全部版块 我的主页
› 论坛 › 提问 悬赏 求职 新闻 读书 功能一区 › 真实世界经济学(含财经时事)
20120606 Follow Me 391 China Challenges U.S. Supremacy in Shale Gas
shenxiaoqiang
3337 15
2012-06-05
China Challenges U.S. Supremacy in Shale Gas
By CHRISTOPHER SWANNPublished: September 4, 2011


China has a chance of challenging the United States for shale supremacy. So far, only the United States has significantly exploited domestic reserves of shale gas. But Sinopec, China’s major state-run oil company, is now taking shale seriously and lacks many of the roadblocks that have held back developers in other countries.

Many nations have energy trapped in their rocks, but shale gas extraction, born in the U.S.A., has all but stayed here. France moved to ban hydraulic fracturing, the contentious drilling technique used to extract energy from shale, earlier this year. In Europe mineral rights often belong to the government, making it difficult for landowners to profit from shale development and thus hardening public opposition. Only in Poland is much progress being made.

China, however, may be best suited to shale. In New York and New Jersey, authorities have halted drilling in response to public unease, at least temporarily. Such sentiments are unlikely to stand in the way in China, where over 1.2 million people were moved to make way for the Three Gorges Dam.


There is good reason to develop shale, too. About 71 percent of China’s power comes from coal, creating an acute need for lower-carbon sources of energy. And while the low price of natural gas may slow drilling in the United States over the coming year, China’s state oil companies have proved willing to operate at a loss to ensure domestic supply.
China’s emerging enthusiasm for domestic shale may be partly a hardball tactic for negotiating with Russian suppliers, with which the country has been struggling to agree on a price for gas imports.
Moreover, geologic deposits are an unknown. While China may have about 50 percent more shale gas than the United States, according to the Energy Information Administration, it has yet to uncover formations like the vast Marcellus or Eagle Ford deposits. But don’t count China out: in the shale race, abundant capital, determination and political will go a long way.


Backing Off Air Rules
President Obama’s environmentally minded backers had every reason to feel let down last week. By blocking a new Environmental Protection Agency rule on smog, the White House has bowed to critics in Congress and industry who said new air quality rules would kill jobs.
With the United States creating zero jobs in August, economic scare tactics are bound to register. And America’s big emitters — the coal, oil and chemical industries — are masters of the art. They have been fighting hard to prevent the E.P.A. from tightening a number of emissions rules. Dow Chemical, for instance, has claimed that updated smog rules alone would cost as much as $90 billion.
The Edison Electric Institute, speaking for electricity generators, warns that the E.P.A.’s full slate of proposals could compel the industry to spend $129 billion on upgrades, force the closing of a fifth of coal generators, and lead to blackouts. Republican critics have branded the new rules job-killers and a brake on business activity and hence the economy.



But dire predictions from affected industries in the past have proved wildly exaggerated — or just plain wrong. During the Clean Air Act debate 20 years ago, the Edison Electric Institute warned that tightened standards would lift electricity prices by up to 13 percent by around 2009. In fact they fell by some 20 percent as of 2006.
And in 1997 the American Petroleum Institute, an oil industry group, warned that smog rules would wreak economic havoc. Yet regions that might have been affected actually had slightly better job creation rates on average than the nation as a whole in following years, according to a study by the Center for American Progress.
Dropping the new rule also undermines electricity generators that have tried to clean up ahead of time, including Exelon and GenOn Energy.
Then there are the benefits that would have come with stricter standards. The E.P.A. estimates new emissions regulations could save as much as $100 billion in health care costs. Such numbers are also open to question. But the case for savings is strong.
By giving in to polluters, Mr. Obama may deflect criticism over red tape and the rule could come back into consideration in 2013. But barring possible tiny, short-lived effects, the supposed economic benefits of caving in are a smokescreen for political maneuvering.

Newest report:
1.Shell Says Early Shale-Gas Drilling in China Encouraging
Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/news/2012/06/05/shell-says-early-shale-gas-drilling-in-china-encouraging/#ixzz1wucwXapi
2.IEA sees natural gas consumption climbing
http://www.france24.com/en/20120605-iea-sees-natural-gas-consumption-climbing
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

全部回复
jinyiwei88
2012-6-5 18:43:45
受到警告
沙发
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

┏soul╄┛
2012-6-6 10:52:23
受到警告
顶一个
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

whachel1976
2012-6-6 14:32:53
Environmental(Environment) problems need to be considered when concerned with investments. But a more practical way is to minimize environmental destruction or to find alternative ways to eliminate negative effects, not to block new opportunities for production capability.

When the technology becomes mature, on the basis that the policy permits, hundreds of private-owned drilling companies will spring up as what has been the case in coal mining industry.

二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

cglee
2012-6-6 17:12:18
To be honest, this article is too professional for me to understand. But I(i) think it's a bit exaggerated to draw the conclusion that "China challenges U.S. supremacy".
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

jias2009
2012-6-6 17:16:57
来点中文的吧，看得太累
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

点击查看更多内容…
相关推荐
栏目导航
热门文章
推荐文章

说点什么

分享

微信QQ空间QQ微博
扫码加好友，拉您进群
各岗位、行业、专业交流群