Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 1836

Should Small Scale Imports & Exports of Liquefied Natural Gas Not Require Environmental Reviews?

Argument in favor

By easing requirements for environmental reviews surrounding the import or export of small volumes of liquefied natural gas, this bill would boost energy production in the U.S. and promote economic growth.

Tricia 's Opinion
路路路
08/25/2019
Regulations on many items are just Government overreach and harms our economy. Those who oppose lifting restrictions are also those who are for open borders馃 I wonder if the recognize their hypocrisy.
Like (16)
Follow
Share
operaman's Opinion
路路路
08/25/2019
When you allow eco-terrorists to debate the answer, it will be a 10 year review followed by a NO, but let the UN Climate Commission give a shot at a review. UN commissions a 20 year study finding photo cells are still the answer and requesting a check of $20 Billion taxpayer dollars.
Like (8)
Follow
Share
JTJ's Opinion
路路路
08/25/2019
If liberals were really environmentalists, they would be pro natural gas.
Like (7)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

This bill is unnecessary and would prevent critical environmental impact reviews from occurring related to the import or export of natural gas. It will only increase our reliance on fossil fuel for short-term growth.

jimK's Opinion
路路路
08/24/2019
Once you get exceptions for legal inspections of 鈥榮mall鈥 LNG shipments, you open the door for arguments that larger and then larger shipments can bypass inspections. All the recent Republican attempts to roll back inspections or decrease taxes for this or that special case just puts a wedge in the door that invites further opening based on the argument that if it was good for 鈥榯hat鈥 special case, it ought to be good for 鈥榯his鈥 special case and so on. I remember the case of the Florida senator who argued that the vast coastal properties which were held in reserve for military defense ought be sold- but with the restriction that the military had the right to repossess the property whenever needed for defense. He and affiliated investors bought up all of this semi-worthless land. A few years later, he pushed through a bill to remove military rights to these properties and became quite wealthy as a major city grew and thrived on his purchased land (I can鈥檛 remember, but I think it was Miami). Point is, be wary of legislation that opens doors to future abuse by calling for special case exceptions to the rules that are otherwise applied generally.
Like (102)
Follow
Share
burrkitty's Opinion
路路路
08/24/2019
Taking the environmental review out of any fossil fuel process is a mistake.
Like (66)
Follow
Share
Donna 's Opinion
路路路
08/24/2019
No. All quantities of natural gas need environmental review.
Like (45)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on Energy and Commerce
    IntroducedMarch 18th, 2019

What is House Bill H.R. 1836?

This bill 鈥 the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act 鈥 would grant applications for imports and exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) that don鈥檛 exceed 0.14 billion cubic feet per day without modification or delay. The approval of such an application would mean that an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment wouldn鈥檛 be required for the project to proceed. It would codify a Dept. of Energy rule that took effect on August 24, 2018 into law.

Impact

Businesses and workers involved in small scale imports or exports of LNG; energy and environmental regulators.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 1836

$0.00
In the 115th Congress, the CBO estimated that implementing this bill wouldn't have any significant costs.

More Information

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL) reintroduced this bill from the 115th Congress to expedite the approval of natural gas exports equal to or less than 51.1 billion cubic feet per year

"With America鈥檚 vast natural gas reserves, JAXPORT in North Central Florida is in a position to be a valuable trading hub to meet global demand for Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) exports. At the end of 2018, demand for LNG has seen a sixty-percent increase from what it was in 2017. We must capitalize on the growth of this energy sector.  Jacksonville is an ideal location to service the needs of the Caribbean, South America, and the rest of the world with abundant, clean-burning American natural gas. This will not only mean good paying jobs regionally but increased economic benefits for our state economy as well.鈥

Original cosponsor Rep. Michael Waltz (R-FL) adds that this bill is especially important now, in order to give South and Central American countries an alternative to Venezuelan oil (which helps prop up the Maduro regime). Rep. Waltz notes"South and Central American countries have limited alternatives to Maduro鈥檚 socialist oil for energy resources. This bill makes American liquefied natural gas accessible and cost-effective to regional allies that no longer want to rely on Venezuelan oil.鈥

Sen. Bill Cassidy, the lead sponsor of this bill's Senate companion and Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Energy, adds

鈥淭his bill unleashes American natural gas potential, creating well-paying jobs with good benefits for families in Louisiana. Increasing small-scale natural gas shipments creates American jobs, improves Caribbean energy security and lowers greenhouse gas emissions as nations transition to clean burning natural gas.鈥

Last Congress, Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH) introduced this bill to encourage exports of American-produced LNG:

鈥淭he U.S. is currently the world鈥檚 largest producer of natural gas, with trillions of cubic feet of recoverable natural gas beneath our feet. We should be doing all we can to take advantage of this abundant resource, and it is my hope that these bills will help further that goal. It鈥檚 critical that we take advantage of this opportunity that we鈥檝e been blessed with -- there is no doubt that LNG exports are creating opportunities and improving the quality of life for hard-working families in Eastern and Southeastern Ohio.鈥

In the 115th Congress, some House Democrats opposed this bill in committee, writing in their report:

鈥淯ltimately, [this] is a bill in search of a problem. It would prematurely and unnecessarily enshrine a Trump Administration pro-fossil fuel proposed rule into law. Approving another bill to expand natural gas exports would incent widespread fossil fuel extraction and higher domestic natural gas prices, with serious climate, public health, and economic consequences for American consumers and manufacturers.鈥

This bill has one House cosponsor, Rep. Michael Waltz (R-FL), in the 116th Congress. A Senate companion bill, sponsored by Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) with the support of four bipartisan cosponsors (including three Republicans and one Democrat), has also been reintroduced in the current Congress. 

In the 115th Congress, this bill had the support of seven Republican House cosponsors and didn't receive a committee vote. The Senate companion bill, sponsored by Sen. Cassidy with two Republican Senate cosponsors' support, passed the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee by a 13-10 vote.


Of Note: In recent years, the U.S. economy has seen a boom in extraction of oil and natural gas from shale. According to data from our partners at USAFacts, a non-partisan civic data initiative, throughout the 1980s and 鈥90s, the total value of oil and gas extraction in the U.S. typically averaged in the $40-50 billion range. However, this decade it has consistently been above $200 billion including a peak of $338 billion in 2014.

Rep. Yoho's office notes that the current permitting process for LNG export facilities is expensive, and small-scale projects are often not cost-effective under current conditions. Yoho's office contends that reducing the time and investment required for small-scale exports "will benefit U.S. production, manufacturing, and construction jobs while also reducing trade deficits with the importing country." Further, Rep. Yoho's office argues that increasing LNG exports 鈥 even on a small scale 鈥 will boost the economies of both the U.S. and the countries receiving U.S. natural gas.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell

(Photo Credit: iStock.com / IgorSPb)

AKA

To amend the Natural Gas Act to expedite approval of exports of small volumes of natural gas, and for other purposes.

Official Title

To amend the Natural Gas Act to expedite approval of exports of small volumes of natural gas, and for other purposes.

    Regulations on many items are just Government overreach and harms our economy. Those who oppose lifting restrictions are also those who are for open borders馃 I wonder if the recognize their hypocrisy.
    Like (16)
    Follow
    Share
    Once you get exceptions for legal inspections of 鈥榮mall鈥 LNG shipments, you open the door for arguments that larger and then larger shipments can bypass inspections. All the recent Republican attempts to roll back inspections or decrease taxes for this or that special case just puts a wedge in the door that invites further opening based on the argument that if it was good for 鈥榯hat鈥 special case, it ought to be good for 鈥榯his鈥 special case and so on. I remember the case of the Florida senator who argued that the vast coastal properties which were held in reserve for military defense ought be sold- but with the restriction that the military had the right to repossess the property whenever needed for defense. He and affiliated investors bought up all of this semi-worthless land. A few years later, he pushed through a bill to remove military rights to these properties and became quite wealthy as a major city grew and thrived on his purchased land (I can鈥檛 remember, but I think it was Miami). Point is, be wary of legislation that opens doors to future abuse by calling for special case exceptions to the rules that are otherwise applied generally.
    Like (102)
    Follow
    Share
    Taking the environmental review out of any fossil fuel process is a mistake.
    Like (66)
    Follow
    Share
    No. All quantities of natural gas need environmental review.
    Like (45)
    Follow
    Share
    All shipments of natural gas must OF COURSE require environmental reviews! This bill smacks of cronyism; a way to get away with dangerous practices for greed and disastrous results. Our Earth is dying due to greed and there is no planet B.
    Like (29)
    Follow
    Share
    Any environmental idea the Rape and Pillage the Earth party puts forward is just wrong.
    Like (26)
    Follow
    Share
    NO! No easing of requirements. Just another Repuglycan ploy to open the door for more relaxation of safety measures and further destruction of our planet.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    Protect the environment at all costs. Shipping products requires the manufacture to meet certain environmental requirements, these requirements are a cost of doing business that the manufacture passes on to the purchaser of these products, which the purchaser passes on to their customers. The fact companies are looking for more profit by bypassing environmental protection requirements shows how greedy these companies have become. We the rest of the human race need to live on this planet. You might need to relook at your dividend or share holder profit margins for ways to afford meeting your regulatory requirements.
    Like (17)
    Follow
    Share
    Protect the environment! The health of the Earth ISN鈥橳 worth all your f___ing money!
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    With our environment tanking around our ears, erring on the side of being too careful cannot hurt.
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    It鈥檚 bullshit. Even though it鈥檚 statistically a small amount as far as impact on the environment in case of an accident it would not be a statistically small amount.
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    First, this is THE most poorly worded double negative question I have seen on this app. Second, all fuels need proper regulations. You don鈥檛 鈥渆ase鈥 or 鈥渟trengthen鈥 regulations. You assess the regulatory need and enact accordingly. Sorry GOP. Your love fest with Big Oil will end in 2020.
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    Protect our environment!!!
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to fully commit to protecting the environment!
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    LNG is highly explosive. Who determines what a small amount is- politicians? Why would we want to ship/ receive small quantities, versus the more economical large quantities, unless you are trying to scam the system? This is bad news no matter how you look at it- environmentally, economically, safety and the chance for abuse. NO
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    All exports and imports of LNG should require Environmental review.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to protect our environment from the dangers of fossil fuel use, and this just opens up the door to more pollution.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    When you allow eco-terrorists to debate the answer, it will be a 10 year review followed by a NO, but let the UN Climate Commission give a shot at a review. UN commissions a 20 year study finding photo cells are still the answer and requesting a check of $20 Billion taxpayer dollars.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    Strong NAY vote HR 1836 Ted Yoho bill is taking the WRONG direction! Truth is Fossil fuels need to stay in the ground. We need to instead invest in renewables and a safe clean environment for the future! Reject fossil fuel lobbyists and GREED!
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    This post is a great example of what political trust should look like. I can without doing much more than skimming the article and scanning the position of voices I have learned to TRUST, to know that I can cast my vote as 鈥渘o鈥. I have learned over the past three years how certain members will vote and what issues they will fight for. This allows me to trust that their view will also be REPRESENTATIVE of my own. I do not need to read every letter, I am free to go about my life trusting in my choice of a political representative. This model of political trust is the same model our Congressional Representatives were supposed to fulfill. Congressional Representatives were to represent the voice of the people. But instead we the people are often left without a voice.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE