politics

Palin backs shipping Alaskan LNG to Japan

23 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

23 Comments
Login to comment

You go Sarah, tap that gas.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Blah Blah Blah. Palin is so much yesterdays news.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Can we export Palin somewhere too?

What happened to her keeping the resources at home stance. She and McCain are so random and scattered. Will be happy when they are both just bad memories. Which is soon!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hope she can send us some big moose steaks while she is at it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

AMERICA needs that gas you DUMMY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Alaska shouldn't export any oil or gas. This woman was a very poor choice for Governor!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BOOO-HISSSS---BOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Some of the gas fields are not that stable and that is another reason they were not tapped a long time ago. Like this one the Aussies started in Indonesia and is still pouring mud out. But I guess Palin would export the mud for face packs. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/01/070125-mud-volcano.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

She thinks Japan is the land she sees rising from behind the sushi shop.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

US supply Japan?

Japan supplies US ships in the Indian Ocean... with whose petroleum products?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

For those on the board who don't actually read the news, Pallin, as Governor of Alaska, pushed through a project to build a natural gas pipeline to the lower 48 states that had been stalled for years. So she is trying to supply natural gas to the U.S., but it is stupid to liquify it so as to ship it by tanker to the lower 48.

There is nothing wrong with the U.S. supplying Japan - a U.S. ally, with natural gas and oil. It is certainly better than having them become dependent upon Russian oil & gas.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

US supply Japan? Japan supplies US ships in the Indian Ocean... with whose petroleum products?

Petroleum products imported from a number of countries and paid for in full by Japan, as if this question required a reply.

Palin isn't as dumb (forgive me) as some are trying to picture her. Supplying Asia with this LNG is the right decision. And perhaps Wyden should concentrate on why America is short of energy. In addition, the export of gas provides much needed funds for a bankrupt nation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

America is short on energy for only one reason and it is not because of what a single politician sais today or tomorrow. Energy was too cheap for too long and was taken for granted. The same is true for Europe and the rest of the developed world. This problem will not go away within our generation jst because you choose a black or white candidate. We have to change not our politicians.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

most of the oil of Alaska is exported also. Why would LNG expected to be different?

Maybe Joe the Plumber can be enlisted in building that gasline-plus the pay is better than Toledo and he can pay back the state his tax obligation.

-as a negative we all pay more for energy except Japan. But hey, if it works for joe it must work for me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

With the money that the lower 49 states save from not buying gas from Alaska, it can buy gas from other sources. The whole issue is silly and it shows a profound ignorance of what trade is. The bottom line: we're talking about a fungible commodity that's traded on international markets. It should be bought from wherever the price is cheapest and sold to wherever the price is highest, just like any other commodity.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the gas is under a lease agreement and owned by the American citizen or Native National (Indian Group) --> they have a right to broker these agreements.

If America decided not to renew these agreements too bad.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

fatloser -- the US doesn't need that gas, as the US is wholly dependent on "friendly" OPEC Oil. Thanks to Liberal Knuckleheads in Congress, there's to be no ANWR drilling, and we have to stay dependent on terror-funding Oil Nations. Gov. Palin is merely doing what she thinks best for her state...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The amount of Alaskan LNG shipped to Japan rather than the "lower 48" will be replaced in the US by LNG obtained from other sources such as Qatar, Nigeria and Algeria. If the US prevented the export of LNG from Alaska to Japan, then Japan would purchase an equivalent amount of LNG from the same sources that the US currently uses, such as Qatar, Nigeria and Algeria, using the same US dollars Japan currently is holding that it otherwise would use to purchase Alaskan LNG. Thus, the net effect, in terms of both LNG and dollars, is the same regardless of which country (the US or Japan) obtains the LNG being shipped from Alaska.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the US doesn't need that gas, as the US is wholly dependent on "friendly" OPEC Oil. Thanks to Liberal Knuckleheads in Congress, there's to be no ANWR drilling, and we have to stay dependent on terror-funding Oil Nations.

You should check who actually provides the US with the most oil. Hint: you can thank NAFTA for forcing #1 and #3 to sell below markert priced oil to the US.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good Jorb, you are exactly right! Canada and Mexico are forced to sell their oil and natural gas to the US below market price, and I am not sure what Canadians think, but I know many Mexicans are not happy with this situation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

but then again, it's free market policy right? if you buy more, you get it at a cheaper price. so let's think of it from supply and demand curve. US oil demand is going to keep growing at some steady, oh i dunno, let's just say 5% rate. we all know that China and India's demand is growing at a much quicker rate of, let's just for the sake of the talk say, 10%. The question is, when is Asia's demand going to meet or surpass those of the United States? I'd say, that's what people have to look at as far as long term energy policy is concerned.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good_Jorb and elbudamexicano - Then let us not blame Sarah Palin for that mess, but for your good, ol', Democrat, Liberal Buddy, President William Jefferson Clinton for NAFTA. Had NAFTA not been in force (much, I might add, at the time when it was ratified, to the pleasure of the Canadians and Mexicans) the US'd be buying that gas at fair market levels. Let's not blame something on Governor Palin that, really, she didn't have much of a hand in doing....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Thanks Blue Tiger, you are probably correct about NAFTA. Governor Palin is only trying to do what is in the best interest for her state of Alaska. Japan is also trying to do what is best for it's own interests too.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So, to recap, Palin would be good for Japan as well as the U.S.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Then let us not blame Sarah Palin for that mess, but for your good, ol', Democrat, Liberal Buddy, President William Jefferson Clinton for NAFTA.

Why would it be your good ol' Democrat, Liberal Buddy? I do not particularly like either Democrats or Republicans nor partisan politics. As for NAFTA, it may have been to the pleasure of some Canadians, but a lot of Canadian's didn't and still don't want to part of NAFTA. As for how the relates to Palin and Oil, who is pro-NAFTA(in particular because of oil and gas), McCain(and by extension Palin), who is openly anti-NAFTA and wants NAFTA renegotiated, Obama.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites