The Energy Tax Threat to Our Natural Gas Future

Posted May 5th, 2009 at 10.04am in Energy and Environment.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

A massive natural-gas discovery here in northern Louisiana heralds a big shift in the nation’s energy landscape. After an era of declining production, the U.S. is now swimming in natural gas.

Even conservative estimates suggest the Louisiana discovery — known as the Haynesville Shale, for the dense rock formation that contains the gas — could hold some 200 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. That’s the equivalent of 33 billion barrels of oil, or 18 years’ worth of current U.S. oil production. Some industry executives think the field could be several times that size. … One industry-backed study estimates the U.S. has more than 2,200 trillion cubic feet of gas waiting to be pumped, enough to satisfy nearly 100 years of current U.S. natural-gas demand.

But don’t count on all that natural gas to be developed yet. The Obama administration wants to slap a massive energy tax on natural gas to pay for their trillion dollar deficits.

Some on the left, like Speaker Nancy Pelsoi (D-CA), have claimed that a carbon tax would help natural gas production. Pelosi told Meet the Press:

I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels. … These investments in wind, in solar and biofuels and focus on natural gas, these are the real alternatives.

But as the Energy Information Administration (EIA) “Energy Kids Page” explains, natural gas is indeed a fossil fuel that emits carbon when turned into energy. Therefore any carbon cap and trade plan would limit natural gas production by slapping a punitive energy tax on it. This would mean higher energy and tranportaiton costs for consumers and less jobs for everybody.

Author: Conn Carroll
Interact: Sphere
Share This

5 Comments

May 5, 2009 Ozzy6900, CT writes:

Proof again that the “Know-it-alls” really have no clue! Natural Gas is almost a pure burn so the pollutants are less than fuel oil. You can get a gas furnace to burn with 95% efficiency with a discharge of more water vapor than carbon. So by all means, tax the living hell out of it so we have no where to turn in the cold weather! Hey, the more money you take out of my pocket, the more dependent I become on your generosity!

May 5, 2009 ra,ohio writes:

There are thousands of natural gas wells that are capped off in the U.S.
This whole ruse is a money grab, and nothing more than propaganda from the left.

Pelosi is a moron, and should not be in her position.
Anybody that listens to what she says can certainly figure that out, hopefully. Problem is, a lot of people aren’t intelligent enough to discern the difference between intentional indoctrination, per the MSM, or the fact that they possess abject stupidity to the degree that they can’t decide
between the two.

Capitalism is systematically being defeated as we watch, with socialistic policies being passed behind closed doors in the halls of congress.

They will start tapping the above mentioned wells as soon as they can pass the cap and trade policies. Watch them.

ozzy6900, you are right, but it’s all about the money.

May 5, 2009 Dean Weichmann, Wisconsin writes:

The speaker is correct, since natural gas has a far lower carbon content than other fossil fuels it would be favored by a carbon tax.

May 6, 2009 Thomas Gray SC writes:

How long will that natural gas last if the environ activist succeed in cutting off the supply of coal use for electricity as they have done against the building of any new nuclear power plants ?,

I know we can build an intermintant electric power source and just use electricity when it’s available.

Will a few math teachers PLEASE speak up.

May 21, 2009 dennis florida writes:

with all these energy resorces all around us,it’s discusting that we can’t have it until the government figures out how to tax it to death.out of every gallon of gas,if my figures are correct,oil companies get 4% profit. government gets 14%tax .it appears that we are going to be dependent on oil and gas for a long time.why not harvest it here.look at the long term jobs it would supply. look at all the money we would save from buying it from outside sources.maby in 2010, we might be able to straighten this mess out.but at least we would be supplying our own energy.nuclear energy would be another consideration. how about coal? I guess no matter what you come up with, this government is going to want to put a heavy tax on it.

The Heritage Foundation - Leadership for America

The Foundry