> A: "Can fracking technology be used to dissociate clathrates?"
See this example: http://www.ngvglobal.com/innovative-hydrate-production-technologies-to-be-tested-in-alaska-0524 Personally, I don't see much commercial scope for this. Renewables are in many cases already price-competitive. http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session33/doc20_p33_SPM_SRREN.pdf Furthermore, a number of studies point at the high leakage during drilling and transport of natural gas, such as: http://www.eeb.cornell.edu/howarth/Howarth%20et%20al%20%202011.pdf The danger is that we end up with large methane releases anyway, while CO2 doesn't get sequestered safely either. Cheers! Sam Carana On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Andrew Lockley <andrew.lock...@gmail.com> wrote: > It would be nice if that were the case, but even in heavily populated > regions such as the Niger delta, where energy infrastructure is extensive > and sea ports are accessible, gas flaring is still common. > > Much methane released is in low concentrations, and can't be recovered, even > if the will is there. The oxidisers used for cleaning it out of mine air > are serious bits of kit, not installed lightly by operators. Substantial > incentives are needed. > > On another note, can fracking technology be used to dissociate clathrates? > > A > > On 1 Jun 2011 22:31, "Mike MacCracken" <mmacc...@comcast.net> wrote: >> I think it is also important to remember the difference. Every reasonable >> effort will be made to capture any methane they can as it can be sold as >> energy. The same is not true of CO2, and with the higher background, leaks >> may well be harder to detect unless some tracer is added to the >> sequestered >> CO2. >> >> Mike MacCracken >> >> >> On 6/1/11 4:39 PM, "Andrew Lockley" <andrew.lock...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I quite like fracking because it gets the oil industry to fund lots of >>> extremely expensive geoengineering research for us, and the only harm is >>> a >>> load of methane and the odd earthquake. >>> >>> Seems like a fair trade off to me! >>> >>> Obviously, it's a completely unacceptable technique for oil extraction in >>> its >>> current form. Nice data set, though. Shame it doesn't bode well for CCS, >>> though - although I'm sure views may vary. >>> >>> If only we could get the oil industry to build us some cloud machines and >>> high >>> altitude planes... >>> >>> A >>> >>> On 1 Jun 2011 21:25, "Michael Hayes" <voglerl...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > Hi Folks, >>>> > >>>> > After reading Greg's post, I have spent some time looking into the >>>> > methane release being caused by "Fracking". Here is a link to a resent >>>> > film >>>> > on the subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZe1AeH0Qz8 If you are >>>> > interested in the methane issue in general, I encourage you to take >>>> > the >>>> time >>>> > to view this film. I do realize that any "media" based documentary is >>>> > subject to dispute and debate. However, I bring this to the group for >>>> > 2 >>>> > reasons. >>>> > >>>> > 1) These are the same oil fields that are being proposed for massive >>>> > CO2 >>>> > geological storage. Fracking is rapidly taking that option off the >>>> > table. I >>>> > have never believed oil field CO2 sequestration was practical. >>>> > However, >>>> this >>>> > type of information should raise profound questions about the entire >>>> concept >>>> > of geological CO2 sequestration. >>>> > >>>> > 2) The methane release (GHG effect) from such wide spread use of this >>>> > drilling method can equal all other anthropogenic GHG sources at >>>> > the regional level. >>>> > >>>> > Fracking is a methane wild card which can not be ignored. And, oil >>>> > field >>>> CO2 >>>> > sequestration is in direct opposition to the current oil and gas >>>> > industry >>>> > activities. I believe the question of; *Should the oil and gas >>>> > industry be >>>> > relied upon at the geological time scale needed for massive CO2 >>>> > sequestration?*, should be asked. The issue of fracking related >>>> > pollution >>>> is >>>> > important and should not be ignored. However, the issue of paying this >>>> > industry to provided centuries of massive CO2 sequestration should be >>>> viewed >>>> > with skeptical eyes usually reserved for used car salesmen. I do >>>> > apologize >>>> > to all used car salesmen for the comparison. >>>> > >>>> > Thanks for your patience. >>>> > >>>> > Michael -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
