Shale gas - a winner?

Shale gas is one of the lowest carbon sources of natural gas. Shale gas produced using fracking may have lower life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than conventional gas. If that sounds controversial, check out a report in recent Environmental Science and Technology, that “shale gas life-cycle [greenhouse gas] emissions are 6% lower than conventional natural gas”.

It goes on to substantiate the claim by saying the lower emissions are due to the fact that multiple horizontal wells (used when tapping shale gas) can be drilled from a single well pad. In conventional vertical drilling, there is one pad per well. In horizontal drilling, there are typically six to eight wells drilled from one pad. This means less equipment, less surface disruption, and fewer opportunities for leaks on the surface. Fewer leaks mean lesser methane escaping!

The report further notes that all types of natural gas represent a huge opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Agreeing that Methane leaks and water management are two of the biggest issues, and must be addressed, it says that natural gas, with fracking, (which it claims is not the cause of water pollution) is still a clear winner. Especially when compared to coal!!

If China builds one new coal plant per week, that translates to about 450 million tons of added carbon emissions each year. If China just built natural gas plants instead of coal plants, it would reduce added emissions by between 150 and 270 million tons per year (depending on the type of coal and power plant, natural gas typically has between 30% and 60% less GHG emissions than coal). That reduction in emissions would be like taking roughly 40 million cars off the road.

Any thoughts?