Scott Morrison, the government affairs manager for the American Public Gas Association was one of two speakers on the topic of liquefied natural gas Tuesday at the College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics. | Justin Tijerina/ The Daily Cougar
Exploration of liquefied natural gas was the main topic covered in a debate held by the College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics as part of the Energy Symposium Series at 6:30 p.m. Tuesday.
The debate was between chief economist of the American Petroleum Institute John Felmy, who has 30 years of experience in energy, economic and environmental analysis, and Scott Morrison, the government affairs manager for the American Public Gas Association.
Felmy and Morrison discussed the main concern with exporting LNG, which is natural gas that has been temporarily converted into a liquid, generally for storage and transportation purposes.
Felmy debated that LNG exporting is a good idea for the United States. He argued that exporting will increase supply and demand.
“If you look at the statistics and studies, they are supportive of this. It will help the whole economy, expand the natural gas export facilities and develop more natural gas and oil supplies,” Felmy said. “The key plea we have is to approve the projects and let the market work.”
Scott Morrison and APGA opposed the export of LNG. He said digging a little deeper will help people understand why they choose to oppose the export.
“The opportunity costs of export are too high. The one thing John and I can agree on: if you export, prices will go up. No matter what study you look at, they all agree on that,” Morrison said. “We’re four, five years into this energy revolution. Why are we so quick to now export this to our economic competitors?”
Environmental science sophomore Margarita Reza said the debate put things in perspective for her.
“They both brought up good pros and cons about LNG export and the impact it would have, not just on the economy, but also on the environment,” Reza said. “I’m glad they talked about who would benefit more from this, the companies or the communities. My position right now is to oppose LNG export, but I will do my research to back up my decision.”
The audience was involved in the debate asking questions about related issues, like where the issue will play out, who will decide what will be done, whether exporting LNG is easier or cheaper, and why we should export LNG. If hesitation occurs, Felmy said, a lot could be lost.
“What it will mean if we develop this opportunity: We’re going to have millions of jobs, trillions of dollars of investment and hundreds of billions of dollars of revenue. If we don’t act now in the case of LNG export, we can lose that bargain,” Felmy said.
The College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics’ Energy Symposium Series will have two more debates held next year, one on Feb. 11 on climate change and the other on March 4 on renewable energy.
Meanwhile, earthquakes in the fracking areas, and well-water poisonings are on the rise. But why bother being concerned with those silly notions and the people they effect when the Oil and Gas companies can dangle the carrot of jobs, jobs, jobs to their gullible audience. Amazing.