![]() Larger companies like Amazon and Cisco Systems lost large portions of their market capitalization, with Cisco losing 80% of its stock value. Others, like, MP3.com and PeopleSound, survived the burst but were acquired. The period coincided with massive growth in Internet adoption, a proliferation of available venture capital, and the rapid growth of valuations in new dot-com startups.īetween 1995 and its peak in March 2000, investments in the NASDAQ composite stock market index rose 800%, only to fall 740% from its peak by October 2002, giving up all its gains during the bubble.ĭuring the dot-com crash, many online shopping companies, notably, Webvan, and Boo.com, as well as several communication companies, such as Worldcom, NorthPoint Communications, and Global Crossing, failed and shut down. The dot-com bubble (or dot-com boom) was a stock market bubble in the late 1990s. 1997–2003 The NASDAQ Composite index spiked in the late 1990s and then fell sharply as a result of the dot-com bubble. "But importing American LNG cannot be a long-term solution.Tech stock speculative craze, c. This is before the energy-intensive process of chilling it, putting it on a boat to Europe, regasifying it and piping it to people's homes. But new research published by Stanford University has now made clear methane leakage is six times higher than previously thought - a rate that would make US natural gas more polluting than the Russian gas it replaces. Methane leakage is notoriously hard to measure. This process is called fracking and it is notoriously polluting because it releases a lot of methane into the atmosphere - a planet-warming gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide. ![]() The US, the world's biggest gas producer, extracts two-thirds of its natural gas by pumping a mixture of water, sand and chemicals into rock at high pressure. Gas emits less carbon dioxide than other fossil fuels, which means that in some cases, states can use it to replace coal or oil as a transition fuel.īut not all-natural gas is produced in the same way. ![]() Shortly after the announcement, a commission spokesman described the EU-US LNG agreement as a "clean energy deal." And continued EU dependency on LNG may persuade producers to invest billions in new gas projects, threatening EU climate goals. "Wealthy Europe and wealthy Asia will have to fight it out over the limited pot of LNG," Derry said. Sign up for EUobserver’s daily newsletterĪll the stories we publish, sent at 7.30 AM.īy signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.Įuropean failure to build suitable renewable replacements for gas and heating, could drive demand on an already tight global LNG market in the short or even medium term. "Much will depend on the success and speed of political decision making…and LNG will need to do most of the work. "Renewables get too much attention considering their limited potential to replace gas for heating purposes," he wrote in an analysis. Gerben Hiemstra, an economist at the Dutch bank ING, responded sceptically to the plan. This is bad news for gas producers, but replacement energy will need to be deployed fast, and there are reasons to doubt that it will. The EU has pledged a move away from Russian fossil fuels - with a joint plan aiming to replace two-thirds of Russian gas before the end of the year, with most of the plans announced aimed at renewable energy, energy saving or the renovation of gas inefficient homes. "They will only be financed if there are enough buyers to ensure 20 years' worth of contracts," Derry said.īut increased European demand may make such projects more feasible, and much will depend on the success of the European shift to green energy. Investors in these billion-euro projects will need assurances that a transition to wind and solar energy will not render these fossil-fuel assets obsolete in a decade. It is still too early to tell if this will in fact happen. But according to one enthusiastic US gas executive investors are already "lining up." This does not mean they will all be built, because financiers will still have to be found. Currently, there are only six terminals in the US. On the other side of the Atlantic, the US has approved 14 new LNG terminals in recent months to meet the global hunger for LNG. The German government announced the first offshore terminal is expected to be deployed this winter. ![]() Germany has already proposed building new terminals to receive LNG and has secured three regasification vessels that can float offshore. After years of low investment, a whole slew of written-off gas projects are actively being discussed by governments and investors around the globe. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |