3 ms·

Even just encouraging fracking (cheap gas vs coal means 2x reduction in carbon), or stopping to subsidize fossil fuels would make a massive difference.

by eloff 4y ago

cableshaft 4y ago
Fracking is not sustainable (you're not going to be able to frack forever, we've already tapped a lot of the 'cheap gas' wells, future wells will eventually get prohibitively expensive, it already is very expensive and not even that profitable[1], and got a lot more expensive this year thanks to it requiring a specific type of sand that's now 3x the cost[2]) and is harmful to freshwater, not only by using a ton of it (average of 45 millions of gallons of freshwater per fracking well) but also because it mixes tons of chemicals in with the water it uses, making the wastewater toxic[3]. It also leaks a lot of methane[4], which is 80x worse for warming than CO2 emissions in the short term (CO2 stays in the atmosphere longer). "To determine the potential impact of fracking in the U.K., a group of Manchester scientists ranked it and other energy sources, such as coal, wind, and solar, after considering environmental, economic, and social sustainability. Of the nine energy sources examined, the scientists found that fracking ranked seventh in sustainability. To make fracking as sustainable as energy sources higher up on the list, such as wind and solar, there would need to be a staggering 329-fold reduction in environmental impact, according to the researchers."[5] [1] https://www.barrons.com/articles/why-are-natural-gas-prices-high-because-fracking-isnt-really-profitable-51635439006 https://www.barrons.com/articles/why-are-natural-gas-prices-... [2] https://sports.yahoo.com/sand-fracking-now-3-times-114500960.html https://sports.yahoo.com/sand-fracking-now-3-times-114500960... [3] https://cen.acs.org/environment/water/Wastewater-fracking-Growing-disposal-challenge/97/i45 https://cen.acs.org/environment/water/Wastewater-fracking-Gr... [4] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/fracking-boom-tied-to-methane-spike-in-earths-atmosphere https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/frack... [5] https://futurism.com/fracking-among-most-harmful-forms-energy-production-study-finds https://futurism.com/fracking-among-most-harmful-forms-energ...
- eloff 4y ago
  It doesn't need to be sustainable, a short-term reduction in emissions it's also helpful and buys more time to go carbon free. It's a complete lie that we have to transition directly from our current state to zero carbon with no stops in between. Fracking is something really only done in the US. Doing more fracking internationally could really bring emissions down. Fracking has done more to reduce US emissions than all the climate change policy combined. The point you bring up about methane leaks is salient though, if you can't do it without leaking too much methane, it doesn't make sense. However, I don't think that's impossible. Taxing methane leakage and monitoring it from satellites, as one idea of how to do that, seems quite possible. Obviously it's also good to mitigate damage to the environment via waste products, etc, but that also seems to be possible with the right regulation and enforcement.

Even just encouraging fracking (cheap gas vs coal means 2x reduction in carbon), or stopping to subsidize fossil fuels would make a massive difference.

by eloff 4y ago

Even just encouraging fracking (cheap gas vs coal means 2x reduction in carbon), or stopping to subsidize fossil fuels would make a massive difference.

cableshaft 4y ago

Fracking is not sustainable (you're not going to be able to frack forever, we've already tapped a lot of the 'cheap gas' wells, future wells will eventually get prohibitively expensive, it already is very expensive and not even that profitable[1], and got a lot more expensive this year thanks to it requiring a specific type of sand that's now 3x the cost[2]) and is harmful to freshwater, not only by using a ton of it (average of 45 millions of gallons of freshwater per fracking well) but also because it mixes tons of chemicals in with the water it uses, making the wastewater toxic[3]. It also leaks a lot of methane[4], which is 80x worse for warming than CO2 emissions in the short term (CO2 stays in the atmosphere longer). "To determine the potential impact of fracking in the U.K., a group of Manchester scientists ranked it and other energy sources, such as coal, wind, and solar, after considering environmental, economic, and social sustainability. Of the nine energy sources examined, the scientists found that fracking ranked seventh in sustainability. To make fracking as sustainable as energy sources higher up on the list, such as wind and solar, there would need to be a staggering 329-fold reduction in environmental impact, according to the researchers."[5] [1] https://www.barrons.com/articles/why-are-natural-gas-prices-high-because-fracking-isnt-really-profitable-51635439006 https://www.barrons.com/articles/why-are-natural-gas-prices-... [2] https://sports.yahoo.com/sand-fracking-now-3-times-114500960.html https://sports.yahoo.com/sand-fracking-now-3-times-114500960... [3] https://cen.acs.org/environment/water/Wastewater-fracking-Growing-disposal-challenge/97/i45 https://cen.acs.org/environment/water/Wastewater-fracking-Gr... [4] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/fracking-boom-tied-to-methane-spike-in-earths-atmosphere https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/frack... [5] https://futurism.com/fracking-among-most-harmful-forms-energy-production-study-finds https://futurism.com/fracking-among-most-harmful-forms-energ...

eloff 4y ago
It doesn't need to be sustainable, a short-term reduction in emissions it's also helpful and buys more time to go carbon free. It's a complete lie that we have to transition directly from our current state to zero carbon with no stops in between. Fracking is something really only done in the US. Doing more fracking internationally could really bring emissions down. Fracking has done more to reduce US emissions than all the climate change policy combined. The point you bring up about methane leaks is salient though, if you can't do it without leaking too much methane, it doesn't make sense. However, I don't think that's impossible. Taxing methane leakage and monitoring it from satellites, as one idea of how to do that, seems quite possible. Obviously it's also good to mitigate damage to the environment via waste products, etc, but that also seems to be possible with the right regulation and enforcement.