[J-Rod]

Today on CSPAN, Rep. Steve King, (R) Iowa, just stated that we have enough natural gas under our federally owned parklands to supply the natural gas demands of America for the next 150 years. Does this have any basis in fact? Or is he just spouting off? He does seem to have some energy knowledge, talking about the cost of nitrogen fertilizer being directly related to the cost of natural gas. (He states that for every dollar of fertilizer cost, 90 cents is due to nat gas.)

Personally, I think he's full of it.

[J-Rod]

Well, I did find this.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'L')and Access - The U.S. government owns more than 29 percent of all the land in the country, and an estimated 40 percent of undiscovered natural gas exists on this land. In several areas, the government has restricted access to federal lands. 59 percent of undiscovered gas resources are on federal lands and offshore waters. Outside of the western Gulf of Mexico, production companies are prohibited access to virtually all federal lands offshore the Lower 48 states. About 9 percent of resource-bearing land in the Rockies is also off limits, and access to another 32 percent is significantly restricted. The National Petroleum Council in 1999 estimated that 213 Tcf of natural gas exists in areas under federal access restrictions. This restriction is the result of presidential and congressional leasing moratoria, and affects the amount of natural gas resources that may be extracted to increase supply.

[PWALPOCO]

blah blah blah ...federally owned parklands* ... 150 years , blah blah

*Represents the parklands in the United states of America , the United African States of America , the United Canadian States of America, the United Middle Eastern States of America , the United Former Soviet State States of America , the United European Union States of America........

Im messing of course , but Id be intersted to know if thats true ! If you guys are so well off with the stuff you can lay off the LNG , we need it more here in the UK !

Paul

[MicroHydro]

LOVE IT!!!

This will create some great buying opportunities for natural gas futures, you can now buy 2008 for under $8 per million btu - a steal!

[Leanan]

It's not true, and the energy companies know it. There's a reason they're pushing for LNG, not for drilling in national parks.

[Sparaxis]

The guy obviously doesn't know math. We consume 22 TCF a year. That seems more like 10 years worth of potential natural gas.

He is right about fertilizer prices. Generally, a 10% rise in natural gas prices will raise the price of anhydrous ammonia by 8% and of urea by 7%. That's why there's already been declarations of a cutback in planting this year because of soaring fertilizer prices. And it doesn't help that we offshored our industry over the last 5 years so that now we are competing in the world market for fertilizer instead of producing it ourselves. But so it goes...

[J-Rod]

Thanks for the annual gas usage Spraxis. I was going to look it up, but I was close to my PO quota for the day. I try to limit myself as to avoid insanity. Time to go play some BF2 and capture some Chinese oil fields.

[aflatoxin]

"enough" is a pretty big word. Putting a time frame like 150 years in the same sentence is irresponsible.

[No-Oil]

The only part you need to concern yourself with is "it is estimated", there is no base research & more to the point no in depth research to indicate where they may find this gas or oil, if it exists at all.

I estimate that the world will end next Thursday, doesn't mean its true or going to happen, just an estimate. When dealing with an unknown quantity, my Thursday estimate is as good as their 40-59% estimate. Anyway how do you estimate the potential of areas you have never been granted permission to explore !?

[aahala]

I smell a lawsuit from Burger King over that 150 years of NG claim.

They already have the rights to "Home of the Whooper."