From:

Subject:
Date:
To:

Douglas Grandt answerthecall@icloud.com

You had better take another look at the oil and gas section of S. 2012
August 2, 2016 at 8:10 AM
David Cleary (Sen. Alexander) David_Cleary@alexander.senate.gov, Dan Kunsman (Sen. Barrasso)
Dan_Kunsman@barrasso.senate.gov, Joel Brubaker (Sen. Capito) Joel_Brubaker@capito.senate.gov,
James Quinn (Sen. Cassidy) James_Quinn@cassidy.senate.gov, Jason Thielman (Sen. Daines)
Jason_Thielman@daines.senate.gov, Chandler Morse (Sen. Flake) Chandler_Morse@flake.senate.gov,
Chris Hansen (Sen. Gardner) Chris_Hansen@gardner.senate.gov, Ryan Bernstein (Sen. Hoeven)
Ryan_Bernstein@hoeven.senate.gov, Boyd Matheson (Sen. Lee) Boyd_Matheson@lee.senate.gov,
Mark Isakowitz (Sen. Portman) Mark_Isakowitz@portman.senate.gov, John Sandy (Sen. Risch) John_Sandy@risch.senate.gov,
Travis Lumpkin (Sen. Cantwell) Travis_Lumpkin@cantwell.senate.gov, Jeff Lomonaco (Sen. Franken)
Jeff_Lomonaco@franken.senate.gov, Joe Britton (Sen. Heinrich) Joe_Britton@heinrich.senate.gov, Betsy Lin (Sen. Hirono)
Betsy_Lin@hirono.senate.gov, Patrick Hayes (Sen. Manchin) Patrick_Hayes@manchin.senate.gov,
Bill Sweeney (Sen. Stabenow) Bill_Sweeney@stabenow.senate.gov, Jeff Michels (Sen. Wyden) Jeff_Michels@wyden.senate.gov,
Michaeleen Crowell (Sen. Sanders) Michaeleen_Crowell@sanders.senate.gov, Kay Rand (Sen. King) Kay_Rand@king.senate.gov
, Joe Hack (Sen. Fischer) Joe_Hack@fischer.senate.gov, Derrick Morgan (Sen. Sasse) Derrick_Morgan@sasse.senate.gov,
Angela Becker-Dippmann (Senate ENR Ctee) Angela_Becker-Dippmann@energy.senate.gov, Ginger Willson (Sen. Sasse)
Ginger_Willson@sasse.senate.gov, Ali Aafedt (Sen. Hoeven) Alexis_Aafedt@hoeven.senate.gov,
Colin Hayes (Senate ENR Ctee) Colin_Hayes@energy.senate.gov, Michael Pawlowski (Sen. Murkowski)
michael_pawlowski@murkowski.senate.gov

Dear Chiefs of Staff:

The Senate and House have overwhelmingly passed S. 2012North American Energy Security and Infrastructure Act of 2016
(formerly the Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2016). I hope differences cannot be resolved and it dies before going to the
Presidents desk.
Unfortunately the section that deals with fossil fuel policy is inadequate and wrongly assumes a viable petroleum industry, and I
believe it is in the best interest of the American Public that there be an open and frank discussion about the conflict that we are
facing in how the industry deals with insolvency vis--vis National Interestin spite of President Obama's vow to veto S. 2012.
As you know from my previous 44 emails to you and three dozen letters your Senator, I believe we are on the brink of an energy
and economic disaster if we continue down the laissez-faire path we allow the oil industry.
Friday and yesterday, I emailed you four articles which cast doubt on ExxonMobils gold standard status:
ExxonMobil Earns $1.7 Billion in Second Quarter of 2016
Can Exxon Mobil Prosper In A Sub-$50 Per Barrel World?
"Not Even Exxon Mobil Is Safe"
"Exxon Mobil: Don't Expect A Big Dividend Hike Anytime Soon
Yesterday, there was more bad news for ExxonMobil and natural gas and LNG producers in "LNG Investments At Serious Risk If
China Succeeds On Shale which casts doubt on recent investments and acquisitions that would be undermined by continued
depressed gas priceedging them closer to financial crisis and the beginning of cascading insolvency.
This news again validates the concerns I expressed over the past year-and-a-half: Congress must investigate the prospects
of a collapse of the oil & gas production and refining industry.
The industry is in a pickle. Where are we headed? What lies ahead for the industrys viability?
What lies ahead for the oil market, the stock market, pensions, life savings, the U.S. economy?
You are the gatekeeper for your Senators staff. You make assignments and review performance. Is anybody on your staff
assigned to evaluate the repercussions of the current oil and gas price crisis?
Please demand ENR Chairman Lisa Murkowski call for CEOs of the major oil and gas production and refining companies to
testify how they will exercise Fiduciary Duty in the face of bankruptcy without jeopardizing the Public Interest, National
Interest indeed U.S. National Security.
Are on the brink of a "train wreck" between Corporate financial survival and National economic survival?
I implore you to require Oil and Gas CEOs to testify at Senate hearings as soon as possible.
Sincerely yours,
Doug Grandt
PO Box 432, Putney, VT 05346

LNG Investments At Serious Risk If China Succeeds On Shale

By Charles Kennedy | Aug 01, 2016, 11:48 AM CDT | Oil Price
The spot prices for liquefied natural gas (LNG) have plunged in recent years, falling by more than 75
percent from the 2014 highs. Too much supply has run headlong into a market that has seen demand
slow significantly.
But China could make things much worse. In an effort to find a domestic source of energy, and clean
up its horrific air pollution problems by shutting down coal plants, the top state-owned energy
companies are scrambling to develop shale gas.
China has been trying to develop shale gas for several years, but has struggled because the geology
is complex, there is a dearth of infrastructure in places where the gas is located, and water availability
issues have also made development difficult. China is persevering, however Sinopec has
announced a goal of doubling production within five years, The Wall Street Journal reports. That
would take production from roughly 2 to 4 billion cubic feet per day by 2020.
The logic for state-owned companies like Sinopec is obvious. Oil production from its aging fields is
falling, so they are venturing into new markets. By growing gas production they are effectively trying
to mitigate whats happening on the oil side of the business, Neil Beveridge, an analyst at Bernstein
Research, told the WSJ. Ramping up shale gas looks like more of a volume strategy than a value
strategy, he added.
In Sinopec is successful, the implications would reverberate beyond Chinas boarders. If China ramps
up shale gas production, it might not need nearly as much imported LNG as everyone expected. That
would put billion-dollar investments at risk, such as ExxonMobils recent $2.5 billion offering for
InterOil, a company that has gas assets in Papua New Guinea and will allow the oil major to expand
LNG exports from that country. Or, Royal Dutch Shells $54 billion purchase of BG Group could turn
out to be a major loser if LNG markets remain depressed for years to come, something that would be
more likely if China succeeds in developing a successful shale gas industry.
For now, substantial hurdles remain. Sinopec is still learning shale drilling techniques and
infrastructure needs improvement. Sinopec boosted output by 10 percent in the first half of 2016
compared to the same period a year earlier, but it is not on track to hit its 18 percent growth target for
the year, according to the WSJ.
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Gas-Prices/LNG-Investments-At-Serious-Risk-If-China-Succeeds-OnShale.html