In North Dakota, Wasted Natural Gas Flickers Against the Sky – NYTimes.com
September 27, 2011
In North Dakota, Wasted Natural Gas Flickers Against the Sky – NYTimes.com.
Howarth, Ingraffea Shale Gas Study on Global Warming Discredited by U.S. Department of Energy | Marcellus Drilling News
May 31, 2011
Howarth, Ingraffea Shale Gas Study on Global Warming Discredited by U.S. Department of Energy | Marcellus Drilling News.
Comment from Howarth:
We are working on a more detailed response, but in the meanwhile, I have
sent the following message out to some folks. Feel free to share,
Bob
“We are working hard to try to understand what the DOE/NETL analysis is based upon. This is not easy, as their data are not well documented in the PowerPoint from their talk. Apparently, NETL is working towards publication of a technical report, which one would hope would have far better documentation. But that is not yet available to us. To date, the PowerPoint available to us and to the public has not seen any rigorous, independent peer review.
We have ascertained that the NETL analysis has an estimate for methane emissions from coal that is similar to ours. Therefore, the reasons for the differences between their estimates and ours lie elsewhere. At this point, we believe there are 4 major differences:
1) we believe they have underestimated the fugitive emissions of methane. They apparently assume no emissions from storage and from distribution systems, and their estimate for >transmission losses are far lower than the estimates we developed for losses from transmission, storage, and distribution. Their estimates are also far lower than those from the US EPA, which we also feel are too low (as is discussed in our paper).
2) they have a very high, optimistic estimate for the total amount of gas produced over the life of a well. This has the effect of giving a low estimate for percentage losses from venting and leaks, particularly during the initial well completion period. Only time will tell what the actual production of these wells will be, as the technology is too new to know. However, we used the best available information on estimates of life-time production, thoroughly documented in our paper. The NETL estimates are far higher.
3) they used a global warming potential for methane of 25, based on a 100-year time integral and the old data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. We used values of 33 for a 100-year time integral and 105 for a 20-year time integral, based on more recent science (Shindell et al. 2009). Their use of the older science results in significantly down-playing the importance of methane venting and leakage on the climate system.
4) they focused solely on generation of electricity. We included generation of electricity in our study, and the analysis by David Hughes for the Post Carbon Institute took that even further. HOWEVER, only 30% of the natural gas in the US is used for electricity. The other 70% is used in home and commercial heating and for industrial processes. To focus on just electricity provides the most optimistic view of natural gas, as that is the only use where natural gas has an efficiency advantage over other fossil fuels.
This focus on electricity generation by the NETL group is curious, as in their own talk, they emphasized that it was not likely that natural gas from shales would replace coal for electricity generation over coming decades. Rather, they predict a DECREASE in the amount of natural gas used to generate electricity in the US. The development of shale gas is expected largely to replace conventional gas in its current uses, and they predict some increase in the use of gas for industrial purposes. Both the replacement of conventional gas by shale gas and the increased use of gas for industrial purposes will significantly increase the overall methane emissions from the US, and the overall greenhouse gas footprint of our nation. The NETL study chose to ignore these aspects.”
_____________________________________
Robert W. Howarth, Ph.D.
David R. Atkinson Professor of Ecology and
Environmental Biology, Cornell University
Telephone: 1-607-255-6175
E.mail: howarth@cornell.edu
New Report: The Truth About Natural Gas Supply, Costs & Environmental Impact May, 2011
May 12, 2011
New Report: The Truth About Natural Gas Supply, Costs & Environmental Impact –
For Release 12 May 2011Tod BrilliantPOST CARBON INSTITUTEtod@postcarbon.org707-823-8700 x105
New Report: The Truth About Natural Gas Supply, Costs & Environmental Impact
San Francisco, CA (May 12) A detailed new energy report argues that the natural gas industry has propagated dangerously false claims about natural gas production supply, cost and environmental impact. The report, “Will Natural Gas Fuel America in the 21st Century” is authored by leading geoscientist and Post Carbon Institute Fellow J. David Hughes.
The most significant of the natural gas industry’s claims – one that has been bought hook, line and sinker by everyone from the Energy Information Agency (EIA) and the Obama Administration, to leading environmental groups – is that the United States has a 100-year supply of cheap natural gas. The report shows this to be a pipe dream. Natural gas would require higher costs and unprecedented drilling efforts to meet even baseline supply projections. In fact, the U.S. faces a decline in domestic gas supplies in the very near future unless drilling rates quickly increase.
Also debunked is the perception that shale gas is better for the climate than coal. Building on other recent analysis, the report shows that shale gas is worse than coal over a 20-30 year timeframe, even after efforts to mitigate fugitive methane emissions. This should have major implications for those who have touted natural gas as a near-term bridge to a clean energy future.
Download the report at: http://bit.ly/pcinatgas
Report author David Hughes will present his findings and participate in a Q&A session next week.
| LINK: | http://bit.ly/jZfykT |
| TELECONFERENCE ONLY: | Toll-free number (US/Canada): 1-866-469-3239 Access Code: 492 172 835 For international toll free access: http://bit.ly/jgcUWx |
Post Carbon Institute’s report concludes that we face serious, and heretofore unacknowledged, production constraints with shale gas that mean the following three things are very unlikely to happen:
- Meeting the Energy Information Agency’s projections for natural gas to 2035.
- Replacing significant amounts of coal-fired electricity with natural gas (not included in EIA projections).
- Transitioning significant % of the vehicle fleet to burn natural gas (also not included in EIA projections).
All of three of these would require much higher levels of drilling and higher prices than projected by the EIA. At least 35,000 new wells will need to be drilled each and every year to meet EIA projections. More still to provide more natural gas-fired electricity and far more than this number to transition the vehicle fleet.
Bottom line, we will be living with less domestic natural gas in the future, not more, unless we are prepared to pay higher prices and tolerate a major scale up of climate and other environmental impacts. This is a major challenge to the nearly ubiquitous assumption that we will have abundant, cheap, and “clean” natural gas to power our future.
ABOUT J. DAVID HUGHES
J. David Hughes is a geoscientist who has studied the energy resources of Canada for nearly four decades, including 32 years with the Geological Survey of Canada as a scientist and research manager. He developed the National Coal Inventory to determine the availability and environmental constraints associated with Canada’s coal resources. As Team Leader for Unconventional Gas on the Canadian Gas Potential Committee, he coordinated the recent publication of a comprehensive assessment of Canada’s unconventional natural gas potential. He is a board member of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas – Canada and is a Fellow of the Post Carbon Institute. He is currently president of a consultancy dedicated to research on energy and sustainability issues.
ABOUT POST CARBON INSTITUTE
Post Carbon Institute provides individuals, communities, businesses, and governments with the resources needed to understand and respond to the interrelated economic, energy, and environmental crises that define the 21st century. PCI envisions a world of resilient communities and re-localized economies that thrive within ecological bounds.
In addition to Senior Fellow Richard Heinberg, Post Carbon Institute Fellows include Bill McKibben, Sandra Postel, Wes Jackson, David Orr and 24 others.
POST CARBON INSTITUTE
Tel: +1.707.823.8700 • Fax: +1.866.797.5820
http://www.postcarbon.org • media@postcarbon.org
Methane Contamination of Drinking Water Accompanying Gas-Well Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing NAS article
May 9, 2011
Methane Contamination of Drinking Water Accompanying Gas-Well Drilling and Hydraulic Fracturing -National Academy of Science Publication, May 2011 text
Methane contamination of drinking water accompanying gas-well drilling and hydraulic fracturing. abstract
Scientific Study Links Flammable Drinking Water to Fracking – ProPublica.Article May 2011
Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations
April 15, 2011
Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations: A letter
SpringerLink – Climatic Change, Online First™.
Here’s the direct link TO THE SITE
LINK TO PDF OF STUDY
LINK TO SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
GHG Howarth update on footprint of gas vs coal — Jan 2011
February 6, 2011
GHG update for web — Jan 2011 (2).pdf (application/pdf Object).
Assessment of the Greenhouse Gas Footprint of Natural Gas from Shale Formations
Obtained by High-Volume, Slick-Water Hydraulic Fracturing
Robert W. Howarth
David R. Atkinson Professor of Ecology & Environmental Biology, Cornell University
(Revised January 26, 2011)
Natural gas is widely advertised and promoted as a clean burning fuel that produces less greenhouse gas
emissions than coal when burned. While it is true that less carbon dioxide is emitted from burning natural
gas than from burning coal per unit of energy generated, the combustion emissions are only part of story
and the comparison is quite misleading. With funding from the Park Foundation, my colleagues Renee
Santoro, Tony Ingraffea, and I have
assessed the likely footprint from
natural gas in comparison to coal.
We submitted a draft of our work
to a peer-reviewed journal in
November, and now have a revised
manuscript under consideration by
the journal. The revision is
improved with input from
reviewers and also uses new
information from a November 2010
report from the EPA. The EPA
report is the first significant update
by the agency on natural gas
emission factors since 1996, and
concludes that emissions –
particularly for shale gas – are
larger than previously believed.
Our research further supports this
conclusion.
GDACC 
