FPL gets approval to charge customers for fracking investment… The Real Story.

FPL gets approval to charge customers for fracking investment | Tampa Bay Times:

I was astounded to here that FPL is getting into the Fracking business. There’s this baloney about trying to save some money for their investors. FPL Customers pay, in advance, to drill Nat Gas wells in Alabama, and then reap some of the benefits of the wells, if any, in the form of low NatGas prices in the future.


It sounds too good to be true. And leaves you shaking your head as to why a publicly regulated power utility would wonder off the path into the woods looking for firewood and NatGas.


So the Fla PSC rubber stamped the deal. As they always do. (Although the PSC turned down a petition to pay for Federal Lobbying, an obvious red herring in the mix.)

Comes to find out that NextEra, the parent company of FPL, already has oil drilling interests… 


There are many reasons why a power company might want to get into the drilling business, but the one given seems like the very last on the list.

Water, maybe. Fracking takes huge amount of water, as does power generation.

Pipe lines. Power companies already have massive right-of-ways related to power lines. This seems like a perfect fit: run power through the line and gas through the ground.

The one I like best would be to capture the NatGas that is flared in oilfields, produce power and send the power off to the grid through wire. We currently flare half of all NatGas produced in the USA. Nobody really wants to talk about it, but probably more than half. (Better to flare it, then release the methane, but still a very ugly and wasteful business).

Here seems to be the answer: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) through pipelines to markets, domestic and abroad. We in the US pay only bout 1/3 of what the rest of the world pays for NatGas. At about $3.50 per unit for us, and maybe $10-$12 for most other countries. Liquidification and shipping LNG is in the works on many fronts. Cheniere Energy, Inc.
(trading symbol LNG) is coming on board with export terminals with a vengeance. 

Imagine what it will look like when our mountains of NatGas start to look like mountains of dollars.

So what does this mean in the next era of power utilities? I don’t really know. It should take some time to understand the maze and the interlinking parts. 

Here is discussion about Spectra Energy (drilling and such) and FPL and the pipeline in existence and/or planned. LAKE.org article. There’s a pipeline through the Gulf…

So very interesting.

And, of course, it has to be mentioned: NatGas is far better than that other major fuel (not mentioning any names, like Coal), but it is still not a renewable resources. Non-sustainable, by any other name, is still a broken business model… It’s just a mater of time.

‘via Blog this’

Similar Posts

  • |

    Natural gas, the media’s failures, and you « The Cost of Energy

    Natural gas, the media’s failures, and you « The Cost of Energy: Ouch! “The Cost of Energy” Lou Grinzo blogs (and reblogs) about how unclear NatGas really is. It all has to do with the Methane released from the fracking. See the reprint of the blog at EthicsAndClimate.org from Dr. Brown. Sadly NatGas may really not be cleaner than Coal. How dirty is that! Here’s my comments over to Lou’s post. Okay, as always, your…

  • |

    World Water Day 2021 in Review

     World Water Day 2021 (in the rear-view mirror): Valuing Water. World Water Day (March 22, 2021) is past (www.WorldWaterDay.org)…   By now you should have taken the Water Day Quiz at SustainZine. It’s been about 10 years since I developed such a quiz. I had to work to improve and update the original quiz… It is still tricky to get good answers to some of these water-critical issues. Often the water usage is available to the…

  • |

    Solar and wind just passed another big turning point, Cheaper n Better

    Solar and wind just passed another big turning point: So solar and wind power generation is reaching a threshold where renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuel-based power in Germany and UK. That is before counting the subsidies for renewables, and ignoring the massive externality costs of our historically favorite dirty black fuel. Note the discussion of the virtuous cycle of renewable fuels. As base load power moves up from 5% renewables the costs of traditional power…

  • |

    Trump of Sustainability – Paul Bunyan tromps again!

    Sustainability efforts take a big hit with the Trump election to president. Some forces are bigger than he, however. Congress didn’t act on most things sustainable-ish, so much of the Obama efforts have been by executive order and by regulations. The EPA on coal, for example. The right way to regulate emissions in general — and fossil fuels specifically — is by a carbon tax (or cap n trade). With a carbon tax, then all…

  • | | | | | |

    From Farm to Future: Four Scenarios for a Carbon-Negative World (2/2)

    Revisiting the Farmer’s Choice In Part 1 of this series, we introduced Elias, a farmer in eastern Ohio whose land sits at the crossroads of energy and agriculture. Beneath his soil lie the Utica and Marcellus Shale formations, tempting him with oil and gas leases. Above his fields stretch skies fit for solar panels and wind turbines. On the ground itself, his soil could be managed regeneratively to store carbon while producing food. (See Part…

  • Growth is always good? No matter the costs!

    Saving can be hugely benefiting to all. But it doesn’t show up in increased sales and higher GDP. A bigger, newer SUV is always better… Hmmmm? http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/jun/10/good-natural-malignant-five-ways-people-frame-economic-growth?CMP=share_btn_tw