We often overlook or take for granted the environmental improvements that will occur in developing countries that import LNG or countries that choose not to develop their shale gas resources. LNG imports to China, India and Mexico are largely driven by environmental concerns and government mandates. However, LNG prices are very high compared to pipeline gas. Now that Beijing has decided to impose tariffs on US LNG, China may turn to other suppliers or even develop its own shale gas resources. I discuss the pros and cons of these alternatives in:
Russo, T. (2018, September). Overlooked environmental improvements from US liquefied natural gas exports.Natural Gas & Electricity 35/2. Read the article Read more about Overlooked Environmental Improvements from US Liquefied Natural Gas Exports
Russo on Energy LLC advises pipleine conpanies, investors and analysts on FERC's review process for siting:
Introduction to the Liquefied Natural Gas Industry:
Infrastructure, Regulation and Markets
December 4-5, 2017
The following post was co-authored by Russo on Energy Partner, Tom Russo.
LNG Peak Shaving Plants costing between $12 million and $200 million are a proven alternative to gas pipelines and large underground storage facilities. They can also ensure deliverability to gas-fired power plants for short periods during extreme weather conditions when natural gas prices peak or where pipeline capacity is constrained. Read more about Is It Time to Rethink Gas Storage and Pipelines?