After the Natural Gas Bubble: An Economic Evaluation of the Recent U.S. National Petroleum Council Study

Abstract

This perspective paper reviews and critiques the policy analysis and modeling of future natural gas markets in the National Petroleum Council’s 2003 natural gas study (NPC Study). The NPC Study provided an important and timely review of long-term natural gas supply, demand and potential policies to increase supply or suppress demand. However, its long-term scenarios used assumptions and simplifications that led to understating likely longer-term market reactions to higher natural gas prices, which results in exaggeration of the potential benefits of the policies recommended by the NPC. In addition, the narrow scope of the NPC Study did not address many important considerations in natural gas policy, such as the costs of recommended policies, or their impacts on taxpayers, resource owners, or the environment. Overall, the study does not provide the evidence needed to justify major natural gas policies, especially in view of the current uncertain market environment.

Keywords

Natural gas government policy US energy markets National Petroleum Council

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Atkinson

Manning

(1995). “A Survey of International Energy Elasticities,” in Barker

Elkins

Johnstone

Global Warming and Energy Demand. Routledge.

Bohi

(1981), Analyzing Demand Behavior: A Study of Energy Elasticities, Baltimore, Maryland: The Johns Hopkins University Press for Resources for the Future.

Bohi Douglas

Zimmerman

M. B.

, (1984), ‘An update on econometric studies of energy demand behavior’, Annual Review of Energy 9, 105—154.

Dahl

Carol

(1993). A Survey of Energy Demand Elasticities in Support of the Development of the NEMS. Paper prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy.

Energy Modeling Forum . (2003). Natural Gas, Fuel Diversity and North American Energy Markets. Stanford University, Stanford, CA (available at www.stanford.edu/group/EMF/research).

Dahl

Carol

(2001). “Interfuel Substitution in US Electricity Generation,” Applied Economics, November 2001, 33(14): 1833-43.

MacAvoy

Paul W.

Moshkin

Nickolay V.

(2000). “The New Trend in the Long-Term Price of Natural Gas,” Resource and Energy Economics, October 2000, 22(4): 315-38.

Martin

Phyllis

(2004). “The Expanding Role of Liquefied Natural Gas.” Presentation at the Annual Energy Outlook Conference, Washington, DC, March 23. (available at http://www.eia.doe.gove/oiaf/aeo/conf/pdf/martin.pdf).

National Petroleum Council (1999). Meeting the Challenges of the Nation' Growing Natural Gas Demand, Volume I: Summary Report, December.

10.

National Petroleum Council (2003, 2004). Balancing Natural Gas Policy - Fueling the Demands of a Growing Economy, Volume I: Summary of Findings and Recommendations, September 2003, and Volume II: Integrated Report, March 2004.

11.

Potash Corporation (2004), Overview of Potash Corp and Its Industry 2004, available at http://www.potashcorp.com/npk_markets/news_21.zsp .

12.

Pratt

Joseph A.

Becker

William H.

McClenahan, Jr.

William M.

(2002). Voice of the Marketplace: A History of the National Petroleum Council, College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.

13.

U.S. Department of Energy (2004). “Tracking New Coal-Fired Power Plants”, National Energy Technology Laboratory, available at http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/refshelf/ncp.pdf .

14.

U.S. Energy Information Administration (2004a), Annual Energy Outlook 2004, Washington, D.C., January.

15.

U.S. Energy Information Administration (2004b). Electric Power Monthly, April.

16.

U.S. Energy Information Administration (2004c). Monthly Energy Review, April.

17.

U.S. Energy Information Administration (2003). Analyses of Selected Provisions of Proposed Energy Legislation: 2003, Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, September.

18.

U.S Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2004). “Existing and Proposed North American LNG Terminals”, Office of Energy Projects, September, 2004.