According to the study, global market conditions are not yet ripe for US natural gas exports, but when they are, the exports would benefit the economy. A key issue is how that benefit is shared.
One of the key energy battles of the next decade is emerging now: what to do with the new natural gas geyser now whooshing onto the domestic US energy market. Keep it at home, or export a big part overseas?
It's hardly an academic question. Companies are lining up for federal permits to build at least nine liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities that would allow that US energy resource to be shipped overseas. Opposing them are environmentalists, members of Congress, and some industry groups worried it will mean higher energy costs for US consumers and manufacturers and potentially the loss of some jobs.
Debate over the issue popped up briefly in Congress this year, but was swamped by a deluge of other election issues. Even though energy policy was a centerpiece of both presidential campaigns, neither Mitt Romney nor President Obama ever unpacked for the public the potentially explosive LNG export issue.
Is it wise to sell the US gas surplus abroad if it ends up hiking energy prices at home? Which sectors of the economy would be winners – or losers? What would be the impact on domestic energy prices and the economy overall?
Answers to those questions are now emerging. According to a much-anticipated new study commissioned by the US Department of Energy and released late Wednesday, the US would get a net overall positive economic boost from exporting a big fraction of its domestic natural gas resources to Asia and other energy-hungry global markets. But that’s only if global market conditions make such exports feasible, which is not currently the case, according to the study.
Page 1 of 6