If you're following the controversy surrounding natural gas drilling and its hydrofracturing (fracking) technique, you'll want to read about a new study that's guaranteed to heighten that debate while also firing up the quarrel between gas and coal.
Subscribers to our daily EnviroPolitics newsletter learned yesterday about a Cornell University study which concluded that so much methane is escaping from gas wells and distribution lines that the fuel's accepted environmental benefit over coal is now questionable.
Poking holes into natural gas's credentials as environmentally preferable to coal is bad news for the
gas industry but should be warmly embraced by coal producers who have seen their market share steadily erode as more and more utilities switch over their power plants to burn natural gas.
It's not surprising that the gas industry reacted immediately with a detailed web rebuttal.
And this is just the start. Can you imagine the number of fervent calls going out from both sides today to PR and lobbying firms?
Expect an avalanche of white papers, special web sites and talking points to follow.
What do you think? Are you surprised by the Cornell study? Think it's biased?
How do you see it shaping the ongoing national energy debate or shale drilling in PA?
Related stories:
Studies Say Natural Gas Has Its Own Environmental Problems
Methane Losses Stir Debate on Natural Gas
More Reasons to Question Whether Gas is Cleaner than Coal
Shale gas 'worse than coal' for climate
Five Things to Know about the Cornell Shale Study
Our most recent blog posts:
Environmental activist Jane Nogaki retires from NJEF
NJDEP stepping up enforcement of wells and pumps
NY to modify Catskill water releases to Delaware River
PA Senator wants a moratorium on natural gas-drilling
Hard to cry poor mouth when pulling down $800,000
Corbett's enviro critics erupt over PADEP shale memo
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribers to our daily EnviroPolitics newsletter learned yesterday about a Cornell University study which concluded that so much methane is escaping from gas wells and distribution lines that the fuel's accepted environmental benefit over coal is now questionable.
Poking holes into natural gas's credentials as environmentally preferable to coal is bad news for the
gas industry but should be warmly embraced by coal producers who have seen their market share steadily erode as more and more utilities switch over their power plants to burn natural gas.
It's not surprising that the gas industry reacted immediately with a detailed web rebuttal.
And this is just the start. Can you imagine the number of fervent calls going out from both sides today to PR and lobbying firms?
Expect an avalanche of white papers, special web sites and talking points to follow.
What do you think? Are you surprised by the Cornell study? Think it's biased?
How do you see it shaping the ongoing national energy debate or shale drilling in PA?
Share your views in the comment box below. If one isn't visible, click the 'comments' line.
Related stories:
Studies Say Natural Gas Has Its Own Environmental Problems
Methane Losses Stir Debate on Natural Gas
More Reasons to Question Whether Gas is Cleaner than Coal
Shale gas 'worse than coal' for climate
Five Things to Know about the Cornell Shale Study
Our most recent blog posts:
Environmental activist Jane Nogaki retires from NJEF
NJDEP stepping up enforcement of wells and pumps
NY to modify Catskill water releases to Delaware River
PA Senator wants a moratorium on natural gas-drilling
Hard to cry poor mouth when pulling down $800,000
Corbett's enviro critics erupt over PADEP shale memo
Like this post? You'll love our daily newsletter, EnviroPolitics
No obligation. Cancel anytime with a single click

This debate is worthy of further discussion. One item of concern I have that is not mentioned is from the following source: (edited for length)
ReplyDeleteU.S. Geological Survey
Marine and Coastal Geology Program
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gas (Methane) Hydrates -- A New Frontier
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methane trapped in marine sediments as a hydrate represents such an immense carbon reservoir that it must be considered a dominant factor in estimating unconventional energy resources; the role of methane as a 'greenhouse' gas also must be carefully assessed.
Dr. William Dillon,
U.S. Geological Survey
Hydrates store immense amounts of methane, with major implications for energy resources and climate, but the natural controls on hydrates and their impacts on the environment are very poorly understood.
Gas hydrates occur abundantly in nature, both in Arctic regions and in marine sediments. Gas hydrate is a crystalline solid consisting of gas molecules, usually methane, each surrounded by a cage of water molecules. It looks very much like water ice. Methane hydrate is stable in ocean floor sediments at water depths greater than 300 meters, and where it occurs, it is known to cement loose sediments in a surface layer several hundred meters thick.
The worldwide amounts of carbon bound in gas hydrates is conservatively estimated to total twice the amount of carbon to be found in all known fossil fuels on Earth.
Extraction of methane from hydrates could provide an enormous energy and petroleum feedstock resource. Additionally, conventional gas resources appear to be trapped beneath methane hydrate layers in ocean sediments.
Recent mapping conducted by the USGS off North Carolina and South Carolina shows large accumulations of methane hydrates.
A pair of relatively small areas, each about the size of the State of Rhode Island, shows intense concentrations of gas hydrates. USGS scientists estimate that these areas contain more than 1,300 trillion cubic feet of methane gas, an amount representing more than 70 times the 1989 gas consumption of the United States. The immense volumes of gas and the richness of the deposits may make methane hydrates a strong candidate for development as an energy resource.
Because the gas is held in a crystal structure, gas molecules are more densely packed than in conventional or other unconventional gas traps. Gas-hydrate-cemented strata also act as seals for trapped free gas. These traps provide potential resources, but they can also represent hazards to drilling, and therefore must be well understood. Production of gas from hydrate-sealed traps may be an easy way to extract hydrate gas because the reduction of pressure caused by production can initiate a breakdown of hydrates and a recharging of the trap with gas.
Methane, a "greenhouse" gas, is 10 times more effective than carbon dioxide in causing climate warming.
Methane bound in hydrates amounts to approximately 3,000 times the volume of methane in the atmosphere. There is insufficient information to judge what geological processes might most affect the stability of hydrates in sediments and the possible release of methane into the atmosphere. Methane released as a result of landslides caused by a sea-level fall would warm the Earth, as would methane released from gas hydrates in Arctic sediments as they become warmed during a sea-level rise. This global warming might counteract cooling trends and thereby stabilize climatic fluctuation, or it could exacerbate climatic warming and thereby destabilize the climate.
For more information please contact: Dr. William Dillon, USGS, Woods Hole, MA 02543 (508) 457-2224 or Dr. Keith Kvenvolden, USGS, Menlo Park, CA 94025 (415) 354-3213
Not surprised about the leaking of natural gas out of the system and into the atmosphere. As long as this natural resource is free to the drilling companies and appears to be plentiful, the losses aren't costing them. Methane and Natural gas are several times worse as greenhouse gases than CO2.
ReplyDeleteThe use of renewables for generating power is to be congratulated. The latest coal publications and coal prices is that emerging countries are predicting to use large amounts of thermal coal for power generation and coal mining for steel production.
ReplyDeleteCherry of www.coalportal.com