gas output is 50 percent higher than any other country’s has ever been. According to projections from the International Energy Agency, the United States will be the world’s largest exporter of natural gas by the mid-2020s.
So why does Boston still need to get gas from Russia? Because America’s energy infrastructure is woefully insufficient for our needs, that’s why. Production can break all known records, but if we can’t deliver natural gas where local supplies are running short, people are going to be left in the cold.
Unfortunately for New England and all of us, bad court decisions and burdensome regulations are hamstringing our ability to develop the infrastructure we need.
There are two basic ways natural gas moves from point A to point B — that is, from the wells producing it to its myriad users, ranging from giant electricity generation plants to New England cottages in winter. The first is by pipeline in its gaseous state. The second is supercooled to minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit — at which temperature it transforms it into a liquefied state that decreases its volume by a factor of 600.
A pipeline that would have brought affordable natural gas to New England is currently on ice. The Access Northeast pipeline would have upgraded and expanded the current Algonquin pipeline system so that it fuels approximately 60 percent of the region’s power sector.
The companies sponsoring Access Northeast argued that the expansion would have brought cheaper natural gas to New England power plants, ultimately saving New England residents $1 billion a year. And that’s saying nothing of the jobs and opportunities the $3.2 billion project would have brought the region.
While Massachusetts’ Governor Baker proposed a plan that allowed electricity ratepayers to pay for the much-needed pipeline expansion, the state’s Supreme Judicial Court struck down the proposal.
Without expanded pipeline capacity, liquefied natural gas (LNG) is the only way to go. LNG is ideal for long-distance and intercontinental shipping.
But liquefaction of natural gas and regasification of LNG require special facilities. Fortunately, a regasification plant in Everett, Massachusetts opens New England’s door to LNG traveling by ship.
But while New England knew it would need extra natural gas this winter or face rolling energy blackouts, it was unable to bring American LNG from the Gulf Coast thanks to a 1920’s rule that prohibits foreign vessels from shipping LNG between U.S. ports. Currently, none of the world’s 500 tankers are U.S. built and registered and crewed by Americans, as the rule requires.
So residents had to buy foreign gas to keep their heat on. And Boston is considering importing even more to cope with its ongoing natural gas shortage.
We should all be working toward President Trump’s energy goals — for the United States to be a self-reliant, net exporter whose citizens have access to the highest quality and cheapest fuel available.
The United States already has a surplus of natural gas. New Englanders shouldn’t have to import Russian fuel just to stay warm.
Paul Diego Craney is the Spokesperson and a Board Member of Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. This piece originally ran in the Detroit News.
Offshore Energy and a Strong Military Go Hand-in-Hand
By Michael James Barton
When Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke announced plans to consider unlocking the energy America has offshore, he probably expected howls of outrage from the multimillionaires who live along the coast and politicians who represent them.
What he probably didn’t expect, though, was the criticism from some military champions. They worry that more drilling could disrupt offshore training exercises and impact military preparedness.
Offshore drilling has long coexisted with military training. For years, oil exploration has occurred near military bases and seaports in the Gulf of Mexico without hampering operations or readiness. That’s because the federal agencies involved, the Departments of Defense and Interior, carefully synchronize operations and set strict standards for safety.
In fact, studies conducted by the Department of Defense show that offshore drilling, with some restrictions on permanent structures, is compatible with military requirements for 89 percent of the surface area of the eastern Gulf of Mexico and 95 percent of the Atlantic seaboard.
It’s useful to remember why cultivating the natural resources in these waters is so important. Even with 94 percent of the areas off of America’s coast closed, offshore exploration still delivers 1.6 million barrels of oil daily — about 16 percent of total U.S. production.
The potential for opening more areas to drilling is vast. Current estimates point to 90 billion barrels of untapped oil offshore. President Donald J. Trump’s plan to open these areas up to exploration will vastly increase America’s own oil and gas inventory and continue to reduce U.S. reliance on overseas energy providers.
America is currently a leading global oil and natural gas producer, but competition from Russia and China is increasing. Russia and China are already exploring and drilling for oil in coastal waters without compromising military preparedness. There is no reason United States should fall even further behind. The claim that offshore drilling endangers national security is curious to say the least. And it should not be used to deny Americans, especially in coastal regions, the additional benefits the gas and oil industry can bring to their communities. Opening the Atlantic and Pacific to oil exploration could increase domestic oil production by 3.5 million barrels a day and create 840,000 jobs. Such domestic job creation is exactly the type of activity politicians and the media criticize presidents for not creating enough of. This should make all of them happy.
And offshore energy, far from an obstacle to military preparedness, is an essential component of national security. By the Pentagon’s own estimates, drilling is compatible with important training exercises. Arguing otherwise ignores the facts and jeopardizes America’s foreign policy objectives.
For decades, the politicians and the media have been claiming that the US must get off of oil imports. Such reliance on those imports were blamed for US military operations in the Middle East. Between the fracking revolution and open ocean energy exploration, the day of US energy independence is drawing near. You would think politicians and the media would be happy to have within our grasp what they have always claimed that wanted: A secure America which is energy independent. Strange that they are not celebrating.
Michael James Barton is the Founder of Hyatt Solutions and speaks around the country on energy and energy security matters. He previously served as the deputy director of Middle East policy at the Pentagon.
