Article

2016-03-20 -Land of the Free

Fracking to Prompt Sharp Rise in Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Study Says

[An Nahar] Fracking is set to lead to a sharp rise in emissions of climate changing greenhouse gases, newly undermining industry and government claims that shale gas is a relatively clean fuel that can help combat global warming, an authoritative new study reveals.

On Thursday, the United States and Canada agreed to cut methane emissions from the oil and gas industry by almost half.

The new study strikes another blow at the strategy of both the US and British governments to rely on shale gas as a relatively clean "bridge" from dirty fossil fuels to non-polluting renewable sources such as the sun, winds, waves and tides.

Their policies are based on the fact that gas emits only half as much carbon dioxide as coal when it is burned -- but do not take into account the leakage of methane and other greenhouse gases during the process. When these are added in, studies show, shale gas can create even more pollution than coal.

The new study -- led by a former director of the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Civil Enforcement, who now heads the Environmental Integrity Project -- focuses on emissions from industrial developments spurred by development of fracking fuel.

How do we know the EPA report wasn't written by the Natural Resources Defense Fund?

Or the Sierra Fund. Meh. More CO2 in the atmosphere means more plant growth sucking it up. Result: more food for the population, decreased desertification, and a return to the normal range. It's one of those self-regulating systems thingies, donchaknow

Posted by Fred 2016-03-20 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11134 views ] Top

#1 not an epa report

and it didn't say what Al Hahar said,

the report was more indirect - it said that petrochemical plants using natural gas from fracking would emit carbon ---- well duh.

Posted by lord garth 2016-03-20 01:03|| 2016-03-20 01:03|| Front Page Top

#2 I'll take the Greenies seriously when they acknowledge the success of GW Bush's global program to reduce methane emissions, which Obama canned. It did more to reduce GHG emissions than all the solar panels on the planet. And vastly cheaper of course.

Posted by phil_b 2016-03-20 03:19|| 2016-03-20 03:19|| Front Page Top

#3 I take environmentalists very seriously---more seriously than I take ISIS.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2016-03-20 04:30|| 2016-03-20 04:30|| Front Page Top

#4 I also take them seriously, they are a threat to humanity and should be rooted out where found.

Posted by Silentbrick 2016-03-20 07:53|| 2016-03-20 07:53|| Front Page Top

#5 I never take Greenies CLAIMS seriously.

I take them as seriously as I do any other fascist organization like the Democrats.

Posted by AlanC 2016-03-20 09:03|| 2016-03-20 09:03|| Front Page Top

#6 but do not take into account the leakage of methane and other greenhouse gases during the process. When these are added in, studies show, shale gas can create even more pollution than coal.

Leakage? Did they drill holes in the supply line so the 'methane and other greenhouse gases' would leak out? Leakage can be managed fairly easily. Yes - I'm serious - these are the same types of people who would 'adjust' temperature data to reflect their preferred conclusion or deliberately place senors and measuring equipment in the center of asphalt parking lots and outside of air-conditioning units in order to 'measure' higher temperatures. Drilling holes is not a stretch and of course if you drill enough holes it 'can create even more pollution than coal.'

I'll take them seriously as a serious threat to the country's economic well being and our freedoms.

Posted by CrazyFool 2016-03-20 09:46|| 2016-03-20 09:46|| Front Page Top

#7 Methane emissions from the oil and gas industry can be eliminated mechanically.
Global warming can never be eliminated by either mechanical or any other means known to man.

It is not the oil companies that pollute the environment. They only extract and refine the products that the public demands.
It is the PEOPLE who demand, buy, and BURN the fuel that pollutes the environment.

Posted by junkiron 2016-03-20 18:35|| 2016-03-20 18:35|| Front Page Top

#8 Well sure.
Cheaper gas and folks will drive more.

Posted by Skidmark 2016-03-20 19:28|| 2016-03-20 19:28|| Front Page Top

#9 In coming decades "fracking" will be deemed by the UN OWG as a "Crime agz the Planet/Humanity" despite its utility in finding out new reservoirs of oil-gas, espec from depleted or difficult fields.

Which begs the Maha-Rushian Questionne' - WHAT TECH(S) WILL BE DEV AS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE(S) TO "FRACKING" AFTER TEAR 0250???

[CAPSIZED USN BB USS"OKLAHOMA" = "FRACK-QUAKED" US STATE OF OKLAHOMA here].

Posted by JosephMendiola 2016-03-20 20:40|| 2016-03-20 20:40|| Front Page Top

#10 Perhaps more importantly, who gets to play "TANK GIRL" in future Reboot???

Posted by JosephMendiola 2016-03-20 20:41|| 2016-03-20 20:41|| Front Page Top

#11 As Glenn Reynolds often says, I'll believe that global warming is a crisis when people who tell me it's a crisis start acting (and living) like it's a crisis.

Instead of flying around the world in private jets to Bali to attend a conference they could easily do via teleconferencing.
Instead of living in huge houses.
Instead of being driven around in huge limousines.

Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2016-03-20 21:04|| 2016-03-20 21:04|| Front Page Top

14:48 NoMoreBS
14:31 NoMoreBS
14:16 NoMoreBS
14:15 NoMoreBS
14:04 swksvolFF
13:47 Regular joe
13:43 swksvolFF
13:38 swksvolFF
13:34 swksvolFF
13:31 Abu Uluque
13:25 Heribertus Vedente
13:24 mossomo
13:20 Abu Uluque
13:14 mossomo
13:06 swksvolFF
12:51 Grom the Affective
12:31 Abu Uluque
12:20 swksvolFF
12:17 Abu Uluque
12:08 swksvolFF
12:08 ed in texas
12:05 ed in texas
12:01 ed in texas
12:00 ed in texas