My Opinion

I have just realised that my blog is actually called ‘A Fracking Good Idea’ and the majority of my posts have been very negative about the topic. So I think it’s finally time that I let you all know my own personal opinion, in case you hadn't already guessed.

When I first started this blog I was already relatively well informed on the topic of fracking and its positives and negatives, however, from writing each post I have learnt something new (and I hope you have too). Not only have I been surprised by the amount of puns used within the fracking debate but also the secrets, dirty politics and overall negative vibe around the topic. I used to be supportive of fracking (hence the title of the blog) as a gateway resource to a cleaner economy while increasing economic and energy security at the same time but since doing so much research it has become clear to me that, in my personal opinion, the negatives far outweigh the positives. I know that we still don’t know how safe fracking will be in the UK so I’m not making any firm decisions just yet but if it is similar to what has been happening over in the US I do not want it near me, even if it will lower energy prices. I recently came across a term in Tim Flannery's new book 'Atmosphere of Hope' where he refers to shale gas as 'fossil fuel-lite' which is perfect for indicating that it is not as bad but still a fossil fuel at the end of the day. I think money would be better put into developing renewable energy rather than wasting time trying to stick with fossil fuels, it's almost as if fracking is a last hurrah for our relationship with fossil fuels before we finally let them go and move on. Shale gas still has the potential to get us into a lower carbon, more efficient and self-sustaining economy but is it worth the risk or can future advancements reduce these risks? What shale we do? (Final pun)

Overall, I now think the move to natural gas may actually be a fracking bad idea. 

Since this is likely going to be my last blog I think I'll leave you all with a quote from Barack Obama when he was on Bear Goes Wild (best episode ever). He compared climate change to driving a car towards a cliff. 'You don't have to screech to a halt at the last second you can just keep tapping at the breaks. This is how we need to deal with climate change and the transition away from fossil fuels in order to reduce carbon emissions.'

This analogy is perfect for saying that fracking may well be an essential gateway resource to a lower carbon economy. It is definitely not the sole solution and shouldn't be relied upon in the long-term but it can help on our path to a renewable world. 

Underground Coal Gasification

Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) is a process by which coal that is unable to be mined for economic and technological reasons can be converted to a product gas while still in the ground (van der Riet, 2008). The coal is ignited in situ and oxidants are injected into the seam at high pressure to convert inaccessible coal into a gas that can be easily extracted through drilling technology similar to that used for fracking. The main gaseous products that come from this process include methane, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and hydrogen (Cui, 2014) that can then be used to produce power and chemical/liquid fuels.

UCG offers an opportunity to extract energy from coal reserves while avoiding many of the health and environmental impacts involved in mining (Greg and Edgar, 1978). It eliminates the dangers that go with conventional mining and has minimal above ground disturbances while producing low-cost energy, it also reduces the need to transport and expose of ash. However, this is a developing industry so there are many disadvantages and problems with method and tests. Many of the major trials have be conducted in the USA, Russia, China and Europe but site criteria has not yet been established (Coach, 2009). Despite 50 years of development there are still only 3 active UCG projects in the world (see map below). There are still many concerns with groundwater contamination and ground subsidence but the Chinchilla project in Australia reported neither of these impacts just 20,000 tonnes of cheap coal (Sury et al., 2004). The British Geological Survey has estimated that there could be 17 billion tonnes of coal eligible for UCG in the UK which has the potential to sustain our energy needs for 289 years.

Source.

There has been a lot of public opposition towards UCG due to its similarity to fracking but with a moreharmful resource. It has been known to cause a lot of the same environmental impacts while still emitting greenhouse gases  and the only advantage is its low cost.

For more detailed information on UCG see Bahl et al. (2014). 

Re-Fracking

Since my last blog was about the future of fracking I felt it was very relevant to follow with re-fracking as many believe this could dramatically influence what happens in the industry in the next few years.

Typically a fracking well only extracts 12% of the oil or gas available meaning almost 90% is left in the ground. The process of re-fracking takes away the need to drill and frack a new well, instead the energy company can simply re-frack the same well at 25% of the cost to untap the trapped oil and gas left behind from the first attempt. With better knowledge, technology and equipment the costs and potential of this process are set to largely improve in the next few years.

One of the first companies to try this technique is Marathon Oil Corp (MOC) in 2014. They have stated that the re-fracked wells have outperformed all expectations thus far and so many other energy companies are now attempting to follow in their footsteps.

 Source.

US shale oil production is set to peak in 2020 but re-fracking could rejuvenate the industry and increase the yield of old wells. This is now common enough in the US to warrant a nickname – if a well is fracked five times it is called a “cinco de fraco.” It is estimated that there are around 100,000 wells that could be re-stimulated and that 3000 will be re-fracked in the US alone within the next 2 years.

This process is still in the early stages however, so there are many unknown risks associated with it. For example, it is unclear whether or not re-fracking will cause damage to the well allowing gas to escape which could potentially cause increased groundwater pollution.

Future of Fracking

The future of fracking has been in doubt recently due to the drop in oil prices, if this continues or even remains at this low price the shale gas industry will likely go into a state of collapse. The stability, and therefore future, of the shale gas industry is different for each country depending on economy, accessibility to gas reserves and import/export opportunities. The industry is constantly advancing however, more recently with horizontal drilling and high volume fracking to reach gas previously inaccessible either due to protected land or geology characteristics.

In the USA the process of hydraulic fracturing emits 40% of their total methane (EPA, 2012) but new fracking regulations proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the USA in 2012 are set to dramatically reduce the countries greenhouse gas emissions. Since these regulations were put in place the industries methane emissions have fallen by 13%. Technologies are being advanced to capture more and more of the greenhouse gases emitted by fracking, particularly methane and volatile organic compounds (VOC’s), this is known as ‘green completion.’

Increased knowledge of the severe impacts of oil and coal have pushed many people into the arms of fracking but there are still climate, water and health impacts involved in shale gas meaning it is likely (or hopefully) going to only exist as a temporary solution. The fact that not all of the problems associated with fracking are yet known, particularly in the UK, means that the future of the industry remains unclear. A lot of the industry’s future depends heavily on demand and supply, can the low price of gas persist? If it doesn’t due to the high cost of the fracking process  and prices begin to rise it is likely that people will finally turn their attention to renewables in hope of cheaper energy. So maybe fracking is just the final step in getting us to a carbon-free, renewable society.

Finally, one of the main questions influencing the fracking industries future is whether it can it be trusted despite a track record of environmental disasters. Since the release of Gasland (see previous blog) it has been no secret that the process of fracking can have very serious environmental and health impacts surrounding the site as well as global climate impacts. This has caused massive public opposition towards the industry meaning any advancement needs to deal with fixing these problems prior to anything else if it going to be supported.  

The Fracking Song

This amazing and annoyingly catchy song perfectly sums up everything you need to know about fracking from the main impacts to general public opinion. Enjoy. 

The Dash for Gas

The dash for gas was the move towards using natural gas for electricity in the 1990’s as it was thought of as a solution to climate change. It caused gas turbine power stations to go from just 5% of the UK’s generating capacity in 1990 to 28% in 2002.

This week the dash for gas continues as on Tuesday night MPs voted to allow fracking under national parks using horizontal drills stationed just outside the boundaries of protected areas. Since David Cameron announced last year that the UK is going ‘all out for shale gas’ it has been a never ending battle between supporters and opposition. One of the conditions for this new agreement states that any drilling that does take place under national parks has to be at a depth of at least 1200m to minimise any potential impacts.  

Not all MPs were on board with this week’s decision. For example, labour wanted a moratorium on fracking until it can be proven that it is a safe form of energy and the leader of the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron, is quoted in saying that it is a ‘complete lack of regard for protecting some of the most beautiful scenery in the UK’. The day after this vote 159 sites were granted licenses to explore for shale gas with the majority in northern England. This marked a 50% increase in the amount of fracking licenses awarded in the UK and it is estimated that the first shale gas production could begin by the end of the decade and energy imports could be almost halved within 15 years. 

On the other hand it is argued that this move will dramatically reduce the countries carbon emissions at the same time as increasing our energy security. It is a vital step that needs to be taken to move forward but strict regulations need to be set for protecting the environment and health and safety of the population. 

This decision is essentially as complete U-turn on earlier promises to keep fracking away from national parks and is a shock as the UN climate talks in Paris have only just ended, surely avoiding fossil fuels is a big part in the fight against climate change and the UK seems to be going in the opposite direction.

COP21

During the past 2 weeks the leaders of almost 200 countries have been negotiating in Paris in an attempt to reduce future global temperature increase to less than 2°C by reducing CO₂ emissions. A final agreement was made on Saturday evening that is both legally binding and voluntary but benefits all countries including developing nations so as not to inhibit any economic growth.

For more information on the final agreements made in Paris click here.

Although there were many arguments that natural gas exploration and use should be a major commodity during the climate talks particularly in developing countries there were also a lot of protests of which many have had hydraulic fracturing as their main target. One of the first major disruptions was caused by two protesters who interrupted Shumlin’s speech with a banner that read ‘fracked gas = climate change’ and called on him to end fracking in Vermont, USA. Also on the 10^th of December there was an international gathering organised by Friends of the Earth Europe (FoEE) as an opportunity for people and groups who oppose fracking to meet, share experiences and create joint strategies for the future. 

There were also many side events during these two weeks in Paris including ‘Keeping Fossil Fuels in the Ground’ which focused on putting pressure on the US fracking industry particularly in California. One of the members of the panel is quoted saying “If you’re looking for good way to heat up the earth fast, poke holes in the earth and let methane pour out” and if I’m honest I think this is a pretty accurate explanation of fracking.