[QUOTE]PITTSBURGH (AP) The Kremlin is watching, European nations are rebelling, and some suspect Moscow is secretly bankrolling a campaign to derail the West's strategic plans.
It's not some Cold War movie; it's about the U.S. boom in natural gas drilling, and the political implications are enormous.
Like falling dominoes, the drilling process called hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is shaking up world energy markets from Washington to Moscow to Beijing. Some predict what was once unthinkable: that the U.S. won't need to import natural gas in the near future, and that Russia could be the big loser.
"This is where everything is being turned on its head," said Fiona Hill, an expert on Russia at the Brookings Institution, a think tank in Washington. "Their days of dominating the European gas markets are gone."
Any nations that trade in energy could potentially gain or lose.
"The relative fortunes of the United States, Russia, and China and their ability to exert influence in the world are tied in no small measure to global gas developments," Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government concluded in a report this summer.
The story began to unfold a few years ago, as advances in drilling opened up vast reserves of gas buried in deep shale rock, such as the Marcellus formation in Pennsylvania and the Barnett, in Texas.
Experts had been predicting that the U.S. was running out of natural gas, but then shale gas began to flood the market, and prices plunged.
Russia had been exporting vast quantities to Europe and other countries for about $10 per unit, but the current price in the U.S. is now about $3 for the same quantity. That kind of math got the attention of energy companies, and politicians, around the world.
Some European governments began to envision a future with less Russian natural gas. In 2009, Russia had cut off gas shipments via Ukraine for nearly two weeks amid a price and payment dispute, and more than 15 European countries were sent scrambling to find alternative sources of energy.
The financial stakes are huge. Russia's Gazprom energy corporation, which is state-controlled, had $44 billion in profits last year. Gazprom, based in Moscow, is the world's largest producer of natural gas and exports much of it to other countries.
But last month Gazprom halted plans to develop a new arctic gas field, saying it couldn't justify the investment now, and its most recent financial report showed profits had dropped by almost 25 percent.
The U.S. presidential campaigns have already addressed the strategic potential.
A campaign position paper for Republican Mitt Romney said he "will pursue policies that work to decrease the reliance of European nations on Russian sources of energy."
In early September, President Barack Obama said the U.S. could "develop a hundred-year supply of natural gas that's right beneath our feet," which would "cut our oil imports in half by 2020 and support more than 600,000 new jobs in natural gas alone."
Poland's Ministry of the Environment wrote in a statement to The Associated Press that "an increased production of natural gas from shale formations in Europe will limit the import via pipelines from Algeria and Russia."
The issue has reached the highest levels of the Kremlin, too.
Hill, of the Brookings think tank, heard President Vladimir Putin speak in late 2011 at a Moscow gathering of academics and media. She said in a blog post that "the only time I thought that he became truly engaged was when he wanted to explain to us how dangerous fracking was."
But one top Gazprom executive said shale gas will actually help the country in the long run. Sergei Komlev, the head of export contracts and pricing, acknowledged the recent disruptions but predicted that the U.S. fuels wouldn't make their way to Europe on any important scale.
"Although we heard that the motive of these activities was to decrease dependence of certain countries on Gazprom gas, the end results of these efforts will be utterly favorable to us," Komlev wrote in an email to the AP. "The reason for remaining tranquil is that we do not expect the currently abnormally low prices in the USA to last for long."
In other words, if the marketplace for natural gas expands, Russia will have even more potential customers because it has tremendous reserves.
Komlev even thanked the U.S. for taking the role of "shale gas global lobbyist" and said Gazprom believes natural gas is more environmentally friendly than other fossil fuels.
"Gazprom group generally views shale gas as a great gift to the industry," he wrote. When natural gas prices rise, "it will make the U.S. plans to become a major gas exporter questionable."
Whether exports happen involves a dizzying mix of math, politics and marketplaces, along with the fact that U.S. natural gas companies and their shareholders want prices to rise, too.
James Diemer, an executive vice president for Pace Global, an international consulting company based in Virginia, believes that shale gas costs more to extract than the current market price. Pace, which recently released a report called "Shale Gas: The Numbers vs. The Hype," has been studying shale gas for Gazprom and other clients.
"The capital will stop flowing" to U.S. shale gas, and the price will go up, Diemer predicted. He would not divulge the kind of work Pace is doing for Gazprom. Pace is owned by Siemens, a German company.
Pace's work for Gazprom has raised some eyebrows in Washington, and Hill noted that industry watchers in Europe already believe Russia is bankrolling environmental groups that are loudly opposing plans for fracking in Europe, which could cut down on Russia's natural gas market.
"I've heard a lot of rumors that the Russians were funding this. I have no proof whatsoever," she said, noting that many critics give the rumors credence because Gazprom owns media companies throughout Russia and Europe that have run stories examining the environmental risks of fracking.
Gazprom dismissed such conspiracy theories, saying that "nothing could be more out of touch with Gazprom's inherent interests," because the shale boom promotes gas as an abundant, affordable energy source.
Many U.S. media outlets, including the AP, have run stories about shale gas and the environment. Regulators contend that overall, water and air pollution problems are rare, but environmental groups and some scientists say there hasn't been enough research.
U.S. energy companies are eager to export natural gas products. The issue is sensitive enough that the Obama administration has delayed a decision on export permits until after the election. In April, the Sierra Club sued to block one plan for exports, saying it would drive up the cost of domestic natural gas and lead to environmental damage.
But just the potential for exports could allow others to seek lower prices from Russia, said Kenneth Medlock III of the James Baker Institute for Public Policy at Rice University in Houston.
"It changes the position at the bargaining table for everybody," Medlock said. "You stack all that up, and you start to realize, 'Wow.'"
There's one enormous unknown with the shale gas bounty in the U.S., Hill said. Unlike in Russia and some other countries, neither the government nor any one private company can really control or direct it.
"The question is, can the U.S. do what the Russians do, which is use this as a political tool?" she said.[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.jsonline.com/business/national/next-cold-war-gas-drilling-boom-rattles-russiaa101793a7eb4445dad3f3f797b5faa45-172057681.html"]http://www.jsonline.com/business/national/next-cold-war-gas-drilling-boom-rattles-russiaa101793a7eb4445dad3f3f797b5faa45-172057681.html[/URL]
[video=youtube;bjW3kMNaW2o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjW3kMNaW2o[/video]
Damn ruskies.
I'd personally love to see the energy companies broken by new sources of energy, just wish it wasn't fracking
Can anybody cite the source's credibility?
I've never seen it before, and there doesn't seem to be any external mentions when I pull up a quick search
I'm having a hard time wrapping up what seems to lead into another Cold War. Could someone explain the heat between the US and Russia, the impact of hydraulic fracturing, and the actions that they are taking to put this into motion? I read the whole thing, but it only made me more confused. Aka in layman's terms.
Thanks in advance.
[QUOTE=choco cookie;37868280]I'm having a hard time wrapping up what seems to lead into another Cold War. Could someone explain the heat between the US and Russia, the impact of hydraulic fracturing, and the actions that they are taking to put this into motion? I read the whole thing, but it only made me more confused. Aka in layman's terms.
Thanks in advance.[/QUOTE]
Russian gas tainted with politics vs. American gas tainted with politics. Somehow this equals cold war v2
who first found of new energy source will win the war and this will be a trigger for ww3
without sounding like a conspiracy nut, my guess would be that it isn't unlikely that a political conflict of a very large/global scale could happen nowadays; the last one happened not that long ago and they happen in intervals... (1914, 1936, 1950, 1985-1996)
Well boys I reckon this is it, gasular combat toe to toe with the ruskies.
to much global warming 4 there 2 be a cold war 2
1/10 would not trust news source
[QUOTE=koeniginator;37868633]to much global warming 4 there 2 be a cold war 2
1/10 would not trust news source[/QUOTE]
What if we used the natural gas to power giant air conditioners?
[editline]1st October 2012[/editline]
millions of them
[QUOTE=koeniginator;37868633]to much global warming 4 there 2 be a cold war 2
1/10 would not trust news source[/QUOTE]
A brand new Warm War
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;37868654]What if we used the natural gas to power giant air conditioners?
[editline]1st October 2012[/editline]
millions of them[/QUOTE]
maybe but governments would probably be too concerned with the 2nd space race to bother with them
[QUOTE=NorthKorea;37868096][URL="http://www.jsonline.com/business/national/next-cold-war-gas-drilling-boom-rattles-russiaa101793a7eb4445dad3f3f797b5faa45-172057681.html"]http://www.jsonline.com/business/national/next-cold-war-gas-drilling-boom-rattles-russiaa101793a7eb4445dad3f3f797b5faa45-172057681.html[/URL]
[video=youtube;bjW3kMNaW2o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjW3kMNaW2o[/video][/QUOTE]
waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait
who from the ap put this up and why the fuck did the local newspaper report on it i mean god damn fear mongering.
I'm not really sure on the credibility of the source, the way it's worded sounds like your average fear mongering.
This is from the NPR:
[URL="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=162046224"]http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=162046224[/URL]
How the fuck did I know someone would post that video eventually.
Probably because it's awesome, but still.
2nd cold war? Are we even sure that the 1st has ended yet?
[QUOTE=Turing;37868943]This is from the NPR:
[URL="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=162046224"]http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=162046224[/URL][/QUOTE]
Do you not see the (AP) at the beginning? It is from the Associated Press.
[QUOTE=ewitwins;37869016]How the fuck did I know someone would post that video eventually.
Probably because it's awesome, but still.[/QUOTE]
Airborne T80BV? righhhtttt
fear mongering to the max.
[QUOTE=entertainer89;37869238]2nd cold war? Are we even sure that the 1st has ended yet?[/QUOTE]
What.
The cold war never ended.
[QUOTE=The mouse;37870045]The cold war never ended.[/QUOTE]
dun dun dun
[QUOTE=The mouse;37870045]The cold war never ended.[/QUOTE]
it's only just beginning.
COLD WAR 2: REVENGE OF MARX AND HIS GAS
[QUOTE=Novangel;37870013]What.[/QUOTE]
Historians are debated as to whether there was a definitive end or if the major powers simply just changed up ideologies. Some still propose that it's moved from a military-centric to economic conflict instead, with countries trying to outdo each other in terms of economic power.
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];37870174']Historians are debated as to whether there was a definitive end or if the major powers simply just changed up ideologies. Some still propose that it's moved from a military-centric to economic conflict instead, with countries trying to outdo each other in terms of economic power.[/QUOTE]
With that logic, the entire world is in a never ending Cold War.
Next Cold War will be this Christmas.
I say the America should just hog all the oil for ourselves. Russia can keep on peddling to Europe; I don't care. I just like the idea of America having a secure and domestic energy source for our future.
[QUOTE=The mouse;37870045]The cold war never ended.[/QUOTE]
electric boogaloo
To any Russian Facepunchers, I just want you to know if the next Cold War does happen...
I still love you.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
