So much for those “Bridge Fuel to Future” claims that rationalized the ongoing high-tech transfusion of proprietary Toxic formulas, for the ground water that nobody needs. All for sake of the EZ-profits that heralded “cleaner than coal” shale gas would bring.
So we were told then, when the “all of the above” energy strategy became the policy of the land.
More recently scientists are telling us that “Bridge to Future” is more like an “Expressway to the Past”, given the little-monitored, little-measured, little-captured Methane that escapes routinely in the normal course of shattering the Earth, for the sake of ‘gold rush’ profits.
Study: Methane leaks make fracked gas 'dirtier' than coal, oil
A new Cornell University study suggests that natural gas produced using the hydraulic fracturing process contributes the same or larger amounts of greenhouse gas emissions than coal or oil.
by Kevin Zwick, wayneindependent.com — Apr 11, 2011
A new Cornell University study suggests that natural gas produced using the hydraulic fracturing process contributes the same or larger amounts of greenhouse gas emissions than coal or oil.
The new study says "fugitive methane" — vented gas that escapes from flow-back and leakage — is a major contributor to the greenhouse gas footprint of shale gas. [...]
“The take-home message of our study is that if you do an integration of 20 years following the development of the gas, shale gas is worse than conventional gas and is, in fact, worse than coal and worse than oil,” Howarth stated in a press release. “We are not advocating for more coal or oil, but rather to move to a truly green, renewable future as quickly as possible. We need to look at the true environmental consequences of shale gas.”
The warming impact of methane is 105 times more (pound for pound) than carbon dioxide, Howarth says, adding that even small leaks make a big difference.
The report shows that roughly 3.6 to 7.9 percent of methane from shale-gas production escapes to the atmosphere in venting and leaks over the life-time of a well, causing emissions that are 30 percent more than and perhaps more than twice as great as those from conventional gas.
Here’s a few conclusions from that Cornell University study:
8 Conclusions and implications
---
The GHG footprint of shale gas is significantly larger than that from conventional gas, due to methane emissions with flow-back fluids and from drill out of wells during well completion. Routine production and downstream methane emissions are also large, but are the same for conventional and shale gas. Our estimates for these routine and downstream methane emission sources are within the range of those reported by most other peer-reviewed publications inventories (Hayhoe et al. 2002; Lelieveld et al. 2005). Despite this broad agreement, the uncertainty in the magnitude of fugitive emissions is large. Given the importance of methane in global warming, these emissions deserve far greater study than has occurred in the past. We urge both more direct measurements and refined accounting to better quantify lost and unaccounted for gas.
---
The large GHG footprint of shale gas undercuts the logic of its use as a bridging fuel over coming decades, if the goal is to reduce global warming. We do not intend that our study be used to justify the continued use of either oil or coal, but rather to demonstrate that substituting shale gas for these other fossil fuels may not have the desired effect of mitigating climate warming.
ScientificAmerican echoes these Fugitive Shale Gas concerns:
"Fugitive methane" released during shale gas drilling could accelerate climate change
by Mark Fischetti , scientificamerican.com — January 20, 2012
[...]
When water with its chemical load is forced down a well to break the shale, it flows back up and is stored in large ponds or tanks. But volumes of methane also flow back up the well at the same time and are released into the atmosphere before they can be captured for use. This giant belch of "fugitive methane" can be seen in infrared videos taken at well sites.
[...]
Currently, pipeline leaks are the main culprit, but fracking is a quickly growing contributor. Ingraffea pointed out that although 25,000 high-volume shale-gas wells are already operating in the U.S., hundreds of thousands are scheduled to go into operation within 20 years, and millions will be operating worldwide, significantly expanding emissions and keeping atmospheric methane levels high despite the 12-year dissipation time.
Howarth said he is particularly concerned about fracking emissions because recent data indicates that the planet is entering a period of rapid climate change. He noted that the average global temperature compared with the early 1900s is now expected to increase by 1.5 degrees Celsius within the next 15 to 35 years, which he called "a tipping point" toward aggressive climate change. More and more fracking would speed the world to that transition or undermine efforts to reduce emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases. The notion, Ingraffea said, that shale gas is a desirable "bridge fuel" from oil to widespread renewable energy supplies several decades from now "makes no sense" in terms of climate change.
[...]
And the Industry response: Out of sight, out of mind … What Fugitive Shale Gas problem? Come out to the drilling rig — and show us. OK …
This video was taken at Marathon’s Sugarhorn Central Facility in Karnes City by TCEQ on August 15, 2012 and September 5, 2012 in response to a landowner complaint.
Marathon failed to submit a reportable emissions report for these two events until late December. The emissions report for the 12-hour August 15th event noted a release of 42.06 pounds of benzene among many other toxic chemicals. The report for the 11-hour September 5th event noted 26.63 pounds of benzene along with many other toxic chemicals. An analysis of the TCEQ’s investigation and Marathon’s report was done by Wilma Subra and can be found HERE.
On Monday, March 4th and Tuesday, March 5th, IR video taken by ShaleTest shows the emissions continue at the same level at this facility.
And if you are among the camps that discount the effects of Climate Change, rationalizing that those are really someone else’s problem further on down that “future bridge” road — then consider the the simple real world impacts that “fugitive toxics” can have on the local neighborhoods, NOW.
---
Roger M. Richards CineReel-Dear President Obama film excerpts from Roger M. Richards on Vimeo.
---
Think of the children … exposed to these “unseen threats” on a “routine basis” … for that sake of what exactly? … a little examined policy of “All of the Above”?
And so many people thought the poisoning of Flint was/is bad — how is this kind of poisoning worthy of only shrugs, simply because it is a bit harder to measure and see.
The eyes and lungs and immune systems of locals — are the ‘canaries’ that no one is listening to, even now.