This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.
Important notes on articles:
- Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
- Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
- If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.
Post being replied to
My own dramatization aside, I didn't assume anything by gregmorrissey
It was spelled out in the articles I linked and cited that the companies involved did not think they would be affected by this pause, and they were moving forward with their planned projects.
Corpus Christi Caller Times: Cheniere taking Biden administration's LNG export terminal 'pause' in stride
As for the supply, the moderate Democrat that Republicans view as the ideal Democrat, Joe Manchin, intimated concerns about the coming supply.
Manchin, who almost never sees eye-to-eye with the administration on energy, said Thursday a pause could be appropriate if “done in a reasonable way.”
“If they do something reasonable that says, ‘We’re pausing right now before we continue to admit others,’” he said. “Well, fine, let’s put a time period on a pause. Let’s find where we are — what our reserves are, our production capacity and if we’re overcharging the market or not.”
The only people mentioning that it will cause an issue appear to be people who profit politically (politicians) or whose job it is to "protect" the O&G industry (trade groups). The Biden Administration was very clear that this policy could be reversed quickly if national security issues change. It's a permitting process that's one step in a very complex equation, and which occurs after other government approvals have already been received. As I cited in my post, two projects had permits expire because they hadn't even started construction. Expiring permits tells me the supply situation is not so dire that taking six to twelve months to update the data used in the approval process makes sense.
EDIT TO ADD: I also found it interesting that the pause announcement was made after the Brownsville, TX permits were approved. This article confirms there are four projects at the DOE approval stage which are affected (two of which were previously approved but the permits expired). These projects were listed under the Reuters article in my original post. Basically, any project that is ready to move forward was approved, further confirming that this pause will have negligible effect on export supply.
Another article laying out the facts:
Biden Administration Freezes LNG Export Approvals
As for the strawman, you might re-read my post. I didn't suggest those were arguments against. I suggested those were the first responses from the other side. My point was that when those responses seem to fit a little too cleanly then I'm naturally suspicious that they match the reality. As expected, in this situation, they don't fit the reality of the situation at all.