Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on February 16, 2013
Natural Gas Drilling = A Future of Dependence
Contrary to the folktales the gas companies spin, shale gas development is not about energy independence, increased jobs, or protection from climate change. Shale gas development is about profits for the gas companies regardless of the harms or costs to the United States of America and us as citizens. It’s important not to be fooled by the rhetoric of the gas drilling industry.
Currently there are at least 15 applications for liquefied-natural-gas (LNG) export facilities pending before the federal government. These applications, along with already-approved exports, would have the capacity to move more than 40 percent of the U.S. annual production of natural gas to foreign countries. The gas companies want the exports overseas because they can sell the gas for as much as three times the price they can capture here in the U.S. At present there is a glut of gas in this country, so unless the industry sells it overseas the companies won’t get their immediate cash sale reward.
Expert reports and data demonstrate that as LNG exports generate generous profits for the gas drillers and export companies, other sectors of our country’s economy remain in decline. In other words, LNG exports only benefit the gas industry.
Similarly, LNG exports, while creating some jobs in the gas industry–many temporary–create a net-job-loss effect for the country. In fact, LNG exports could result in the net loss of as many as 270,000 jobs per year here at home.
The Environmental Cost
New research emerges almost daily showing the harms of shale gas on our communities, our country, and our earth. Among the most recent scientific findings is that as much as 9 percent of the methane–one of the most potent greenhouse gases known to man–produced while drilling for gas is lost to the atmosphere. That 9 percent coupled with all the methane emitted during the transport of gas through pipelines, during storage, and when the gas is used means that shale gas is a more potent contributor to climate change than any other fossil fuel–21 times more potent than carbon dioxide if you look over a 100-year period. If you look over the next 20 years, when it is the most crucial that we reduce damaging emissions, natural gas is more than 100 times more potent.
The unparalleled level of harm to drinking water, air quality, food supplies, and people’s health that results from ongoing and increased drilling and fracking for shale gas comes with a high price tag for the United States economy and the nation’s taxpayers. Not only do our communities lose out on life’s basic needs–clean air, water, food, and health–but also we as taxpayers have to pay the upfront and long-term financial burden of these harms, including the necessary cleanup and healthcare costs.
The deforestation, land compaction, wetlands destruction, and increased earthquake potential inflicted by shale gas development means increased flooding and flood-ravaged homes and communities; it means increased erosion of public and private lands; it means the fear and harm of earthquakes; it means lost fishing, hunting, boating, birding, and all of the jobs they generate. And of course, someone has to pay for all this harm. That someone is you–and me!–in the form of emergency services, taxes, hazard mitigation, and more national debt.
The Financial Cost
Transforming our country into one dependent on shale gas instead of oil and coal will also be a costly process fiscally: By some estimates, it will cost as much as $700 billion. Most recent estimates from the United States Geologic Survey of the volume of Marcellus Shale gas that may be recoverable is a mean value of about 84 trillion cubic feet. At the current U.S. consumption rate of 24 trillion cubic feet per year, chasing after this gas, and incurring all of the harm shale drilling and fracking brings, will only give an additional 3 ½ years of supply.
Other estimates of unproven reserves show all U.S. natural gas to last approximately 10 to 21 years at this consumption rate. The timeline for infrastructure replacement gets further shortened as LNG exports increase. Wouldn’t it be smarter to spend our money on the infrastructure needed for sustainable energy sources like solar, wind, geothermal? We’re going to have to do it at some point. Why not now?
While we invest in transforming our national energy program to one that is based on drilled and fracked shale gas, the rest of the world is wisely racing ahead of the United States in developing the technology and manufacturing facilities necessary to create and supply sustainable energy. And in just a few short decades, when the shale gas is gone, we’ll find ourselves more dependent than ever on foreign sources of energy–this time, on the technology needed to create a sustainable energy supply.
The gas-drilling industry is not interested in gaining energy independence, addressing climate change, growing jobs, or improving our economy. The gas-drilling industry, including the pipeline and export companies, is interested in growing its profits. We must not be fooled by the rhetoric or well-paid advertisements. When we rely on the scientific facts, it’s clear, there is no place for LNG exports or the shale gas development the industry supports. Sustainable energy and increased efficiency must not be just our future, but our present as well.
Here’s what you can do to help us get closer to a sustainable energy future:
- Congress is deciding right now what to do about LNG exports. Write your congressional representatives today. Tell them you don’t want them to support LNG exports because doing so hurts our economy, jobs, the health of our kids, and that of our communities and environment, and prevents us from becoming the leaders we should be in sustainable-energy technology and manufacturing.
- And sign the petition to tell President Obama you don’t want him to sell fracked gas to foreign countries. Our collective voice matters!
14 Comments on "Natural Gas Drilling = A Future of Dependence"
Plantagenet on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 2:33 am
I disagree.
Of course we want to sell LNG to foreign countries. It creates good paying jobs and HELPS our economy.
AND of course we want to replace coal in our power plants with NG—-it releases much less CO2 into the atmosphere.
AND of course we want to switch cars and trucks from oil to NG—we’re running out of oil, Dude.
BillT on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 4:17 am
Well, dude…it doesn’t matter what you think as that will NOT affect the future other than yours. Fraking is a bubble that is about to burst for oil and NG. There are a lot of dreams floating around, but the economy is going to change them quickly. How many NG companies were or are being driven to bankruptcy by low gas prices? Many. All the hype is about getting the few suckers that still have money to invest in their dreams. Who makes the money? The few at the top that get theirs first. Who gets the shaft? The investors and the land owners.
No, fraking should be banned totally. We need to be weaned from the petroholic nightmare we have been in the last few years (fraking, Tar sands, deep ocean, Arctic, etc.) We need the shock of reality and the end of the age of petro by a huge price shock that stops the insanity NOW!.
GregT on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 5:46 am
The exact same thing is happening in Canada. Daily full page newspaper ads, television ads, and radio ads. All telling the public how environmentally safe these practices are, how many jobs will be created and how much money will go to the public coffer. Our provincial premier just announced two days ago, that LNG will wipe out all government debt, and even end taxes in the province of BC by 2025. All of this 3 months before an election, of course.
It really is amazing how the lies keep getting bigger and bigger, and people just don’t seem to pay attention.
baldwincng on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 8:23 am
The author has confused shale gas – which has no material impact on the environment – with oil shale which does have an impact closer to open cast coal mining
Shale gas can save the planet from global warming by helping us to capture the carbon from coal – by leaving it in place.
DC on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 8:34 am
You know Greg, I often wonder why no one hasnt yet complained to the CRTC about the dubious claims that CRAP, sorry CAPP has been spamming the airwaves with. I know the CRTC is pretty toothless, but if groups got together and complained about the accuracy and content of those ads, the publicity alone might force them to back off some no? After all, when was the last time any of saw an anti-tar sands on Toob?
Yea, zero. Lack of desire has nothing to do with it of course. But I wonder if such ads were produced if they would ever get past the regulators. Naturally, Pro-tar sands propaganda will always get a pass, no matter how questionable there claims may be.
GregT on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 9:13 am
The media makes it’s money from advertising. Big Oil and Big Business means Big Money. Biting the hand that feeds you is not a smart thing to do if you want to continue eating.
We are in desperate need of alternate media in Canada, unfortunately somebody needs to pay for it. Most people are already so brainwashed by the MMM that it would be very difficult to gain enough support.
SOS on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 10:22 am
Facebook will get a tax return of about 450 million this yr. they aren’t in business to help you stay in touch with family and friends, they are in business to make money and receive huge subsidies from the taxpayers.
With that said this article is rediculous. Of course the gas companies are in it for profit. They supply energy that people buy.
Maybe the dream of peak oil and the anger some of you are consumed with because you believe tripe like this article, would be better advanced if we just outlawed all drilling? It’s that darn drilling, and it’s done for profit not to help us, that is preventing the triumph of the peak oil prophecy.
Critical thinking skills help people become logical, level headed, clear thinking individuals. Emotions are not a good substitute for critical thinking skills.
keith on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 11:14 am
CBC.
keith on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 11:18 am
All this supposed wealth. Climate change duh! We are screwing are grand children. The way we scoff and look down at the 50’s. How will they look at us? The word hate comes to mind.
econ101 on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 12:16 pm
Face Book gets a 500 million dollar tax return this year, or should I say a subsidy or they are expoiting a loophole? Could it be they are about profits and not about keeping you in touch with family and friends. The dairy queen in town just opened another location, they are raking in the cash at a record pace. could it be they are in business to make money and not provide us all with cool dairy treats?
GregT on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 5:53 pm
Even the CBC is guilty. I watched a program a couple of weeks back with David Suzuki talking about the importance of water and air to the survival of our planet.
The same ads were running during the sponsor breaks. Promoting Tar Sands development and pipeline expansion.
Kenz300 on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 7:13 pm
How long will it be before the current oil exporting nations reduce oil exports because of increasing demand at home and diminishing supplies?
Natural Gas may be needed here at home to power the economy rather than for export.
DC on Sat, 16th Feb 2013 8:25 pm
SoS. you dont need to spam the same tripe with your econ-sock, we got it the 1st time ok?
@Keith. The CBC is hardly alternative media. Far too many times they simply regurgitate garbage form Amerikan Propaganda (AP) and try to pass that off as ‘news’. Actual reporters doing there own actual investigating and reporting are very thin on the ground these days at the CBC. As such, the reporting coming out is only occasionally reflects a Canadian veiewpoint, and is in most cases, virtually identical to that of he United Snakes. The news division itself is pretty tar-sands friendly, less so on the documentary side, they still seem to have some independence.
Bottom line, Those CAPP ads need to be legally challenged, even if the elite say they are fine, the bad publicity alone would be worth it.
Kenz300 on Sun, 17th Feb 2013 7:03 pm
Quote — “Shale gas development is about profits for the gas companies regardless of the harms or costs to the United States of America and us as citizens. It’s important not to be fooled by the rhetoric of the gas drilling industry.”
————————-
Sums it up pretty well.