If you are unable to view the message below, please read it on our website.

Friend,

Public meeting on drilling in the Loyalsock State Forest    • Williamsport, 06/03 A Watershed United: First annual meeting and conference of the Coalition of the Delaware River Watershed    • Lambertville, NJ, 06/10 Climate Change Advisory Committee meetings, 2013 Harrisburg open to the public; dates subject to change    • July 2    • October 8 PennFuture Facts is available for reprint in newspapers and other publications. Authors are available for print or broadcast interviews. For more information, please contact us at 717-214-7920, or info@pennfuture.org.

Vol. 13, No. 8 - April 13, 2011
A Tale of Two Studies

Download a pdf-formatted version of this issue.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way...

A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens

An article published this week in The New York Times highlights two new studies that suggest that fugitive methane emissions from drilling and transporting natural gas may negate the presumed reduction in heat-trapping gases from burning natural gas instead of coal or oil.

Simply put, when natural gas is burned, it creates about half of the carbon dioxide of coal, and about 30 percent of oil. That is a critical advantage if we want to tackle the imminent threat of climate change. But methane is 21 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, so releases of methane during the drilling process and from leaky pipelines could – and according to the studies cited, do – more than offset the combustion advantage.

The studies call into question the strategy of using natural gas to turn off coal fired power plants and of switching auto and trucks fuels as a way to slow down climate change.

They contradict an assessment of the life cycle carbon dioxide emissions from coal and gas combustion by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), which found that gas combustion was 50 per cent less carbon intensive than coal.

And the studies add fuel to the raging debate over the perils and promise of shale gas development in Pennsylvania.

A cold, hard look shows that these studies are not the final answer. The studies certainly do not contradict the public health benefits associated with fuel switching. The reductions in toxic mercury, arsenic, soot, and smog pollution that can be gained by switching from coal and oil to natural gas will improve public health and save lives. Nor do they erase the environmental costs of coal – 5,000 miles of dead streams and 180,000 acres of abandoned mine lands in Pennsylvania, and 500 or so mountaintops in West Virginia that have been lopped off and dumped into stream beds in mountain top removal mining – to cite three obvious examples. Nor do they obliterate the national security advantage that an abundant source of domestically-produced energy brings.

Even the authors admit that these studies are not definitive. The assumptions that led to the reports' conclusions matter, especially the chosen time-horizons. Methane dissipates in the atmosphere in 20 years, but carbon dioxide persists for a century or more. Given the shaky underlying data and the questionable assumptions used, there is clearly a need for the scientific process of free inquiry and peer review to do its vitally important work.

David Hawkins, the director of climate programs with the Natural Resources Defense Council, summed up the situation well: "This is a huge and growing industry, and we just don't have the information we need to make sure that this resource is being developed as cleanly as it can be."

Citizens and regulators alike need more information. Some suggest this is a reason to halt Marcellus Shale gas drilling – that we should stop all drilling until all the unknowns are known. Ironically, the same argument was made a few years ago in Pennsylvania about wind power.

Perhaps, in a perfect world, we could take this path.

But the planet is warming at an alarming rate, thanks to our reliance on coal and oil. Using coal to create our electricity puts us all at risk. It annually causes 14,000 to 36,000 premature deaths; 23,000 nonfatal heart attacks; 21,000 cases of acute bronchitis; 240,000 cases of aggravated asthma; and 1.9 million missed school and work days.

We do not live in a perfect world. We will never have perfect information. Every source of energy carries risks. We must balance the risks that we know through tight, evolving regulation and strict enforcement. We must study the risks that we don't know enough about. And we must be open to considering risks we haven't considered. Policy and regulation should go where the science leads.

At a minimum, the two studies reported in The New York Times point the way to additional research. They place the issue of fugitive methane emissions on the agenda of tighter regulation of all aspects of unconventional gas drilling.

And they illustrate the power of incredulity, and the importance of wisdom.

What city will we choose to live in?

Forward To A Friend   Visit Us Online   Contact Us   Unsubscribe  Update Your Account

Copyright 2011 PennFuture. All Rights Reserved.