Last year the United States took a beating when Pres. Donald Trump pulled us out of the Paris climate accord.  The Paris agreement involved virtually every country on earth signing up to reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions.  That was all in an effort to keep global warming to less than 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures.  
 
When announcing the decision, which was hardly a surprise based on his past statements, Pres. Trump said “Compliance with the terms of the Paris Accord and the onerous energy restrictions it has placed on the United States could cost America as much as 2.7 million lost jobs by 2025…”  
 
Other leaders were unimpressed.  The European Union’s commissioner for climate, for example, said “Today is a sad day for the global community, as a key partner turns its back on the fight against climate change…. this vacuum will be filled by new broad committed leadership.  Europe and its strong partners all around the world are ready to lead the way.”  
 
Now that some time has passed since the decision, we can begin to evaluate who is truly leading the way.  The American Enterprise Institute, drawing on data from BP, says that America is leading the way without even being a part of Paris.  In 2017, America reduced its carbon dioxide emissions by 42 million tons, or .5%.  That was the largest decline in emissions in the world, and the third consecutive year that emissions declined in the U.S.  That is rather remarkable given the economy was growing rapidly in those three years.  The European Union, despite grousing about their leadership, actually increased their emissions by 1.5%.  China’s emissions grew by 1.6%, and they had the largest increase in emissions of any country in the world.  
 
The boom in American shale gas production has allowed us to replace coal with cleaner-burning natural gas and drastically reduce our carbon footprint without having to suffer any economic consequences.  Much of that gas is coming from the Marcellus region, and if you want to get involved with producing it you can call the Pennsylvania-based land experts at Cimmaron Land at 412-212-7517.

 
Pres. Donald Trump has been spending some time overseas, and as always he made all kinds of headlines.  One of his first stops was a nice friendly breakfast in Brussels with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.  It got tense as Pres. Trump laid into one of the most important countries in NATO, saying that “Germany is totally controlled by Russia.”   Some reporters watching the painful exchange said that Pres. Trump’s advisors, including his Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, looked painfully uncomfortable.  The White House would later (hilariously) clarify that Gen. Kelly “was displeased because he was expecting a full breakfast and there was only pastries and cheese.”  
 
So what was this awkward exchange really about?  Natural gas, of course.   Germany is the world’s largest importer of natural gas.   Half that gas comes from Russia.  In fact, Germany gets 50% of its natural gas, 40% of its crude oil, and 30% of its coal from Russia.  The importance of the relationship goes both ways, as Germany is Russia’s biggest export market for natural gas in Europe.  
 
NATO, of course, is an alliance of countries set up to defend against Russia.  Pres. Trump’s complaint is that America is spending money defending NATO countries like Germany, while Germany is paying money to Russia instead of spending that money to defend against Russia.  His logic makes sense to a lot of people, though countries have generally treated commercial deals and national security as separate.  
 
Pres. Trump’s biggest complaint is about a project called Nord Stream 2.  This is an 800-mile-long pipeline that will run underneath the Baltic Sea.  As the name implies, there is already a pipeline called Nord Stream that covers that route, and Nord Stream 2 will roughly double the capacity of that line. Russia exports about $250 billion in gas per year to Germany right now.
 
It is also worth pointing out, as Pres. Trump did, that there is a bit of shadiness  associated with the Nord Stream 2 project.  Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder was a big supporter, and after he was voted out in 2005, but before leaving office, he hastily signed a deal with Russia setting the project in motion.  A few weeks after signing that deal he was running the project himself. He was then hired to sit on the board of several other Russian-involved projects.  He recently became the chairman of Rosneft, Russia’s largest oil company.  In short, Russia made him rich after he approved the Nord Stream 2 project.
 
Russia has responded to Pres. Trump’s statement by saying he is trying to bully Europe into buying American energy, such as liquefied natural gas.  Here in the Marcellus Shale region, there will not be too many people upset about Pres. Trump pushing American gas on the world.  If you want to help supply that gas,  give us a call at all 412-212-7517.

 
On July 3, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) put out new data on overall energy consumption and it is worth pausing to reflect on the dramatic rise of natural gas.  We often talk about natural gas and its market share in electricity generation.  One thing the EIA’s overall consumption chart reminds people of is that even though petroleum has been pushed out of electricity almost completely, it is still the most-used energy source in the country.  
 
Almost half, 47%, of that petroleum is burned as gasoline in vehicles.  Most of the rest of the petroleum is burned as diesel or other liquid fuels.  Another way of looking at it is that 92% of Americans’ transportation is fueled by petroleum.  Natural gas has only a small, but growing, 3% share of the transportation market.  
 
Natural gas is really dominating everything outside of transportation, though.  In the EIA’s 2016 data, only 36% of the natural gas consumed in the United States went to electricity.  Another 34% went to industrial uses, which covers everything from burning the gas for heat and power to breaking the gas down to produce products like chemicals and fertilizer.  About 16% of the gas in America is used to heat the air, water, and stovetops in residential homes. The final major use is in the commercial sector, which consumes about 11% of the gas supply to provide heat and lighting for businesses. 
 
The new overall energy consumption chart shows both coal and natural gas usage growing from the 1950s until 2005.  By 2005, both coal and natural gas were providing about the same amount of energy.  Since that time, the two fuels have gone completely different directions.  Coal has dropped like a rock, losing over 40% of its consumption as coal-generated electricity began to fall out of favor because of changing costs and pollution concerns.  Meanwhile, natural gas consumption increased 24% over that same period.  Natural gas usage dropped slightly last year, but the trend lines seem to show a great future for gas and continued pain for coal.  
 
The EIA also has data showing that production from Appalachia has been the primary driver of growth in American natural gas production since 2012.  Cimmaron Land has some of the leading land experts in Appalachia, and if you are interested in opportunities in the region we encourage you to contact us today.

On June 25, a federal judge in California threw out a major lawsuit by the cities of San Francisco and Oakland that sought hold oil and gas companies liable for climate change.  The cities argued that BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobile, and Royal Dutch Shell created a “public nuisance” by causing greenhouse gasses to be emitted into the atmosphere.  Nuisance is an old legal doctrine that in the past might have been used to force a factory to pay for disruption and pollution that impacted its neighbors.  

The judge called this lawsuit a “breathtaking” use of the legal theory.  It would make these individual companies liable for decades worth of legal sales of fossil fuels.  The law of public nuisance requires courts to balance the alleged harm against the benefits of the conduct.  The judge pointed out that the “monumental progress” made since the industrial revolution would not have been possible without fossil fuels.  It seems unfair, the judge said, to blame oil and gas companies for supplying the fuel that the rest of us burned.  
 
The giant oil and gas companies tend to take most of the blame for global warming, because they have been operating for so long and there is some evidence they understood the risks of climate change early on.  In fact, there is a similar ongoing lawsuit by the Californian counties of San Mateo and Marin that is pending in California state court.  
 
In our region, the largest operators generally tend to be newer and regional operators that do not have the baggage of the major oil and gas companies.  So these climate lawsuits are less likely to impact our region directly, but it is always good to see a judge acknowledge the importance of the oil and gas sector.  At Cimmaron Land, we work hard to make for smooth interactions between landowners and E&P companies, and if you would like to discuss our work in the region you can call 412-212-7517.