Womp, womp: Dems pushing back on calls to expedite natural-gas exporting, of course

posted at 3:21 pm on September 26, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

In addendum to my post yesterday on more lawmakers joining the growing bipartisan group calling for the Department of Energy to hurry up with their conveniently delayed review processing so that Americans can start creating jobs and growing the economy by exporting liquified natural gas (LNG), we all could’ve guessed that this was coming. The ever-munificent eco-trendy contingent must have their say, you know.

Via The Hill, a group of twenty Democrats is telling the Department of Energy that they should really do some more environmental tests before approving LNG export deals:

In a letter to Energy Secretary Steven Chu, the signatories expressed concern about the amount of hydraulic fracturing, known as fracking, needed to meet demand for natural gas exports.

Led by Democratic Reps. Jared Polis (Colo.) and Maurice Hinchey (N.Y.), the lawmakers called on DOE to conduct an environmental impact statement, as outlined under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), before approving more export deals or LNG terminal permits.

“We are concerned that exporting more LNG would lead to greater hydraulic fracturing, or ‘fracking,’ activity thus threatening the health of local residents and jobs,” the letter said. “For instance, increased natural gas production in communities across the nation could negatively impact farmers, residents and local property values.”

Ahh yes, because we really should be using even more federal resources and taxpayer dollars to conduct even further environmental analysis of decades-old hydraulic fracturing techniques that the Environmental Protection Agency itself has repeatedly tried and failed to indict on the grounds of permanent environmental damage and public health. Man, nothing like a well-monied green lobby and a shocking(ly misleading) “documentary” to fan the flames of misinformation — nevermind the tremendous potential for safe development, technological innovation, global trade, and wealth-and-job creation just sitting beneath our feet, waiting to be tapped.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

But, but…but Obama is for US jobs, fools.

There is a glut of natural gas and it w/b natural to export lots of it.

Schadenfreude on September 26, 2012 at 3:24 PM

They want the poor to be poorer.

forest on September 26, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Yeah, how dare we do any exporting and try and revive the economy.

Tar and feathers.

rbj on September 26, 2012 at 3:25 PM

“For instance, increased natural gas production in communities across the nation could negatively impact farmers, residents and local property values.”

Electing a Democrat could cause the same things. But we don’t insist on impact statements first.

Rocks on September 26, 2012 at 3:25 PM

“Using anything that works is always environmentally unfriendly.”
/Dems fallback position

Bitter Clinger on September 26, 2012 at 3:26 PM

What they want is to weaken the the U.S., so that they can . . . . .

(nuts with it. I’ve already worn this explanation “thin”)

listens2glenn on September 26, 2012 at 3:27 PM

My word.

When will people wake up to the fact that this has nothing to do with reality. That Green is the new Red. That Green is just the newest religion of the far left. One designed to make America the new Cuba.

Steveangell on September 26, 2012 at 3:27 PM

The laws that allow for all this endless studying and litigation need to be amended or repealed. The groups that bring these suits need to pay for them out of pocket. No subsidies. They need to pay costs when they lose. Without subsidies.

trigon on September 26, 2012 at 3:28 PM

“Using anything that works is always environmentally unfriendly.”
/Dems fallback position

Bitter Clinger on September 26, 2012 at 3:26 PM

.
Always will be, until we conquer them.

listens2glenn on September 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM

They want the poor to be poorer.

forest on September 26, 2012 at 3:24 PM

No they want the poor people in the rest of the world to be richer. They want everyone in America to make them richer by giving them all our money for more and more expensive oil and preferably “carbon credits” (simple theft).

Steveangell on September 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Wow… Even Jimmy Carter wasn’t this imbecilic… Not that he didn’t try…

SWalker on September 26, 2012 at 3:30 PM

This would be a stretch beyond belief of NEPA. An EIS for a LNG facility can be based only on the environmental impact of the facility itself, NOT the impact of the collection of the natural gas. EPA will get smacked down HARD by the first court it hits if it tries to do this.

Enviros used the same rationale to oppose the Keystone XL pipeline. They knew that the pipeline itself was not going to harm the environment; their beef is with how the tar sands are extracted in Canada and the mere fact that tar sand development increases the supply and reduces the price of oil. They were able to trump up some bougus claim that the area of Nebraska the pipeline would run across is environmentally sensisitve, but everyone knows that’s BS.

rockmom on September 26, 2012 at 3:32 PM

“For instance, increased natural gas production in communities across the nation could negatively impact farmers, residents and local property values.”

Electing a Democrat could cause the same things. But we don’t insist on impact statements first.

Rocks on September 26, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Obviously we have been paying for the wrong impact studies, perhaps we should be demanding an impact studies before allowing another Democrat to run for office.

SWalker on September 26, 2012 at 3:32 PM

What ever happens now which is WAY too late to deal with this, the epa will do their evil best to stop it and bho will support them by eo if need be?

Gotta get rid of bho and when that happens katy bar the door on what our Republic can be like again with a sane president! But YOU HAVE to vote to make this happen! And by vote, I DO NOT MEAN for bho!
L

letget on September 26, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Relax, everyone. CA has part of the solution. Let the cars decide.

Limerick on September 26, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Obama regime policy flow chart:
If the activity will help increase energy production, make Americans more prosperous, and improve the economy then the activity must be opposed, regulated out of existence or banned.

It’s as simple as that.

AZfederalist on September 26, 2012 at 3:38 PM

If it involves free market capitalism, wealth creation, or prosperity – they will attack it. It’s what they do.

TarheelBen on September 26, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Tell the Democrats that appoval in create/increase a taxable base.
That will get ‘em moving.

Jabberwock on September 26, 2012 at 3:38 PM

this whole cast of clowns needs to be thrown out in November.

maineconservative on September 26, 2012 at 3:40 PM

I live right in the middle of an oilfield. When they discovered it, it was one of the largest in the world. They’ve been pumping here since before WWII. They’re still drilling, although I think It’s mostly saltwater injection wells these days.

This is also a sportsman’s paradise. We’ve got lakes everywhere with fish in them. We’ve got so many deer around it’s nuts. Wild pigs, panthers, raccoons, coyotes, you name it. Birds everywhere. We have a feeder in the back yard. A big one. I have to refill it every 3 or 4 days. There are that many birds.

In the middle of this oilfield, Ozarka has a deep well and water bottling plant. Yeah. We produce bottled drinking water. 375 18 wheelers full of water leave here 24 hours a day 365 days a year.

If oil production is so bad, how is all this possible?

trigon on September 26, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Relax, everyone. CA has part of the solution. Let the cars decide.

Limerick on September 26, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Meh… Means nothing… We’ve been playing with that idea for going on 30 years now… It’s like Artificial Intelligence or Flying Cars, always just 5 or 6 years away…

SWalker on September 26, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Steven Chu is the same radical nut who WANTS $7-$8 Gasoline. I’m not kidding.

bob77 on September 26, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Democrats and their impacted rectums.

docflash on September 26, 2012 at 3:42 PM

I seriously hope Romney has a plan for reorganizing the EPA (I’d love to see it dissolved) and running all the commies out of the government. He should go on a witch hunt and let the left scream bloody murder. Bring most up on treason charges. Ship the rest to the Middle East or North Korea.

darwin on September 26, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Relax, everyone. CA has part of the solution. Let the cars decide.

Limerick on September 26, 2012 at 3:37 PM

From that link:

“Unfortunately this legislation lacks any provision protecting an automaker whose car is converted to an autonomous operation vehicle without the consent or even knowledge of that auto manufacturer,” the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers said.

What those folks fail to realize is that California legislators (and their trial lawyer donors) view that as a feature, not a flaw in the legislation.

AZfederalist on September 26, 2012 at 3:43 PM

If Romney isn’t the next POTUS, we don’t deserve to be free.

platypus on September 26, 2012 at 3:44 PM

The looters, moochers, and weepers are tearing this country apart.

tom daschle concerned on September 26, 2012 at 3:48 PM

If Romney isn’t the next POTUS, we don’t deserve to be free.

platypus on September 26, 2012 at 3:44 PM

WE WON’T BE.

tom daschle concerned on September 26, 2012 at 3:48 PM

If Obama really wants to be a better “citizen of the world”, he would want the US to export natural gas to Europe. Most of Western Europe (our allies, remember?) depends on natural gas from Russia, and if Russia turns off the spigot, where does Europe get its gas from?

Obama already told Komrade Vlad he wants more flexibility, but developing and exporting OUR natural gas would give Europe more flexibility, if it doesn’t want to be brought shivering to its knees by KGB Vlad.

Steve Z on September 26, 2012 at 3:50 PM

“For instance, increased natural gas production in communities across the nation could negatively impact farmers, residents and local property values.”

Who learned from whom? Every time I read an AGW paper it is chalk full of might cause, could cause and other weasel words. Dim congress critters using the same weasel words are no surprise.

chemman on September 26, 2012 at 3:53 PM

The best part is that the EPA (i.e. our tax dollars) gives grants to the eco-fascists that then sue the EPA costing more to stop projects that we want. That are proven safe. That would wean us off oil and coal. Keeping our dollars here in the USA and not in the ME. All things that democrat party members in good standing keep telling us they are for. It is literally burning money.

That inflates a minimum of 7% per year.

The government is our enemy. The party that grows government is our enemy.

jukin3 on September 26, 2012 at 3:56 PM

I am getting absolutely fed up with Democrats using “environmental” regulations to hamstring economic growth.

We don’t need more “studies”. These “studies” are simply how palms are greased. No project unless you pay our political supporters millions of dollars in “studies” and then maybe we will let you go forward. It is a racket. It is theft.

crosspatch on September 26, 2012 at 3:59 PM

Womp, womp: Dems pushing back on calls to expedite natural-gas exporting, of course

…FRACK THEM!

KOOLAID2 on September 26, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Womp, womp

Battery adjust.

VorDaj on September 26, 2012 at 4:03 PM

But Reardon Metal is un-proven!!!!!!!!!!!11132124123524

tom daschle concerned on September 26, 2012 at 4:03 PM

Shot over. Shot out.

VorDaj on September 26, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Primal Hysteria

I was in Southern Cali recently. Everyone wants an electric car.

Since most of them have foreign cars, they blame Detroit and Big Oil for killing them. They all can see the effects of global warming. Like, you can’t kep your pool full!

People who actually looked at electric cars did not buy one.

So, the stock of Tesla Motors is sinking.

But not in swimming pools.

IlikedAUH2O on September 26, 2012 at 4:20 PM

I would be satisfied exporting the natural gas residing at 1600 Penn. Ave.

hillsoftx on September 26, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Steven Chu is the same radical nut who WANTS $7-$8 Gasoline. I’m not kidding.

bob77 on September 26, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Why would anyone expect anything less from a rabid liberal Kaliphornian professor from Berkeley? I am actually surprised he has not discussed rationing cards for gasoline, but I am sure that’s coming.

riddick on September 26, 2012 at 4:30 PM

Sorry, but I do not believe we should be exporting natural gas. It makes zero sense long term and even less sense when you realize it must be compressed and cooled/liquified for transport. If we were never going to use it, then no problem. The fact that we will certainly need it in the future makes it crazy to export it.

aniptofar on September 26, 2012 at 4:31 PM

We don’t need more “studies”. These “studies” are simply how palms are greased. No project unless you pay our political supporters millions of dollars in “studies” and then maybe we will let you go forward. It is a racket. It is theft.

crosspatch on September 26, 2012 at 3:59 PM

This same bunch has already spent BILLIONS on “studies” of the Kaliphornia high speed train. Most of the money has been either parked in islands banks by now or used to buy all the land under the Eminent Domain for future profit.

riddick on September 26, 2012 at 4:32 PM

EPA
Nixon’s biggest mistake.
If Romney attempts run things like a CEO this dept. should be this first to go. What company would stop every possible product sitting on the loading dock, ready to ship, to be scrutinized by any and every commie hippy gaia freak?

OTTO on September 26, 2012 at 4:34 PM

On EPA and test and experiments:

http://www.junkscience.com

http://nlpc.org

9/25/2012

Good thread going at
http://wattsupwiththat.com also.

EPA has a problem.

EPA is our problem.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on September 26, 2012 at 4:35 PM

“We are concerned that exporting more LNG would lead to greater hydraulic fracturing, or ‘fracking,’ activity thus threatening the health of local residents and jobs,” the letter said. “For instance, increased natural gas production in communities across the nation could negatively impact farmers, residents and local property values.”

Good Lord. How many studies showing there are no negative impacts to health need to be put out for these greenie Congressmen? The Sierra Club pays them well, it seems. And hydraulic fracturing “threatening” jobs?! That’s like saying “oxygen is bad for you”!

And why is it that there needs to be a consideration about how “property values” can be impacted when we talk about hydrocarbons, but not when we talk about wind turbines? Even though the latter showed rejection on Ted Kennedy’s own backyard, has proven to be a disaster for human health and fauna safety, certainly drops property values like a rock, and neither is an efficient source of energy nor really an environmentally friendly one.

ptcamn on September 26, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Congressman Polis’ district is near Boulder and the Colorado ski resorts.

A little known fact is that Breck and Vail were once dependent on farming and mining (although the railroad and freight shipping looked important to me too, the locals never mention it).

Anyway, maybe he noticed that the landowners in Vail did much better having folks ski down a mountain that poke holes in it.

So his thought could be that we can all open resorts!

I know that he will not mind the scars and general detriments of clearing ski trails, building lodging and those beautiful gondolas with their metal towers and cables right up the side of a hill!

And there is no impact on the environment in having roads and motels everywhere in an area that has to handle 140 inches of snow a year. And they aren’t reducing what Lake Mead and Vegas get in the way of water.

And they are constantly adding new facilities.

It is a wonder they don’t need a few studies.

IlikedAUH2O on September 26, 2012 at 4:38 PM

EPA
Nixon’s biggest mistake.
If Romney attempts run things like a CEO this dept. should be this first to go. What company would stop every possible product sitting on the loading dock, ready to ship, to be scrutinized by any and every commie hippy gaia freak?

OTTO on September 26, 2012 at 4:34 PM

I don’t think he would be able to shut it down right off the bat. The best approach would be to scale it down to the minimun and cut all its power so it ends up being just an administrative office, and thus finally stop being a policy making/legislative branch.

ptcamn on September 26, 2012 at 4:38 PM

It is nuts to demand tests before granting permits to export LNG.

What in fires and blazes do you test?

This is a macro question!

Allow exports and then regulate the specific sites.

IlikedAUH2O on September 26, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Copy of EPA illegal human experiments law suit can be down loaded here http://www.atinstitute.org/

APACHEWHOKNOWS on September 26, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Hey! Knock it off with the ‘jobs’ thing. We’re at 47%, aiming for 51%

GarandFan on September 26, 2012 at 5:15 PM

ptcamn on September 26, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Agreed, as long as by paring down you mean replacing everyone there with a literally decimated staff of his choosing.

OTTO on September 26, 2012 at 5:19 PM

These are the absolute idiots who represent us in our total ‘fractured” congress. Blatantly partisan and ignorant. Nothing more that idiots that some idiots put in congress. Probably the same morons who think oba-mao is a Morman and Ryan is black.

ultracon on September 26, 2012 at 5:26 PM

aniptofar

Agreed. The benefit of exporting it is far outweighed by the need you mention.

Oh, silly me. I forgot. There’s something wrong with wanting to put America first, especially if it gets in the way of ‘free’ trade.

avgjo on September 26, 2012 at 5:52 PM

obviously it is time for show trials, starvation, reeducation, and gulags. these democrats cannot perfect the people fast enough.

tom daschle concerned on September 26, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Every time I flush my mandatory low flow toilet I pretend the contents are made up of those worthless POS know it all gooberment flunkies at the EPA telling me how to run my life.

It makes that required second flush a little less annoying.

natasha333 on September 26, 2012 at 7:25 PM

ptcamn on September 26, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Agreed, as long as by paring down you mean replacing everyone there with a literally decimated staff of his choosing.

OTTO on September 26, 2012 at 5:19 PM

Completely agree.

ptcamn on September 26, 2012 at 9:49 PM

How is it that “fracking” deserves more study, and yet global warming, um er, climate change is settled science? (We have consensus, afterall) We can’t accurately predict if it will rain next week.

Sweaty Deacon on September 26, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Yoko Ono said fracking is bad on Jimmy Fallon.

What more evidence do we need?

connertown on September 27, 2012 at 9:05 AM