The Energy Department approves liquid natural gas terminal in Freeport

Fracking has allowed the US to become an energy exporter. Japan - which is relying less on nuclear power due to problems associated with the tsunami - is expected to be a major consumer.

There's an interesting conflict over whether increasing natural gas exports is a good idea. Producers and free trade supporters are in favor of it, and environmentalists oppose it. But some petrochemical companies that use natural gas are concerned that increased exports will increase the cost of natural gas, a cost that will impact their business.

The story refers to the Energy Information Administration (see Wikipedia also) as a source for current gas prices and forecasts for natural gas production based on how many additional terminals are authorized. Wikipedia describes is as a member of the Federal Statistical System of the United States the "decentralized network of federal agencies which produce data about the people, economy, and infrastructure of the United States."

Their specific task of the EIA is the responsibility for " collecting, analyzing, and disseminating energy information to promote sound policymaking, efficient markets, and public understanding of energy and its interaction with the economy and the environment."

- Here's information about the rulemaking process in the DOE.
- And here's the decision by the DOE to authorize the Freeport Terminal. They concluded that arguments that the LNG permit did not violate the public interest.

The story mentions the Senate Committee which oversees the Energy Department and offers this:

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said that the Energy Department “will be making export decisions on a case-by-case basis” in a way that is “consistent with my belief that a measured approach on exports will provide the greatest advantage for the U.S economy.” Wyden said the department should “assess the market impacts of each export decision after it is announced, to ensure American consumers are not harmed by large-scale exports.”

“This decision is a victory for those who believe free trade is good for the American economy,” said the committee’s ranking Republican member, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska).

Is the level of violent crime related to the level of lead in the environment?

There's evidence that a relationship exists between exposure to high levels of lead - it used to commonly be in paint and gas - and propensity to commit violent crime. The data correlate strongly.  

The lines are shifted a bit so they seem to overlap more than they normally would. The reasoning is likely that someone who was exposed to lead as a child would be more likely to commit violent crimes as an adult.

The question now is whether the relationship is spurious, and there is a different factor that drives the change - perhaps something that drives both independently. But researchers have isolated a molecule in lead that reduces IQ. Does that also increase the likelihood that someone will become a violent criminal? If so, that's your link.

Over the past few decades, laws have been passed limiting the amount of lead in the environment. Could these be taking effect? The prison population has been reduced recently, and there has a been a long term trend downward in the percent of people going to prison. A commentator calls this one of the major unreported public policy stories of the year.





















Many factors are associated with this shift, but there's a definite shift in the tendency of younger males - the one's likely to commit violent crimes - to be sentenced to prison. Something seems to have shifted about 35 years ago - which was about the time leaded gasoline and lead paint were phased out.