The US (in 2021) used 827 billion cubic meters of natural gas per year and produced 934. The amount it's expected to send to Europe (45 billion cubic meters) amounts to under 5% of its own production which has been increasing every year. Most of that hasn't even been sent yet so the percentage up to now is even smaller.
So yeah this was never about the US selling natural gas to Europe.
You have to add on the 34 bcms to the 45 bcms for a total of 79 billion cubic meters expected to be exported to Europe in 2022. Prices in Europe for gas seem to be about 10X higher than in the USA. Costs of LNG export are also higher, but I imagine the profit return on those European sales is about as large as their total profit on all domestic USA sales (and note domestic prices have doubled as well).
This is pretty basic supply and demand stuff. It's hard not to conclude that a major US goal was cutting Europe off from Russian gas, and replacing that with American LNG. You can find all sorts of quotes to this effect from the US government before 2022:
> (March 2021) "‘President Biden has been very clear, he believes the pipeline is a bad idea, bad for Europe, bad for the United States,’ Blinken says in Brussels"
(Sep 2021) "Natural Gas Boom Fizzles as a U.S. Glut Sinks Profits: Chevron’s multibillion-dollar write-down of gas assets is the most recent sign that the gas supply has far outstripped demand."
>You have to add on the 34 bcms to the 45 bcms for a total of 79 billion cubic meters expected to be exported to Europe in 2022.
The 34 was already being exported so it's sort of disingenuous to add it in terms of supply/demand impact.
>Costs of LNG export are also higher, but I imagine the profit return on those European sales is about as large as their total profit on all domestic USA sales (and note domestic prices have doubled as well).
Now you're making assumptions.
>So, if Europe's not going to get gas from Russia, who does that leave?
Transitioning to clean energy, nuclear, etc.
>These dots are not that hard to connect.
Thank you for finally not beating around the bush on what your actual point and angle are.
Well, the amount the US is expected to send to Europe in 2022 is at least 79 billion cubic meters. The price differential relative to selling that gas in the US @ ~$4 per mmBTU (pre-inflation 2021) vs in Europe @ $34 per mmBTU (post-inflation 2022), where 1 bcm = ~36 million mmBTU is what?
I get an addition $85 billion in gross revenue relative to selling that gas domestically (where there was a supply glut). Even if you just add on the excess shipped to Europe relative to 2021, that's at least an additional $40 billion.
Add on the ~doubling of domestic gas prices from 2021 to 2022 which is for that 827 bcm used domestically, hmm... roughly another additional $60 billion in revenue.
So, the Ukraine war has brought a windfall revenue gain to US gas producers on the order of $100 billion for 2022, right?
As far as agenda, mostly I'm interested in accurate information.
> This is pretty basic supply and demand stuff. It's hard not to conclude that a major US goal was cutting Europe off from Russian gas, and replacing that with American LNG. You can find all sorts of quotes to this effect from the US government before 2022:
It’s actually very easy to conclude that this is not the case because selling a few billion dollars worth of oil simply isn’t worth global destabilization. To the extent that this was some sort of “goal” of the US (under the Trump admin I’m guessing?) it’s a minor goal at best.
The reason Biden for example said that the pipeline was a bad idea was because Europe was placing its energy security in the hands of Russia, which as we saw turned out to be a bad idea. Note previous Russian aggression in Crimea in 2014, etc.
Similarly to “NATO expansion” being a dog whistle to anti-American sentiment the “the US wants to sell gas” is another attempt to distract from much more plain and serious truths such as Putin simply thought he’d be able to take over Ukraine and wanted to do so.
It's more like an extra $100 billion in revenue. Not counting the military procurement bill, which is what, approaching $20 billion? This war is a real cash cow for certain sectors of the US government (fossil fuels and defense contractors), although the resulting inflation isn't doing anyone else any favors.
Yea so not a lot of money and not worth the global instability, hence it’s a very poor theory.
A much better one would be something like the US knowing that the Russian military was in very rough shape and that an invasion would lead to the permanent decline of Russia and shore up allies in Europe and elsewhere so they goaded Putin into action by not doing anything after previous actions in places like Crimea.
But that’s also prescribing too much agency to the US government.
So yeah this was never about the US selling natural gas to Europe.