Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Socialist Progressives
Related: About this forumUS fracking companies & Ukraine
Why US fracking companies are licking their lips over Ukraine
From climate change to Crimea, the natural gas industry is supreme at exploiting crisis for private gain what I call the shock doctrine
Naomi Klein
The Guardian, Thursday 10 April 2014 14.12 EDT
The way to beat Vladimir Putin is to flood the European market with fracked-in-the-USA natural gas, or so the industry would have us believe. As part of escalating anti-Russian hysteria, two bills have been introduced into the US Congress one in the House of Representatives (H.R. 6), one in the Senate (S. 2083) that attempt to fast-track liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, all in the name of helping Europe to wean itself from Putin's fossil fuels, and enhancing US national security.
According to Cory Gardner, the Republican congressman who introduced the House bill, "opposing this legislation is like hanging up on a 911 call from our friends and allies". And that might be true as long as your friends and allies work at Chevron and Shell, and the emergency is the need to keep profits up amid dwindling supplies of conventional oil and gas.
<snip>
Or the fact that for years the industry has been selling the message that Americans must accept the risks to their land, water and air that come with hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in order to help their country achieve "energy independence". And now, suddenly and slyly, the goal has been switched to "energy security", which apparently means selling a temporary glut of fracked gas on the world market, thereby creating energy dependencies abroad ...
Much more here: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/10/us-fracking-companies-climate-change-crisis-shock-doctrine
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 1156 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
US fracking companies & Ukraine (Original Post)
TBF
Apr 2014
OP
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)1. Totally impractical.
.
TBF
(33,776 posts)2. You're going to have to be more specific. nt
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)3. In a nutshell
One supertanker emits in a year the equivalent of 50,000,000 cars, would require 400 or so supertankers most of which would need to be built because they don't currently exist and literally millions of Atlantic crossings. Aside from the US is not capable of producing that volume of LPG.
Last but not least do you really believe the Europe would simple exchange reliance on Russia for reliance on the USA.
TBF
(33,776 posts)4. Did you read the article?
Naomi is arguing that the republicans introducing this bill are out of their minds.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)5. I read it the day it was published here in the UK.
.