Is Natural Gas No Better Than Coal?

This article was written by Oilprice.com -- the leading provider of energy news in the world. Also check out these recent articles.

new study by scientists from Purdue and Cornell suggests that the methane emissions from shale gas could be much higher than previously thought. The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, looked at fugitive methane emissions in Pennsylvania by flying an airplane over drilling sites and collecting samples. What they found was a bit unnerving.

"It is particularly noteworthy that large emissions were measured for wells in the drilling phase — in some cases 100 to 1,000 times greater than the inventory estimates," said Purdue chemistry professor Paul Shepson. "This indicates that there are processes occurring — such as emissions from coal seams during the drilling process — that are not captured in the inventory development process." The study measured 2 to 14 grams of methane per second per square kilometer over active drilling sites during a two day period. During the fracking process, operators at times drill through coal beds in order to get to gas, and methane can escape as a result. The wells leaking the most amount of methane, according to the study's results, were in the middle of the drilling phase.

The results are troubling because natural gas has been trumpeted for its supposed emissions benefits when compared to coal. The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change notes that hydraulic fracturing has been "an important reason for a reduction in GHG emissions in the United States." But it then goes on to say that more research is needed to understand the extent to which methane is escaping during the drilling process. The key threshold that scientists agree upon is 3.2%-if less than that amount of methane is being emitted than natural gas maintains its advantage over coal. The problem is that the latest Purdue/Cornell study pegs the fugitive rate at somewhere between 2.3% and 17.3%. Much hinges on the exact rate of methane leakage, but different studies have thus far produced very different results. Clearly, more study is needed, but the evidence at least suggests that there is a possibility that natural gas is no better for the climate than coal.

Not that greenhouse gas emissions are at the forefront of politician's minds, particularly in Pennsylvania where the Purdue/Cornell study was conducted. Even the Democratic candidates in this year's gubernatorial election in Pennsylvania are falling over each other to tout their plans to bring fracking riches to the state.

That makes the federal government's next steps on methane all the more pivotal. The EPA has rules coming into effect in 2015 that will govern new fracking sites. The so-called "green completion" rules will require operators beginning in January 2015 to capture methane that they have until now been flaring during the flowback phase. These rules are already likely leading to lower emissions as companies begin to comply with the rules ahead of next year's deadline. The White House is considering further action on methane, which would target other places along the supply chain, and has instructed EPA to study the matter. The Obama administration will decide later this year if it wants to pursue tougher regulation.

But the Purdue/Cornell study also suggests that the EPA does not have even the basic data from which to regulate. If methane emissions are escaping at a rate that deviates sharply from what EPA believes, forthcoming rules may not be appropriately calibrated. However, with the White House directing the EPA to study the matter more closely, it is possible that it also comes to the conclusion that methane is leaking into the atmosphere at a higher rate than it previously thought. If that occurs, it would be more likely that the Obama administration decides to take tougher action on methane before the President's term is up in late 2016.

3 stock picks to ride America's energy bonanza
Record oil and natural gas production is revolutionizing the United States' energy position. Finding the right plays while historic amounts of capital expenditures are flooding the industry will pad your investment nest egg. For this reason, the Motley Fool is offering a look at three energy companies using a small IRS "loophole" to help line investor pockets. Learn this strategy, and the energy companies taking advantage, in our special report "The IRS Is Daring You To Make This Energy Investment." Don't miss out on this timely opportunity; click here to access your report -- it's absolutely free. 

 


Read/Post Comments (4) | Recommend This Article (2)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On April 16, 2014, at 2:56 PM, Schneidku40 wrote:

    There's an error in the second paragraph- "During the fracking process, operators at times drill through coal beds in order to get to gas, and methane can escape as a result." Fracing takes place after drilling has been completed. There is no drilling taking place during the fracing process.

    As far as the whole article, I think the title and description could be more specific in describing the area of concern is likely only Pennsylvania, where there are large coal beds between the ground surface and the formation targeted for natural gas recovery. The same method of drilling in North Dakota's or Texas's shale plays are not likely to have the same issues because for the most part they do not drill through such large coal seams to get to the pay formation.

  • Report this Comment On April 16, 2014, at 9:53 PM, drdrab wrote:

    In addition to what Schneidku40 stated, the coal beds would only be open for a few days before being behind casing and cement. Nothing compared to what is discharged during coal mining.

    Just another anti-fracing hit piece.

  • Report this Comment On April 17, 2014, at 9:17 AM, Mathman6577 wrote:

    The radical greenies don't want any fossil fuels. They want solar, wind, biogas, etc. and want us to go back to the horse and buggy days.

  • Report this Comment On April 17, 2014, at 10:20 AM, Heidikitty wrote:

    If the Obama administration decides to make tougher action on methane how will that affect the off shore drilling, coal in places like W Va and Penn not to mention our dependency on foreign oil and if we are more dependent on foreign oil how will that affect us ref safety of our country. I just do not get it. We are loosing jobs and we need all the help we can get to be independent of other countries.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2917609, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 10/2/2014 7:08:00 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement