Jump to content

Create a Free Account or Sign In to connect and share in green living and alternative energy forum discussions.

Natural Gas Production Destroys the Climate, Doesn’t Save It


 
8 replies to this topic

#1 E3 wise

E3 wise

    Shifted

  • Premium Shifter
  • 1,027 posts 286 rep

Posted 01 December 2013 - 10:19 AM

This article in Cleantechnia highlights the many reasons of why the natural gas fracking boom is a no win for the environment over coal.  Look I am part of the Beyond Coal movement.  Coal is very bad but Natural Gas is no savior.  Two of the areas I found very important are facts which we have been highlighting for a long time but the main stream media and public are not focusing on- so here goes.
  • The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported recently that methane is a far more potent a greenhouse gas than we had previously realized, some 34 times stronger a heat-trapping gas than CO2 over a 100-year time scale — and 86 times more potent over a 20-year time frame.

  • Finally, natural gas makes little sense as a short-term sustainability play, since we know that each fracked well consumes staggering amounts of water, much of which is rendered permanently unfit for human use and reinjected into the ground where it can taint even more ground water in the coming decades. That’s particularly worrisome considering that fossil fuels destroy the climate and accelerate drought and water shortages.
So I encourage everyone to read the article about the So called Natural Gas Bridge.
http://cleantechnica...te-doesnt-save/

#2 E3 wise

E3 wise

    Shifted

  • Premium Shifter
  • 1,027 posts 286 rep

Posted 01 December 2013 - 10:31 AM

In the past people have tried to argue against the greenhouse effects of natural gas or that the water used was lost for future use.  I hope they will refer to the articles sources because these two facts must be focused on.. Methane is worse than CO2 as a green house gas, the numbers we had been presented at our last climate summit in Washington in 2012 was 23 times more, that number has now grown with further study.  Likewise the water issue is still central to our belief that fracking is trading our planets most threatened natural resource, fresh water, for another unclean energy source that is only making things worse in the long run.    The answer has been and will always continue to be more alternative energy, not more fossil fuels.

#3 Shortpoet-GTD

Shortpoet-GTD

    Shifted

  • Validating
  • 8,025 posts 758 rep

Posted 02 December 2013 - 04:28 AM

The thing talked about on many green and news sites is the same; lack of substantiated measurements of
methane leakage.
Through lack of expertise, lack of equipment, not caring about the leaks or trying to hide the results,
the leakage continues.

With the public, governments (city, state, federal) not knowing the amount of leakage; they cannot be alarmed
enough to call for action.

If a tanker truck lost 50% of it's load from the refinery to the service station for delivery, would people
be alarmed? You bet. But if no one knew it.....?
http://www.climatece...-benefits-16020

Pdf article-
http://assets.climat...imateChange.pdf

#4 E3 wise

E3 wise

    Shifted

  • Premium Shifter
  • 1,027 posts 286 rep

Posted 03 December 2013 - 08:18 PM

New report from EPA estimates Methane blooms in Artic to be 20 times those seen 5 years ago.  This natural release of methane is blamed on climate change.

#5 Dustoffer

Dustoffer

    Activist

  • Pro Shifter
  • 471 posts 91 rep

Posted 24 April 2014 - 07:52 AM

3 Fracking Facts That Gov. Perry Forgot to Mention

New Yorkers Against Fracking | April 22, 2014 4:07 pm | Comments


"In response to Texas Gov. Rick Perry ®’s wild claims about fracking on Fred Dicker’s Talk 1300 Radio program this morning, John Armstrong of Frack Action, on behalf of New Yorkers Against Fracking, wanted to remind Gov. Perry about some of the facts he forgot. Posted ImageFracking wells south of the West Texas town of Odessa. Photo credit: Dennis Dimick / Flickr.
“Governor Perry suffered another colossal ‘oops’ failure today, forgetting the harms fracking is causing Texans each day under his administration,” said Armstrong. “Although he’s in New York for ‘job recruitment,’ we expect he’s going to find that contaminated water, toxic air and a range of negative health impacts are not selling points. While he enjoys clean, frack-free New York water and air, we took the liberty of writing down three facts for Governor Perry.”
1. Fracking contaminates water: A University of Texas study linked fracking to drinking water contamination with arsenic. The head of Texas A&M University’s Petroleum Engineering Department recently noted inherent problems with fracking. That’s in line with 2013 and 2011 studies from Duke University, high well casing failure rates, and widespread water contamination.
2. Fracking pollutes the air: An eight-month investigation recently revealed that fracking is releasing a “toxic soup of chemicals” into the air, linked to hundreds of reports of sickness, and that Gov. Perry’s administration is failing to monitor or address the situation. That’s even though the Colorado School of Public Health has identified air pollutants by fracking sites at sufficient levels to raise risks for cancer, neurological deficits and respiratory problems, American Lung Association data show alarming levels of air pollution near fracking, and a recent study found high levels of benzene and volatile organic compounds at fracking sites in rural Utah.
3. Fracking causes earthquakes: The Ohio Department of Natural Resources linked fracking to earthquakes this month, just as earthquakes have been tied to fracking in the United Kingdom, Canada, Mexico and elsewhere in the U.S. And Texas has its own history of earthquakes linked to fracking wastewater deep injection wells."
http://ecowatch.com/...got-to-mention/
""Purdue and Cornell Researchers Find Up to 1,000 Times More Methane Emissions Than Estimated in Drilling Phase
Brandon Baker | April 15, 2014 11:23 am | Comments
Tweet

Because natural gas has less carbon than dirty coal, gas producers and even the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have applauded it as a cleaner alternative. Hopefully, a joint study from researchers at two universities will change that.

Purdue and Cornell universities on Monday released a study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America with data on higher-than-expected methane levels found above shale gas wells.

The researchers used a “top-down” approach, flying over seven well pads of the Marcellus shale formation in southwestern Pennsylvania. They accounted for less than 1 percent of the wells in Southwestern Pennsylvania and were only in the drilling stage, which usually isn’t when the emissions take place."
http://ecowatch.com/...hane-emissions/
Then this happy HS put out by the petro industry;
"
Appalling Earth Day Video Actually Thanks Fracking For Reducing Carbon Emissions

Brandon Baker | April 22, 2014 12:16 pm | Comments

It would have been hard to miss the reports of earthquakes, explosions, lack of clean air, nosebleeds and more attributed to fracking.
These type of stories have been all over every form of media imaginable in recent years.
But according to Energy In Depth (EID), a campaign launched by the Independent Petroleum Association of America, those stories have apparently been drowning out the real story—that fracking is somehow responsible for the drop in carbon dioxide emissions.
Yes, this group actually released a video on Earth Day thanking shale gas and fracking for decreasing emissions. You have to see it—and its out-of-context remarks and data—to believe it:"
http://ecowatch.com/...video-fracking/

#6 Shortpoet-GTD

Shortpoet-GTD

    Shifted

  • Validating
  • 8,025 posts 758 rep

Posted 24 April 2014 - 02:09 PM

He didn't forget; he's in their pockets and doesn't want to stop the $$ flow.
Not to mention, he's a (supposedly) :wink: stone idiot and a liar.

#7 Dustoffer

Dustoffer

    Activist

  • Pro Shifter
  • 471 posts 91 rep

Posted 25 April 2014 - 07:49 AM

Please do not insult stones!

#8 Shortpoet-GTD

Shortpoet-GTD

    Shifted

  • Validating
  • 8,025 posts 758 rep

Posted 25 April 2014 - 02:38 PM

View PostDustoffer, on 25 April 2014 - 07:49 AM, said:

Please do not insult stones!
:laugh: My bad.

#9 Dustoffer

Dustoffer

    Activist

  • Pro Shifter
  • 471 posts 91 rep

Posted 08 June 2014 - 10:37 AM

http://ecowatch.com/...orado-fracking/
Why Natural Gas is a Bridge to Nowhere

Brandon Baker | May 31, 2014 9:00 am | Comments

"Though the president and federal Environmental Protection Agency are on the brink of issuing new rules for existing coal-fired power plants, a Cornell University professor says natural gas deserves a bit of attention, too.
Robert Howarth has maintained for three years that natural gas was capable of emitting more greenhouse gases than coal. Now, the professor of ecology and evolutionary biology has new research to back it up.
Published in the Energy Science & Engineering journal this month, “A bridge to nowhere: methane emissions and the greenhouse gas footprint of natural gas” also argues that natural gas emits more greenhouse gases than oil and other fuels in both residential and commercial usage. The main reason? Methane comprises about 75 percent of natural gas."
http://ecowatch.com/...dge-to-nowhere/
This is more vindication for the first post.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users