A new report from M.I.T. predict that the U.S. will
expand its use of natural gas to produce electricity and as vehicle fuel — but will eventually need to capture its carbon dioxide emissions
It will also
expand use of natural gas and clean energy sources such as hydro, wind, geothermal and nuclear energy (specific targets include: 200 GW of installed wind capacity and 100 GW of installed solar capacity by 2020).
And while
expanded use of natural gas can provided a valuable bridge toward non-polluting energy choices, according to many experts, those darned pipelines have found strident opposition, backyard by backyard, particularly in crowded regions of the country.
The White House and their eco-allies fear that
expanding use of natural gas, in particular, will exacerbate global warming as methane is more than 80 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
While this unprecedented shift does provide some near - term benefits, dramatically
expanding our use of natural gas to generate electricity is an ill - advised gamble that poses complex economic, public health, and climate risks.
Not to mention the increasing body of research, from both academics and intergovernmental agencies, such as the International Energy Agency, shows that
expanding the use of natural gas will do nothing to prevent climate change, and that natural gas obtained by fracking has radically higher greenhouse gas emissions than gas obtained through conventional methods.
Not exact matches
In other words, to get away from fossil fuels requires not just
expanding alternatives but also discouraging the
use of coal, oil and
natural gas.
The
expanded use of drilling technology to extract resources trapped in tight formations 8,000 feet underground has opened the door to trillions
of cubic feet
of new
natural gas reserves.
A new analysis
of global energy
use, economics and the climate shows that without new climate policies,
expanding the current bounty
of inexpensive
natural gas alone would not slow the growth
of global greenhouse
gas emissions worldwide over the long term, according to a study appearing today in Nature.
Here's a quick review
of developments related to the fast -
expanding extraction
of natural gas using hydraulic fracturing, otherwise known as fracking, that point to a route forward amid concerns about everything from earthquakes to water pollution.
We've got to
expand nuclear; we've got to do clean coal, we've got to
expand the
use of hybrid vehicles, wind, solar, hydroelectric, liquid
natural gas,
natural gas, domestic oil, more refineries....
Higher density sources
of fuel such as coal and
natural gas utilized in centrally - produced power stations actually improve the environmental footprint
of the poorest nations while at the same time lifting people from the scourge
of poverty... Developing countries in Asia already burn more than twice the coal that North America does, and that discrepancy will continue to
expand... So, downward adjustments to North American coal
use will have virtually no effect on global CO2 emissions (or the climate), no matter how sensitive one thinks the climate system might be to the extra CO2 we are putting back into the atmosphere.
Supply, cost, environmental consequences - these are among the central features
of debate over energy policy in the U.S. Those who want to open up more areas to drilling - on land and offshore - and
expand the
use of fracking to extract
natural gas from deep underground argue that we must reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
The fact is that even while production has significantly increased, total criteria air pollutants and greenhouse
gas emissions have fallen simultaneously, in large part due to industry's commitment to environmental protection and the
expanded use of abundant, affordable
natural gas in electricity generation.
Domestic U.S. oil and
natural gas companies are pioneers in developing alternatives and
expanding America's
use of virtually every form
of energy — from geothermal to wind, from solar to biofuels, from hydrogen power to the lithium ion battery for next - generation cars.
The fact is that even while production has significantly increased, total criteria air pollutants and greenhouse
gas emissions have fallen, in large part due to
expanded use of abundant, affordable
natural gas in electricity generation.
--
expand drilling / fracking to extract as much domestic energy as possible, —
use clean
natural gas, where possible, to replace dirtier coal and for heavy transportation vehicles; — support basic research efforts aimed at finding economically viable green energy technologies; — at the same time, install new nuclear power generation capacity in place
of new coal plants, wherever this makes economic sense.
Today, the Union
of Concerned Scientists (UCS) released a new analysis, which shows that instead
of aggressive over-reliance on
natural gas by utilities as they phase out coal plants, a far better bet for achieving a clean energy future is to greatly
expand the
use of renewable energy and energy efficiency.
But the scientific report in Nature Climate Change suggests that under the «business as usual scenario» − whereby no steps are taken to address climate change, and the
expanding the
use of coal, oil and
natural gas dumps ever greater quantities carbon dioxide in the atmosphere − then such conditions could occur once every decade or so before 2100.
Published in Nature, an analysis
of global energy
use, economics and the climate shows that without new climate policies,
expanding the current supply
of cheap
natural gas would not slow the long - term growth
of global greenhouse
gas emissions.
[44] Drilling
expanded greatly in the past several years due to higher
natural gas prices and
use of horizontal wells to increase production.
Spokesmen for the Independent Petroleum Association
of America and the
natural gas lobbying groups Energy in Depth, American Clean Skies Foundation and America's Natural Gas Alliance, which have all been pushing to expand the use of gas, declined to comment on the EPA's new figures and what they mean for the comparison between gas an
natural gas lobbying groups Energy in Depth, American Clean Skies Foundation and America's Natural Gas Alliance, which have all been pushing to expand the use of gas, declined to comment on the EPA's new figures and what they mean for the comparison between gas and co
gas lobbying groups Energy in Depth, American Clean Skies Foundation and America's
Natural Gas Alliance, which have all been pushing to expand the use of gas, declined to comment on the EPA's new figures and what they mean for the comparison between gas an
Natural Gas Alliance, which have all been pushing to expand the use of gas, declined to comment on the EPA's new figures and what they mean for the comparison between gas and co
Gas Alliance, which have all been pushing to
expand the
use of gas, declined to comment on the EPA's new figures and what they mean for the comparison between gas and co
gas, declined to comment on the EPA's new figures and what they mean for the comparison between
gas and co
gas and coal.
There Are Better Ways Forward Than Fracked
Natural Gas My take on this is fairly simple: There are simply better ways to invest in our energy infrastructure as we transition away from fossil fuels than expanding the use of fracked natur
Natural Gas My take on this is fairly simple: There are simply better ways to invest in our energy infrastructure as we transition away from fossil fuels than expanding the use of fracked natural g
Gas My take on this is fairly simple: There are simply better ways to invest in our energy infrastructure as we transition away from fossil fuels than
expanding the
use of fracked
naturalnatural gasgas.