Insight and inspiration in turbulent times.
It isn’t often that the world’s working stiffs get a chance to fleece rich investors. But that’s essentially what has happened as a result of the vast overinvestment in natural gas drilling in the United States. Strangely, the long-term result may be a plunge in supply and a huge spike in price.
•Report questions long-term productivity of gas wells in Barnett Shale•Town Sued After Barring Debate on Gas Extraction at Meetings•PwC: Shale oil surge poses threat to renewables•Gas company targets protected Manú park in Peruvian Amazon•NY fracking decision faces further delay on health study
•A Mysterious Patch Of Light Shows Up In The North Dakota Dark •Poland Stumbles as Shale Gas Industry Fails to Take Off •Is fracking responsible for the flooding of an Upper Egyptian village? •Shale gas is not a game-changer for the UK, says BP
•How Google Earth Revealed Chicago’s Hidden Farms
•Cash for Hay Driving Thieves to Move Bundles
•A people’s buy-out of Britain’s farmland
•Enviro Crusader Turns Pro-GMO, Anti-Organic—And Anti-Logic
•The U.S. Will Again Produce More of the Nitrogen Fertilizer it Uses for Agriculture
The technical-corporate-financial elite which controls our energy supplies has no clue about how to manage those supplies in the unfolding age of energy scarcity. That portends considerable political upheaval as the public becomes more engaged in shaping our energy future.
Matt Damon’s new fictional movie about natural gas development in a rural township shows no tanker trucks, no ghastly wastewater ponds, and not even one drilling pad or derrick. In fact, drilling has yet to begin. So why is the natural gas industry having such a hissy fit over the film?
We are in the midst of an amazing energy boom, but by sweeping the idea of peak oil under the rug we are ignoring a significant fact: the relationship between hydrocarbon reserves and flow rates are not the same as they used to be—reserves have increased but flow rates are not as high or sustainable.
A weekly update, including:
•Oil and the global economy
•The Middle East
•The Doha Climate Summit
•Quote of the week
•The Briefs
The US Department of Energy (DOE) released a report on 5 December, 2012 which examined the question of economic benefit to the US of natural gas exportation. Last December, Deloitte issued an independent report regarding exportation which had hauntingly similar conclusions. Interestingly enough, many of the conclusions in the Deloitte report are now known to be erroneous only one year later.
If last week’s energy bill announcement was about building the low carbon power system of the future, this week’s gas strategy and autumn statement felt like a blast from the past.
The great fear among those working to address climate change is that the seemingly vast resources of fossil fuels waiting to be burned will send the world hurtling toward certain catastrophe. By invoking fossil fuel abundance, climate activists believe that their argument for a rapid transition to alternative energy is made more persuasive. But, it is poor strategy to reinforce the myth of fossil fuel abundance when doing so actually makes many people less open to such an argument. And, as it turns out, the abundance argument is also contrary to the available data, logic and prudent risk management principles.
•Methane leaks suggest fracking benefits exaggerated •Gas Industry Attacks Scientists After Research Finds Triple The Normal Levels Of Methane At Australian Gas Fields •Shale gas needs regulation, not a ban -European Parliament •A Contrarian on Shale Gas •US Shale Gas Won’t Last Ten Years: Bill Powers •Gas is abundant, affordable and acceptable. It’s also the future, argues Shell chief Peter Voser
