Marcellus worse than coal for global warming?

[CodorusTUTom]

This Cornell study concludes that may be the case:

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/04/shale_gas_worse_for_global_war.html

 

[bikerfish]

guess we're all safe to plant palm trees soon!

 

[franklin]

Looks like most of the peers conclude it's based on unrealistic assumptions.

 

[pcray1231]

That is, assuming the well isn't flared. If its flared, then no. And thats just shale gas, as more is vented, it's nowhere close for non-shale sources.

Also, I wonder if the study took into account transportation. Coal is trucked, trained, etc. When you add up all the diesel fuel used.... And gas is piped.

And, nobody was questioning the health effects, acid rain, etc. where natural gas has a clear advantage (though neither are problem free).

What the study points out, correctly, and importantly, is that if the natural gas from shale is vented then a lot of methane makes it into the atmosphere, and methane is many times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2. I don't think the author was pretending that the conclusions were valid, as "the data available is far from perfect". I think he was successfully pointing out a source of greenhouse gas emmissions from gas, and one that'd be relatively easy to remedy. He kicked off a series of beneficial discussions, but doesn't pretend to be the final word.

 

[Selfinflictedfunk]

Here's a little added reading

This was posted yesterday....

http://scienceblogs.com/classm/2011/04/natural_gas_wont_save_us.php

This is from 2006......

http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/3/8/222920/5485


Lets face it we have known about problems with the natural gas industry for a long time but let's not expect solutions or enforcement of current laws (or any new laws) to the detriment of the money that flows from it. I'm actually over it. This government (fed and state) will do whatever they want while putting on a horse and pony show to try and make us all feel better. Enjoy the outdoors while you can.

 

[franklin]

pcray1231 wrote:
That is, assuming the well isn't flared. If its flared, then no. And thats just shale gas, as more is vented, it's nowhere close for non-shale sources.

Also, I wonder if the study took into account transportation. Coal is trucked, trained, etc. When you add up all the diesel fuel used.... And gas is piped.

And, nobody was questioning the health effects, acid rain, etc. where natural gas has a clear advantage (though neither are problem free).

What the study points out, correctly, and importantly, is that if the natural gas from shale is vented then a lot of methane makes it into the atmosphere, and methane is many times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2. I don't think the author was pretending that the conclusions were valid, as "the data available is far from perfect". I think he was successfully pointing out a source of greenhouse gas emmissions from gas, and one that'd be relatively easy to remedy. He kicked off a series of beneficial discussions, but doesn't pretend to be the final word.

I read the study. It did not appear to take into account any impacts of mining, transporting, scrubbing, or ash disposal for coal. The study does take into account various losses of gas into the atmosphere in the drilling, production, and transportation of gas.

 

[pcray1231]

So, basically, for the issue of greenhouse emissions only:

All greenhouse emissions from the entire lifecycle of natural gas production and use is roughly equal to the greenhouse emissions of only the use of coal. I believe that. But for a fair comparison, you'd have to do the whole lifecycle of coal too, no? Transportation, mining, etc. Plus, coal contains plenty of methane, and I'm sure quite a bit is emitted during all of these operations, perhaps more than is emitted in natural gas wells and pipes.

My guess is that it's a good article and brings up some good points that can be looked at and improved upon in the gas industry. But it was never intended for the public to use it to draw a comparison between the damages of gas and coal.

 

[franklin]

pcray1231 wrote:
So, basically, for the issue of greenhouse emissions only:

All greenhouse emissions from the entire lifecycle of natural gas production and use is roughly equal to the greenhouse emissions of only the use of coal. I believe that. But for a fair comparison, you'd have to do the whole lifecycle of coal too, no? Transportation, mining, etc. Plus, coal contains plenty of methane, and I'm sure quite a bit is emitted during all of these operations, perhaps more than is emitted in natural gas wells and pipes.

My guess is that it's a good article and brings up some good points that can be looked at and improved upon in the gas industry. But it was never intended for the public to use it to draw a comparison between the damages of gas and coal.

The problem I have with this kind of study is that it generates headlines which give the general public a false impression. Most people don't have the background or the time to read the study and understand the details.