INVESTIGATION: The Flip Side Of Obama’s Keystone XL Delay

INVESTIGATION: The Flip Side Of Obama’s Keystone XL Delay.

New Report Reveals Additional Fossil Fuel Subsidies Equaling $4 Billion Each Year – EcoWatch: Cutting Edge Environmental News Service

New Report Reveals Additional Fossil Fuel Subsidies Equaling $4 Billion Each Year – EcoWatch: Cutting Edge Environmental News Service.

Port Ambrose LNG terminal

    By

  • WILL JAMES

A proposal to build a natural-gas facility off Long Island and New Jersey has turned into a proxy for the debate about hydraulic fracturing, the gas-drilling technique that remains banned in New York state.

Liberty Natural Gas LLC is asking the federal government for permission to build a facility where ships carrying liquefied natural gas would dock, vaporize the gas and pump it into the New York City area.

The company says it will never use the $300 million terminal in the Atlantic Ocean to export the gas overseas. But opponents are skeptical, saying the facility to be called Port Ambrose could drive a hydraulic-fracturing boom in the Northeast as the U.S. natural-gas industry appears poised to pivot from importing to exporting.

Federal agencies are reviewing the application, but environmental groups from the Catskills to the Jersey Shore are lobbying Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a New York Democrat, and Gov. Chris Christie, a New Jersey Republican, both of whom have the power to stop the proposal.

“Fracking in New York state will be made possible because of this facility that is being proposed off of our shores,” said Jeremy Samuelson, the executive director of Concerned Citizens of Montauk, an environmental group in eastern Long Island.

A spokesman for Mr. Cuomo said: “We are monitoring the federal process.” A Christie spokesman didn’t respond to requests for comment. In 2011 and 2012, Mr. Christie vetoed two proposals by Liberty to build offshore terminals, citing environmental and security concerns.

Liberty, based in Manhattan, said it wanted only to exploit a niche market in the New York City area, where winter prices rise because pipeline capacity falls short of demand.

“We’ve identified New York City as a particularly attractive seasonal peak market during the winter months,” said Liberty Chief Executive Roger Whelan.

Industry experts backed the Liberty business plan’s logic. “It’s not totally crazy, because of the constraints to deliver to the New York City area,” said Kenneth Medlock, senior director of the Center for Energy Studies at Rice University, in Houston. “It’s a way around pipeline constraints.”

Hydraulic fracturing—widely known as fracking—involves the injection of millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals into the earth to break up shale rock and release natural gas. Critics cite concerns about groundwater pollution, hazardous byproducts and the release of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.

Parts of New York state sit on the Marcellus Shale, a rock formation rich in untapped natural gas. A moratorium on widespread, high-volume fracking has been in place since 2008 as New York state government officials weigh whether to allow it. It is legal in other states, such as Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, that also sit atop the formation.

The U.S. Coast Guard and the Maritime Administration are conducting an environmental review of the Port Ambrose proposal, which would be 20 miles southeast of Jones Beach on Long Island and 28 miles east of Long Branch, N.J.

Port Ambrose would consist of two submerged buoys—each 33 feet tall and 24 feet in diameter—moored to the sea floor where ships could stop and turn liquefied natural gas into its gas form. The gas would travel through underwater pipelines into an existing pipeline serving New York City and Long Island.

The Maritime Administration ultimately will rule on the application, but it must deny it if Mr. Cuomo or Mr. Christie expresses opposition.

The proposal comes at a dynamic time for the gas industry. U.S. prices have been dropping for years as new production methods such as fracking have driven a domestic boom.

As U.S. natural gas production has hit record heights in recent years, more companies have been seeking to ship it overseas. Port Ambrose is one of four pending import terminals, while there are 20 seeking to export, according to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

A representative for Neptune LNG Deepwater Port, an offshore terminal in Massachusetts Bay near Boston designed to exploit a niche similar to the one eyed by Liberty in New York, said last week that low natural-gas prices have rendered the facility inactive for years and it planned to suspend operations.

Neptune was one of only two operational offshore ports designed to import liquefied natural gas—like Port Ambrose.

Even though Neptune is shutting down, Mr. Whelan said the Boston area still relies on liquefied natural gas from other facilities in the winter, due to pipeline constraints. “It really is an apples and oranges comparison,” he said. “We still believe there’s a very strong market in the winter months for this kind of supply into New York City.”

Some of the contention over Port Ambrose hinges on whether it would be legal or technically feasible to switch an import facility to an export facility.

Mr. Whelan said he wouldn’t seek to export gas from Port Ambrose because it wouldn’t be legal under the federal license he seeks. Liberty’s opponents say federal law allows the Maritime Administration to easily amend licenses without having to solicit public input, and they want the federal government to take the impacts of exporting the gas and fracking into consideration.

The Maritime Administration said if Liberty sought to export liquefied natural gas from Port Ambrose, it would be required to file a new application and restart a lengthy review process. The current application is being considered exclusively for importing, a spokeswoman said.

Emerging technology will allow exporters to liquefy natural gas on vessels and ship it from offshore terminals like Port Ambrose, but Mr. Whelan said that technology was prohibitively expensive, costing billions of dollars. “It would be insanity to install an export facility,” he said.

A version of this article appeared July 22, 2013, on page A19 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Offshore Plan Spurs Debate On Fracking.

Northeast Gas Association: NGA ISSUE BRIEF: Pipeline Expansion Projects

Northeast Gas Association: NGA ISSUE BRIEF: Pipeline Expansion Projects.

SUMMARY

  • Numerous projects are in development to expand the Northeast pipeline system, to transport supplies from the productive Marcellus shale gas basin in Appalachia
  • Projects rely upon customer commitments via contracts to proceed
  • Development must meet federal and state regulatory requirements.
  • NGA: pipeline infrastructure development is needed in the region to meet market demand.
Photo: Spectra Energy

The Northeast’s natural gas industry is striving to move forward with infrastructure projects designed to meet growing market demand. There is substantial growth in natural gas supplies within the Marcellus Shale basin on the border of the Northeast region (NY, NJ and New England). Even so, getting these new supplies to market requires further natural gas pipeline infrastructure investments, which requires incremental contract commitments.

Benefits of Adding Infrastructure

The Northeast natural gas pipeline system region remains constrained at several key points – particularly into the New York City area/Long Island and New England. New supplies and infrastructure will help to ease those constraints, and should help to improve the regional price situation.

The multiple projects all center around bringing Marcellus Shale supplies in Appalachia to market. These projects are designed to help further increase regional natural gas capacity, deliverability, flexibility and reliability, as well as provide economic and environmental benefits to the region. They also are planned to bring natural gas liquids, such as ethane, to market, a by-product of gas production.

In addition, there are planned system expansions on local utility systems to meet growing demand for natural gas – at the residential and commercial/industrial levels.

Importance of Contract Commitments to Project Advancement

The natural gas delivery system is designed to fulfill its contractual arrangements. Pipeline capacity is added to meet the needs of gas customers requesting primary firm service and who are willing to execute firm transportation contracts that pay for the required capital investment and operating costs. Without such commitments and arrangements, projects cannot proceed.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in a December 2003 report on New England’s natural gas infrastructure noted:“The adequacy of the natural gas infrastructure is based on its ability to fulfill its contractual commitments. Natural gas may be contracted on a firm or interruptible basis. Interruptible contracts are typically less expensive because capacity is only paid for if used, and the supplier or transporter may interrupt service. The natural gas infrastructure is considered adequate if firm commitments are met and terms of the interruptible contract are satisfied.”

The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA) noted in fall 2011 that “between 2005 and 2010, pipeline expenditures [in the U.S.] averaged $8.8 billion per year in real 2010 dollars.”

However, natural gas pipeline companies do not design or build pipeline projects based on the assumption that there will be a future market for transportation. Capital investment by pipelines must be supported by revenue certainty through firm service agreements.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) summarizes the various options for creating additional pipeline capacity as including:

  • Building an entirely new pipeline
  • Adding a parallel pipeline along a segment of pipeline, called looping
  • Installing a lateral or extension off the existing mainline
  • Upgrading and expanding facilities, such as compressor stations, along an existing route.

What are the Stages of Pipeline Project Development?

There are several stages of project development. The following is adapted from a U.S. EIA paper.

As shown in the chart above, pipeline capacity additions in the Northeast have been rising in recent years. The outlook for further growth in 2013 – shown in pale green – is especially robust.

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, March 25, 2013

Phase I: Market Assessment and “Open Season”
Market need and project viability assessed
Meet with stakeholders
Project proposal announced
“Open season” held to gauge level of market interest among potential customers
non-binding commitment to sign-up for a portion of the capacity rights available on the project

If enough interest is shown, sponsors arrive at preliminary design.

Phase 2: Development of final project design and obtaining of firm financial commitments from customers; meet with stakeholders

Phase 3: Filing with regulatory agencies – federal, state, etc.

Phase 4: Regulatory review and issuing of necessary certificates

Phase 5: Construction

Phase 6: Commissioning and testing

Photo: Yankee Gas Services Company

The process from initial development to commissioning can take from 3 to 5 years, and sometimes even longer.

Regulatory Review

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is the lead permitting agency for interstate pipeline projects. FERC is an independent agency that regulates the interstate transmission of natural gas, electricity and oil.

In addition, projects require certain state (and sometimes local) permits, particularly in environmental matters.

The U.S. EIA observes: “A FERC review of an interstate pipeline project takes from 5-18 months, with an average time of 15 months. No data are available on the average time for obtaining approval from an individual State agency. Usually, approval by the regulating authority is conditional, but most often the conditions do not constitute a significant impediment. The project sponsor must then either accept or reject the conditions or reapply with an alternative plan.”

Opportunities for the Region

The Marcellus supply production and the related infrastructure development offer great opportunities to the economy and environment of the Northeast. This region remains one of the most highly-populated, highly-priced and yet most highly-constrained gas markets in the U.S. These supply and pipeline developments have the potential of transforming the traditional paths of supply sourcing into the region, creating a more diverse supply mix and a more varied delivery network. This bodes well for regional supply security and economic competitiveness.

For Further Information

NGA Summary of Proposed Northeast Pipeline Projects [pdf]

U.S. EIA Outline of Pipeline Development Process

U.S. FERC

Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA)

 

Susquehanna County PA Compressor Station Tour

Bill Huston’s Blog (Binghamton NY): Plane Ride 7-17 Broome County NY / Susquehanna County PA Compressor Station Tour.

US shale gas to heat British homes within five years | Environment | guardian.co.uk

US shale gas to heat British homes within five years | Environment | guardian.co.uk.

America’s Coming Infrastructure Disaster – Newsweek and The Daily Beast

America’s Coming Infrastructure Disaster – Newsweek and The Daily Beast.

List of pipeline accidents in the United States in the 21st Century – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of pipeline accidents in the United States in the 21st Century – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.