5 ms·
Whether or not you believe we're approaching or passed Peak Oil, it's astounding the impact that technology improvements in horizontal drilling and shale gas ar
by etrain 14y ago
Whether or not you believe we're approaching or passed Peak Oil, it's astounding the impact that technology improvements in horizontal drilling and shale gas are having on domestic oil and natural gas prices vs. the rest of the world.
Currently, natural gas trades for ~$3 in the US vs. ~$12 in Europe. No pure arbitrage available here, because Nat Gas is extremely expensive to transport. But, as the US infrastructure develops (natural gas gas stations, more power plants running on nat gas, etc.), this discrepancy will deteriorate.
Deliberately ignoring the environmental implications, this is a great thing for the US. For once, we might actually be able to use energy for leverage vs. the rest of the global economy, not the other way around.
- rdl 14y agoIf we can move coal and oil loads to natural gas, it's an environmental win, too. (not as big as nuclear or wind or solar, but still better, especially for everything except CO2). I would almost argue for natural gas + global warming abatement (ocean seeding, atmospheric modification) as the least bad likely path through the 21st century. At the very least, move other fossil fuels to natural gas while working on other energy sources.
- etrain 14y agoI agree with you here, but there are environmental concerns related to the extraction process - namely contaminated water supplies and greenhouse gas emissions.
- quantumhobbit 14y agoCorrect me if I'm wrong, but isn't natural gas a win on CO2 also. Low molecular weight hydrocarbons, when burned, produce more H20 and less CO2 per unit energy than the heavier hydrocarbons. CH4 and C2H6 have relatively more Hydrogen than C7H16 .etc. Coal is almost pure carbon, so all hydrocarbons win vs. coal.
- InclinedPlane 14y agoQuite so. Think of CH4 as sort of half way between burning coal and burning Hydrogen. Methane and ethane generate about 14 to 15 kg of Carbon emissions per gigajoule of energy released in combustion, compared to 18 for gas/kerosene and 37 for coal. So switching from coal to natural gas has a giant impact on carbon emissions (cutting them by more than half for the same energy use) while switching from gasoline to natural gas still reduces emissions by more than 20% (and that doesn't factor in the emissions due to refining, which are significant).
- mseebach 14y agoYou're technically correct, there's less CO2. But if your quest is for no CO2, nat gas isn't a win. [snark about incrementalism vs absolutism]