Energy Facts of the Day

Wading through the hype and raucous debate from the energy companies as well  as the people adamantly opposed to any industrial energy venture has been quite a challenge.  It seems that through all this, one voice with credentials and perhaps a clearer vision has been the former Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner, John Hanger. At his site one can find articles Mr. Hanger writes almost daily on all topics related to energy.  These are his opinions that we think are enlightening about all aspects of the energy production industry.

Monday, January 30, 2012

 

CBS News Botches Dimock Story, Despite My Effort!

  CBS News botched its Saturday January 28th story on Dimock and hydraulic fracturing (http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7396742n&tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea). Most unfortunately the story got critical facts totally wrong; more than a couple million people saw it; and I was in it!

On Friday January 20th, CBS News asked to do an interview with me about Dimock. I traveled to the CBS Harrisburg affiliate and answered from 7:30pm to 8:15pm on camera via satellite numerous questions from a  CBS News producer in New York about Dimock.

We spoke  about what happened in Dimock and, just as importantly, what did not happen there. Simply put, I said that gas had migrated from poor drilling to 18 water wells, but no fluids from hydraulic fracturing had returned from depth.

I walked CBS News through the testing and investigation done to conclude that gas had migrated to 18 wells, but fracking fluids had not. I stressed that Duke University's testing of the same wells also had found no fracking fluids but high methane levels.

I noted that, since the driller (Cabot) had not done pre-drill water tests in 2008, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection's investigation of the water well contamination was  more difficult.  I explained the various tests and steps completed that supported a finding that gas had migrated but that frack fluids had not returned from depth to contaminate water wells. I told CBS about the recent Lenox Township case involving Cabot where a pre-drilling water test had been done. In that case, there was very low methane levels prior to drilling and very high levels after drilling.

I hit hard that the problem was gas migrating and not frack fluids returning from depth. After seeing the CBS story, I might as well as have spat in a hurricane.

The CBS story starts with the exploding water tap scene from Gasland and flatly says that the Dimock wells were contaminated by fracking fluids and that the EPA has concluded so.  It includes a diagram to show fracking and fluids entering the aquifer.

What about the 45 minute interview that I gave? CBS takes less than 5 seconds from it and has me saying only that "Poor drilling contaminated 18 wells." 

The piece contains nothing from me saying that the problem was gas migrating and not frack fluids. Nothing from me saying that the frack fluids had not returned from depth. Nothing from me saying that hydraulic fracuring had nothing to do with the problem. Nothing from me explaining the difference between the drilling and hydraulic fracturing phases of well development. Nothing from anyone that contradicted the narrative of the story that fracking had caused contamination with chemicals and fluids of the water wells.

Instead 5 seconds of my interview are edited brutally and misleadingly to build the narrative that fracking fluids contaminated water in Dimock.  As I left the affiliate's station, the cameraman for the interview asked, how I thought the interview had gone?  I replied that editing would provide the answer. 

While Pennsylvania's reporters like Don Gililland, Andrew Maykuth, Laura Legere, and Don Hopey often write factually accurate stories, the CBS story is an example of the national reporting about natural gas that misinforms, misleads, and misguides the public

Thursday, January 5, 2012

 

PA Gas Wells Decline 23% But Production Skyrockets

Pennsylvania saw the number of gas wells producing drop from 57,000 in 2009 to 44,000 in 2010, according to EIA data. The sharp drop in gas wells did not bring an equivalent decline in gas production. Instead Pennsylvania produced much more gas from less wells.

Pennsylvania produced 572 billion cubic feet of gas during 2010, making it then the 8th biggest gas producing state. Pennsylvania production increased more than 250% since 2005, when it produced approximately 163 billion cubic feet. Production will have rose still further during 2011 and will likely exceed 1.5 trillion cubic feet in 2012. At that level, Pennsylvania will become a top 5 gas producing state.

The 2010 decline in the number of producing wells is explained by the shutting in of about 13,000 small, traditional gas wells that are not profitable in the low-price gas environment of 2010 and 2011. It is likely, therefore, that the total number of producing wells in Pennsylvania declined again in 2011.

The big jump in production, despite the 23% decline in the 2010 number of producing wells, results from the approximately 2,000 Marcellus shale wells that were drilled in Pennsylvania by the close of 2010. A small fraction of Pennsylvania's total wells were producing 70% of the state's total gas in 2010.

 

Natural Gas Imports Three Times Greater Than Exports

Just 5 years ago the conventional wisdom was that natural gas imports would increase substantially, because US gas production would decline and increasingly be unable to meet domestic demand. Yet another example of conventional wisdom proven unwise.

Five years later domestic production has instead increased, and US net imports of gas have dropped from 16% to 11% of gas consumed here. Most of the gas imported comes from Canada. A small amount of LNG is imported mainly from Trinidad.

The US has for many years exported comparatively small amounts of natural gas also to Canada and Mexico via pipelines. The US has no LNG export capability, though several facilities are being developed.

Exports were 728 billion cubic feet in 2005 and since then grew to 1.1 trillion cubic feet. By comparison US natural gas imports have declined from 4.3 trillion cubic feet to 3.7 trillion cubic feet. Consequently, imports of gas are more than three times greater than exports. All data is from the EIA.

 

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

New Record Highs Exceed Lows By 2.8 Times & Danger of Fantasy

The ratio of new record highs to record lows continues to get bigger, more extreme.  While the ratio of record highs to record lows was close to 1 to 1 during the 1970s, the number of new record highs has greatly outpaced the number of new record lows, as average temperatures have increased substantially over the last 30 years.

In 2011, there were 2.8 times as new many record highs as record lows in the USA, up from 2.3 times as many record highs as record lows in 2010, and up from 2.03 more record highs than lows for the decade of 2000 to 2009.

This pattern of increasing numbers of new record highs compared to new record lows is just a piece of the enormous evidence that the planet is warming and the pace of warming is accelerating.  Of course, some simply deny these facts or develop extensive conspiracy theories of a massive hoax.  Others assert that the rising temperatures are not a result of the rising concentrations of heat trapping gas in the atmosphere or that humans are not the cause of the rising concentrations of heat trapping gas in the atmosphere.  Yet, the fact of rising concentrations of heat trapping gas in the atmoshpere or that human activity, especially these days in China, causes concentrations to rise is not sanely disputed.

The flight from facts that are inconvenient and the dash to mad, dangerous fantasy goes well beyond global warming and is across the political spectrum:  shale gas is a ponzi scheme; gas is as dirty as coal; evolution is a fraud; grotesquely charged that September 11th was an inside job; President Obama is not a natural born US citizen.  Though mad and dangerous they are, many of these positions are advanced or coddled by leading figures or groups within our society.

No society can succeed unless it faces facts honestly and then discusses thoughtfull what to do. 

 

Key Pennsylvania Marcellus Well 2011 Facts

During 2011, Pennsylvania issued 3281 permits for Marcellus shale wells in 36 counties.

The top 5 counties in order were Bradford (735 permits); Tioga (372); Susquehanna (338); Lycoming (326); and Washington (247). These 5 counties accounted for 2018 of the total permits issued or 61%. One hundred or more permits were issued in 10 counties. Well permits are being issued in more than half of Pennsylvania's 67 counties, while currently 10 counties account for just less than two-thirds of all activity.

The drilling activity will continue for decades across Pennsylvania. For example Bradford county leads in permits issued and had essentially twice as many issued there as second place Tioga. Yet drilling in Bradford for Marcellus may continue for 12 years by some estimates. In Bradford and other counties drilling development began at 1906 well-sites during 2011.

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection issued 1090 violations at Marcellus gas well sites during 2011 or about 8% less than in 2010. This level of activity is found in other parts of America and explains why gas fell below $3 during the middle of winter.

 

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

The Messages Sent By $3 Winter Gas and $3 Plus Winter Oil

Gas and oil prices are sending strong, contrary messages to which attention should be paid.  Natural gas prices fall below $3 for a thousand cubic feet in the middle of the winter, but Brent oil remains at $109, with heating oil consumers paying more than $3 per gallon.  What does it mean?

Let's start with the sarcasm.

Shale gas is one of the great Ponzi Schemes of all time, is it not? I mean on December 30th natural gas hit $2.98, and the February Future price is $2.99. Then yesterday the French Oil Giant just became the latest sophisticated buyer in a long list to spend hundreds of millions of dollars buying into the Marcellus or Utica shales.  These low winter prices and continuing big investments must mean that the shale gas resource is not real, is inflated, right?

But don't expect the NYT ever to correct the message it sent by spreading far and wide the Ponzi scheme charge that fuels public misunderstanding.  Shale gas is as much a ponzi scheme as global warming is a hoax. Both charges should be ridiculed by serious people and news organizations, not coddled.

Low-priced gas will be a ferocious competitor for electricity generation market share during 2012, with gas gaining still more market share and coal losing it.  EIA projects a 4% decline in coal's share this year.

While gas is at bargain levels, oil is expensive.  On a rolling 12 month average basis, oil is close to its highest levels, with oil prices above $100 for a sustained period.  The threat of expensive oil priced in the global market to our economy and national security remains high no matter what happens with Iran in 2012.

The delinking of oil and natural gas price continues, with oil prices up about 10% and gas prices down about 30% in late December 2011 compared to late December 2010. Current oil prices pushed to $99 for West Texas Intermediate from $90 one year ago, but gas fell to around $3 from above $4 for a thousand cubic feet. The oil to natural gas price ratio that used to be 6 to 1 is now 33 to 1 or even higher.

US shale gas production and shale gas alone explains the delinking.

Shale gas now accounts for 34% of all US gas production and nothing demonstrates the size and reality of the shale gas revolution more strongly than below $3 natural gas. The price signal is one of great bounty.

Hign oil prices, however, are sending a message of strain, if not scarcity or danger. Oil supply remains challenged to meet the demand posed by 1 billion cars and booming India and China.

These strong price signals are a roadmap for a smart energy policy.  We will be watching in 2012 to see if policymakers grap the opportunity and avoid the peril ahead.

 

Friday, December 9, 2011

Statement On EPA Wyoming Fracking Investigation Report

The EPA issued yesterday its draft findings of its Pavilion, Wyoming Ground Water Investigation for Public Comment and Independent Scientific Review.  Its contents are disturbing and demand attention from all regulators and all those charged with managing drilling companies. The mess in Pavillion, Wyoming is a screeching, disturbing event for regulators and the gas industry.

My preliminary review of the 121 pages of draft findings is that EPA has done a careful, methodical investigation that has produced strong, probably compelling evidence that leaks from surface pits, gas well design and operation failures, and hydraulic fracturing at what appear to be depths less than 1,300 feet below the surface have caused chemical and methane pollution of groundwater in Pavillion, Wyoming.  For the EPA draft findings and accompanying press release, go to http: www.epa.gov/region8/superfund/wy/pavillion/index.html.

The press release states: "The draft report indicates that ground water in the aquifer contains compounds likely associated with gas production practices, including hydraulic fracturing." For example chloride levels 18 times the expected levels have been found in ground water and other measurements in the draft findings strongly support the preceding sentence.  Encana, a large Canadian headquartered gas business, is the only company identified as being engaged in "gas production practices" in the document.

The report itself says there are 169 production wells which extract gas in the area and that "at least 33 surface pits previously used for the storage/disposal of drilling wastes and produced flowback waters are present in the area" (page xi). Pages 17 to 27 of the findings provide strong evidence that failures in the pits have caused ground water contamination

The report goes on to say that water wells are as deep as 732 feet but: "With the exception of two production wells, surface casings of gas production wells do not extend below the maximum depth of domestic wells in the area of investigation" (page xi).

The EPA's description of the surface casing, cementing, and fracking at depths of less than 1300 feet add up to a set of outrageous practices, if the descriptions are correct, and they appear to be.  They would violate the Pennsylvania drilling rules or just about any set of rules.  Rules must be enforced and followed to do any good. This mess is a strong reminder of that cardinal rule of regulation and good management.

The EPA states that the circumstances in Pavillion appear unique to the area.  I would certainly hope so.

Pages 27 to 29 of the draft findings provide strong evidence of gas drilling causing gas migration and pollution of ground water.

Pages 29 to 32 have strong evidence that  poor casing and cementing as well as hydraulic fracturing  frequently at depths of less than 2,000 feet and at least once at 1222 feet caused ground water pollution. Leaving aside the issues of casing and cementing for a moment, Marcellus Shale fracking in Pennsylvania occurs at depths between 5,000 to 8,000 feet below the surface.

Here are the key conclusions at page 33: 

1. "Detection of high concentrations of benzene, xylenes, gasoline range organics, diesel range organics, and total purgeable hydrocarbons in ground water samples from shallow monitoring wells near pits indicates that pits are a source of shallow ground water contamination in the area of investigation."  This finding again highlights the risks associated with pits that store frackwater and the operational challenges of pits, a practice that is declining in Pennsylvania but not yet totally eliminated.

2. "Detection of contaminants in ground water from deep sources of contamination (production wells, hydraulic fracturing) was considerably more complex than detection of contaminants from pits necessitating a multiple lines of reasoning approach common to complex scientific investigations...While each individual data set or observation represents an important line of reasoning, taken as a whole, consistent data sets and observations provide compelling evidence to support an explanation of data.  Using this approach, the explanation best fitting the data for the deep monitoring wells is that constituents associated with hydraulic fracturing have been released into the Wind River drinking water aquifer at depths above the current production zone."

EPA has issued its draft findings for a 45 day public comment period.  The draft findings are not the final word.  Yet, this document should be read by every board member of every gas drilling company operating anywhere in the world, by all the top managers of those companies, and by every regulator charged with environmental protection.

The EPA has provided reasons for humility, a real commitment to strong rules and strong enforcement, and a genuine dedication to excellence in operations and a culture of safety by both companies and regulators.  The opposite may well have happened in Pavillion, Wyoming.

Thursday, December 8, 2011

PA Has 6 of 20 Biggest Toxic Polluters But Gas Dominates Environmental Fears

 

The Environmental Integrity Project is out with a must read report detailing pollution from power plants.  See the link below.  The data is compelling and leads me to these questions:

Why are so many in Pennsylvania and a lot of the environmental community focused largely on the environmental impacts of gas drilling, when Pennsylvania is home to 6 of the nation's 20 biggest power plant toxic polluters--all of them old, poorly controlled coal plants?  Which poses the most threat to our air and water? These top power plant toxic polluters emitting huge amounts of arsenic, lead, mercury? Or natural gas production that provides a fuel that emits zero mercury, lead?  These questions are not posed by the Environmental Integrity Project in its great new report on power plant pollution but should become burning inquiries, given the enormous data in the EIP report.

The good news in America's Top Power Plant Toxic Air Polluters is that nationally toxic metal emissions from electricity utilities are down from approximately 10% to 50% between 2007 and 2010.  See page 4 at www.environmentalintegrity.org/12_07_2011.php.  Electric power plants burning coal and oil, however, continue to emit much more toxic pollution than any other industrial source, approaching 50% of the nation's total.

The bad news is that Pennsylvania has 6 of the 20 biggest power plant toxic polluters (see page 6) in the nation and that still large amounts of lead, arsenic, mercury, chromium, nickel, and selenium are dumped into America's air and water. Also distressingly, the amount of arsenic pollution emitted in Pennsylvania has actually risen since 2001, and Pennsylvania power plants emit more arsenic and lead than any other state's.  Or bluntly stated, we are number 1 in arsenic and lead power plant pollution.

The data in this report confirms four things:

1. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision overturning in 2009 the state mercury rule that the Rendell Administration successfully enacted over huge opposition was a public health disaster.

2. The EPA's proposed Air Toxic Rule is desperately needed in Pennsylvania to protect human health.

3. The top 20 power plant toxic polluters identified in this report must install modern pollution controls or switch to gas or other cleaner burning fuels.

4. The failure to use more gas to clean our air is a massive public policy, economic, and health mistake. 

It is extremely unfortunate that the gas industry and the environmental community do not make common cause on critical issues where their mutual interests are aligned, like the EPA's proposed Air Toxic Rule or using more gas and less coal and oil, while agreeing to disagree on other important issues.  The failure to cooperate hurts the gas industry, environmental protection, public health, and our economy. 

Sometimes fighting takes on its own momentum and "logic."

 

Thursday, November 10, 2011

UPDATED: UT Preliminary Fracking Study Finds Little Impact On Water

Chip Groat, a prominent geologist at the University of Texas, released yesterday preliminary results of a study underway that is examining impacts of drilling and hydraulic fracturing on drinking water and ground water. See http://www.statesman.com/news/local/preliminary-study-says-minimal-imapct-from-fracking-1960103.html. The UT team states that its review of data so far indicates that spills and leaks at the surface are the major source of impacts on water and that the rate of these problems appears greater at shale gas operations than conventional gas drilling sites.

Professor Groat is quoted as saying: "Hydraulic fracturing doesn't seem to be of concern to groundwater."

The UT study will cost $300,000 and is being paid for completely by the University of Texas.  Final results from the UT study are expected in the coming months.

EQT's Pittsburgh Gas Customers See Huge Savings From Shale Gas

Unlike gasoline or milk prices, utility rates are mysterious to most consumers, with few able to say how much they pay per kilowatt-hour or per thousand cubic feet of gas.  Consumers get just 12 utility bills in a year, unlike the daily gasoline pricing information they see, and utility bills are hard to read no matter what is done to simplify them.  As a result many consumers insist that they have seen no benefit in their gas bill from the huge shale gas production that has flooded energy markets since 2008.

Despite the perception of no bill impact, gas costs and gas bills in fact have declined sharply since 2008.  Take the incredible EQT (a gas utility in the Pittsburgh area that also drills and transports gas) gas rate and bill story as just one example.

EQT's 2011 gas costs charged to consumers are down 60% compared to October 2008.  The lower gas rate produces residential bills that are $55 per month less in October 2011 than at the same time in 2008. 

The current annual savings for a residential customer are about $660.  A very big deal for median income families and the difference between having gas service or losing it for tens of thousands near the poverty line.

Here are the EQT details:

On October 1, 2008, the gas cost rate charged by EQT and approved by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission was $10.98, and the average residential bill was $146.35.

On October 1, 2011, the EQT gas cost is $4.78, and the average residential bill is $91.12, a huge savings compared to 2008 when shale gas production in the Marcellus began to ramp up.  Indeed the 2011 gas rate is 10% lower than it was just last year, when EQT charged $5.31 per thousand cubic feet and the average bill was $99.29.

Savings of this magnitude are a major boost to the economy, as these lower gas bills free up income to purchase other goods and services.  These lower gas bills also come when major cuts to the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program are hitting needy families.

While reading gas bills will be as difficult as ever this winter, the bottom line is much lower than it was in October 2008. Shale gas has yielded the much lower gas bills delivered last winter and the still lower gas bills that will arrive this winter.

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Handicapping The DRBC November 21 Gas Drilling Vote

The Delaware River Basin Commission is highly likely to approve at its November 21st Special Meeting the draft proposed gas drilling rules it released yesterday.  Well prior to yesterday's public release, the draft rules were certainly  extensively reviewed by officials within each state and would not have been released by the DRBC staff if internal opposition was at a tipping point.  I say that as someone who has participated as a policymaker in DRBC processes.

Given approval is likely, what will the vote on the 5-member DRBC be on November 21st? 

It would be surprising at the least if Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and the Federal Commissioner all did not vote for the draft rules.  It is likely New York will too.  Delaware may be favored to vote against them.  I will go out on a limb and say the final vote will be 4-1 for the rules, with a 5-0 or 3-2 vote not impossible.

What about the content of the latest draft rules?  And could there be further changes made at the November 21st meeting?

There could be changes made at the November 21st meeting but don't expect many. What was released yesterday will not change much, unless politics around the rules really threatens to blow them up. 

The latest draft rules generally follow in most cases the stronger Pennsylvania rules that were adopted between 2008-2011 combined with the recommendations of the Marcellus Shale Commission for further strengthening of protections on matters like setbacks from public drinking water reservoirs or the amount of bonding for the plugging of wells.

The DRBC draft rules, however, provide even stronger protections than the existing Pennsylvania rules in a few matters.   For example, DRBC would require testing before and after gas drilling of groundwater near gas wells and the provision of "financial assurance" for not only plugging a well once it finishes producing but also site reclamation and clean up of any pollution events.

The DRBC also would limit shale gas drilling to a total of 300 wells at which point the DRBC would have to vote on whether to allow more drilling after conducting a review of the impacts of gas drilling. This interim review and staging of development

 

Monday, November 7, 2011

Oil Carbon Emissions Declining 14% in USA

Carbon pollution from oil will decline 14% in 2011 from its 2005 peak year total, according to EIA data. The oil carbon clock has been setback to 1996 levels.

In 2005 oil consumption in the USA produced a record 2628 million metric tons of carbon pollution, but 2011 levels will fall approximately 330 million metric tons from the 2005 total to about 2295 million metric tons. Oil accounted for 2290 million metric tons in 1996.

Increases in gasoline and heating oil prices are driving both greater efficiency in using oil and substituting especially lower carbon natural gas and biofuels for oil. Now electric vehilces are just emerging as another powerful substitute for oil, with my sister who has ordered a Volt as an example of a rapidly changing auto consumer and marketplace.

Will this trend continue? Yes, if oil stays above $80 per barrel and the odds of it doing so are high. Indeed, probabilities are significant that oil will trade consistently above $110 for the next 10 years. Oil pricing that high will boost electric vehicles, in addition to CNG, biofuels, and efficiency.

Advances in technology and so called tight or unconventional oil production do create a new scenario where oil prices are not pressured by demand consistently pressing against supply limits. The odds of super high oil prices in the $200 range within a few years that were considerable in 2008 have declined in 2011 as a result of technology advances.

 

Coal Carbon Emissions Declining 11% in USA

Carbon emissions from coal are down 11% in the USA or back to 1996 levels, according to EIA data. The peak year for coal carbon emissions was 2005 when 2182 million metric tons of carbon were emitted from coal combustion.

In 2011, the USA is on track to reduce coal carbon emissions to about 1940 million metric tons or about 240 million metric tons less than in 2005. The 2011 emissions may well be below the 1996 total of 1995 million metric tons.

The reduction in carbon pollution from coal combustion reflects a decline in coal consumption due to natural gas, renewables, and nuclear power increases substituting for coal to make electricity. The decline is also due to increasing levels of efficiency that has cut US energy consumption to 2000 levels.

Will this trend continue? Yes, as long as natural gas prices remain low and the pricing of wind and solar continues to fall.

Indeed the trend of falling carbon emissions from coal may accelerate if the EPA's proposed Air Toxic Rule takes effect on the schedule EPA has announced. The Air Toxic rule could reduce by 100 million tons the coal combusted for electricity, while increasing natural gas demand by 1.2 trillion cubic feet per year.

 

Weekly Facts Rodeo

The weekly facts rodeo begins with jobs, jobs, jobs.

1. The US economy in 2011 has created 1.2 million jobs or about 120,000 per month. It is just about enough to keep up with a growing population but not enough to lower rapidly the now 9% national unemployment rate.

2. The 1.2 million jobs created nationally so far in 2011 underscores the poor performance of the Pennsylvania economy since May. Since May, Pennsylvania has lost 5,000 jobs per month, with the unemployment rate jumping from 7.4% to 8.3%. Pennsylvania now ranks in the bottom 10 states for job creation, after being a top ten state from January 2010 to April 2011.

3. Chinese greenhouse gas emissions in 2010 were 50% higher than US emissions. China had matched US emissions in approximately 2007.

4. India ranks third in world carbon pollution and are rising swiftly. The combination of rapidly rising Chinese and Indian emissions make it difficult to see how carbon concentrations could be stabilized at less than 600ppm and make a world with 1,000ppm possible. Those numbers are scary whether anyone is scared or not.

5. Indeed 2010 global carbon emissions exceed the worst case scenario in the IPCC studies. But world leaders are not paying attention.

6. Despite massive global increases driven by Chinese and Indian demand, USA emissions in 2011 will fall to 1997 to 1998 levels and are likely to continue falling as gas substitutes for coal and oil;  renewables grow; CNG, biofuels, and electricity substitue for gasoline and diesel; and energy efficiency rises in transportation, buildings, and production processes.

 

Friday, November 4, 2011

New CMU Study Shows Bromide Declining But Above Background On Mon

The AP is reporting that yesterday researchers at Carnegie Mellon University presented at a CMU conference new but preliminary data that showed bromide levels on the Mon river had declined but were above background readings and still a concern. http://www.centredaily.com/2011/11/03/2973525/mon-river-pollutant-level-down.html#lxzz1cgHazEeT.  The AP states that the researchers would not now release the newest data, because the study is preliminary and undergoing review.

Bromide research conducted by Carnegie Mellon University in 2010 and released in early 2011 prompted Secretary Krancer to request that gas drilling companies no longer take gas drilling waste to municipal water treatment systems that did not have the ability to treat wastewater for total dissolved solids of which bromide is a part. DEP states in the AP story that "nearly all" drilling companies no longer discharge drilling wastewater at treatment plants.

Other than drilling wastewater, there are multiple other sources such as industrial plants and coal plants for total dissolved solids discharges of which bromide can be a part to the historically tds stressed Mon river.  TDS readings on the Mon River for many years and well before Marcellus wells were drilled have had elevated levels of TDS, though below levels established by the Safe Drinkig Water Act, except during a spike from October to December 2008.   DEP in 2010 recommended to EPA that the EPA list the Mon river as being impaired by sulfate pollution.  Sulfates are also a part of TDS.

Bromide itself is not toxic, but can react with certain chemicals sometimes used at drinking water plants that could create a harmful compound.  Consequently, drinking water systems monitor bromide levels in their intake water to determine whether bromide is at concentrations that could lead to reactions that could compromise drinking water safety.  If bromide levels are at such levels, drinking water systems change the chemical treatment process of the water to prevent the reactions that create the harmful compound.

2011 US Carbon Emissions Will Be Below 1998 Levels

Carbon emissions in the USA during 2011 are likely to below 1998 levels. Emissions in 2011 will also be below the 2010 mark. Those are the conclusions from EIA data at www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec12_3.pdf

What explains the USA's real progress on reducing carbon emissions?

America is using production, energy more efficiently with energy consumption at 2000 levels, rampimg up sharply all renewables, including biofuels as a substitute for oil, and continues to shift from coal to gas for electricity production.  Coal on a lifecycle basis emits twice the carbon pollution to make electricity as gas does.

Other pollutants like mercury, nox, sox are also declining sharply, in part for the same reasons that drive carbon emission declines and in part  because 60% of coal plants now have installed pollution controls for non-carbon, traditional pollutants and comply with the new EPA cross state air pollution rule and the proposed EPA Air Toxic Rule

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Fueling America's Home This Winter: Trick or Treat?

As the discussion about shale gas and our energy choices continues, far too little is said about home energy security and affordability of heating bills. America has 113.6 million homes, but tens of millions of Americans struggle financially to keep homes warm on cold nights. 

Especially at risk this year of heating bill shock are the 6.9 million homes that use oil that is jumping in price by another 27% and the poor who face major cuts in programs providing assistance to pay for heat. 

By contrast, the 55.6 million American homes who heat with natural gas or the 38.2 million that use  electricity for heat will have the treat of a stable, even slightly lower heating bill, thanks to the enormous new natural gas supplies that have driven down the price of gas from $13 for a thousand cubic feet in July 2008 to less than $4 for the January 2011 contract. These lower natural gas prices save many families a total of $1,000 in lower gas and electricity bills, because lower natural gas prices drive down electricity prices too.

Unfortunately unlike natural gas, oil pricing is up. After another round of price increases, heating oil prices that where high last winter will reach on average $3.82 per gallon, according to the EIA.  In the Northeast where 80% of the 6.9 million homes using oil are located, a family can use 700, 800 or more gallons each winter, and face a heating bill for $2,500 to $4,000.  Even median income families using oil must spend about 7% to 10% of their after-tax income just to stay warm.

A poor family living with $10,000 to $20,000 and using oil may have to spend 20% or more of their income on the heating bill.  Remember that a disgraceful 25% of America's children woke up this morning in a poor home.

To make matters worse, major cuts in the Low-Income Home Heating Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) are being implemented.  Indeed, even when the LIHEAP budget is high, this program typically contributes $300 to $600 for heating bills that reach a thousand dollars and much more.

For tens of millions of Americans finding the money to pay the heating bill is an annual struggle that imposes sacrifices in the form of foregone medicine, food, or needed clothing purchases.  As a young lawyer in Philadelphia, I represented good people who had no heat but ice in their homes.

I would ask that discussions about shale gas policy remember the millions of Americans for whom the approximately $1,000 energy savings produced by the huge, new natural gas supplies are no windfall or luxury but a necessity.

 

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Yet Another Study Whacks Howarth But His Mess Lives On Too

 

A new paper by researchers at the University of Maryland becomes the latest to join a growing science posse trying to correct the enormous damage done to science and public understanding by Professor Howarth of Cornell University when he released his study finding gas to be as dirty as coal for carbon emissions.  For the University of Maryland Paper go to http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/6/4/044008.

Joining a chorus of disagreement to Professor Howarth's work, the University of Maryland researchers say: "Arguments that shale gas is more polluting than coal are largely unjustified." 

A key assumption among many shaky or false assumptions of Howarth and his colleague, Professor Ingrafea, in their study was that shale gas had a massively higher fugitive emission rate than conventional gas.  The Carnegie Mellon University study financed by the Sierra Club and released in August found this assumption to be false for Marcellus shale wells. 

Now the University of Maryland researchers report similar findings to Carnegie Mellon University on the point of whether shale gas wells have higher fugitive emissions and say: "We have demonstrated that the fugitive emissions from the drilling process are very likely not substantially higher than for coventional gas."

Professor Howarth and Ingrafea's paper is already considered to be junk by researchers in the area and reviled by some for the damage it has done to science.  But their mess lives on.  Their paper is constantly cited by the popular press.  More than a few mainstream environmental groups will not tell their members that this study should not be trusted, fearing what would be real blowback from members.

And so many good people believe that in terms of at least carbon pollution, gas is as dirty as coal when coal is twice as dirty on a life cycle basis as gas. 

In truth, the Howarth piece has as much scientific integrity as a typical hit piece on global warming science does.  Both betray science and the climate.

 

New Water Testing Again Disproves NYT Radiation Scare

 

The NYT radiation scare lives on in the minds of many, as regularly people still incorrectly write or say that drilling polluted or threatened to pollute Pennsylvania's waters with radionuclides.   For example just yesterday I was asked by a reporter, "what about the radiation pollution of your water by drilling?"

My surprising answer to the reporter was that Pennsylvania's waters were never polluted with radiation or radionuclides and that large amounts of testing, especially by the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority, proved my statement to be correct. 

The Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority has been conducting monthly testing of both river water and tap water for 4 radionuclides regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act: Combined Radium 226 and Radium 228, Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, and Uranium.

PWSA testing began in March.  PWSA posts its radionuclides test results on its website at http://www.pgh2o.com/ or www.pgh2o.com/docs/radiological_survey.pdf.  The most recent test results are for August.

PWSA testing confirms that levels of the 4 radionuclides regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act in both river water and tap water are safe.

Pennsylvania American Water Company did the same testing at 5 drinking water plants in Western Pennsylvania, as did about 14 other drinking water suppliers.  The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection conducted too radiation testing of river water in 7 streams.  Waters in western Pennsylvania have probably been more tested for radionuclides than any in the country.

The test results all arrive at the same conclusion: the water is safe.  It is not polluted with radiation.

But the NYT radiation scare will live on and never die in the minds of many, especially since the NYT will not run a story saying the scare it caused was false.  Once a lie is released, the truth rarely catches up.

 

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Marcellus Lowers Gas Prices and Summer Electricity Prices in Northeast

 

EIA states, "In the Northeast, wholesale natural gas prices were down between 2% and 15%, reflecting both lower regional demands and growing natural gas production from the Marcellus Shale play."  http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=3530.

Lower natural gas prices also contributed to lowering spot market electricity prices in Pennsylvania, New York and New England by 3% to 15%, according to EIA.

The consumer benefit in natural gas costs and electricity costs of the Marcellus supply can also be seen by contrast. Look at gas prices in the Southwest and California.  EIA states, "Natural gas prices were about 4-7% higher than last summer in the Southwest and California markets and supported modestly higher wholesale power prices in those markets."  Power prices were up to in these regions by 2% to 5%.

Natural gas prices impact electricity prices more than any fuel. In turn natural gas provides about 24% of all electricity generated and about the same percentage of all energy produced.  But natural gas plants often set the entire market price for electricity at any given hour, because frequently a natural gas plant is the last unit needed to meet the demand for electricity.  Natural gas plants are said to be many times on the "margin of the market."

Natural gas power plants will virtually always bid into the electricity market a price that allows them to recover the cost of natural gas they burn.  Consequently higher natural gas prices become higher electricity prices and the reverse is also true.

For median income families and those in poverty, as are 24% of USA's children, energy prices are important, even life and death.  I spent my first 6 years in the workforce working with poor and struggling families and  sat across a lawyer's desk seeing a mother weep because her gas, electricity, and water services were all shutoff.  The price of natural gas matters a lot.  We all should remember that.

 

Math Guarantees Solar Will Be As Big As Shale Gas

Solar at 6 to 8 cents per kilowatt-hour will capture enormous electricity market share and make central station power plants a declining business, as David Crane, the CEO of NRG that owns power plants said in Virginia on October 18th.

But will solar hit those price points? And when?

Solar is at the 10 cents per kilowatt-hour price in Arizona, after a 30% to 40% decline in the last 12 months. Another decline of 30% to 40% and solar would be at 6 to 7 cents per kilowatt-hour.

Another 30% to 40% decline in solar prices is insured, since solar prices have been declining steadily for 20 years, and the pace of lower prices is quickening due to economies of scale and large investments in the industry. A rule of thumb is that solar prices decline 1% per month and that the efficiency of panels increases by 0.5% per year. Lower prices but more power production year after year.

Projecting an annual decline in solar pricing of 6% to 12% is reasonable and would mean in about 4 or less years solar will be in the 6 to 8 cents per kilowatt-hour where it is a deeply disruptive, creatively destroying resource. The math guarantees solar soon will be as big as shale gas is today.

Monday, October 24, 2011

Solar Hits 10 Cents Per Kilowatt-hour

 

If you want to see why solar by 2015 will be as big as shale, take a look at solar pricing in Arizona. Arizona has a virtually unmatched solar resource and is reaping low solar power prices already.  New utility scale solar facilities are generating solar at 10 cents per kilowatt-hour.  http://planetark.org/wen/63601.  That price includes no tax credits or any subsidies.

Electricity rates of 12 to 18 cents per kilowatt-hour are common from California to Maine so solar at 10 cents will be attractive just on economics alone for many consumers. Hawaii which still depends on expensive and dirty oil for a lot of electricity has had rates from 20 to 30 cents per kilowatt-hour.

The 2011 Arizona solar price has fallen sharply from 14 to 16 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2010.  The lower prices are leading to a solar boom in Arizona that will install 240 megawatts of solar this year, according to Suntech, a major solar company.

But the key is not today's 10 cents solar price but the continuing price declines. Those continuing price declines will make solar as big an energy event as shale gas is today.

Must Read: Major New Marcellus Drinking Water Impacts Study Released

A study done by researchers at Penn State University for the Center for Rural Pennsylvania sampled 233 water wells in 20 counties for impacts from gas drilling.  http://www.rural.palegislature.us/documents/reports/Marcellus_and_drinking_water_2011.pdf.   What are its findings?

In the Marcellus wars, it probably will be spun in both directions.  To avoid spinning, I will quote key sections from the Executive Summary.

"In this study, statistical analyses of post-drilling versus pre-drilling water chemistry did not suggest major influences from gas drilling or hydrofracturing (fracking) on nearby water wells, when considering changes in potential pollutants that are most prominent in drilling waste fluids." (Page 4)

Unlike the Duke Study, the PSU study found no correlation between distance from drilling and methane contamination of water wells. "When comparing dissolved methane concentrations in the 48 water wells that were sampled both before and after drilling...the research found no statistically significant increases in methane levels after drilling and no significant correlation to distance from drilling."  (Page 4). 

I suspect the different outcomes between the Duke and PSU studies may have a lot to do with the county location of wells.  Duke conducted its analysis in the few counties where confirmed gas migration cases are concentrated.  PSU's study used water wells in 20 counties.

The researchers further state, "The research found that bromide levels in some water wells increased after the drilling and/or fracking. These increases may suggest more subtle impacts to groundwater and the need for more research. Bromide increases appeared to be mostly related to the drilling process. A small number of water wells also appeared to be affected by the disturbances due to drilling as evidence by sediment and/or metals increases that were noticeable to the water supply owner and confirmed by water testing results.  Increased bromide concentrations in water wells along with sporadic sediment and metals increases were observed within 3,000 feet of Marcellus gas well sites in this study." (Page 4). See further discussion at pages 16 to 19.

The researchers speculate the source of the bromide may be drilling muds used in the drilling phase and kept at well pads.  The researchers call for more research on this issue.  Whatever the source, stopping it should be the top priority.

The researchers also found that 40% of the water wells tested prior to drilling "failed at least one Safe Drinking Water Act water quality standard, most frequently for coliform bacteria, turbidity, and manganese..."  The researchers also found methane in 20% of the pre-drilling water wells, "although levels were generally far below any advisory levels."

The Center for Rural Pennsylvania is an agency of the Pennsylvania General Assembly.  I recommend reading the report.

Friday, October 21, 2011

EPA Should Set Zero Untreated Discharge As Drilling Wastewater Standard

Yesterday the EPA stated that it would set standards for the discharge of shale gas wastewater by 2014 and coal bed methane wastewater by 2013. My first reaction is, why take so much time?

And my second reaction is: zero discharge to rivers and streams of drilling wastewater not fully treated should be the standard.

Sometimes technology improvements solve once difficult problems, and that is the case with drilling wastewater. The combination of recycling technology and treatment plants that can turn drilling wastewater into distilled water means that there is no justification to discharge untreated wastewater, including for total dissolved solids, into streams.

The important innovations in water treatment reflect the good work of the gas industry and the pressure to change created by the adoption of Pennsylvania's drilling wastewater rule in August 2010 that ended the decades old practice of discharging untreated for TDS drilling wastewater.

These technology innovations make easy this EPA standards setting. For more information on the EPA docket go to: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/304m/.

NRG CEO Sees 50 Million EVs

The year 2014 will be the pivotal year for Electric Vehicles, according to David Crane, the electricity chief executive who is thinking ahead.

In 2014, Nissan will increase its US electric car production ten-fold to 250,000. If Nissan sells, its production Crane predicts that electric car adoption will be much faster than most now think.

Crane stuck his neck out and predicted that 50 million or more electric cars could be on our roads by 2025.

To position NRG as a fuel supplier to electric cars, Crane has his company rolling out public charging stations in Houston and some other markets.

Early indications are that car drivers like the driving experience offered by this era's electric cars so Crane may be gaining a good first mover advantage. Hertz reports that it would like to have 3,000 electric cars to meet all the requests it receives for EV rentals but only has a small fraction of what it would like. Hertz further states that drivers who do rent an EV have strongly favorable driving reactions.

EVs cost about 3 cents per mile to fuel compared to 15 cents for many gasoline vehicles. Low fuel costs can improve the mood of today's drivers.

Just possibly 50 million EVs by 2025 may come true.

 

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Extraordinary Shale Production Growth Rates Smackdown Ponzi Charge

At some point shale gas production numbers--drilled, produced, consumed--end the Ponzi scheme story advanced by the NYT and a few others. Consider extraordinary production shale data from the Energy Information Administration that suggest that point has arrived.

Shale gas production increased by on average 17% per year from 2000 to 2006. Those strong gains meant shale production doubled every 4 years. But the 2000 to 2006 production gains were just a preview of production growth ahead.

From 2007 to 2010 shale gas production increased by 48% per year or it doubled about every 18 months.

Shale gas today accounts for 30% of all gas consumed. That's quite a reality for a fraud or Ponzi scheme.

The USA has now had 10 years of shale gas production that have featured explosive annual growth rates and added up to massive total annual production. These production numbers alone should drive a stake through the Ponzi diversionary charge.

Big News: First Solar Makes Big Efficiency Breakthrough

The Holy Grail in solar panel manufacturing is to make a low-cost, high efficiency panel.  Already a low-cost producer, America's First Solar has made a solar efficiency breakthrough for its thin film solar cell that jumps its efficiency of converting sunlight to power from 11.7% to 17.3%.  This is an enormous jump in an industry where cell efficiency improves typically about 0.5% per year.

The making of solar panels is intensely competitive business that is going through a shakedown with General Electric entering the business this year and small companies like Solyndra and Evergreen bankrupting.  First Solar is America's largest solar panel manufacturer and one of the world's top ten.  It is also one of the most innovative PV panel makers that has pushed its cost down to 73 cents per watt.

A 73 cents per watt, 17.3% efficiency solar panel competes well with Chinese manufacturers and most importantly produces electricity at a price equivalent to fossil fuels without tax credits.  First Solar states that it has about a "dozen changes" that it will be making in its production processes to bring this breakthrough to the market.

Unlike most PV panel makers, First Solar makes a thin film and not crystalline silicon solar panel. Thin film solar cell panels use less materials and are cheaper but have been at least 50% less efficient at converting sunlight to power than crystalline silicon cell panels.  See http://www.solarbuzz.com/ for more discussion about the differences. 

First Solar's efficiency breakthrough for thin film means that it has closed the efficiency gap with the most efficient crystalline silicon panels on the market to about 10%, while retaining the cost advantages of thin film.

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

US Solar Jobs Top 100,000

High profile bankruptcies at Solyndra and Evergreen, both panel manufacturers, create the false impression of an imploding solar industry in the US.  Solar jobs in the US actually grew 6.8% from August 2010 to August 2011 when compared to prior period and now total 100,237. 

The foregoing numbers come from the Solar Foundation that  conducts an annual job census and is releasing tomorrow its full report.  See http://www.solarfoundation.org/.
For the same period, jobs in the USA grew 0.7% so the solar industry remains a bright spot in a struggling economy.

Solar jobs are  growing and solar installations are booming.  Solar installations during 2011 in the USA will smash the 2010 record that in turn smashed the 2009 record that smashed the record in 2008 and so on.  Close to 2,000 megawatts of solar power will be installed in America this year.

Globally 2011 will be another big year for solar installations and possibly a record year.  Total global installations are expected to be between 15,000 and 20,000 megawatts in 2011.

PA Ranks Second In Producing Gas Wells

Only Texas with 93,000 gas wells in 2009 had more gas wells than Pennsylvania, according to the Energy Information Administration. Pennsylvania ranked second with more than 57,000 producing gas wells in 2009. More than 95% or more than 55,000 of the PA gas wells were traditional, shallow wells and not Marcellus shale wells.

The number of producing gas wells in Pennsylvania has nearly doubled since the 1990s when gas prices were often at $2 for a thousand cubic feet or lower.  Importantly, in terms of the number of producing gas wells, as distinguished from the volume of gas produced, traditional, shallow gas wells account for 90% of the increase in gas wells.

No matter how the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection organizes its oil and gas staff it has a big job.  Staffing levels and resources to do that job are more central to mission than organizational charts.

Despite the high number of producing wells that accounted for about 12% of all gas wells in the USA during 2009, Pennsylvania produced just a bit more than 1% of US gas in 2009.

As the big Marcellus wells start producing, Pennsylvania gas production is surging and now accounts for about 6% of US production.

Finally, which state ranked third in the number of gas wells? West Virginia. It too is home to both numerous traditional wells and a increasing number of  Marcellus wells. r

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Gas Drilling Gets High Grade For Managing Rains & Floods

The floods and massive rains hit parts of Pennsylvania where shale gas drilling is being done and were an unprecedented test of the gas industry's operations and strength of rules to protect the environment during extraordinary circumstances and stresses.

How did the industry do in protecting the environment during the floods and rains? Now one week later it would seem that the gas industry deserves a high grade for operating in a manner that prevented any significant pollution.  The same cannot be said for sewer operations in many parts of the state that were overwhelmed and sent large volumes of contaminated raw sewage into rivers and streams.

Don Gilliland writes an article in today's Patriot-News  (http://www.pennlive.com/) that reviews information from industry, industry opponents, and regulators and reports that no major pollution incident has been attributed to gas drilling. 

At one point, according to Gilliland, PennEnvironment put a photo of a drilling rig under water on its website with the message: "Here's more evidence Marcellus Shale drilling pads should NOT be allowed in floodplains."  But the group took down the photo when it realized it was of a drilling rig in Pakistan.

During the rains, the biggest concern were pits to store water used by some companies in the gas drilling industry, but many in the gas industry do not use pits anymore.  Instead mostly tanks or so-called closed loop systems that keep water in closed containment systems at all times are used. 

Moreover the regulations governing open pits require the design of the pits to be able to withstand at least 24 inches of rain falling directly into the pit and to prevent any run-off from flowing into it.

The rains and floods were a huge stress that would have exposed substantial problems in the gas industry's operations if it was not well prepared.  The absence of incident reports indicates that a high grade has been earned.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Climate Study Underlines Paradox of Replacing Coal With Gas or Anything

A new climate study that looks at the environmental impact of replacing coal with gas and will be published in the Journal Climatic Change Letters by Australian researcher Tom Wigley underlines the paradoxes and difficulties of energy choices.    Burning coal releases huge amounts of pollution around the world.  The pollution includes toxics like mercury, arsenic, and lead; sulfates or particles in the air; and heat trapping carbon dioxide in large quantities.

The sulfates and particles emitted by coal into the air sicken and kill people but they also reflect heat and are a cooling force. 

Wigley has been quoted as saying: "...by not burning coal you're not having the cooling effect of sulfates and other particles. This particle-effect of sulfates is a double-edged sword because reducing them is a good thing in terms of lessening air pollution and acid rain.  But the paradox is when we clean up these particles, it slows down efforts to reduce global warming."  See the Ecocentric blog of Time.com.

Gas is cleaner and saves lives.  Wigley does not apparently suggest otherwise.  But  the denier crowd will use parts of the above to argue coal has beneficial impacts.  Also expect to see them to point to this study to argue that it takes a great deal of doing anything to impact the global climate trend of rising temperatures and so in essence why bother.

The article apparently concludes that replacing 50% of coal with gas would have a small impact on rising temperatures for this century.  But so would replacing 50% of coal with
renewables or nuclear.

The carbon loading of the atmosphere is already significant and no one action or technology or energy choice short of sucking carbon out of the atmosphere is going to cut quickly or substantially the confirmed rising temperatures.

It probably is true that replacing coal with gas, renewables, energy efficiency, or nuclear--all of which do not load the atmosphere with particles--removes the cooling forcing provided when coal does put sulfates and particles in the atmosphere.  That impact of removing the cooling forcing of particles by itself raises temperatures in the short to medium run or the upcoming decades.

Of course a key point is that renewables, nuclear, energy efficiency as well as gas are cleaner than coal (renewables are the cleanest by a lot) but as a result all would remove the cooling forcing and so have the paradoxical effect Wigley notes.

The study has not been published and I have not read it, but assumptions matter in every study.  It seems that the study assumes that gas replaces just 50% of coal.  Why not run the models with a 100% replacement to see what the impact would be of removing even more carbon pollution and more particle pollution? 

Had Wigley run this study looking at a 50% replacement of coal with renewables, Wigley would have likely produced numbers that would show a relatively small impact on temperatures as well. That would not be a reason, at least for me, to slow down renewable deployment.

Other questions will be answered by reading the paper. Does Wigley use a 25-year or 100-year period or both to measure the global warming potential of gas? I am not sure.  The study does apparently assume methane leakage rates from zero to 10%.

Gas removes particles and emits 50% less carbon pollution than coal, as 3 recent studies document. Renewables, nuclear, and energy efficiency remove particles and emit 100% less carbon pollution.

The climate models indicate that at least a 50% reduction in carbon pollution and probably more will be needed to stabilize global temperatures.  Time is short if not expired for effective action.  All tools that cut carbon pollution by meaningful amounts should be embraced, and no one energy technology can right now do the job that is needed.

Kalamazoo River Oil Spill Damages Water More Than All Marcellus Drilling

Marcellus gas drilling is major industrial activity that cannot be done without environmental impact, but its cumulative impact on water to date probably is less than the damage done by the single oil spill on the Kalamazoo river in Michigan.

There one spill of 834,000 gallons of oil 14 months ago has closed 35 miles of the river ever since the day of the spill. According to the September 10th New York Times, the oil spill will cost $500 million to clean up.

Oil is inherently orders of magnitude more damaging and threatening to water quality than gas. According to the NYT, each year 100 significant oil or hazardous liquids spills from just pipelines take place. Another major oil pipeline spill just this year fouled the Yellowstone River, a natural jewel.

Despite the significant leaks and spills from pipelines, pipelines are actually the safest, cleanest means of transporting oil. Therein lies a window to the full toll to water caused by oil releases.

To get the full impact of oil releases to the environment, one would need to add the enormous quantities spilled from ships, trucks, tanks, industrial processes, homes.

Few things would do more for water quality than using more gas to displace large quantities of oil. While that is true, it is not a reason for regulators of the gas industry and companies to become complacent about the impacts of gas production on water.

Recycling of driling wastewater, excellent practices to limit erosion and sediment impacts, reducing and containing spills at drilling sites, preventing gas migration are daily challenges requiring daily focus. The goal must be excellence every day in operations and regulation.

Monday, September 12, 2011

Kalamazoo River Oil Spill Damages Water More Than All Marcellus Drilling

Marcellus gas drilling is major industrial activity that cannot be done without environmental impact, but its cumulative impact on water to date probably is less than the damage done by the single oil spill on the Kalamazoo river in Michigan.

There one spill of 834,000 gallons of oil 14 months ago has closed 35 miles of the river ever since the day of the spill. According to the September 10th New York Times, the oil spill will cost $500 million to clean up.

Oil is inherently orders of magnitude more damaging and threatening to water quality than gas. According to the NYT, each year 100 significant oil or hazardous liquids spills from just pipelines take place. Another major oil pipeline spill just this year fouled the Yellowstone River, a natural jewel.

Despite the significant leaks and spills from pipelines, pipelines are actually the safest, cleanest means of transporting oil. Therein lies a window to the full toll to water caused by oil releases.

To get the full impact of oil releases to the environment, one would need to add the enormous quantities spilled from ships, trucks, tanks, industrial processes, homes.

Few things would do more for water quality than using more gas to displace large quantities of oil. While that is true, it is not a reason for regulators of the gas industry and companies to become complacent about the impacts of gas production on water.

Recycling of driling wastewater, excellent practices to limit erosion and sediment impacts, reducing and containing spills at drilling sites, preventing gas migration are daily challenges requiring daily focus. The goal must be excellence every day in operations and regulation.

My Home Town & Region Hit By Massive Floods

Large parts of Hershey, Pennsylvania which is my home town and central Pennsylvania are flooded. As of last night, 5 lives have been lost, including a man in Hershey who died when he was bailing water out of his basement, and it collapsed around him. Another woman drowned in her car in Lancaster County, while truly heroic fireman saved with no time to spare the lives of 4 others, including an 18 month baby, caught in the same roaring water that turned a country road into a death trap.

Waters are to the roofs of many businesses and homes. Roads and bridges have been severely damaged and blocked, including as of yesterday Interstate Route 81 north bound and the Pennsylvania Turnpike for a portion east of Harrisburg.  Mudslides are a regional hazard.  Damages run into the billions of dollars.

Flood waters overwhelmed Zoo America in Hershey, where the staff saved most animals, but 2 Bison could not be reached, were drowning, and had to be shot.  Boil water advisories are in place for many communities as a significant number of water and sewer plants are damaged or knocked out of service.

Friends and neighbors are dealing with real loss.  Pennsylvanians are a tough, caring, brave people standing on generations of greatness.  Those qualities are the rock in the troubled waters and will be the foundation for the recovery ahead.

Thursday, September 8, 2011

NY EIS Greenlights Marcellus Development

NY's latest draft of its environmental impact statement for Marcellus shale drilling is an exhaustive, thorough examination of all conceivable environmental impacts associated with shale drilling. It is more than one thousand pages. While I suspect only a handful of people have read every word, the EIS finds no show stoppers.

Here are some highlights:

"Accordingly, there is no likelihood of significant adverse impacts from the underground migration of fracturing fluids." Page 12.

"No significant adverse impacts are identified with regard to the disposal of liquid wastes."

NY projects an annual peak of 2,500 wells and average of 1,600 wells per year. It finds that the average land disturbance, including a multiple-well pad, access road, infrastructure will be 7 to 8 acres to produce gas from 640 acres, given horizontal drilling. NY expects 90% of Marcellus wells to be multiple-well pads with horizontal drilling.

It finds that gas drilling will require 9 billion gallons of water per YEAR at peak drilling
and that would be just a 0.24% increase in water demand for NY. Water withdrawals for all uses in NY are now 10.3 billion gallons per DAY.

The EIS proposes substantial environmental protections in all areas, including for air emissions from production equipment and methane leakage.

But New York is moving ahead, separating itself from New Jersey where a moratorium has been imposed. Comments on this EIS will now be taken. In addition formal rules will be proposed in October.

New York's economic analysis indicates Marcellus development will create approximately 55,000 jobs.

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

Gas Could Slash Carbon Emissions To Pre-1980 Levels

Canada's announcement that it would phase out coal-fired power plants produces a thought experiment.  What would US carbon emissions be if gas replaced coal at power plants in the USA? 

The Carnegie Mellon University, NETL, and the Worldwatch Institute studies all document that coal emits two times more carbon emissions than gas.  Gas is not zero carbon or zero pollution, but it is much cleaner than coal. In fact it emits approximately 50% less carbon on a life cycle basis, in addition to emitting no toxics or soot.

The enormous decrease in carbon emissions that widespread use of gas could provide is startling when one looks at the total US carbon emissions.

In 2010, US coal fired power plants emitted 1,990 million tons of carbon dioxide and that number would have been cut in about half if gas replaced coal.  Or gas would cut carbon emissions by about 995 million tons.

Total carbon emissions from the energy sector in the USA during 2010 were 5,636 million tons and that was below the 5,996 million tons emitted in 2005.

Subracting the 995 million tons of avoided carbon emissions by using gas and not coal from the 2010 total would reduce US emissions to 4,641 million tons.  A big reduction.

The reduction is so big that widespread use of gas would turn back the carbon clock by more than 30 years.  It would cut US energy sector carbon emissions to levels experienced before 1980.  Emissions in 1980 were 4,770 million tons.  And it would cut carbon emissions about 22% below 2005 levels or 8% below 1990 levels.

These facts are good news, but some must face them. Moreover using gas or electricity more widely in transportation to displace oil would boost the carbon savings produced by gas still further.

  Widespread use of gas reduces soot in the air, toxics in the environment, and heat trapping gas in the atmosphere.

Gas production is an industrial business that must be regulated strongly, especially for its air emissions, and taxed reasonably. But gas offers a substantially less polluting alternative to both coal and oil, in addition to providing economic, consumer, and national security benefits. 

Denying the fact that gas is much cleaner than coal or oil is false and sacrifices the environment and public health. Insisting that gas is strongly regulated reduces its environmental footprint and maximizes its benefits to the environment.

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Summarizing 4 Studies Debunking Prof. Howarth's Life Cycle Gas Study

The recent flood of scientific studies contradicting professor Howarth's junk science study falsely claiming that gas is dirtier on carbon emissions than coal is so big that it needs summarizing.  Impressively, two of the studies refuting Howarth were either done (Worldwatch Institute) or financed (Sierra Club) by a leading environmental organization.  All the debunking studies reach the same conclusion that coal emits about twice as much heat trapping pollution as does gas or gas emits about 50% less heat trapping pollution than coal on a life cycle basis.

Failing to recognize this fact, this truth, would be a real outrage and an assault on the environment.  Here is your scorecard for studies debunking Howarth.

First to debunk Howarth was the National Energy Technology Laboratory that found essentially that coal is twice as dirty as gas or gas emits about 50% less than coal on a life cycle basis.  See the May 23rd posting on the NETL paper at this blog: http://johnhanger.blogspot.com/2011/05/national-energy-technology-lab-latest.html.

The second debunking came from 6 researchers at Carnegie Mellon University whose work was financed by the Sierra Club.  This study focused on the Marcellus shale gas production, finding that coal emitted twice as much carbon as gas on a life cycle basis and that a Marcellus shale well emitted statistically the same heat trapping pollution as a conventional gas well.  See the August 17th posting.  http://johnhanger.blogspot.com/2011/08/carnegie-mellon-life-cycle-gas-study.html.

Third up was a paper from IHS-CERA charging that Professor Howarth in his study distorted and misused gas well data that IHS-CERA had developed.  See the August 25th posting.  http://johnhanger.blogspot.com/2011/08/top-energy-consultancy-critiques.html.

Fourth, and so far last but not least, is the Worldwatch Institute and Deutsche Bank Climate Advisors study that also found that coal was about twice as dirty as gas in terms of heat trapping pollution.  See the August 29th posting.  http://johnhanger.blogspot.com/2011/08/world-watch-institute-study-finds-coal.html.

This list is actually a partial summary.  The Clean Skies Foundation also issued a study, finding that coal is twice as dirty as gas.

Petroleum, Not Coal, Is Biggest US Carbon Dioxide Source

As Governor Perry flies back to Texas to deal with massive, unprecedented fires around Austin, he might reflect on the state of Texas's climate and from where all that heat trapping gas is coming.  44% of all carbon dioxide emissions in the USA come from petroleum, and petroleum is the biggest source of carbon emissions, bigger than coal.

That petroleum is now the biggest source of carbon emissions explains why so many people are alarmed about moving toward Canadian oil sands that is both foreign petroleum and more carbon intensive oil. 

That the USA is figuring out how to import more foreign oil when we are sitting on American gas that is cheaper and cleaner is insane.  Gas, biofuels, domestic oil production, energy efficiency, electric vehicles are all better economic and environmental alternatives to Canadian tar sands oil. Shipping  our money to Canada for their oil hurts our economy.  Burning Canadian tar sands oil damages our environment.

Meanwhile in Austin, its residents has now had 80 days this year with temperatures above 100, shattering the previous record of 69 set in 1929 and pushing well past 68 days of 100 plus heat in 2009.  The land is bone dry and on fire.

As he gets off the campaign trail, Governor Perry might notice not just the Austin fires but also that the state is in the grips of the worst drought in 150 years.  And if he talks with the state climatologist, the Governor will hear that Texas' average temperature is already up 2 degrees since 1970 and that the climate science that the Governor dismisses as a fraud projects higher temperatures ahead in the next 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years.

US Public Yawns About Climate Change

According to an article by Nathaniel Gronewold of E&E Reporter, Nielsen Global Online reports that 69% around the world expressed concern about climate change, up slightly from 2009, but just 48% of the US public joined in that concern.  Moreover, a sharp 14 point drop in the percentage of the US public concerned about global warming had taken place since 2007.

Nielsen also finds that concern about global warming is lowest in the US and Canada, much lower than in Europe or China, though erosion of concern in China was also documented.

At 48% there is room to argue that the glass of US public support for addressing climate change is either half-full or half-empty.  But there is no doubt that the glass has emptied substantially in the last 4 years.

Reasons abound.  The financial crisis of 2008 and the resulting economic distress has pushed many issues aside.  

Conservatives have successfully made rejection of climate science a litmus test for good standing in the Republican party.  A PPP poll found that just 25% of Republican primary voters accept climate science, with most in Governor Perry's camp of dismissing it or charging it is a fraud. 

Of Republican Presidential candidates, only Governor Huntsman has tweeted his acceptance of climate science as well as evolution and said prophetically, "call me crazy."  Judging by Huntsman's standing in the polls, Republican primary voters are politely doing just that.

I suspect that the decline in concern about climate since 2007 tracked by Nielsen has been evident in most demographic groups but particularly sharp among conservatives and Republicans. 

Climate change in the USA will not be addressed without substantial public support to do so.  As the numbers in support of taking action dwindle, the concentration of heat trapping gas in the atmoshpere rises each year and global temperatures rise each decade.

 

Sunday, September 4, 2011

Wind Kills 100,000s of Birds But I Use It

The US Fish and Wildlife Service is investigating the deaths of 6 golden eagles at a wind farm in California that is owned by the Los Angeles municipal electricity utility.  Those 6 golden eagle deaths are part of the the 150,000 to 500,000 birds that wind turbines kill each year at the 500 wind farms where 35,000 turbines operate. The low estimate of 150,000 bird deaths comes from the American Wind Energy Association and the high estimate is from the USFWS.  Furthermore the American Bird Conservancy predicts that bird deaths at wind farms will double in 20 years.

Despite these significant bird deaths, wind turbines kill few birds compared to the other leading causes of bird deaths.  Cats kill 500 million per year; glass buildings 100 million; autos 11 million; and power lines 10 million

But is the fact that other things kill many more birds a reason to ignore the toll of wind turbines on birds? No.  Doing sensible things to reduce bird and bat deaths are being done and should be done.  But why not go further still?  Why not ban wind or put in place regulations that make wind impossible?

I buy wind power for my home and have fought to build the 16 operating wind farms in Pennsylvania and the 4 more under construction now not because wind is perfect, but because it is better than the alternative means of generating electricity--including for the birds.  Wind power is an example of another imperfect energy source--like natural gas--that has more economic and environmental benefits than costs.

Wind has zero air pollution. It does not sicken or kill people as old coal plants do.  It emits no carbon pollution, while coal emits huge amounts, twice the amount that gas does.  Wind uses no water and does not pollute water, while locking in an energy price for 25 years.

The water, air, and carbon pollution from other forms of electricity generation all threaten people and birds.  Indeed heat trapping pollution has changed climate already, will change it further, and will cause extinction of large numbers of whole bird species, unless we can stabilize carbon emissions at 450 ppm.

Wind is medicine for a warming planet and the humans and birds that inhabit it.  It is one of our better, but very imperfect, real energy choices.  That is why I love it.

Friday, September 2, 2011

Dominion Power Closing 6 Coal Units; Gas, Renewables, Conservation Grow

Dominion Power filed yesterday its plan with Virginia regulators for meeting a projected 30% demand growth over the next 15 years.

In its press release, it said:  "Dominion Virginia Power plans to use a mix of cost-effective generation--including biomass, natural gas-fired units and coal-fired units converted to natural gas--coupled with additional conservation and load management programs to meet growing customer demand for electricity over the next 15 years."

The company went on to detail the closure of 5 coal units, the refueling with gas of another coal unit,  the construction of new natural gas units, and moving forward with the process to build another nuclear unit by 2022.

The company also stated that it would be meet Virginia's goal of 15% of its supply be from renewable resources by 2025 and that it would initiate a new rooftop solar program.  Further the company listed 6 conservation initiatives for residential and commercial customers that it would commence.

This plan is one example of how the nation as a whole is moving away from coal to gas and renewables primarily.  Projections that coal's national market share of electricity generation will fall to about 30% in 20 years are based on solid information and market developments.

Thursday, September 1, 2011

USA Starts Kicking Foreign Oil Habit! Oil Imports Down 11%

It looks like the USA has an emerging energy policy that is actually working to break our addiction to foreign oil. 

Oil imports in August 2011 where 11% lower than in August 2010, according to an article in the August 27th Wall Street  Journal.  These 2011 oil import declines build on lower imports in 2010 when oil imports were their lowest level since 2003.

What is the emerging energy policy that has begun to wean the USA off of foreign oil?   Rapidly rising biofuels production driven by a federal renewable energy standard, significantly raised federal fuel efficiency standards for cars, growing usage of natural gas and electricty to power transportation, and rising domestic US oil production add up to a recipe, almost a policy, for ending foreign oil imports.

Yet, providers of addiction treatment know that beating an addiction is a daily battle for the patient.  And the progress made in 2010 and 2011 could be easily reversed, unless the policy needed to end our foreign oil addiction is boosted.

Specifically, while the federal policies are in place to increase biofuels and increase vehicle fuel efficiency, no coherent federal or state policy exists on promoting the use of gas and electricity in transportation.  This is a major hole in policy that must be filled.

High global oil prices as long as they last will provide major financial incentives for oil drilling in the US and shale oil is a major new resource.  But will high global oil prices persist? 

Given booming Chinese and Indian demand for oil, the odds are high that global oil prices will be at least where they are today and quite likely much higher within the next 5 years.

While fueling domestic oil drilling, those higher global oil prices mean that another oil price shock is likely around the corner.  Our economy can barely afford $80 per barrel oil and US economic growth is crippled by oil prices at $125 per barrel or higher. 

We must reduce our oil consumption and end our reliance on foreign oil to protect our economy and national security.  While few Americans know it, important progress in doing both is now underway.  But our progress is fragile and must be nurtured with further smart policy.

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Natural Gas Doubles Electricity Market Share: Why?

This year natural gas power plants will provide 24.5% of all electricity generated, a doubling of their 12% market share in 1990, according to Energy Information Administration data.  EIA projects gas reaches 25% in 2012 and is likely to keep rising.

From 1990 to 2003, the electricity market share of gas rose from 12% to 16.7% or by about 40%.  From 2003 to 2011, natural gas jumped from 16.7% to 24.5% or about 45%.  Natural gas gains seem steady, unstoppable.

Why is natural gas like a Pac Man eating electricity generation market share?  The capital costs of natural gas power plants are lower--much lower--than any of the main alternatives--coal, nuclear, wind.  They are cheaper to build than anything else.  This is the main competitive advantage of gas, but there are more.

Natural gas power plants face lower development risks and are easier to build than certainly coal or nuclear plants, because they generally face much less local or national opposition in the siting and permitting processes.  They do so, because natural gas power plants emit little pollution--no mercury, arsenic, lead.  Natural gas power plants meet the proposed EPA Air Toxic Rule for example.

Natural gas power plants--the air cooled models especially--require much less water than a coal or nuclear plant.  In many parts of the country, water is becoming a scarce resource, as a result of population pressures and a changed climate and so the fact that natural gas power plants sip and do not guzzle water is a major advantage.

Natural gas power plants do not have a dangerous, expensive waste stream to manage, as nuclear plants do.  Yet coal plants also have a waste problem, producing large amounts of coal ash that must be safely stored, but sometimes is not, with dire results for water quality and human safety.

Natural gas plants also are flexible and can be designed to run as baseload, intermediate, or peaking plants.  Natural gas plants can quickly power up or down, making them ideal to provide back up power and to match with wind.  Coal and nuclear plants cannot perform this function.

Natural gas power plants also use fuel efficiently and can be very efficient if they capture and use waste heat.  In competitive power markets, where plants do not recover from captive, monopoly ratepayers fuel costs, the fuel efficiency of a plant is a key factor.

The key weakness of natural gas power plants has been both the volatility of natural gas pricing and periods of high natural gas prices that made them uneconomic to run in competitive electricity markets, during many hours of the year, when electricity market prices were low or average.

The shale gas boom that began in 2000 and took off in 2007 has driven natural gas prices below $5, while coal prices have increased.  Shale gas means that natural gas is now often lower cost than coal, and plants that can run on either coal or gas burn gas.

All these strengths will drive up further the market share of natural gas power plants.  It almost certainly will reach 33% within a decade and likely go higher, much higher, over time.

Updated Gas Cuts by 15% Coal's Electricity Market Share

Some environmental critics of natural gas have suggested that shale gas will not lead to less coal-fired generation. The facts indicate that this critique of natural gas is wrong.

Natural gas is now taking almost directly electricity market share from coal.  Gas has cut by about 15% coal's electricity market share just between 2003-2011.

Consider these facts drawn from the Energy Information Administration data: 

Coal's market share fell from 50.8% in 2003 to 44.4% in 2009 or 6.4 percentage points, while gas's market share rose from 16.7% to 23.3% or 5.6 percentage points in the same period. Gas up 5 percentage points and coal down 6.  An almost one-for-one move.

Or how about these facts?

Coal's market share fell from 44.4% in 2009 to 43.3% in 2011 or 1.1 percentage points, while gas increased from 23.3% to 24.5% or 1.2 percentage points.

The data show that natural gas and coal's electricity market share are tightly but inversely linked.  Gas goes up and coal goes down.

 

Updated Marcellus To Produce 12% Of US Gas

Marcellus gas production numbers are skyrocketing and are likely to reach an incredible 7 to 8 billion cubic feet per day within 4 years, according to projections made by the energy consultancy Benetek.  At that level, the Marcellus will be producing between 2.5 trillion and 2.9 trillion cubic feet per year or about 12% of total US gas production.

That amount of gas will be equal to 3% to 4% of the total energy consumed--from all sources--in the USA and close to 1% of all energy consumed in the world.  These are phenomenal numbers.

These numbers make two things crazy:  First, the Ponzi scheme smear advanced by a few and wished to be true by others; and second the absence of a drilling tax in Pennsylvania, though West Virginia has had a drilling or severance tax on gas production in place successfully for several years now.

Production is currently about 3 billion cubic feet per day in Pennsylvania and The Marcellus Shale Coalition projects it will reach 3.5 billion cubic feet per day in 2011 or 1.2 trillion cubic feet per year.

This humongous gas production means there is no reason left to operate old, coal-fired power plants without pollution controls or to not move aggressively to replace foreign oil with domestic natural gas in trasportation. 

 

Thursday, August 18, 2011

The Media, The CMU Study, & The Marcellus

In reaction to my posting yesterday about the CMU life cycle gas study hiding in plain sight since August 5th, when it was published, Andy Leahy says in the Comment section:

"Nice scoop, John. Remarkable to me, the delayed, low-key rollout on the CMU paper, compared to the media tsunami which carried the Cornell paper.  Are the anti-drillers more polished in the PR department?"

This is a meaty, great comment in a few words.

The Howarth/Cornell study did get a media tsunami response, and Cornell said at one point no study in the history of that great university had ever generated more media coverage.

Why?  Impressive credentials go a long way.  And even more important is the message. Professor Howarth had credentials and had a shocking message, a bad news message, a message that built on the narrative constructed by the NYT gas reporter and Gasland that shale drilling or "fracking" is the vey worst environmental threat.  Howarth said that gas is as dirty or possibly dirtier than coal (he was talking about just one pollutant--carbon--but that got lost too). 

Bad, shocking, outrageous sells.  Good news rarely does.  Why? Readers and listeners respond to the outrageous.  No matter if it is false or wrong.  Smears work. It is the marketplace in which reporters work.

Add the reality of some real bias against the gas industry in a few reporters (the NYT gas reporter is the most prominent example) to Howarth's impressive credentials and the shocking but false message that gas is dirtier than coal creates the media tsunami that Andy mentions.

Howarth is a member of the academy from a great university. One had to be an expert in the field to say that this struting academic emperor wore no clothes and most of the coverage had little to warn the reader that the study was junk.  And the body of the piece is never as powerful as the headline or the lead and the lead was some version of gas is as dirty as coal. 

Many in the media also treated  Howarth as an objective researcher doing disinterested scientific research.  He is an anti-fracking activist who wears anti-fracking pins and so on. He wants in particular to keep drilling out of his home area and all that is perfectly fine but his agenda was not made clear.   He is doing work and using the credibility of his employer to create weapons for his cause which is to ban shale gas hydraulic fracturing.

And then there is the careful work of the 6 CMU researchers that hides in plain view for 12 days before I did a posting.  Why?

In part, the message confirmed that coal is much dirtier than gas. Not an outrageous, shocking conclusion.  The researchers were not adding another allegation to the indictment against gas drilling so the NYT gas reporter and the narrative he has constructed was not served by this piece. 

Unlike the Duke University researchers that did a major roll out of the Duke gas migration study, CMU and the researchers apparently did little of the normal press work needed to gain media attention.  You cannot blame the media for not covering something if there is no reason for them to know about it.

But to answer the question posed by Andy Leahy, part of the explanation is also that those fighting gas drilling are more effective than the industry in messaging. 

My concern is not to score the fight like a boxing match but to try and make sure the discussion focuses on the real issues like a reasonable tax, gas migration and air emissions, while not falling prey to nonsense like the Howarth study

Thank you to the 6 researchers at CMU.  Hopefully as many people will learn about their careful research as heard about Howarth's junk. Reporting is a tough, vital job. Great reporters are invaluable members of society. Truth depends on them and their work.

 

Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Carnegie Mellon Life Cycle Gas Study Debunks Howarth Claims

Drawing virtually no press attention, 6 researchers at Carnegie Mellon University published on August 5th a detailed study of life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of Marcellus Shale gas.

The study concluded that Marcellus shale gas is much cleaner than coal when greenhouse gas pollution is used to compare the environmental impact of gas and coal. The study specifically analyzed the carbon footprint of Marcellus gas and not other shale reservoirs. The study was also reviewed prior to publication by the Sierra Club.

It is a careful piece of work that lays out the data used, the assumptions made, and conclusions reached.

The Carnegie Mellon researchers find: "Natural gas from the Marcellus shale has generally lower life cycle GHG emissions than coal for production of electricity in the absence of any effective carbon capture and storage processes, by 20-50% depending upon plant efficiencies and natural gas emissions variability."

The researchers found that there was virtually no difference between greenhouse emissions from Marcellus shale gas and conventional gas production.

This careful study debunks and decimates professor Howarth's hit piece study that the NYT gas reporter and other media gave so much attention. By contrast, the CMU study has received very little press attention so the result remains that many people think Howarth is the final word on this important matter.

The lead researcher of the CMU paper is Mohan Jiang of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department. W Michael Griffin, Chris Hendrickson, Paulina Jaramillo, Jeanne VanBriesen, and Aranya Venkatesh also authored the study. The Tepper School of Business and the Department of Engineering and Public Policy also participated in the study.

The paper was published in Environmental Research Letters. Go to http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/6/3/034014/fulltext.    The study is a must read if you are interested in science and truth and should get much more publicity and recognition.

Posted by John Hanger