Tag Archive | "hydraulic fracking"

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What is the Real Cost of Natural Gas?

Posted on 22 April 2013 by Jerry

The future effects of energy options, especially natural gas, depend entirely on our assumptions.  Simple computation of cost and break-even appear to show natural gas as a better choice than burning coal.  Improvements in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracking of underground shale releasing abundant natural gas make this plausible. However, a recent study published in the April 9, 2013 edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) casts doubt on this conclusion.

The study looked at the cost effectiveness and ecological attractiveness of natural-gas electricity and natural gas powered vehicles.  The controversial conclusion reached by researchers from Princeton University, Duke University, the Rochester Institute of Technology, and the Environmental Defense Fund was that any computation hinged on the assumption used of leakage levels of methane from natural gas infrastructure.  They held that there was too much conflict in recent reports to decide one way or another.

Reports from research conducted in Colorado and Utah identified very high natural gas leakage rates ranging from 4% to 9%. This is considerably above and discredits the official rate of 2.4% used by the Environmental Protection Agency as it regulates the natural gas industry (see our January 31, 2013 post “Coal to Overtake Oil, Natural Gas is a Questionable Substitute”).  Both of these leakage rates make natural gas a worse energy alternative than coal.

In addition, there are studies that have been undertaken in Australia that support these statistics with methane release rates of up to 6.89 parts per million.  Isaac Santos at Southern Cross University is quoted as saying, “If it is leaking from the infrastructure that’s an easy fix.  If it is seeping from the soil that’s much harder to fix.”  This refers to the risk that hydraulic fracking so fragments the underlying sediments that gas seeps out of the soil in addition to at the wellhead.  Concern about this possibility is growing worldwide.

The world is experiencing the effects of a major natural gas disaster that has played out on a gas platform off the coast of Scotland.  The French company, Total SA, built the natural gas platform.  It has been spilling around 7 million cubic feet of natural gas everyday since its rupture in March of 2012.   Of course this spillage has not been widely reported as sensational since it is just the release of natural gas into the atmosphere and does not involve a visible oil spill with dead shore birds.  It is however, the global warming equivalent of putting another 300,000 cars on the road daily.  It also contributes to our worsening worldwide climate change.

Of course once again, the oil and gas industry is rushing forward to capitalize on our, industry created, present love affair with natural gas.  In fact, John Kerry our Secretary of State is quoted, while a Senator, as boasting, “We are the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.”  Our “ready, fire, aim” attitude, where there is no time for adequate study and there may be an industry/government agreement against it, may in fact be leading us to accelerate the negative impact of our existence on climate change.

Because issues about the value or harm of individual energy options are a very complex topic, it may require additional background.  I have included links below which describe the terms used with respect to natural gas and which answer a number of questions about the studies reported.

Use the following links to obtain more information:

http://www.pnas.org/content/109/17/6435.full?sid=9be41aa2-3b47-4450-8711-b2ba7641e01f

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,2111562,00.html

http://e360.yale.edu/digest/methane_leak_data_highlights_concerns_about_natural_gas_drilling/3730/

http://iamaguardian.com/1093/coal-to-overtake-oil-natural-gas-is-a-questionable-substitute/

http://www.scu.edu.au/news/media.php?item_id=6041&action=show_item

http://newscientist.com/article/dn22521-methane-leaks-suggest-fracking-benefits-exaggerated.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/16/business/global/total-reveals-cause-of-north-sea-natural-gas-leak.html

http://www.edf.org/energy/faqs-pnas-paper-natural-gas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/hydraulic_fracturing

Comments Off on What is the Real Cost of Natural Gas?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Coal to Overtake Oil, Natural Gas is a Questionable Substitute

Posted on 31 January 2013 by Jerry

At the present rate of demand, the International Energy Agency (IEA) reports that coal will overtake oil as the top world energy source within a decade.  Driven by increasing use around the globe this does not bode well for efforts to slow or reduce climate change.  Increasing consumption in both China and India is projected to exceed that of the United States by 2017.  Without any significant breakthroughs in carbon capture and sequester (CCS), which would remove harmful chemicals from the output of coal plants, coal will continue to be very cheap and very dirty.

United States coal demand is declining because of the substitution of plentiful, less expensive natural gas.  New natural gas extraction techniques, such as hydraulic fracking which pulls gas out of shale deposits, coupled with increasing distribution around the world purportedly offer a cost effective, cleaner substitute for coal.  IEA executive director, Maria van der Hoeven has said that “The U.S. experience suggests that a more efficient gas market marked by flexible pricing and fueled by indigenous unconventional resources that are produced sustainably, can reduce coal use, CO2 emissions and consumer electricity bills, without harming energy security.”

Unfortunately (see 2-26-12 post, “Natural Gas My Speed Climate Change”) the natural gas bonanza for the U.S. may ultimately turn out to be part of the problem rather than solution.  In the earlier article we described results from a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and University of Colorado study of methane leaks conducted in a natural gas field near Denver.  Methane is the dominant component of natural gas.  That original study showed a total leakage of 4% of the total gas produced at that field.  This 4% is twice the level the government has assumed for these fields.  Two percent makes natural gas competitive with coal.  Four percent or higher makes coal the better choice. The four percent level of leakage makes natural gas dirtier and more harmful to the environment than coal.

Now the same scientists have reported new data from the original Colorado gas field which supports earlier findings.  In addition, they have released preliminary results of a new, more sophisticated, study of leakage at a natural gas field in Utah which showed an even higher level of leakage.  These measurements show a 9% leakage of total production.  These two high levels of natural gas leakage if duplicated in other studies across the country would suggest we halt production until the leakage problem is corrected.

It also indicates we should not approve the Keystone XL Pipeline which will open up many more areas of Canada to natural gas production.  Otherwise natural gas is a much greater contributor to climate change than we ever imagined, greater than coal.  It will be very difficult however, to slow the land rush for natural gas since the profit motive is often the dominant and overriding motivator in the U.S. and Canada.

Use the following links to access additional information:

http://www.iea.org/newsroomandevents/pressreleases/2012/december/name,34441,en.html

http://www.nature.com/news/methane-leaks-erode-green-credentials-of-natural-gas-1.12123

http://iamaguardian.com/490/natural-gas-may-speed-climate-change/

Comments (0)

Advertise Here
Advertise Here
September 2017
S M T W T F S
« Feb    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930