Robert, I'm slightly disappointed that you didn't include Australia in Chart 1. In 2022, according to that same Statistical Review of World Energy report, Australia produced 5.5 exajoules - more than Norway or Saudi Arabia.
I mention this as Australia was the 2nd biggest exporter of LNG in 2023. Yet the US EIA forecasts it to be a first time importer towards the end of 2024 and the Australian Energy Regulator often forecasts domestic shortfalls during certain periods in the next few years!
No surprise, as NG is the energy bridge for the next 40 yrs. We learned the Enviro groups pushing back on NG are in fact not Enviro at all, and funding is coming from Russia (keeps their NG price up) and China ( photovoltaic producers). We have tracked the money.
Natty IS our best source of abundant inexpensive energy. But we're working as hard as we can to export that advantage away. It's not cheap in limitless quantities forever. Oil prices are way up yet rig counts are declining by the week. 1st year depletion in new wells is 70% now. We need to be putting rigs to work to hold production flat this year, much less grow it.
As usual a great article. Unfortunately policy is being directed by bureaucrats who have no experience in the fields of energy, transportation, or utilities. Look at the board members who make up the California Air Resources Board. Hard to find one that has had an actual real job. Keep up the good work as you reaching more and more people.
You omitted a chart or charts depicting U.S. total reserves of recoverable natural gas. Without that information, everything else you've provided here is less useful.
"U.S. natural gas proved reserves have increased nearly every year since 2000. Major advances in natural gas exploration and production technologies, such as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing in shale, sandstone, carbonate, and other tight geologic formations, contributed to increases in natural gas production and reserves."
Great piece Robert, very well researched. Part of the reason Ohio is attracting tech manufacturing is its easy access to the Marcellus-Utica shale gas field. Both Intel and the EV battery manufacturers have tapped the supply. Personally my home is as natural gas I can get it, which saves me significant money every year.
Just imagine how low energy prices would be if Joe "the super greenie" Biden and his bevy of administrative loons would accept this reality.
I just read that since January 2021 under Biden, energy prices, particularly electricity, have climbed 30%, rising 13 times faster than the previous seven years.
Most people conflate the fact the most things are made directly-as a base or foundational element with natural gas or indirectly-input for petrochemical & electrical. Renewable energy (wind & solar) would not be even possible without the flexibility of natural gas. Both Texas and Germany have and had respectfully centered their renewable buildout of low natural gas. The difference in success-although I would caution that word when speaking about renewables-is that Texas is awash in natural gas-so much so it turns negative at times-and Germany imported it. That should speak for itself.
LOVE it that you use energy units to describe, well, energy! Exajoules. The graphs provide excellent visuals for what is happening WRT energy production and transfer - to EU.
Yes the #6 stat really stuck out. How can the total energy produced by wind go down by so much DESPITE the increase in generation capacity? The song & dance explanation of how that happened would be entertaining to watch....
What I had hoped for, in reading these 29 comments, was some form of intellectual debate or conversation about the INVESTING IMPLICATIONS of what Robert discusses in this article. Unless I missed something, there has so far been no such conversation. So [ hopefully ] let me start one. WHAT and WHERE are the Nat gas companies worth investing in? In Goehring and Rozencwaig's 4th quarter 2023 report [published] 23 Feb 2024 ] there is an entire section starting on page 10 titled "Is Gas the new Uranium?" So, I ask again, investing in what companies and why invest in them is the best way to play the coming boom in Nat Gas? If all I get back are the sounds of not even crickets in the night, then for sure I'll know I'll be onto something!! Let the investing into Nat Gas discussion begin!!! I hope . . . .
Good luck! With natural gas in the US at $1.86 per Robert's article, there isn't much money to be made directly selling it. As Doomberg has mentioned in previous articles of theirs, the entire O & G industry are "price takers" and any innovation they come up with, generates more of that commodity which in turn lowers prices!
The LNG market would expand NG use. Especially plants on the west coast. But need LNG carriers. The shipping industry (besides not running into bridges) will be under going a massive change over in fuel propulsion in the next few years. LNG seems to make the most sense, but ammonia (derived from NG) is another top contender...
Unless there is a massive govt subsidy, the stock market/investments won't really happen (IMHO) so look for the subsidies if they come...
Why are you are looking for investment advice in an energy forum Ronald? That said - Follow the money and maybe we see where the enregy transition is going
Very good essay, sir. Thank you. I have two questions, preferably for Democrats or for those who support idea of "net-zero."
1. Referencing Chart 7: If residential use of natural gas has been essentially "flat" for the past 50 years, why do you feel compelled to initiate programs that would eliminate residential gas use? According to the EPA. only 13 percent of emissions come from residential and commercial use. How will "eliminating" only 13 percent of the emissions make a serious dent in global temperatures? Biden's and California's programs that eliminate gas stoves and gas furnaces seem to be programs searching for fly shit in the pepper.
2. Referencing Chart 8: This chart tells an incomplete story. It would be more effective had it shown the capacity factors for energy sources in areas affected by the winter storm. My question is simple: why do you insist we rely on energy sources that are totally dependent on weather to produce electricity?
How does the Climatist's Handbook suggest you answer these questions? I really am curious.
The sheer amount of low cost, efficient natural gas available to the United States is staggering. That is reliable cannot be debated. Yet, despite the efforts of Robert Bryce and many others here on Substack, a cabal of wealthy, supposedly educated elitists want to keep all of that wealth in the ground so we can, supposedly yet quite preposterously, run the world’s largest economy on windmills and solar. Their fervent desire to force everyone else to live in an all electric world fueled entirely by renewables reflects both the collapse of our educational system and the corruption of “science” and common sense.
Robert, I'm slightly disappointed that you didn't include Australia in Chart 1. In 2022, according to that same Statistical Review of World Energy report, Australia produced 5.5 exajoules - more than Norway or Saudi Arabia.
I mention this as Australia was the 2nd biggest exporter of LNG in 2023. Yet the US EIA forecasts it to be a first time importer towards the end of 2024 and the Australian Energy Regulator often forecasts domestic shortfalls during certain periods in the next few years!
No surprise, as NG is the energy bridge for the next 40 yrs. We learned the Enviro groups pushing back on NG are in fact not Enviro at all, and funding is coming from Russia (keeps their NG price up) and China ( photovoltaic producers). We have tracked the money.
Natty IS our best source of abundant inexpensive energy. But we're working as hard as we can to export that advantage away. It's not cheap in limitless quantities forever. Oil prices are way up yet rig counts are declining by the week. 1st year depletion in new wells is 70% now. We need to be putting rigs to work to hold production flat this year, much less grow it.
Thanks for writing! I appreciate this comment as it is mostly new information to me. I'll dig deeper.
As usual a great article. Unfortunately policy is being directed by bureaucrats who have no experience in the fields of energy, transportation, or utilities. Look at the board members who make up the California Air Resources Board. Hard to find one that has had an actual real job. Keep up the good work as you reaching more and more people.
You omitted a chart or charts depicting U.S. total reserves of recoverable natural gas. Without that information, everything else you've provided here is less useful.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/how-much-gas-is-left.php.
"U.S. natural gas proved reserves have increased nearly every year since 2000. Major advances in natural gas exploration and production technologies, such as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing in shale, sandstone, carbonate, and other tight geologic formations, contributed to increases in natural gas production and reserves."
No thourogh environmental/social assessment would agree. Maybe if we started this 50byears ago, it might be the case. Suck it up.
Great piece Robert, very well researched. Part of the reason Ohio is attracting tech manufacturing is its easy access to the Marcellus-Utica shale gas field. Both Intel and the EV battery manufacturers have tapped the supply. Personally my home is as natural gas I can get it, which saves me significant money every year.
Just imagine how low energy prices would be if Joe "the super greenie" Biden and his bevy of administrative loons would accept this reality.
I just read that since January 2021 under Biden, energy prices, particularly electricity, have climbed 30%, rising 13 times faster than the previous seven years.
Most people conflate the fact the most things are made directly-as a base or foundational element with natural gas or indirectly-input for petrochemical & electrical. Renewable energy (wind & solar) would not be even possible without the flexibility of natural gas. Both Texas and Germany have and had respectfully centered their renewable buildout of low natural gas. The difference in success-although I would caution that word when speaking about renewables-is that Texas is awash in natural gas-so much so it turns negative at times-and Germany imported it. That should speak for itself.
LOVE it that you use energy units to describe, well, energy! Exajoules. The graphs provide excellent visuals for what is happening WRT energy production and transfer - to EU.
Outstanding, Robert!
Two items struck us:
a) #6 - that wind produced 9 LESS Twh's in 2023 vs. 2022 (despite the subsidies and GWs of new capacity installed)
b) #7 - that residential natty use is pretty much flat for 50 yrs.
Great research!
Yes the #6 stat really stuck out. How can the total energy produced by wind go down by so much DESPITE the increase in generation capacity? The song & dance explanation of how that happened would be entertaining to watch....
Been reading that US is awash with so much gas they are changing engines in heavier equipment to run on natural gas
See the DOOMBERG article of today, which speaks to exactly the point you make here.
I’m in Australia and we have completely ruined cheap natural gas. Apparently our gas comes out at about $1 cost.
We have no reservation policy but I ask from the North Americans is a reservation policy the main reason the US is awash with natural gas?
What I had hoped for, in reading these 29 comments, was some form of intellectual debate or conversation about the INVESTING IMPLICATIONS of what Robert discusses in this article. Unless I missed something, there has so far been no such conversation. So [ hopefully ] let me start one. WHAT and WHERE are the Nat gas companies worth investing in? In Goehring and Rozencwaig's 4th quarter 2023 report [published] 23 Feb 2024 ] there is an entire section starting on page 10 titled "Is Gas the new Uranium?" So, I ask again, investing in what companies and why invest in them is the best way to play the coming boom in Nat Gas? If all I get back are the sounds of not even crickets in the night, then for sure I'll know I'll be onto something!! Let the investing into Nat Gas discussion begin!!! I hope . . . .
Good luck! With natural gas in the US at $1.86 per Robert's article, there isn't much money to be made directly selling it. As Doomberg has mentioned in previous articles of theirs, the entire O & G industry are "price takers" and any innovation they come up with, generates more of that commodity which in turn lowers prices!
The LNG market would expand NG use. Especially plants on the west coast. But need LNG carriers. The shipping industry (besides not running into bridges) will be under going a massive change over in fuel propulsion in the next few years. LNG seems to make the most sense, but ammonia (derived from NG) is another top contender...
Unless there is a massive govt subsidy, the stock market/investments won't really happen (IMHO) so look for the subsidies if they come...
Why are you are looking for investment advice in an energy forum Ronald? That said - Follow the money and maybe we see where the enregy transition is going
Very good essay, sir. Thank you. I have two questions, preferably for Democrats or for those who support idea of "net-zero."
1. Referencing Chart 7: If residential use of natural gas has been essentially "flat" for the past 50 years, why do you feel compelled to initiate programs that would eliminate residential gas use? According to the EPA. only 13 percent of emissions come from residential and commercial use. How will "eliminating" only 13 percent of the emissions make a serious dent in global temperatures? Biden's and California's programs that eliminate gas stoves and gas furnaces seem to be programs searching for fly shit in the pepper.
2. Referencing Chart 8: This chart tells an incomplete story. It would be more effective had it shown the capacity factors for energy sources in areas affected by the winter storm. My question is simple: why do you insist we rely on energy sources that are totally dependent on weather to produce electricity?
How does the Climatist's Handbook suggest you answer these questions? I really am curious.
The sheer amount of low cost, efficient natural gas available to the United States is staggering. That is reliable cannot be debated. Yet, despite the efforts of Robert Bryce and many others here on Substack, a cabal of wealthy, supposedly educated elitists want to keep all of that wealth in the ground so we can, supposedly yet quite preposterously, run the world’s largest economy on windmills and solar. Their fervent desire to force everyone else to live in an all electric world fueled entirely by renewables reflects both the collapse of our educational system and the corruption of “science” and common sense.