A Tea Party fantasy word?Originally Posted by Boreas
Gold Member
A Tea Party fantasy word?
Supreme Member
You do understand that when an average goes down while the population increases, the result is not all that great. But it is better than going up. The decline of the middle class over 30 years, plus the Bush depression have played a role too. No doubt about it that Natural Gas is better than coal, but not nearly as good as renewables - speaking of which - having renewables - ethanol and bio-diesel - as 10% of our transportation fuel helps too. All good things (not the depression and decline of the middle class - but the reduction in carbon production). But that doesn't negate the fact that Americans still produce more carbon per capita than the rest of the world.
Natural gas has problems - although it produces less CO2 than oil or coal, it still produces plenty, and worse they aren't accounting for the effect of methane leaks. And fracking is hideously polluting and inevitably releases large amounts of methane that is not captured for energy use. Natural Gas is a great idea as a transition from oil and coal, but it is not the end game.
Nothing's wrong with Naked Ambition! --> T-shirts for nudists
Diamond Member
Let's rise above pointing out spelling mistakes: dilemma. If eye had a nickle four every spelling misteak, ...
I'm aging like fine wine ... I'm getting complex and fruity.
Diamond Member
CFF Moderator
Well, eye cood if the poster wasent so sefl-proclamed smart.....
Happily married in Canada
It is a cruel jest to say to a bootless man that he should lift himself up by his own bootstraps. It is even worse to tell a man to lift himself by his own bootstraps when somebody is standing on the boot. ~ Martin Luther King Jr.
Platinum Member
Sure, natural gas has problems but they are insignificant compared to so called renewables. Ethanol and bio-diesel are frightfully expensive and would not exist were it not for huge government subsidies. Wind and solar are unreliable, expensive and pretty much impractical. I suppose I would have to eat those words when 747's fly on solar energy....but I don't expect that in my lifetime.
America may be producing more carbon per capita than the rest of the world but we are the only country that is REDUCING our carbon footprint. AND...what do we have to show for it???? A hot summer...and that equals Global Warming.
I'm not a scientist....but if I remember right, Al Gore said that man makes CO2 and CO2 makes Global Warming and if we don't stop making CO2 the world will heat up, the ice caps will melt, the oceans will rise and the world will come to an end.
Now it appears that man (or at least Americans) are reducing CO2 and everything is heating up anyway. Maybe Al got it backwards.....??? What a colosal waste of time........what a colosal hoax!
Bronze Member
Wii are talking about global warming. The CO2 does not stay over the country that produces it. Although there maybe a reduction in the amount of CO2 being produced the total percent in the atmosphere is still going up. You can't make dirty water clean by putting less dirt in it, you have to take the dirt out.
Being nude is cool
Supreme Member
Natural Gas is not as clean and wonderful as the industry propoganda claims:
“Natural gas is being widely advertised and promoted as a clean- burning fuel that produces less greenhouse gas emissions than coal when burned,” Howarth writes. “While it is true that less carbon dioxide is emitted from burning natural gas than from burning coal per unit of energy generated, the combustion emissions are only part of (the) story, and the comparison is quite misleading. A complete consideration of all emissions from using natural gas seems likely to make natural gas far less attractive than other fossil fuels in terms of the consequences for global warming.”
Howarth looked at high-volume, slick water hydraulic fracturing (HVSWHF), also known as hydrofracking, or fracking, processes and found that methane leakage during the entire production cycle may expose the environment to higher levels of greenhouse gases than even the mountaintop removal extraction of coal. Howarth warns these are purely estimates but further suggests greenhouse gas emissions from fracking-obtained natural gas “are estimated to be 60 percent more than for diesel fuel and gasoline.”
Much of the estimation stems from 2006 data released by the EPA that estimated a methane leakage rate of about 1.5 percent of natural gas consumed. Leakage of methane is of particular concern because it is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
“The leakage of methane gas during production, transport, processing and use of natural gas is probably a far more important consideration,” Howarth wrote. “Methane is by the far the major component of natural gas, and it is a powerful greenhouse gas: 72-times more powerful than (carbon dioxide) per molecule in the atmosphere.”
Howarth has even suggested a moratorium on obtaining natural gas from shale, an energy-intensive process that further contributes to greenhouse gas emissions.
Instead, Howarth suggests, the nation should be focusing its attention on renewable sources of energy.
“Natural gas is being widely advertised and promoted as a clean- burning fuel that produces less greenhouse gas emissions than coal when burned,” Howarth writes. “While it is true that less carbon dioxide is emitted from burning natural gas than from burning coal per unit of energy generated, the combustion emissions are only part of (the) story, and the comparison is quite misleading. A complete consideration of all emissions from using natural gas seems likely to make natural gas far less attractive than other fossil fuels in terms of the consequences for global warming.”
Howarth looked at high-volume, slick water hydraulic fracturing (HVSWHF), also known as hydrofracking, or fracking, processes and found that methane leakage during the entire production cycle may expose the environment to higher levels of greenhouse gases than even the mountaintop removal extraction of coal. Howarth warns these are purely estimates but further suggests greenhouse gas emissions from fracking-obtained natural gas “are estimated to be 60 percent more than for diesel fuel and gasoline.”
Much of the estimation stems from 2006 data released by the EPA that estimated a methane leakage rate of about 1.5 percent of natural gas consumed. Leakage of methane is of particular concern because it is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
“The leakage of methane gas during production, transport, processing and use of natural gas is probably a far more important consideration,” Howarth wrote. “Methane is by the far the major component of natural gas, and it is a powerful greenhouse gas: 72-times more powerful than (carbon dioxide) per molecule in the atmosphere.”
Howarth has even suggested a moratorium on obtaining natural gas from shale, an energy-intensive process that further contributes to greenhouse gas emissions.
Instead, Howarth suggests, the nation should be focusing its attention on renewable sources of energy.
http://www.register-herald.com/marce...aner-than-coal
Supreme Member
Ethanol and bio-diesel subsidies ended last year. Oil and natural gas subsidies continue.
Nothing's wrong with Naked Ambition! --> T-shirts for nudists
Supreme Member
Duke study finds “systematic evidence for methane contamination of drinking water associated with shale gas extraction”
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...ter-shale-gas/
Drinking water in thousands of homes 'contaminated with harmful levels of methane'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...xtraction.html
Corporate America KILLS Americans and the GOP is supporting this kind of domestic war on the American People.
New Yorkers Against Fracking and Corporate Lies, Deceit, and Misinformation:
Fracking in New York
A Bad Deal for New Yorkers!
Gas drilling using hydraulic fracturing “fracking” is a highly industrial process used to extract natural gas from deep within the earth. Its proponents claim that with proper regulatory over sight, it can be done safely in New York, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and bring about much needed economic benefit.
Unfortunately, the facts don’t support their claims. Fracking is a dangerous and destructive extreme form of energy extraction and it brings with it very serous environmental, health and economic problems. In the end it will leave our communities in much worse condition than when it starts. It is a bad deal for New Yorkers.
Based on extensive study, scientific evidence, and the results of what has happened in other states and communities, Catskill Mountainkeeper has determined that there is no way safe way to extract natural gas from underground using hydraulic fracturing and we have called for it to be banned in New York State. Never-the-less we are working hard within the existing process to raise critical issues, widen the discussion and pursue the best options for all New Yorkers.
Please use the information in this section to learn about the dangers of gas drilling using hydraulic fracturing and pass along this information to your friends and neighbors. All New Yorkers will be negatively affected by fracking and it is important that we all get involved to address this very dangerous threat.
http://www.catskillmountainkeeper.or...rams/fracking/
What Exactly is Being Released Into the Atmosphere?
There are many different classes of air contaminants that are released from natural gas production. They all have potentially serious effects on health. They include:
BTEX compounds, which stands for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene. They are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) – (organic chemical compounds that are highly evaporative and can produce noxious fumes). Benzene is a known carcinogen, and has also been shown to cause blood disorders. Both benzene and toluene can affect the reproductive and central nervous systems. Ethylbenzene and xylene can have respiratory and neurological effects.
Carbon monoxide (CO), which is poisonous if inhaled because it inhibits the blood’s ability to carry oxygen, can cause dizziness, unconsciousness and even death.
Hydrogen sulfide (H2S), which is lethal if inhaled at high concentrations, has a characteristic rotten egg odor at low concentrations.
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), which are formed during flaring and when fuel is burned to power machinery for heavy equipment and at compressor stations, forms smog when it reacts with volatile organize compounds. Health impacts include respiratory problems, heart conditions and lung damage.
Sulfur dioxide (SO2), which can be emitted during flaring or when gas is burned, reacts with other chemicals to form particulate pollution (the suspension in air of dust or soil) during well construction, or from diesel exhaust and engines. It can damage lungs, cause respiratory illness, heart conditions and premature death.
Natural gas itself gets released during venting operations or leaks. Natural gas is primarily made up of methane, which can cause oxygen deprivation and can act as an aspphyxiant at high concentrations. In addition, methane is flammable and highly explosive. Natural gas frequently contains other hydrocarbons such as ethane, propane, butane, and pentanes as well as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes and hexanes, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and carbon dioxide.
Health Impacts
One of the travesties of Governor Cuomo’s push for natural gas exploration in New York State is that no health impact study has been done to assess the impact of fracking on the health of New Yorkers. This follows a pattern throughout the United States of drilling first and then suffering the consequences later. One of the only documents that we were able to find that studied health impact was a health impact assessment done by Garfield County, CO at the request of the residents of Battlement Mesa, CO. This assessment concluded that air pollution will likely “be high enough to cause short-term and long-term disease, especially for residents living near wells. Health effects may include respiratory disease, neurological problems, birth defects and cancer.” It goes on to say, “Natural gas development and production operations and the diesel engines used to support them have the potential to release many hydrocarbons, carbonyls, and other contaminants into the air. People can be exposed to these contaminants as they breathe ambient air in and outside of their homes. Some of these contaminants, such as benzene, diesel exhaust, and PM2.5, are human carcinogens. Others, such as carbonyls, alkanes, ground-level ozone, and 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene, can act as irritants of the eyes, skin, and respiratory tract or cause neurological effects. In addition, hydrocarbons, carbonyls, and nitrogen oxides serve as precursors for ground level ozone formation…In addition to the effects that each of these substances can produce by itself, there is also the possibility of complex health reactions occurring as a result of the interaction of multiple substances. The current state of the science is limited in ability to assess exposures to these complex mixtures of air toxics, especially, synergistic and antagonistic interactions at low levels. Preliminary studies that indicate complex mixtures can act additively or synergistically to increase effects on human health. For example, studies of healthy adults indicate that continuous exposure to sulfur dioxide or nitrogen dioxide increases ozone absorption. Studies of asthmatics suggest that ozone enhances response to allergen challenge. Other studies have reported injury to lungs with exposure to the combination of ozone and PM is larger than when exposed to either alone.”
Let The Truth Be Told:
People’s Stories Cuomo and Corbett Ignore Health Concerns from Gas Fracking
DC Brueau, March 9, 2012
By Peter Mantius
After natural gas drilling began near their rural homes about 30 miles southwest of Pittsburgh, Carol Moten and her neighbors noticed that their well water began to smell. Then came the headaches, skin lesions, and diarrhea, in household after household. A two-year-old dog fell over dead.
“We’re talking about little children that have nosebleeds, cats that fall off windowsills,” she said.
Three years ago, Moten and her neighbor, Donald Allison, visited Dr. Amelia Pare in nearby McMurray for their skin infections. Allison’s health continued to deteriorate and earlier this month he died from what the neighborhood understood to be bone cancer. He was 46.
Since there was no autopsy, Pare said, the exact cause of Allison’s death is unclear. “Does anybody really know?” she said. “There’s no funding for this.”….
Fracking Poses Risk of Cancer Epidemic
Ithaca Journal, January 20, 2012
By Andi Gladstone
When I was diagnosed with breast cancer at the age of 44, I was shocked. I had no family history and was a non-smoking, non-drinking, jogging vegetarian. I was, however, exposed to environmental toxins during puberty, a period of life that is now designated as a “period of vulnerability” for breast cancer. The introduction of hydrofracking in New York threatens to create more stories like mine…To permit hydrofracking, which opens countless portals of toxic contamination… puts all New Yorkers at greater risk of sitting in a doctor’s office, like I did, and hearing the devastating news that changes one’s life forever.
Gladstone lives in Danby. She was the founding executive director of the Ithaca Breast Cancer Alliance and is the current executive director of the New York State Breast Cancer Network….
Fracking fury reaches fever pitch in Erie
Residents band together to challenge planned drilling, fracking operation near schools
Daily Camera, January 7, 2012
By John Aguilar
ERIE, CO — “We’re just sick.” Tears accompanied the words that came out of the mouth of April Beach, a mother of three boys who lives in Erie’s Grandview neighborhood. Her family’s symptoms — asthma, dizziness, allergies and migraine headaches — have all appeared in the wake of a natural gas-drilling operation that occurred a couple hundred feet from her home, she said. Even though it’s difficult to prove, Beach is convinced that the emissions from the drill site and the chemical mix used in hydraulic fracturing — the practice of pumping fluid underground at high pressure to crack rock and release oil and natural gas — are at the root of her family’s illness. “Every single thing we have can be caused by something else, but the reality is we were never sick until we moved to Erie and we were never this sick until after the drilling,” she said. “I know that the air is a problem.” Beach, who has lived in Erie for a decade, has discovered she isn’t alone. Wendy Leonard, a relatively new arrival to Erie who lives across town from Beach, said her family hasn’t felt well for months…..
Fracking: The Dirty Truth in North Dakota
Bakken Watch hired an independent lab to test the air quality on a remote farm in western North Dakota. The air sample canister was placed outside in the yard. The family says that they are sick, as well as livestock and other animals on the farm. The test reveals chemicals that should not be in the open air in such a remote location. There are many fracking operations in the immediate area of this farm. Viewer discretion is advised….
Cancer Rates in Barnett Shale Climb, Residents Want Answers Why
KDAF.TV – October 18, 2011
FLOWER MOUND, TX—
Lorrie Squibb remembers many days when she didn’t feel well, but she didn’t know why.
“I was just sick, month after month,” said the mother of two.
Squibb says two months after she moved from Flower Mound to Michigan in 2010, she was diagnosed with multiple myeloma, a blood cancer that is often associated with factory exposure to toxins in men.
“I am a stay at home Mom so there is no explanation about where I could have contracted this,” Squibb said from her Michigan home.
People still living in the area surrounding Squibb’s old neighborhood in Wellington Estates in Flower Mound are concerned about possible cancer clusters, after a string of leukemia cases in children and breast cancer in women.
Residents wonder if the danger isn’t just down the street, where there is natural gas drilling in the Barnett Shale. State air testing near some natural gas facilities revealed high levels of benzene, a cancer-causing toxin.
“People are getting sick and it doesn’t matter what color they are or their economic situation,” Sharon Wilson, organizer with the Texas Oil & Gas Accountability Project, said…..
The Trouble With Health Problems Near Gas Fracking
NPR – September 29, 2011
Fresh Air from WHYY
Susan Wallace-Babb lived on a ranch in western Colorado. One summer night in 2005, she drove her truck down the road into a field out past her neighbors. She stepped out of her truck, felt woozy and immediately passed out.
“When she came to, she raced out of the area, called fire department officials and sought help. But it began a period of very intense, negative health effects for her,” says ProPublica reporter Abrahm Lustgarten. “By the next morning, she felt intense nerve pain in her legs, intense nausea, and eventually within a couple of days had skin rashes over her body. And her health got progressively worse from that point on.”
Wallace-Babb was told by local deputies that there was a spillover between a pair of fuel storage tanks that sat next to a natural gas well, located less than half a mile away from her car. Initially she wasn’t sure it was related to gas drilling.
“It wasn’t until she began talking with other residents of this part of Colorado and learning that others had similar experiences and talking with doctors who had expertise in gas field exposure [that] she did come to believe that, though it is difficult to prove, that her health problems have been caused by exposure to some sort of chemical in the drilling field,” he says….
Pa. should serve as warning on drilling
Ithaca Journal – September 23, 2011
By Libby Foust
Our family farm is in Bradford County, Pa. Our farm was one of the first well sites chosen and is now one of hundreds, soon to be thousands.
When the folks in Pennsylvania first heard of the wells coming, they were excited. No one had ever experienced the drilling business, so there was nothing to fear. They had toiled their whole lives just to make ends meet, and maybe this was the road to a better life.
Then they came. Trucks by the hundreds, tankers, dump trucks, drilling rigs, fracking rigs. Five-acre drilling pads were bulldozed in the middle of farmers’ best fields, million-gallon ponds were installed, roads were built, woods and fields were trenched and bulldozed for tie lines. Drilling rigs went up at an unbelievable rate. From one spot on our farm, I counted eight rigs….
Health Issues Follow Natural Gas Drilling In Texas
NPR – November 3, 2009
by John Burnett
Vast new natural gas fields have opened up thanks to an advanced drilling technique. While natural gas is a cleaner burning fuel than coal or petroleum, extracting it is still hard, dirty work. Some people who live near the massive Barnett Shale gas deposit in north Texas, have complaints. Health and environmental concerns are prompting state regulators to take a closer look.
RENEE MONTAGNE, host: A boom in natural gas is underway. New gas fields have opened up thanks to an advanced drilling technique. It allows gas to be extracted from underground shale rock formations. Natural gas is a cleaner burning fuel than coal or petroleum, though extracting it is still hard, dirty work. And some people who live near some major gas projects are complaining. NPR’s John Burnett has this story from the massive Barnett Shale gas deposit in North Texas.
JOHN BURNETT: To date there are more than 12,000 gas wells in the Barnett Shale. It’s a vast rock formation that underlies 5,000 square miles surrounding Fort Worth. To get the gas to market requires an underground highway of pipelines and compression stations. These big internal combustion engines make noise and spew pollutants into the air day and night. State records show that in the past decade the number of gas compressors in the Barnett has jumped from a few hundred to 1,300, and they’re getting closer and closer to populated areas.
Mayor CALVIN TILMEN (Dish, Texas): My name is Calvin Tillman. I’m the mayor of a small town of Dish, Texas, the home of free Dish Network satellite TV, and it is also known for 11 natural gas compression stations….
Water Worries Threaten U.S. Push for Natural Gas
Reuters – October 1, 2009
By Jon Hurdle
PAVILLION, Wyoming (Reuters) –
Louis Meeks, a burly 59-year-old alfalfa farmer, fills a metal trough with water from his well and watches an oily sheen form on the surface which gives off a faint odor of paint.
He points to small bubbles that appear in the water, and a thin ring of foam around the edge.
Meeks is convinced that energy companies drilling for natural gas in this central Wyoming farming community have poisoned his water and ruined his health.
A recent report by the Environmental Protection Agency suggests he just might have a case — and that the multi-billion dollar industry may have a problem on its hands. EPA tests found his well contained what it termed 14 “contaminants of concern.”
It tested 39 wells in the Pavillion area this year, and said in August that 11 were contaminated. The agency did not identify the cause but said gas drilling was a possibility….
US Energy Future Hits Snag in Rural Pennsylvania
Reuters – March 13, 2009
by: Jon Hurdle
A glass of milky brown drinking water from a residential well in Dimock, Pennsylvania, after natural gas drilling operations began nearby.
Dimock, Pennsylvania – When her children started missing school because of persistent diarrhea and vomiting, Pat Farnelli began to wonder if she and her family were suffering from more than just a classroom bug.
After trying several remedies, she stopped using the water drawn from her well in this rural corner of northeastern Pennsylvania, the forefront of a drilling boom in what may be the biggest U.S. reserve of natural gas.
“I was getting excruciating stomach cramps after drinking the water,” Farnelli said in an interview at her farmhouse, cluttered as a home with eight children would be, while her husband, a night cook at a truck stop, slept on the couch….
Last edited by Sanslines; 07-10-2012 at 08:20 AM.
Platinum Member
Oil, gas and nuclear energy are currently the most available and efficient forms of energy we have. They should be subsidized.
Maybe the "official" subsidies for ethanol and bio-diesel ended but until EPA-EPACT2005 is repealed the government MANDATES that ethanol and/or bio-diesel to be blended with petroleum based fuels. A government regulation is better than a little subsidy any day.
So all we get for EPACT2005 is higher food prices, Less corn in the supermarkets, lower performing fuel and rich farmers.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote