Natural gas NOT the panacea its made out to be.

[Dot Com]

I was hoping that some of the smoke they were blowing (pun intended) was true but, sadly the energy industry has misled us again

One more time: Natural gas is not good for the environment (yet)

As I've written before, one of the most environmentally damaging — and least publicized — consequences of drilling for natural gas is the release of methane. Natural gas burns cleaner than any other traditional fuel, but is composed mostly of methane, which is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide if it leaks before it can be burned. Now there are indications that the situation is worse than we thought. Researchers just finished a new study on methane leaks in Pennsylvania natural gas wells, and the results are very, very bad:

how fast before the 1st denier puts lipstick on this?

 

[Moonglow]

When the world runs out due to overpopulation we will have other things to worry about...

 

[DriftingSand]

The key word is "if." Today's technology is designed to greatly minimize the "ifs." The industry doesn't want to lose any of their product so they're gonig to do everything they can to minimize losing it. What's more, it's already released naturally.

More fear tactics and over-exaggeration. Control, control, control. Fracking puts Americans to work and helps our economy.

 

[Dot Com]

...while increasing GHG emmissions.

 

[Moonglow]

So do my farts....

 

[Mr. H.]

Go away, Dottie.

Five Facts about Ingraffea and Howarth's Latest Methane Study

 

[Mr. H.]

Researchers specifically target high emission areas, admit little to no emissions from other well pads.

Ingraffea and Howarth use modeling exercises instead of direct measurements.

Ingraffea blasted previous research based on small sample size, but his latest work examined far fewer sites.

Funding is provided by the organization that funds Howarth’s Cornell professorship.

As natural gas production has gone up, methane emissions have fallen dramatically.

 

[Mr. H.]

 

[Kosh]

Well this is not surprising that a far left Obama drone would believe another far left Obama drone on natural gas.

 

[DriftingSand]

...while increasing GHG emmissions.

Oh well. People breathing probably creates greater emissions. We're fine!

 

[elektra]

I was hoping that some of the smoke they were blowing (pun intended) was true but, sadly the energy industry has misled us again

One more time: Natural gas is not good for the environment (yet)

As I've written before, one of the most environmentally damaging — and least publicized — consequences of drilling for natural gas is the release of methane. Natural gas burns cleaner than any other traditional fuel, but is composed mostly of methane, which is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide if it leaks before it can be burned. Now there are indications that the situation is worse than we thought. Researchers just finished a new study on methane leaks in Pennsylvania natural gas wells, and the results are very, very bad:

how fast before the 1st denier puts lipstick on this?

Well, its too bad that so much Natural Gas was used to build the World Largest Wind Turbines.

Green Energy advocates and politicians demanded and built a Heavy Industry, that is the manufacture of the World's Largest Structures for electricity. Wind Turbines, millions upon millions of tons of Silica are melted with Natural Glass in a furnace. Wind Turbines increased the demand for all Fossil Fuels as well as increased the size of Heavy Industry, this is completely ignored by people concerned about Natural Gas.

The Green Energy Advocates build and cover more land with more material using 1000 times more natural gas then any equivalent project, and they act as if the junk they created smells like roses.

 

[Politico]

Could care less. I am going to keep using it.

 

[Mr. H.]

IPCC Destroys Anti-Fracking Activists' Favorite Climate Claim

Just days after the Sierra Club released a report rehashing its thoroughly debunked argument that natural gas development is “releasing billions of tons of new climate-disrupting carbon pollution into the air,” the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has released its latest assessment, which should finally put this claim to rest. As the IPCC makes clear, it’s largely because of hydraulic fracturing and natural gas that the United States has been able to reduce its GHG emissions dramatically:


“A key development since AR4 is the rapid deployment of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling technologies, which has increased and diversified the gas supply… this is an important reason for a reduction of GHG emissions in the United States.” (Ch. 7, p. 18)

 

[skookerasbil]

OK.....this is officially the STOOPIDEST thread of the year in this forum. And that takes some doing with some of the nuttiness that is thrown up on here. This thread is hyper-k00k. There is an epic revolution going on in the energy industry right now and shale is off the charts BIG!!!

I cant.....I cant even address stoopid shit like this.....not even worth finding a link.

 

[Dot Com]

...while increasing GHG emmissions.

Oh well. People breathing probably creates greater emissions. We're fine!

Why do you even bother posting. That post is no more than a place holder.

 

[westwall]

...while increasing GHG emmissions.

Which have to date failed to modify the climate. Zero empirical data exists to support the hysterical theory that a trace gas, being elevated by a trace amount can do anything. In fact all empirical data we have PROVES the opposite.

 

[Dot Com]

IPCC Destroys Anti-Fracking Activists' Favorite Climate Claim

Just days after the Sierra Club released a report rehashing its thoroughly debunked argument that natural gas development is “releasing billions of tons of new climate-disrupting carbon pollution into the air,” the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has released its latest assessment, which should finally put this claim to rest. As the IPCC makes clear, it’s largely because of hydraulic fracturing and natural gas that the United States has been able to reduce its GHG emissions dramatically:


“A key development since AR4 is the rapid deployment of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling technologies, which has increased and diversified the gas supply… this is an important reason for a reduction of GHG emissions in the United States.” (Ch. 7, p. 18)

Your other post had merit but this one is an out-and-out deflection. A "yabut" post

 

[westwall]

...while increasing GHG emmissions.

Oh well. People breathing probably creates greater emissions. We're fine!

Why do you even bother posting. That post is no more than a place holder.

You whole OP is nothing more than a placeholder. Next time present us with something a little more factual eh? This "study" is rubbish.

 

[Kosh]

...while increasing GHG emmissions.

Oh well. People breathing probably creates greater emissions. We're fine!

Why do you even bother posting. That post is no more than a place holder.

You should know!

 

[flacaltenn]

I was hoping that some of the smoke they were blowing (pun intended) was true but, sadly the energy industry has misled us again

One more time: Natural gas is not good for the environment (yet)

As I've written before, one of the most environmentally damaging — and least publicized — consequences of drilling for natural gas is the release of methane. Natural gas burns cleaner than any other traditional fuel, but is composed mostly of methane, which is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide if it leaks before it can be burned. Now there are indications that the situation is worse than we thought. Researchers just finished a new study on methane leaks in Pennsylvania natural gas wells, and the results are very, very bad:

how fast before the 1st denier puts lipstick on this?

The bigger issue is relying TOO MUCH on nat gas for electricity, transport and heating.
BTW --- No lipstick Dotty --- OP went right into the body bag..