Seismic Shifts in Store: Pro and Con LNG Groups Point to the Future of U.S. Energy Development
The future of LNG (liquid natural gas) markets lies in the Gulf Coast region of the United States—specifically Texas and Louisiana, according to industry experts who foresee an armada of shale-gas-filled tankers dispatched from coastal ports within the next several years, connecting American-extracted LNG’s to the rest of the world. Soon enough, the American Gulf Coast LNG markets will surpass the entirety of Japan and the U.K.’s, bringing about a seismic shift in the global market.
Seismic being the key word: along with the excitement over the growth of the U.S. LNG market are concerns over the potential environmental impact, as well as the risks to local communities, that comes hand-in-hand with it. LNG exports are expected to increase by 43 million tons per year over the course of the next three years. This means there will a substantial rise in fracking needed to produce the liquefied gases. Fracking has been controversial since it came into the public consciousness this past decade, and has been linked to environmental dangers up to and including causing earthquakes, so it should comes as no surprise that the boom in LNG shipping would be met with some harsh opposition and skepticism.
In Southern Texas, locals have voiced their concern over plans from five different developers to build several LNG terminals along the Brownsville Ship Channel, one of the largest stretches of undeveloped land not only within the coastal region but the entire state. The ports’ industrial footprint will drastically increase if and when the projects move forward, as the development of these terminals would necessitate the installation of electric generation plants required to cool natural gas to the point where it becomes liquefied and ready for shipment via giant tankers.
The main concerns of those opposed to these developments revolve around the effect they would have on the wildlife indigenous to the wetlands of the region, which are considered a refuge by The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as the disruption they would inflict upon the natural splendor of the area, all of which has made it a destination for ectotourists. Other concerns include the potential risk to nearby communities posed by plant failures or explosions.
Of course, these concerns are met with their own opposition. Supporters and developers claim they are taking measures to ensure as little environmental disruption as possible, as well as putting in place the most stringent safety measures available. They are confident that local job creation will offset the opposition to the developments, in particular the thousands-upon-thousands of construction jobs that would be required, to say nothing of the new industry jobs created by a sustained LNG trading HUB.
Supporters also point to the national interest that is at stake. It should come as no surprise to anyone that America is its own biggest consumer when it comes to the liquid natural gas that it produces. As the U.S. LNG market grows, America’s dependence on foreign energy continues to drastically decrease, a goal that both sides—pro-frackers and anti-frackers—tend to be in favor.
As the LNG market flourishes, excitement will continue to be tempered by conflict with conservationists as well as the concerns of the local population along the Gulf Coasts who, thanks to still-fresh man-made environmental disasters such as The Deepwater Horizon oil spill, have more than their fair share of deep-seated reservations. These developments will be watched closely by all sides, and it will interesting to see if a real consensus can be come to. If so, it could serve as a potential model for future developments of this kind, as the U.S. continues to explore alternative energy sources in the coming century.
