Congressmen back LNG Solutions

Reps Gene Green and Lee Terry write about the benefits and rocky road in introducing liquefied natural gas to American markets:

Over the past four years, American consumers have paid an estimated $130 billion more for natural gas than in the prior 48 months. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has warned that unless we expand our supply, the United States will become increasingly uncompetitive in industries that rely on natural gas. To do this, Greenspan advocates a drastic increase in our LNG capacity to serve as a safety valve to ease price volatility.

Vast amounts of natural gas around the globe (at least 10,000 trillion cubic feet) are ready to be developed, from places such as the Caribbean, Australia and Eastern Europe that look more favorably on U.S. interests. In this country, mitigation measures coordinated by federal, state and local agencies will make LNG terminals, ships and ports the world's most secure.

The good news is that more than 30 LNG terminals are in various stages of planning throughout North America.

The bad news is that not-in-my-backyard opposition and litigation-minded outside interests in certain areas, particularly Southern California and New England, have delayed many of these plans. Ironically, these regions consume massive amounts of natural gas. In fact, one-third of the natural gas consumed in New England is currently supplied by an existing LNG facility.

The opposition to LNG by a handful of communities is costing the nation dearly, as these costly delays have forced many companies to abandon their plans.