4 ms·

> The conflict in Ukraine means my heating bill in NY goes up 40% this winter. Why? The US is the largest producer of natural gas in the world, and by quite a

by Alupis 4y ago

> The conflict in Ukraine means my heating bill in NY goes up 40% this winter. Why? The US is the largest producer of natural gas in the world, and by quite a large margin[1]. Europe tied themselves to Russian natural gas, heeding no warnings in the process, and now find themselves cut off due to conflict. Oh, if only this could have been predicted and avoided in advance... It makes sense for Europeans to experience ludicrous natural gas bills, but not someone in NY. Further, the US should not make citizens suffer in order to prop up European nations that couldn't have cared any less about their own security until it was too late. [1] https://yearbook.enerdata.net/natural-gas/world-natural-gas-production-statistics.html https://yearbook.enerdata.net/natural-gas/world-natural-gas-...

Spooky23 4y ago
We’re shipping LNG to Europe, and limited pipeline capacity in the northeast is a constraint.
randomdata 4y ago
> It makes sense for Europeans to experience ludicrous natural gas bills, but not someone in NY. It's a globally traded commodity. If someone in NY won't pay 40% more, someone in Europe will. Just like you work for who gives you the most compelling offer, so too does natural gas go to who presents the most compelling offer. > the US should not make citizens suffer in order to prop up European nations Given that the US is where most of the natural gas is produced, per your comment, the US will realize a huge windfall by shipping its product to Europe at a high markup. The citizens of the US will be emboldened by it. They may have to pay more for heat, but stand to gain even more than that. Europe loses either way.
- Alupis 4y ago
  > The citizens of the US will be emboldened by it. They may have to pay more for heat, but stand to gain even more than that. I have to disagree here. The citizens of the US gain nothing from the US permitting natural gas companies to export to Europe instead of filling local demand first. These are private companies anyway... so not sure how this logic holds up. > It's a globally traded commodity. Sure it is... however a nation can and will prohibit exports when local demand exceeds available reserves. Natural gas is a strategic asset after all, and we're already dangerously dancing with inflation/recession - it wouldn't make sense to accelerate that path just because Europe needs gas after a series of terrible, completely avoidable choices.
  - randomdata 4y ago
    > however a nation can and will prohibit exports when local demand exceeds available reserves. Sure. There is no doubt a tipping point. Seeing 100% exports wouldn't work. But the nation of the US is made up of its citizens, so only when the citizens start to feel that tipping point has nearing or has occurred will they take measures to prohibit such exports. Clearly we're not there. There is still more upside than downside.
    - Alupis 4y ago
      I think in theory you would be right, but practically Joe Biden isn't going to ask regular citizens if he should allow export of Natural Gas to European nations. Majority of citizens just accept the half-truth that Putin's War caused high gas (both natural and petroleum) for everyone, and that there's nothing that can be done except end the war. Europe needs to suffer for their poor decisions. Enough of the US swooping in and solving European mistakes... then getting villainized for being the world's safety net.
      - randomdata 4y ago
        > but practically Joe Biden isn't going to ask regular citizens if he should allow export of Natural Gas to European nations. No, that isn't practical. Which is why government is set up in reverse: The citizens tell Biden what they want. The citizens are the boss, after all. It stands to reason that the message comes down from the boss. Except that isn't practical either, so middlemen are employed to combine and distill the information they receive from the boss into a more digestible form that can be presented in a practical manner to the worker. Those middlemen are chosen by the citizens through a long and arduous process to ensure that they are trustworthy enough to accurately convey the desired message to the worker on the ground. Yes, theoretically an unscrupulous middleman could spread false information, but through hundreds of years of using this system the citizens have shown to have a strong degree of confidence in the effectiveness of the selection process. Not only do they have confidence, but they also find utility. It would be downright silly to go to all of the trouble of selecting the most trustworthy middleman and hire him, at a decent rate of pay I might add, only to never use his services. The citizens recognize the value they get by hiring these people to pass their orders to the workers. You personally may have no use for said middlemen as you management style sees you sit back and forever wait for Biden to knock on your door, but citizens (plural) is inherently about more than you.

by Alupis 4y ago

Spooky23 4y ago

We’re shipping LNG to Europe, and limited pipeline capacity in the northeast is a constraint.

randomdata 4y ago

> It makes sense for Europeans to experience ludicrous natural gas bills, but not someone in NY. It's a globally traded commodity. If someone in NY won't pay 40% more, someone in Europe will. Just like you work for who gives you the most compelling offer, so too does natural gas go to who presents the most compelling offer. > the US should not make citizens suffer in order to prop up European nations Given that the US is where most of the natural gas is produced, per your comment, the US will realize a huge windfall by shipping its product to Europe at a high markup. The citizens of the US will be emboldened by it. They may have to pay more for heat, but stand to gain even more than that. Europe loses either way.

Alupis 4y ago
> The citizens of the US will be emboldened by it. They may have to pay more for heat, but stand to gain even more than that. I have to disagree here. The citizens of the US gain nothing from the US permitting natural gas companies to export to Europe instead of filling local demand first. These are private companies anyway... so not sure how this logic holds up. > It's a globally traded commodity. Sure it is... however a nation can and will prohibit exports when local demand exceeds available reserves. Natural gas is a strategic asset after all, and we're already dangerously dancing with inflation/recession - it wouldn't make sense to accelerate that path just because Europe needs gas after a series of terrible, completely avoidable choices.
- randomdata 4y ago
  > however a nation can and will prohibit exports when local demand exceeds available reserves. Sure. There is no doubt a tipping point. Seeing 100% exports wouldn't work. But the nation of the US is made up of its citizens, so only when the citizens start to feel that tipping point has nearing or has occurred will they take measures to prohibit such exports. Clearly we're not there. There is still more upside than downside.
  - Alupis 4y ago
    I think in theory you would be right, but practically Joe Biden isn't going to ask regular citizens if he should allow export of Natural Gas to European nations. Majority of citizens just accept the half-truth that Putin's War caused high gas (both natural and petroleum) for everyone, and that there's nothing that can be done except end the war. Europe needs to suffer for their poor decisions. Enough of the US swooping in and solving European mistakes... then getting villainized for being the world's safety net.
    - randomdata 4y ago
      > but practically Joe Biden isn't going to ask regular citizens if he should allow export of Natural Gas to European nations. No, that isn't practical. Which is why government is set up in reverse: The citizens tell Biden what they want. The citizens are the boss, after all. It stands to reason that the message comes down from the boss. Except that isn't practical either, so middlemen are employed to combine and distill the information they receive from the boss into a more digestible form that can be presented in a practical manner to the worker. Those middlemen are chosen by the citizens through a long and arduous process to ensure that they are trustworthy enough to accurately convey the desired message to the worker on the ground. Yes, theoretically an unscrupulous middleman could spread false information, but through hundreds of years of using this system the citizens have shown to have a strong degree of confidence in the effectiveness of the selection process. Not only do they have confidence, but they also find utility. It would be downright silly to go to all of the trouble of selecting the most trustworthy middleman and hire him, at a decent rate of pay I might add, only to never use his services. The citizens recognize the value they get by hiring these people to pass their orders to the workers. You personally may have no use for said middlemen as you management style sees you sit back and forever wait for Biden to knock on your door, but citizens (plural) is inherently about more than you.