That Fracking Gas
That Fracking Gas
In the science fantasy TV adventure, Battlestar Galactic , angry moments led to passionate comments about some “fracking” whatever. Frack was never defined, but it was obviously bad. A nonfiction term of “fracking” may be truly bad for alternative energy.
Fracking refers to fracturing of rock strata to increase flow of natural gas (methane) and often smaller amounts of other hydrocarbons. The process is particularly useful in loosening gas from shale deposits.
Advances in horizontal drilling and three-dimensional (3-D) seismometry allow drilling a spider web of bore holes into a layer of shale. Then, high-pressure water, sand, and chemicals are pumped into the bore holes, causing them to swell and cause cracks in the rock. These fractures allow more passageways for the natural gas (or other fluids such as petroleum) to flow out faster.
Fracking is a major factor in a 35-percent increase in U.S. natural gas reserves during the past year. More importantly, it suggests that affordable natural gas may last another century, and those supplies could conceivably even replace much present gasoline and diesel fuel use. (This could be done either by modifying engines to burn natural gas directly or by processing the gas into synthetic fuel substitutes such as methanol for gasoline and dimethyl ether for diesel.
The fracking problem is that much of alternative energy is predicated on an expectation of radically higher fuel prices and even chronic shortages. Peak oil production would be followed within a decade or two by peak natural gas. High fuel prices would make it a more practical choice to pay the high upfront costs of solar water heating, solar heating, massive masonry for solar inertia, and dozens of other alternate energy technologies.
Conversely, those fracking drilling companies are changing the economic equation. Decades of natural gas defer a catastrophic rise in energy prices for that time period. High-cost investments in, say, photovoltaic panels with a 20-year payback may be even dicier as investments.
Of course, some “alternative energy” investments benefit. Cogeneration, where a power plant also supplies heat for another activity, becomes a much better investment if affordable natural gas is assured. Likewise, natural gas “combined cycle” power plants were considered in danger several years ago because of supply concerns. Not any more.
Meanwhile, well run cost-effective alternate energy projects can still make a profit.
Bibliography
· The Economics of Natural Gas: Drowning in It,” The Economist, August 13, 2009.
· Evans-Prichard, Ambrose, “Energy Crisis is Postponed as New Gas Rescues the World, Telegraph, Oct. 11, 2009. Accessed at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/629929`/Energy
· “Pathways and Sources of Contamination,” Earthworks website at http://www.earthworksaction.org/contaminantpathways.cfm. Accessed Oct. 19, 2009; describes environmental concerns.
In the science fantasy TV adventure, Battlestar Galactic , angry moments led to passionate comments about some “fracking” whatever. Frack was never defined, but it was obviously bad. A nonfiction term of “fracking” may be truly bad for alternative energy.
Fracking refers to fracturing of rock strata to increase flow of natural gas (methane) and often smaller amounts of other hydrocarbons. The process is particularly useful in loosening gas from shale deposits.
Advances in horizontal drilling and three-dimensional (3-D) seismometry allow drilling a spider web of bore holes into a layer of shale. Then, high-pressure water, sand, and chemicals are pumped into the bore holes, causing them to swell and cause cracks in the rock. These fractures allow more passageways for the natural gas (or other fluids such as petroleum) to flow out faster.
Fracking is a major factor in a 35-percent increase in U.S. natural gas reserves during the past year. More importantly, it suggests that affordable natural gas may last another century, and those supplies could conceivably even replace much present gasoline and diesel fuel use. (This could be done either by modifying engines to burn natural gas directly or by processing the gas into synthetic fuel substitutes such as methanol for gasoline and dimethyl ether for diesel.
The fracking problem is that much of alternative energy is predicated on an expectation of radically higher fuel prices and even chronic shortages. Peak oil production would be followed within a decade or two by peak natural gas. High fuel prices would make it a more practical choice to pay the high upfront costs of solar water heating, solar heating, massive masonry for solar inertia, and dozens of other alternate energy technologies.
Conversely, those fracking drilling companies are changing the economic equation. Decades of natural gas defer a catastrophic rise in energy prices for that time period. High-cost investments in, say, photovoltaic panels with a 20-year payback may be even dicier as investments.
Of course, some “alternative energy” investments benefit. Cogeneration, where a power plant also supplies heat for another activity, becomes a much better investment if affordable natural gas is assured. Likewise, natural gas “combined cycle” power plants were considered in danger several years ago because of supply concerns. Not any more.
Meanwhile, well run cost-effective alternate energy projects can still make a profit.
Bibliography
· The Economics of Natural Gas: Drowning in It,” The Economist, August 13, 2009.
· Evans-Prichard, Ambrose, “Energy Crisis is Postponed as New Gas Rescues the World, Telegraph, Oct. 11, 2009. Accessed at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/629929`/Energy
· “Pathways and Sources of Contamination,” Earthworks website at http://www.earthworksaction.org/contaminantpathways.cfm. Accessed Oct. 19, 2009; describes environmental concerns.
Comments
Post a Comment