Perpetual Innovation

Category: NatGas

  • Natural gas, the media’s failures, and you « The Cost of Energy

    Natural gas, the media’s failures, and you « The Cost of Energy:

    Ouch!

    “The Cost of Energy” Lou Grinzo blogs (and reblogs) about how unclear NatGas really is. It all has to do with the Methane released from the fracking.

    See the reprint of the blog at EthicsAndClimate.org from Dr. Brown.

    Sadly NatGas may really not be cleaner than Coal. How dirty is that!

    Here’s my comments over to Lou’s post.
    Okay, as always, your blogs are extremely informative, with lots of facts that are well substantiated. The Dr. Brown article is a real eye opener on fracking.

    Ouch! This is ugly. So we really don’t gain anything from NatGas except maybe fuel independence — and a wonderful improvement to our US trade (im)balance!:-(

    The question I have for all of this NatGas is here and now. Half of the NatGas in the US is flared. So when we say that NatGas is 50% cleaner than coal, do we count the other 100% that is flared in the making? Oh, wait, we aren’t saying that NatGas is actually cleaner than coal. It may not be!

    Don’t get me wrong, there’s a safety and a transport issue here with flaring…

    Good news is that much of the flaring is probably methane, right? So it could be worse, there might not be as much flaring. Simply releasing the methane would be a hefty magnitude worse?

    And, of course, the point is that there should be no (short-term) plan to switch to NatGas without some follow-on plan to switch completely to sustainable fuel/power.

    Much like our US energy policy, if there is one, the short-term plan is the only plan, even though it is based on exhaustible resources. That is, the plan is broken as designed.

    Non-sustainability, over time, has a way of giving a wicked whiplash effect. And somehow, everyone with this broken short-term plan feel warm and cuddly about it.

    Double ouch!

    ‘via Blog this’

  • Study: Natural gas industry can cut fracking emissions

    Study: Natural gas industry can cut fracking emissions:

    This would be great to minimize the methane from the fracking of wells.

    Since NatGas is soooo much cleaner than coal (and gasoline). It is a slam-dunk decision as a way to start moving away from coal.

    Of course, it is not a sustainable solution for the looong term. NatGas could be a bridge fuel to a clean and renewable future.

    ‘via Blog this’

  • Ceres Monthly Newsletter – Flaring of Gas/NatGas

    Ceres Monthly Newsletter:
    Ceres Monthly Newsletter – Flaring of Gas/NatGas
    This report starts to document the amount of gas (nat gas) that is flared in the production of oil/gas.

    In the US we can’t get the nat gas to market, so it is imply flared in many cases. The oil (wet particulates) are much more valuable so that is shipped by pipe if possible, but by truck or train if not.

    One statement from a CEO in the oil patch has commented that half of the nat gas produces in the US is being flared. Safety, of course is critical. But this is a humongous waste of energy and environmental waste as well.

    Check out the article and then look at the report here: http://www.ceres.org/resources/reports/flaring-up-north-dakota-natural-gas-flaring-more-than-doubles-in-two-years/view

    Basic economics is one approach to this issue. If NatGas were more valuable, then there would be very little flaring. Right now it is about $3.50 (per … unit) in the USA. So Nat gas is a byproduct of the production of oil unless it can be readily distributed to market (pipeline).  But for the world markets, NatGas is very valuable, let’s say $10. If we can bridge the gap from domestic only to world, then the price would jump and the flaring would, well, burn out. 🙂

    The key is liquefied natural gas (LNG). Not coincidentally, LNG is the trading symbol of Chaniere Energy, one the the leading players in infrastructure for exporting LNG.

    ‘via Blog this’

  • US energy use dropped in 2012 as renewables, natural gas rose | Ars Technica

    US energy use dropped in 2012 as renewables, natural gas rose | Ars Technica:

    Yes, the US has backed off a little with energy use during the recession, especially.

    That would be a good thing if not for the emissions from China and India.

    This is an AMAZING chart of the energy in and the energy out within the USofA. This has been an interesting chart to watch over the years.

    ~95.1 Quads

    That is Quadrillion BTUs. (British Thermal Unit). If you think a Quadrillion is a LOT, you are right.

    Double interesting in this picture is the the “rejected energy”. That is 58.1, estimated to be the same as that used. Therefore the right side is about 116.2 (58.1 + 58.1). I guess the left side is the 95.1

    It takes some time to fully understand this diag, over time it is very interesting.

    Note the drop in Coal in the US. Nat gas is so clean and cheap it is likely to put coal out of business. In the USA anyway.

    We’ll send it to China? By now China must have exceeded half of the worlds coal consumption.

    Want to look at forecasts of the future, go to US Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2013.

    ‘via Blog this’

  • AP IMPACT: CO2 emissions in US drop to 20-year low – Yahoo! News

    AP IMPACT: CO2 emissions in US drop to 20-year low – Yahoo! News:

    CO2 from the US is down. WOW!. See the full EIA report on CO2 Emissions.

    The last time we had that was in 2009, we all assumed that was mainly because of the economic slowdown. But apparently, even then, part of it was because of the switching to NatGas.

    “[T]he U.S. Energy Information Agency, a part of the Energy Department, said this month that energy related U.S. CO2 emissions for the first four months of this year fell to about 1992 levels. Energy emissions make up about 98 percent of the total.“

     So the big reasons for the CO2 emissions reduction is primarily because of the switch to NatGas from coal in energy generation! … The slowing of economic growth down to 1.8% is another reason. 

     What’s amazing about this is that the switch to natgas is primarily driven by market forces. The power industry has been wining endlessly about the big food of the EPA on the juggler veins of the power industry… and of course the US economy. Yet, the move happened way ahead of schedule. 

     Low prices of nat gas make it, well, irresponsible, not to switch to clean gas away from dirty coal.

    Health benefits (fewer deaths and injuries in mining). Massive improvement in air and water quality. No coal ash to deal with.

     This would all be a good thing, if it weren’t for the massive increase in coal consumption from China and India. Where, exactly, is the benefit of us cutting back on coal when we simply ship it to China and they burn it. And they don’t worry about scrubbing it as much as we.

    China now burns half the coal in the world, and rising quickly.

     Sorry for looking good news in the eye and sounding skeptical. We sometimes simply need a little good news here and there and just to enjoy it.

     Ahhhh, NatGas, A cleaner addiction to a unsustainable problem.

    ‘via Blog this’