MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W294542419

Liquefied Natural Gas: Regulation in a Competitive Natural Gas Market

2003· article· en· W294542419 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gearold L. Knowles

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy law journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicOil, Gas, and Environmental Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural gasLiquefied natural gasConsumption (sociology)Gas consumptionInvestment (military)CommissionNatural resource economicsNatural gas pricesBusinessEconomicsDownstream (manufacturing)Supply and demandCommerceFinanceEngineeringWaste managementEnvironmental economicsOperations managementMicroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I. INTRODUCTION Over the past three years there has been increasing discussion of the role imported liquefied natural gas (LNG)1 may play in the supply of natural gas for the U.S. market. This is a result of the projections of domestic production and importation of natural gas from Canada (compared with projections of the growing demand for natural gas), as well as the significantly higher prices in the domestic spot markets. Forecasts of LNG consumption by 2015 range from 4% to 10% of domestic natural gas consumption, with more aggressive projections reaching the 10% level by 2010. During 2002, LNG constituted approximately 1% of domestic natural gas consumption.2 LNG projects are large endeavors requiring investments in the hundreds of millions of dollars for a single LNG terminal. A full supply chain project can require investment in excess of $2.5 billion.3 The structure of future LNG projects and the regulatory environment must be capable of encouraging and facilitating the necessary investments. The recent focus on the need to construct the infrastructure to facilitate a sharp increase in the supply of LNG has resulted in significant policy changes by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission). LNG was viewed as a high-cost source of natural gas in the early years of its importation into the U.S. This view changed during the periods of natural gas supply curtailment, when LNG was seen as necessary to augment an inadequate supply of domestic natural gas. Additionally, LNG was viewed as a largely seasonal source of natural gas to be utilized at times when users were willing to accommodate the higher prices. Recently, LNG has come to be viewed as more than just a peaking supply of natural gas. Proponents of new LNG projects assert that in the future LNG can be a competitively priced source of natural gas available to fill an increasing portion of the growing demand for natural gas in the U.S. Whether the U.S. will have adequate supplies of natural gas to meet the expected growth in demand, at prices that will allow economic growth, has become a dominant energy issue, as well as a significant economic and political issue.4 The supply and price of natural gas, as well as the growing importance of LNG as a component of the U.S. natural gas supply has gained the attention of both the FERC Chairman and the Federal Reserve Board Chairman.5 This article examines the growing importance of LNG in the U.S. natural gas supply. Recent legislation and changes in regulatory policies are intended to remove perceived impediments to the development of the infrastructure. This infrastructure is necessary to facilitate the importation of significantly increased quantities of LNG. The article is in the context of the growing global trade in LNG, in the light of its mixed history in the domestic natural gas market. II. LNG IN THE WORLD NATURAL GAS SUPPLY The global consumption of natural gas has increased dramatically during the past thirty years and is projected to continue to grow at a high rate over the next twenty-five years. Natural gas is forecasted to be the fastest growing component of global energy consumption, with projected average annual increases of 2.8% between 2001 and 2025.6 As shown in Figure 1, worldwide natural gas consumption is projected to increase from 90 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) in 2001 to 176 Tcf in 2025. LNG will play a significant role in satisfying the growing demand for natural gas. The global demand for LNG has been consistently growing at a rate of 6% to 7% annually since 1970. In some countries, LNG has been a major component of the natural gas supply for several years, often serving as a primary source of natural gas for regions lacking natural gas supplies that can be delivered by pipeline. Historically, LNG has played a minor role in the U.S., providing only about 1% of the natural gas supply during 2002, while providing about 97% of the supply in Asia. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy law journalSame topicOil, Gas, and Environmental IssuesFrench-language works237,207