The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!
According to a press release from U.S. Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), a report submitted to the Department of Energy on the impacts of natural gas exports uses two-year-old data and makes other key missteps. Rep. Markey, Ranking Member of the Natural Resources Committee, pointed this out in a comprehensive critique of the study sent to DOE Secretary Steven Chu.
According to Markey, the critique comes as some are using the flawed report to advocate for a national policy on natural gas exports that could send huge percentages of the domestic fuel to foreign markets—raising prices for American consumers and businesses.
“I was disappointed to find fundamental flaws with the study that I fear may have led to conclusions that severely underestimate the negative impacts of large-scale natural gas exporting,” Rep. Markey writes to Secretary Chu. “Given the important role this study may play in determining U.S. natural gas export policy, I strongly urge that the study’s methodology be reevaluated in some key areas, that the most recent projection data available be utilized in the model, and that the model be re-run and re-analyzed.”
In the letter to Chu, Rep. Markey points out major flaws in the report conducted by NERA Economic Consulting, including:
- NERA’s model used energy projection data published in 2010, a time when the full extent of the shale gas revolution and its impact on America's electric, manufacturing, and transportation sectors was not fully understood. This old data badly underestimates the growth that has already occurred in domestic natural gas demand as well as demand that is expected in the future. For example, the data used by NERA projected that natural gas use in the U.S. power sector would actually decline between 2010 and 2020. In reality, natural gas use in the power sector has already grown by 27 percent since 2010, and the latest EIA projections are that it will grow 11 percent between 2010 and 2020. The 2012 report was available, and now the 2013 version has been released, but 2010 data was inexplicably used instead.
- The report used an analysis of the Waxman-Markey climate and energy bill that passed the House in 2009, but misinterpreted both the bill and the analysis. The bill protected energy-intensive industries like steel and plastics that might have incurred extra costs in a carbon-constrained world, but unfettered natural gas exports would provide no such protections for American industries, putting domestic jobs at risk. NERA said they could not analyze the sector-by-sector impacts of natural gas exports, even though the Waxman-Markey study they misinterpret does exactly that.
- The NERA report fails to assess the relative economic impacts associated with domestic industrial utilization of natural gas compared to exporting, and it made inaccurate assumptions regarding who would benefit through exporting. The report does not account for the very narrow distribution of income resulting from natural gas exports and investments held in gas companies, and does not do a full analysis of the impacts on American jobs.
“The flaws in the NERA study indicate that we still have a long way to go before we can be confident that large-scale LNG exporting is truly in America’s interest and can be done in a way that protects American consumers and manufacturers,” writes Rep. Markey. “It is critical that policy makers and the American people have a true understanding of the full impacts of exporting domestically produced natural gas before the Department moves forward in granting additional LNG export permits.”
Visit EcoWatch’s FRACKING page for more related news on this topic.
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
georgeclerk / E+ / Getty Images
By Jennifer Molidor
One million species are at risk of extinction from human activity, warns a recent study by scientists with the United Nations. We need to cut greenhouse gas pollution across all sectors to avoid catastrophic climate change — and we need to do it fast, said the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
This research should serve as a rallying cry for polluting industries to make major changes now. Yet the agriculture industry continues to lag behind.
"The Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources Conservation and Tourism wishes to inform the public that following extensive consultations with all stakeholders, the Government of Botswana has taken a decision to lift the hunting suspension," the government announced in a press release shared on social media.
Company Safety Data Sheets on New Chemicals Frequently Lack the Worker Protections EPA Claims They Include
By Richard Denison
Readers of this blog know how concerned EDF is over the Trump EPA's approval of many dozens of new chemicals based on its mere "expectation" that workers across supply chains will always employ personal protective equipment (PPE) just because it is recommended in the manufacturer's non-binding safety data sheet (SDS).
By Grant Smith
From 2009 to 2012, Gregory Jaczko was chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which approves nuclear power plant designs and sets safety standards for plants. But he now says that nuclear power is too dangerous and expensive — and not part of the answer to the climate crisis.
By Brett Walton
When Greg Wetherbee sat in front of the microscope recently, he was looking for fragments of metals or coal, particles that might indicate the source of airborne nitrogen pollution in Rocky Mountain National Park. What caught his eye, though, were the plastics.
In a big victory for animals, Prada has announced that it's ending its use of fur! It joins Coach, Jean Paul Gaultier, Giorgio Armani, Versace, Ralph Lauren, Vivienne Westwood, Michael Kors, Donna Karan and many others PETA has pushed toward a ban.
This is a victory more than a decade in the making. PETA and our international affiliates have crashed Prada's catwalks with anti-fur signs, held eye-catching demonstrations all around the world, and sent the company loads of information about the fur industry. In 2018, actor and animal rights advocate Pamela Anderson sent a letter on PETA's behalf urging Miuccia Prada to commit to leaving fur out of all future collections, and the iconic designer has finally listened.
If people in three European countries want to fight the climate crisis, they need to chill out more.
"The rapid pace of labour-saving technology brings into focus the possibility of a shorter working week for all, if deployed properly," Autonomy Director Will Stronge said, The Guardian reported. "However, while automation shows that less work is technically possible, the urgent pressures on the environment and on our available carbon budget show that reducing the working week is in fact necessary."
The report found that if the economies of Germany, Sweden and the UK maintain their current levels of carbon intensity and productivity, they would need to switch to a six, 12 and nine hour work week respectively if they wanted keep the rise in global temperatures to the below two degrees Celsius promised by the Paris agreement, The Independent reported.
The study based its conclusions on data from the UN and the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) on greenhouse gas emissions per industry in all three countries.
The report comes as the group Momentum called on the UK's Labour Party to endorse a four-day work week.
"We welcome this attempt by Autonomy to grapple with the very real changes society will need to make in order to live within the limits of the planet," Emma Williams of the Four Day Week campaign said in a statement reported by The Independent. "In addition to improved well-being, enhanced gender equality and increased productivity, addressing climate change is another compelling reason we should all be working less."
Supporters of the idea linked it to calls in the U.S. and Europe for a Green New Deal that would decarbonize the economy while promoting equality and well-being.
"This new paper from Autonomy is a thought experiment that should give policymakers, activists and campaigners more ballast to make the case that a Green New Deal is absolutely necessary," Common Wealth think tank Director Mat Lawrence told The Independent. "The link between working time and GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions has been proved by a number of studies. Using OECD data and relating it to our carbon budget, Autonomy have taken the step to show what that link means in terms of our working weeks."
Stronge also linked his report to calls for a Green New Deal.
"Becoming a green, sustainable society will require a number of strategies – a shorter working week being just one of them," he said, according to The Guardian. "This paper and the other nascent research in the field should give us plenty of food for thought when we consider how urgent a Green New Deal is and what it should look like."
- Reduced Work Hours as a Means of Slowing Climate Change ›
- How working less could solve all our problems. Really. | ›
- Needed: A shorter work week – People's World ›