Unconventional gas disrupts the energy situation

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 21/01/14, 12:05

That we are polarized (for those who are hostile to it!) On the local pollution of aquifers and indifferent to the general effects of greenhouse gas production does not surprise me, insofar as it is admitted that nothing will be done to really try to reverse the trend (apart from a few wishful thinking) ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 21/01/14, 21:08

http://www.manicore.com/documentation/p ... _conv.html

What appears above shows that fracking, which occurs a few thousand meters below the surface, cannot have direct effects on the water table, which is in turn a few tens of meters below the surface.

Afterwards, we can imagine that the gas, or the water used for fracking, passes into the water table because of leaks that would occur in the wellbore. But ... we do not see why this risk would be limited to unconventional gas drilling: almost all oil and gas drilling in the world passes through a water table! Indeed, there are such aquifers in all sedimentary basins, which are also the basins where oil and gas are found.

However, in the United States alone, tens of thousands of wells are drilled each year for the exploitation of hydrocarbons (conventional or not), with a fleet of wells in operation which is around half a million. In the world as a whole, a few million wells are currently in service (and more than a hundred thousand new boreholes per year), and if a leak in a water table was a frequent side-effect of drilling oil and gas we wouldn't have waited for unconventional gas to hear about it.

In practice, all hydrocarbon production wells are "sealed" (we say "jacketed") to prevent leaks during the rise of gas or oil to the surface, and this applies to conventional hydrocarbons as well as to bedrock gas. There are probably accidents from time to time, but there is no reason why they are unique to "shale gas".

***

Hydratons Us

As the name suggests, hydraulic fracturing is difficult to do ... without water. And it takes more than a toothed glass, since around 1.000 m3 are required for fracturing (there are usually several per well, which brings the water needed to around 10.000 m3 per well). If this volume does not necessarily pose big problems where there is an abundance of water (that makes 2 seconds of flow from the Seine downstream of Paris), it is otherwise where there is little 'water. At this time you have to bring the water by truck, and at the rate of 25 m3 per truck it makes a small noria by fracturing!

Remember that the extraction of fossil fuels always consumes water, because it is necessary for the drilling of the well (gas and oil), for the assisted extraction of oil, or, when it comes to coal, to wash. this last. Reduced to the unit of energy extracted, the water consumption for unconventional gases is "in the average" of what is done for oil, with the notable exception of the tar sands which are 20 to 30 times more consumers of water than other hydrocarbons.

Last point often mentioned: the additives put in the water. In practice, these are "common" substances, namely:

sand (a few% by volume), so that the microcracks do not close,

and, for approximately 0,15% by volume, various additives intended to promote the flow of gas up to the well exit: detergents (like those for dishes!) and antibacterials.

If the water used for fracturing came out of the well, it is better to avoid discharging it as it is into the environment, but the treatment of this water is not particular compared to that of any industrial discharge. And if it stays in the well, as mentioned above, it will not communicate with the water we use for our agricultural and domestic needs.

If we sum up, the fracturing of parent rocks, practiced for more than a century, generates second-order disadvantages face first-order disadvantages what are greenhouse gas emissions - because gas is a fossil fuel - and the occupation of space on the surface, with the associated infrastructures. But it is not this hierarchy that the French media have chosen to respect!


How to divert reality:
Yes, hydraulic fracturing is not new and is very widely used for oil, conventional gas etc ... nothing really new in terms of pollution, but the comparison stops there.

For extractions (oil, gas), we stick to the "minimum" number of boreholes, for reasons of (enormous) cost, while for shale gas, the necessary step is to multiply:
- drilling (if not more flow).
- the inevitable leaks that go with it each drilling.
- pollution (in particular of the water table) with ever more "additives", detergents and whatnot more or less toxic. ***

It is not because the extraction of hydrocarbons is a known and "usual" ecological calamity that one should not worry that certain irresponsible people do not care to increase the effects tenfold.

The orders of magnitude should not be confused, a borehole is "viable" if the percentage of hydrocarbon recovered once released, water, sand, mud etc ... is important. For groundwater, a tiny percentage of filth injected makes it non-potable / unusable for humans and / or agriculture etc ...

The depth at which one drills does not upset the number and volume of leaks along the "jackets" which cross the water table ..... for each drilling taken individually.

But hydraulic fracturing means increasing the number of drilling, which is anything but trivial and increases pollution tenfold.

What would be interesting would be to quantify the total pollution of all environments (air, earth, water, living) by energy recovered for each hydrocarbon. (by a truly independent body, not funded by any hydrocarbon lobby : Mrgreen: )

*** (The list and the quantity of products used, whether toxic or not, is not subject to the agreement of those who will be entitled to have it to consume)

To sum up, the fracturing of source rocks, which has been practiced for more than a century, generates second-order drawbacks compared to the first-order drawbacks of greenhouse gas emissions - because gas is an energy fossil - and the occupation of surface space, with associated infrastructure. But it is not this hierarchy that the French media have chosen to respect!


No, the first-rate disadvantage is that a handful of lawless profiteers is ready to sacrifice the water tables of entire regions on the altar of the god $ as long as they can put their pockets in it. : Evil:
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 22/01/14, 00:16

the word hydraulic fracturing is misleading: it makes us believe that we use only water to break the rock

the reality is completely different: the gas is trapped by capillary action in the rock, to get it out you need detergent! water is not enough

the detergent makes soluble all kind of thing which should remain where it is: it is the enormous quantity of detergent which will dissolve all kind of piggyness to put everything in the phreatic tablecloths ... it may be irremediable!

and the worst part is that it may not even release as much gas as we hope ... too low gas production and lasting pollution of water tables

the americans do what they want in large spaces with a small population ... but with us the geology is smaller, if there is gas it will be small, with a lot of people who are more likely to suffer from pollution some water

there may be another way one day to get this gas out, for example with CO2 injection ... but by the current method it is better to do nothing

it's a bit like coal: it's full of piggy, if we dump detergent in the coal layers it would cause enormous pollution
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79121
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 02/06/14, 10:39

Another unconventional gas: lake methane
0 x
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554




by moinsdewatt » 07/06/14, 14:12

Germany wants to legislate on shale gas ... to better authorize it

05 June 2014 La Tribune

The federal government is working on a law to regulate hydraulic fracturing, after having carried out tests. Future drilling could potentially cover 86% of its territory. But several German ministers assure that the new rules in preparation do not signify a green light for the extraction of shale gas

The German government stressed on Thursday that the new rules under preparation on the controversial hydraulic fracturing technique would in no way mean a green light for the extraction of shale gas in Germany.

"An overrated solution to the energy question"

Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks clarified that after a two-year moratorium, new legislation expected to be introduced later this year would only concern deep drilling to extract gas from tight reservoirs (" tight gas "). She told the Ruhr Nachrichten newspaper:

"I think not only that fracking is a bad solution but that it is also an overrated solution to the energy question. Clean water and health are the top priority. According to what was decided in the agreement coalition (government), fracking with toxic substances, in particular for shale gas, will be banned ".

Ambiguous information

However, a letter from the Minister of Economy Sigmar Gabriel left doubts on a future authorization for the exploitation of shale gas. The document sent to the Bundestag's finance committee clearly indicates that the government is working on a bill to this effect, as explained in an article on the German news site RP ONLINE. He specifies that new requirements will be brought to fracking, which consists of injecting sand, water and chemicals under high pressure into the rock to make the gas rise.

The project, which is due to be reviewed before the end of the summer, would give the green light to hydraulic fracturing after "reviewing the conditions for protecting the environment". Protected wetlands, ie 14% of the territory, will be excluded from authorized areas. Tuesday, the Green deputy Oliver Krischer was alarmed: "On reading the note drafted by Sigmar Gabriel, hydraulic fracturing will be authorized on 86% of German territory".

A "small" reduction in its dependence on Russian gas

According to Le Figaro, the use of shale gas by the federal state would allow it to "slightly" reduce its dependence on Russian gas. The daily writes:

"For the moment, it is still difficult to assess the potential of shale gas in Germany. According to the US Department of Energy, the German subsoil contains 476 billion cubic meters of recoverable reserves. Eight times less than the French potential, and the equivalent of about six years of German gas consumption. "

But the argument of independence is put forward by Sigmar Gabriel, following the Ukrainian crisis which casts doubt on the supply and price of gas. In a hurry, he hopes to pass these legislative changes in 2015.



http://www.latribune.fr/actualites/econ ... riser.html
0 x
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554




by moinsdewatt » 31/03/15, 22:12

Romania: Chevron gives up shale gas

Tuesday February 24, 2015 Le Courrier des Balkans

Following the fall in the price of a barrel, the American oil group Chevron announced that it was abandoning shale gas exploration in Romania. It is a huge relief for the thousands of opponents mobilized over the years.

This decision was confirmed by a Chevron spokesperson who spoke to Mediafax in Bucharest. "The results of drilling in Romania do not justify hopes and progress has been too slow to expand investments", according to the Romanian media.

In 2014, Romanian Prime Minister Victor Ponta acknowledged that the exploration work carried out by Chevron had failed to produce results, despite significant investments.

“Romania is making a lot of effort for something that does not exist. It looks like we don't have shale gas, "said the prime minister, adding that the country would buy the additional gas it needed from Gazprom.

Chevron experts initially estimated the amount of shale gas in Romania to be 51 billion m3, which they said would be enough to supply the country with gas for a century.

The Romanian government at the time had issued Chevron a three to five year exploration permit. Bucharest hoped that shale gas would guarantee energy security and end its dependence on Russia. Gazprom supplies 20% of the gas consumed in Romania.

Last summer, Chevron had been forced to suspend its work in the Romanian district of Vaslui, following demonstrations by residents and environmentalists. They feared that drilling and injecting large quantities of chemicals into the soil would cause environmental pollution.

"We have won thanks to our protests, we will no longer be poisoned", exclaimed residents of Pungeşti. They had repeatedly opposed the work of Chevron, especially on December 7, when several of them had confronted the gendarmes.

The drop in oil prices is behind the Chevron decision to withdraw from Romania. The company also withdrew from Bulgaria, where protests took place, and from Poland, where it had encountered less resistance.

http://balkans.courriers.info/article26677.html
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79121
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 31/03/15, 22:22

Yes, there is nothing green in this decision: the barrel at $ 55 destroys the profitability of shale gas ... and the oil sands also elsewhere ...

If it's cool that fracking and shale oil are being abandoned (for now ...), oil again so low is not good news for the planet ...
0 x
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554




by moinsdewatt » 23/08/15, 14:15

Total abandons its exploration well in northwest Denmark. Property of the deposit ultimately not interesting.

Total Abandons Shale Gas Exploration at Well in Denmark

by Reuters, August 18, 2015

French oil major Total abandoned has exploration work at its shale well Vendsyssel-1 in northwestern Denmark, the Danish Energy Agency said in a statement late on Monday.

The well, which is 80 percent owned by Total and 20 percent by Denmark's state oil company Nordsofonden, confirmed the presence of gas but the thickness of the layer was smaller than expected.

"The results didn't fulfill the partnership's expectations on reservoir properties and thickness of layers," the agency said.

"No further work will be performed in the well, which is now being permanently plugged and abandoned."

http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/1 ... in_Denmark
0 x
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554




by moinsdewatt » 23/08/15, 14:15

Shale gas: London issues new permits to explore underground

By Challenges.fr published on 19-08-2015

It is the first time since 2008 that permits have been offered to explore for oil and shale gas in the country.

British authorities on Tuesday (August 18th) selected the companies selected for 27 new exploration licenses for conventional hydrocarbons and shale, for the first time in seven years concerning this controversial energy source supported by the Cameron government.

The Oil & Gas Authority (OGA), the national regulator of the sector, indicated to have retained in particular the British groups Cuadrilla and IGas (the latter allied to Total), the French GDF Suez (Engie) or the Swiss Ineos for a total of 27 land exploration blocks in central and northern England.

It is the first time since 2008 that permits have been offered to explore for oil and shale gas in the country. Licenses must still be formally allocated to the companies selected during the year. They will not be until after the completion of further environmental studies for a second group of 132 exploration blocks across the country, which should be offered later.

64.000 jobs at stake?

"It is important that we continue on this path and move the shale forward, while maintaining strong environmental controls. Investment in shale could reach 33 billion pounds (46,5 billion euros) and support 64.000 jobs" , said Nicholas Bourne, Secretary of State for Energy.

Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron is a very enthusiastic supporter of the development of shale gas, potentially seeing it as a cheap and abundant source of energy, despite the opposition of some residents and concerned environmental groups. consequences of using the hydraulic fracturing technique.

While drilling has stalled since 2011, when a Cuadrilla well caused minor earthquakes in the north of England, the British government has taken steps to try to accelerate the development of shale. He announced last week that he could now directly issue the necessary authorizations to operate the sites, in order to bypass local authorities deemed too slow or reluctant.

Opposition of residents

The environmental association Friends of the Earth ruled on Tuesday that the new licenses would "provoke anger and controversy because wherever hydraulic fracturing has been proposed, it has encountered opposition from residents."

Opponents of this technique - which consists of creating underground cracks and infiltrating a mixture of water, sand and chemicals to allow the extraction of hydrocarbons trapped in the rock - fear in particular the pollution of the reserves of potable water.

http://www.challenges.fr/europe/2015081 ... s-sol.html
0 x
raymon
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 901
Registration: 03/12/07, 19:21
Location: vaucluse
x 9




by raymon » 24/08/15, 20:27

Bof given the drop in the price of crude they are not about to go.
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 226 guests