Thomas Elias: The Russians are trying...

Thomas Elias: The Russians are trying to foist LNG on us

There are 11 comments on the Long Beach Press-Telegram story from Dec 9, 2009, titled Thomas Elias: The Russians are trying to foist LNG on us. In it, Long Beach Press-Telegram reports that:

For much of the last three decades, California companies like Sempra Energy and Pacific Gas & Electric have tried to foist expensive, environmentally questionable liquefied natural gas onto this state's consumers.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Long Beach Press-Telegram.

Gayle Kiser

Kelso, WA

#1 Dec 9, 2009
Excellent article. This is a part of the LNG story we have been following closely, being involved in the process for the past 4 years due to Bradwood Landing's threats of Eminent Domain taking our property for a pipeline. Don't miss another piece of the puzzle: exportation of our domestic gas to the LNG market. Shell is building three floating liquefaction ships that could utilize the proposed LNG facilities to move our gas to the world market. The proposed pipelines from Wyoming all end at the Pacific. The industry will protest that they aren't capable of doing this, but that is a load of bull. It would take very little to retrofit the tanks to ship the gas the opposite direction. When Kittimat filed to become an export facility, I believe it tipped the hand of what has been in the plans for years.
Concerned American

Las Vegas, NV

#2 Dec 9, 2009
Gayle Kiser wrote:
Excellent article. This is a part of the LNG story we have been following closely, being involved in the process for the past 4 years due to Bradwood Landing's threats of Eminent Domain taking our property for a pipeline. Don't miss another piece of the puzzle: exportation of our domestic gas to the LNG market. Shell is building three floating liquefaction ships that could utilize the proposed LNG facilities to move our gas to the world market. The proposed pipelines from Wyoming all end at the Pacific. The industry will protest that they aren't capable of doing this, but that is a load of bull. It would take very little to retrofit the tanks to ship the gas the opposite direction. When Kittimat filed to become an export facility, I believe it tipped the hand of what has been in the plans for years.
I apparently need educating on this subject. From what I am reading it would appear that you are against private industry exporting a product that we have plenty of in the U.S.. If we have much more natural gas than current demand requires, what is wrong with the companies that own this gas selling it to markets that need it? Please fill me in.
Robert J G Jackson Sr

Long Beach, CA

#3 Dec 10, 2009
All forms of domestic energy should be developed, including gas, oil, coal, nuclear, and all of the renewables. Our energy costs will continue to skyrocket and to be controlled by foreign powers until we make better use of our own vast resources. We should not be relying on any other country for energy. We have our own. We simply aren't using it. That fact also means that the jobs are in foreign countries, the taxes are in foreign countries, and our money is flowing to these foreign countries to purchase and transport the energy we use. It's shameful.
Joe Peters

Long Beach, CA

#4 Dec 10, 2009
Any one who reads Elias knows that the Russians aren't our enemy. Elias only Hates American Patriots. Elias's tainted view of America colors his every word. He prefers Windmills to natural gas in any form.
econ101

Long Beach, CA

#5 Dec 10, 2009
Robert J G Jackson Sr wrote:
All forms of domestic energy should be developed, including gas, oil, coal, nuclear, and all of the renewables. Our energy costs will continue to skyrocket and to be controlled by foreign powers until we make better use of our own vast resources.
According to your free trade "economics", wouldn't somebody already be developing these energy sources if they could make a buck?
Gayle Kiser

Kelso, WA

#6 Dec 10, 2009
Concerned American, check out who owns many of the shale gas fields in America, you'll find lots of foreign investors, including Statoil of Norway who is already partnering with Gazprom. We have relied on foreign energy for too long. If we have accessible gas, we should develop it for American needs. This whole LNG import scheme is just another money maker for the big energy giants.
Concerned American

Las Vegas, NV

#7 Dec 10, 2009
Gayle Kiser wrote:
Concerned American, check out who owns many of the shale gas fields in America, you'll find lots of foreign investors, including Statoil of Norway who is already partnering with Gazprom. We have relied on foreign energy for too long. If we have accessible gas, we should develop it for American needs. This whole LNG import scheme is just another money maker for the big energy giants.
Thank you for your response. So, if I understand you correctly, the problem is not that we have plenty of reserves in the U.S., but that we are selling this product to foreigners, who turn around and sell this same product back to us at a higher price than what we would have had to pay had it stayed in the U.S.. If that's the case I think it is absurd. We need to produce as much of our own energy sources as possible, and keep those resources for our own benfit. The less we have to import the better. The larger problem is that our politicians refuse to allow us to develop our own resources. To my knowledge we are the only industrialized country in the world that is being handicapped by its own government when it comes to developing domestic resources to the fullest.
guess what

North Hollywood, CA

#8 Dec 10, 2009
Concerned American wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for your response. So, if I understand you correctly, the problem is not that we have plenty of reserves in the U.S., but that we are selling this product to foreigners, who turn around and sell this same product back to us at a higher price than what we would have had to pay had it stayed in the U.S.. If that's the case I think it is absurd.
Think so? Do you know who you pay for the water that comes out of your faucet in this state? A private company who owns a major resevoir, which retains water made possible from public works, and sells it back to the state.
He also sells future water on the market in the form of derivative instruments. When you strip the veil of secrecy, most libs are the most hardcore porn level of capitalists you're likely to meet.
zane salazar

Long Beach, CA

#9 Dec 10, 2009
Concerned American wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for your response. So, if I understand you correctly, the problem is not that we have plenty of reserves in the U.S., but that we are selling this product to foreigners, who turn around and sell this same product back to us at a higher price than what we would have had to pay had it stayed in the U.S.. If that's the case I think it is absurd. We need to produce as much of our own energy sources as possible, and keep those resources for our own benfit. The less we have to import the better. The larger problem is that our politicians refuse to allow us to develop our own resources. To my knowledge we are the only industrialized country in the world that is being handicapped by its own government when it comes to developing domestic resources to the fullest.
Don't blame Democrats. Only the cold hearted Progressive freaks are hell bent on bringing America down.
econ101

Long Beach, CA

#10 Dec 10, 2009
Concerned American wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you for your response. So, if I understand you correctly, the problem is not that we have plenty of reserves in the U.S., but that we are selling this product to foreigners, who turn around and sell this same product back to us at a higher price than what we would have had to pay had it stayed in the U.S.. If that's the case I think it is absurd. We need to produce as much of our own energy sources as possible, and keep those resources for our own benfit. The less we have to import the better. The larger problem is that our politicians refuse to allow us to develop our own resources. To my knowledge we are the only industrialized country in the world that is being handicapped by its own government when it comes to developing domestic resources to the fullest.
This could be similar to our diminished sovereignty of food, where alot of family farms went belly up with low food prices, which allowed multi-national cartels to buy them up cheap, which gives the private owners of these cartels more leverage over US policy with their increased control of the food supply.
Aaron S

Long Beach, CA

#11 Dec 10, 2009
econ101 wrote:
<quoted text>
This could be similar to our diminished sovereignty of food, where alot of family farms went belly up with low food prices, which allowed multi-national cartels to buy them up cheap, which gives the private owners of these cartels more leverage over US policy with their increased control of the food supply.
Interesting post. Thank you.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Sempra Energy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News How Renewable Energy Could Leave You Mired in B... (Oct '14) Oct '14 Solarman 1
News RBS Sempra Founders' Freepoint Said to Start Eu... (Dec '11) Dec '11 Audrey Cullen Davis 1
News Natural gas increasing its power, Exxon energy ... (Dec '11) Dec '11 Dwight Baker 1
News Sempra opens Nevada photovoltaic plant (Dec '10) Dec '10 Solarman 1
News 'Green' grant: Citrus College gets money for st... (Mar '10) Mar '10 Bob 1
News Energy Stocks: Energy stock rise on lower oil s... (Jan '10) Jan '10 Donny Reeds 1
News Thomas Elias: The Russians are coming - to forc... (Dec '09) Dec '09 Dont Be Stupid 2
More from around the web