Freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has gotten much attention by proposing a Green New Deal, a far-ranging proposal to shift the U.S. economy away from fossil fuels over the next decade while somehow creating millions of good-paying jobs.
Her plan amounts to turning success into failure by ignoring the vast economic and environmental benefits natural gas has provided to America in the past decade — and the opportunity to multiply these benefits in the decade ahead.
Simply put, the economic and environmental benefits of natural gas are proven. The Green New Deal is hypothetical at best, and most likely reckless.
The benefits from expanded use of natural gas include the following.
—Good paying, secure middle-class jobs. According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, 4.6 million jobs have been created from the shale boom. More will be generated as production rises and steps are taken to increase liquefied natural gas exports worldwide.
—Reduced carbon emissions. With half the carbon emissions of coal, natural gas is an effective and immediate way to reduce carbon and other toxic emissions. In October, the Environmental Protection Agency reported that emissions from large power plants were down 4.5 percent since 2016 and 19.7 percent since 2011. This is also a key factor in the country’s total greenhouse gas emissions declining 2.7 percent from 2016 to 2017.
—Export boom. China, Poland, Mexico and many other countries are importing a great deal of American liquefied natural gas (LNG). The Energy Information Administration projects that U.S. LNG export capacity will double in 2019, making America the world’s third-largest exporter.
LNG not only replaces dirty coal plants. It brings electricity to many places of the world that did not have it and were relying on burning dung or brush, both very unhealthy and high-polluting activities. Natural gas is cleaner than gasoline and a cleaner fuel to power electric vehicles.
Close to home, America’s neighbors in the Caribbean have begun to benefit from using LNG and should accelerate use of this clean, low-cost fuel. It is ironic that many countries in this picturesque region still receive much of their electricity from highly toxic oil.
According to the Energy Information Administration, 47 percent of Puerto Rico’s electricity is from petroleum, which keeps Puerto Rican power prices higher than those of any state, except Alaska and Hawaii. By contrast, the United States gets less than 1 percent of its electricity from oil. Even oil-rich countries shun using oil for electricity.
According to the International Energy Agency, Haiti, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua and El Salvador all receive at least 40 percent of their electricity from oil.
This has severe consequences as the International Monetary Fund found in a 2016 report: “The cost of electricity in the Caribbean has been persistently high over the past two decades and has eroded competitiveness. This is largely due to serious inefficiencies in the power sector and dependence on expensive imported petroleum products.”
The push toward greater U.S. use of natural gas and LNG export creates a win-win for U.S. and overseas businesses, as well as for our respective economies and environments.
Rather than summarily dismissing the benefits of natural gas, those favoring a Green New Deal should look for ways that its expanded use can be part of a broader environmental strategy. And they should exercise some humility. The benefits of natural gas are clear, well-established and they will soon be even greater.
At best, this remains to be seen with the Green New Deal.



makati1 on Thu, 21st Feb 2019 6:02 pm
An ad to push the US’ over priced LNG.
As insane an idea as the GND by AOC.
Russia is going to supply the East and the EU with all the cheap NG it needs. The US, trying to block that idea may lead to a war that will destroy the US permanently. It’s ALWAYS about $$$. LMAO
Pete Bauer on Thu, 21st Feb 2019 6:48 pm
Natgas is a clean fuel which can replace oil in transport sector, instead of focusing on this, they are foolishly trying to kill the natgas.
Free Speech Forum on Thu, 21st Feb 2019 7:21 pm
Does anyone get the feeling that Americans will be wearing Mao suits and giving Nazi salutes soon?
makati1 on Thu, 21st Feb 2019 7:41 pm
Free, it sure looks that way. But you will never get them to see what is already happening. Deluded by propaganda and fed ‘bread and circus” daily for all of their lives, the typical American ‘frogs in the pot’ feel the water getting warmer, but it is still comfortable so they just enjoy it and don’t think about the future.
“What? Me worry? is the ingrained mindset of the dumbed down, brainwashed Americans. They are too stupid and lazy to “Get out of Dodge” or even rise up and take their country back. So be it.
Davy on Thu, 21st Feb 2019 7:42 pm
“Natgas is a clean fuel”
No it isn’t
makati1 on Thu, 21st Feb 2019 7:57 pm
We agree on that one, Davy. No FF is “clean”.
Robert Inget on Fri, 22nd Feb 2019 10:50 am
Cleaner.
Robert Inget on Fri, 22nd Feb 2019 11:15 am
No just cleaner but cheap* and more to the point available.
* Affordable
W/O inexpensive NG tens of thousands of Americans would have frozen to death during
The Great Depression 2008.. when, because of horizontal fraccing gas went from $7 to $2.
The next major downturn will reprove how vital
NG is to our current situation.
Lets face reality for a hot second.
We won’t survive the next 2 decades even if waving magic wand stopped using FF Saturday.
There’s enough CO/2 and other powerful GHG’s
in the ‘Pipeline’ already that will change everyone’s lives for fucking ever.
The least we can do is try to adapt.
NG is all too slowly, driving (far worse) coal off markets. Enviros didn’t do that, O&G technologists did.
(that’s obviously IS the least we are doing, you really don’t want to stop that).
Wyton on Fri, 22nd Feb 2019 11:01 pm
Sequestering carbon allowed evolution of complex life forms. Do you really want to run that process backwards?