It's going to take a Sarah Palin to drill the wells America will need to replace coal.
Open Access Article Originally Published: September 21, 2009
Reprinted from the 21 September 2009 edition of Peak Oil Review, published weekly by the ASPO-USA.
In late August the Vancouver Sun ran an article on the bullish prospects for Canadian shale gas. The piece began this way: “What energy crisis? Despite what you may be hearing about a global peak in oil production, waning reserves, and $100-plus oil prices, North America is suddenly awash in fossil fuel.”
The most arresting quote came from Mike Graham of EnCana, a Canadian company that holds dominant positions in British Columbia’s Montney and Horn River plays. “Natural gas will displace coal. It will displace oil. There is no reason North America shouldn’t be energy self-sufficient if we can displace a lot of the oil with natural gas.”
Are we all of a sudden “awash in fossil fuel?” On the road to “energy self-sufficiency?”
You may have your doubts, but when talking with key gas industry insiders, it’s clear they believe shale gas has changed the game. (We’ll explore the topic in depth at the upcoming ASPO conference in Denver, October 11-13th. To register: http://www.aspo-usa.com/2009denver/)
For example, Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy, believes the Marcellus shale, which underlies Appalachia, holds as much gas-in-place as the U.S. has used in its entire history. Production from the Marcellus is still negligible, and not all of that gas is recoverable, but the belief that America’s gas future is much brighter than we thought a few years ago is beginning to take root.
Ignoring the ubiquitous hype, let’s presuppose for a minute that increased domestic drilling, combined with large hikes in LNG imports, could lead to big increases in U.S. gas supply. What would be the highest and best use of that new gas?
To reduce the trade deficit and lessen U.S. dependence on foreign oil, you could launch an effort to use compressed natural gas in vehicles. (After decades of half-hearted efforts, there are still way
fewer than one million CNG vehicles on American roads, out of a fleet nearing 250 million.) If the goal is to save money and enhance national security, this would be the smartest strategy.
GO TO NEXT PAGE >>
|
| Times Article Viewed: 6227 |
|
|
|
Reader Comments
A valid email address and confirmation is required before your comment can be posted. Comments not confirmed within
24 hours are automatically deleted.
6 comments so far...
21-Sep-2009
68079
| |
Patrick,
Thanks for putting Randy's concerns to rest. Your arguments are sound and your data inarguable. I can trust you because I am certain you have no horse in the race.I am going to start leaving the doors on my home open in winter.
Love,
Gullible.
Posted by: Eric Olson
|
|
21-Sep-2009
68080
| |
The following quote from the last paragraph took my breath away:
- "to displace half the coal we now use with gas, we’d need to complete 30,000 to 50,000 new wells a year for decades to come"
Suddenly, I don't feel like going out to buy that plasma screen TV anymore. Better go for a trip in the wilderness while there is any wilderness left.
I am deeply disappointed that the author dismisses using LESS energy so quickly. Does he wish for a thousand wells in each pristine valley?
This is very disheartening.
Posted by: Myrto Ashe
|
|
23-Sep-2009
68100
| |
As the switch away from coal towards more sustainable sources of energy takes place you will need to look at gas no doubt about it. But gas should not be your only option and should as our technology is developed primarily be backup for wind solar and bio fuels. Also gas can and will play an important role as a clean and co2 friendly alternative to diesel in transportation.
Gas has the advantage over other fuels that each carbonatom holds 4 hydrogenatoms and thus contains more energy per carbonatom when burnt. The ratio is 2 to one when compared with coal and 3-2 when compared with diesel. But gas also has the advantage that it burns very cleanly.
In Denmark we have at mix of energy sources of which coal is an important ingredient today. Our electricity is produced from 20 % wind, 30 % biomaterial (incineration of straw and waste) 20 % ng 10 % hydro, 10% nuclear and 10% oil and other sources. The year 2050 plan proposed by the engneering society for a co2 neutral society calls for 20 % increase in wind and 20 % increase in bio, but also a 20% reduction in consumption.
To become truely carbon neutral you need to conserve energy and americans have the great advantage that they use excessive amounts so there are many opportunities for improvement. One example ; You will shortly see crossover vehicles or hybrids running on alternative fuels to gas and diesel,- that will significantly improve fuel efficiency while also running on cheaper and cleaner fuel ei NG. One example is the Ford S max from Langford that does 80 miles to the gallon for an ordinary midsize 7 seater. It is fitted with at micro gasturbine and batteries,- and weighs no more than a conventional version of the same car.
http://www.lpengines.com/news_detail.php?id=10
The switch away from coal towards gas and sustainable sources will not involve "30- 50.000 new wells for decades to come". Much less will do it.
The way I see it gas will play the role of backup for wind and solar ( as will incineration of waste and straw ) and it will play a key part in transportation.
Posted by: ole abildgaard
|
|
21-Sep-2009
68078
| |
Shale gas is a strong North American energy asset. Proven and economic water management strategies are available. Go to www.fountainquail.com for details.
Posted by: Patrick Horner
|
|
23-Sep-2009
68111
| |
Very nice post Ole.
I would hope we use our natural gas wisely and reserve as much as possible for future generations.
Two ways to get the most from NG is to use it in hybrid solar/NG thermal electricity generation plants and in CAES (compressed air energy storage).
We can build plants that use sunlight to make steam during the sunny part of the day and then run them using NG as needed during the dark hours. That way we use no fuel during the day and get double use out of the turbines and transmission lines during evening peak hours. And we have the NG ability available on dark days as a solar backup.
We are building, and must build, renewables to service peak hour demand. As we install wind turbines to meet peak demand we create surplus off peak energy which can be stored in underground caverns and later used to power turbines. To make this system work best, a relatively small amount of heat needs to be used to further expand the compressed air, and this is where NG comes into the picture.
CAES is already being used and is the least expensive way to store energy. Least expensive by a very large margin.
If we can use NG as a bridging technology to get us off of imported petroleum and reduce our carbon output, that's a great thing. But the final goal should be to get all carbon out of our personal transportation systems.
Posted by: Bob Wallace
|
|
23-Sep-2009
68113
| |
No!
Posted by: john hurt
|
|