État pathétique de la narrative de BHO sur le gaz US

Brèves de crise

   Forum

Un commentaire est associé à cet article. Vous pouvez le consulter et réagir à votre tour.

   Imprimer

État pathétique de la narrative de BHO sur le gaz US

On ne sera pas vraiment surpris d’apprendre que les affirmations de l’équipe BHO, Kerry & Cie sur la capacité des USA d’alimenter l’Europe en gaz si les Européens étaient placés devant la rupture de l’alimentation en gaz russe dans le cadre de la crise ukrainienne en expansion explosive s’avèrent totalement mensongères. (On préfère ce terme à “fausses”, qui impliquerait une erreur d’évaluation tant l’affirmation est basée sur des faits immédiats, évidents qui interdisent cette hypothèse.) La narrative avait d’ailleurs été psalmodiée par Obama-Yes he can lors de la rencontre USA-UE à Bruxelles, pour faire avancer les négociations sur le TTIP à l’avantage des USA, renforçant d'autant la thèse du mensonge («Once we have a trade agreement in place, export licenses for projects for liquefied natural gas destined to Europe would be much easier, something that is obviously relevant in today’s geopolitical environment»).

Sur NSBC.me, le 9 avril 2014, F. William Engdahl pulvérise l’argument général de la “proposition” US, notamment selon deux points essentiels. Le premier, qui est la confirmation de l’effondrement d’une autre narrative, le mirage de la prospective formidable du gaz de schiste aux USA, n’est pas étrangère à nos lecteurs, grâce à notre contributeur Shalegas Gate (voir le 11 janvier 2013). Engdhal détaille ses deux arguments...

«Number one, the “shale gas revolution” in the USA has failed. The dramatic rise in US natural gas production from “fracking” or forcing gas out of shale rock formations is being abandoned by the largest energy companies like Shell and BP as uneconomical. Shell has just announced a huge reduction of its exposure to US shale gas development. Shell is selling its leases on some 700,000 acres of shale gas lands in the major shale gas areas of Texas, Pennsylvania, Colorado and Kansas and says it may have to get rid of more to stop its shale gas losses. Shell’s CEO, Ben van Beurden stated, “Financial performance there is frankly not acceptable … some of our exploration bets have simply not worked out.”

»A useful summary of the shale gas illusion comes from a recent analysis of the actual results of several years of shale gas extraction in the USA by veteran energy analyst David Hughes. He notes, “Shale gas production has grown explosively to account for nearly 40 percent of US natural gas production. Nevertheless, production has been on a plateau since December 2011; eighty percent of shale gas production comes from five plays, several of which are in decline. The very high decline rates of shale gas wells require continuous inputs of capital—estimated at $42 billion per year to drill more than 7,000 wells—in order to maintain production. In comparison, the value of shale gas produced in 2012 was just $32.5 billion.”

»So Obama is either being lied to by his advisers on the true state of US shale gas supplies, or he is willfully lying. The former is most likely.

»The second problem with the US “offer” of gas to the EU to replace Russian gas is the fact that it requires massive, costly infrastructure in the form of construction of new Liquified Natural Gas terminals that can handle the huge LNG supertankers to bring it to similar huge LNG terminal harbors in the EU.

»The problem is that owing to various US laws on export of domestic energy and supply factors, there exist no operating LNG liquefaction terminals in the US. The only one now under construction is the Sabine Pass LNG receiving terminal in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, owned by Cheniere Energy, where John Deutch, former CIA head, sits on the board. The problem with the Sabine Pass LNG terminal is that most of the gas has been pre-contracted to Korean, Indian and other Asian LNG customers, not to the EU.

»The second problem is that even were a huge port capacity installed to satisfy EU gas needs to replace Russian supplies, that would push domestic natural-gas prices higher and cut short the mini-manufacturing boom fueled by abundant, cheap shale gas. The ultimate cost to EU consumers of US LNG would have to be far more than current Russian gas pipelined over Nord Stream or Ukraine. The next problem is that the specialized LNG supertankers do not exist to supply the EU market. All this takes years, including environmental approvals, construction time, perhaps seven years on average in best conditions. [...]

»The EU has no realistic alternative to Russian gas. Germany, the largest economy, has foolishly decided to phase out nuclear power and its “alternative energy”—wind power and solar–is an economic and political disaster with consumer electricity costs exploding even though alternatives are a tiny share of the total market. In short, the chimera of shutting Russian gas and turning on US gas instead is economic, energy and political nonsense.»

... Et l'on conviendra que le plus impressionnant dans ces observations de Engdhal, lorsqu’on les rapproche avec d’autres manifestations de communication de l’équipe BHO, Kerry & Cie, c’est l’extraordinaire ligne du mensonge systématique qui caractérise les interventions publiques US sur la situation générale, essentiellement depuis la crise ukrainienne et à propos de cette crise et de ses conséquences. Il n’existe plus aucune précaution, plus aucun habillage, plus aucune construction, tant le mensonge qui devient une complète indifférence pour la vérité, ou pour la réalité c’est selon, est débité sans aucune précaution ni le moindre souci de vraisemblance. Il va bientôt devenir problématique (“mensonger” dirions-nous pour agrémenter la circonstance) de parler de narrative, parce qu’une narrative demande tout de même une certaine mise en scène, une certaine technique de conteur, un effort de construction.


Mis en ligne le 10 avril 2014 à 06H00

Donations

Nous avons récolté 1160 € sur 3000 €

faites un don