Shale Gas vs. Coal Controversy

In a the article dated April 12th, Richard Black, Environment correspondent for BBC News, writes about a controversial report on shale gas.

The Cornell University study is said to have found that extracting natural gas from shale formations using hydraulic fracturing generates more greenhouse-gas emissions than burning coal.  (Read more HERE)

The study has drawn criticism directed at its authors, methodology and its conclusions, which both scientists and industry groups say is flawed.

Gerson Lehrman Group is amongst the latest to challenge the report's conclusions.

In the analysis, Methane (Natural Gas) from shale wells is superior to coal, GLG writes that the idea that a shale gas well will put more greenhouse gas (methane) into the atmosphere than any other type of gas well is patently wrong.

A properly installed and managed well site will not “leak” methane to the atmosphere.... When burning methane as a fuel source the discharge of carbon dioxide (CO2) is less than one half of that of coal.

Once coal is mined it is transported to the point of consumption (normally) by rail. The coal is also handled by various means during the movement process using other fossil fired devices such as dump trucks and loaders. There is considerable greenhouse gas discharge during this movement. Compare this to natural gas where it is piped from the wellhead to the point of consumption with no leaks or discharge. Coal also continues to off gas (discharge) after mining and this methane is emitted to the atmosphere. While both coal production and shale gas production have a surface footprint shale gas has a much smaller footprint than does coal, particularly when compared with strip mining.

An argument may be made for any side of an issue when the facts are used selectively. One must look at this objectively and then you will determine that natural gas is the cleanest of fossil fuels.

Source: Gerson Lehrman Group

Further Reading: Shale Gas and the Cornell Study