From the Brisbane Courier Mail Coal-seam gas comes up cleanDes...

From the Brisbane Courier Mail

Coal-seam gas comes up clean
Des Houghton From: The Courier-Mail June 25, 2011 12:00AM


CARBON SAVIOUR: Coal-seam gas's supposed drawbacks have been declared fallacious and as an energy source, it is remarkably carbon efficient. Source: AFP
A LANDMARK report has given coal-seam gas mining the all-clear, saying fears of environmental damage are groundless or greatly exaggerated.

The report by The Global Warming Policy Foundation gave a series of positive findings on why coal-seam gas will bring massive "environmental, economic and political benefits".

And it says chemical run-off from agriculture poses greater environmental threats than gas extraction.

The report should be compulsory reading for sceptical farmers and extremists like the Greens, who ridiculously call for a halt to gas extraction in Queensland.

The London-based foundation can't be easily ignored because it is an international advisory group that includes 19 professors across many scientific disciplines.

Its report came as gas was given a highly favourable report card closer to home. The State Government released encouraging figures showing environmental safeguards have been honoured by the mining giants operating in Queensland. Of the 2700 wells tested, 98 per cent had no leaks.



The industry-wide audit into Queensland gas wells follows shenanigans by protesters, especially at Tara, about 300km west of Brisbane.

There is no doubt that gas mining will be disruptive but with the proper safeguards the risks are low and the potential benefits great.

A new code of practice sets guidelines for companies for ongoing testing, monitoring and maintenance.

And, of course, prime agricultural land like that at Emerald or in the Felton Valley must be protected at all costs.

The foundation's report, The Shale Gas Shock, was written by Matt Ridley, one of the world's most respected science journalists.

He says: "The gas is not only abundant but relatively cheap, and therefore promises to take marketshare from nuclear, coal and renewable energy and to replace oil in some transport and industrial uses over coming decades."

He says the global gas industry "is unlikely to be a major source of pollution or methane emissions but in contrast promises to reduce pollution and accelerate the decarbonisation of the world economy".

He adds: "Abundant and relatively cheap, shale gas promises to lower the cost of gas relative to oil, coal and renewables. It indefinitely postpones the exhaustion of fossil fuels and makes reducing emissions of carbon dioxide possible without raising energy prices."

In a foreword in the report, eminent scientist Professor Freeman Dyson says: "Shale gas is not a perfect solution to our economic and environmental problems, but it is here when it is needed and it makes an enormous difference to the human condition.

"The lessons to be learned are clear. The environmental costs of shale gas are much smaller than the environmental costs of coal."

Green groups please note.

Much of the report details the history of exploration in the US. There, the Congressional Research Service says thanks to gas, America now has the world's largest fossil-fuel resources - greater than Saudi Arabia, Canada and China combined.

However, this claim has been widely challenged.

There are 48 shale basins with gas in 32 countries. There are large gas deposits in Poland, Morocco, South Africa, New Zealand and China. Not all of it is recoverable.

The report also contains welcome news about hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking", a process whereby sand and chemicals are pumped into the ground at pressure to fracture the coal seam to release the water and gas.

With precautions, it is unlikely to pose a risk, the report says.

"At high dilution these are unlikely to pose a risk to human health in the event they reach groundwater," it says.

And it quotes from a study by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, which says no groundwater pollution or disruption of underground sources of drinking water has been attributed to fracking.

The report concluded that groundwater is at risk of contamination unrelated to the shale-gas industry such as agricultural run-off, oil spills from the transport industry and run-off from coal mines.

Gas also has marked advantages over other ways of generating electricity.

"Given the higher efficiency of gas turbines and the lower carbon content of gas, burning gas produces only 37 per cent of carbon dioxide as burning coal for the same electricity output," the report says. "In addition, unlike burnt coal, burnt shale gas includes no sulphur dioxides, no mercury and fewer nitrogen oxides.

"It requires no surface mining and mountain top removal, no tunnelling and ground subsidence and results in many fewer human fatalities. Gas is piped to customers rather than transported by congested road or rail.

"Therefore, while coal is cheap, it has many environmental externalities, not all of which are fully priced in. 'Clean coal' with carbon dioxide emissions removed would probably be, at 9c per kilowatt hour, roughly twice as costly as gas for electricity generation, yet have only a slim carbon emission advantage. Gas, because it burns cleaner, is also more amenable to carbon capture than coal."

End of report

Cheers Mattocks
Should email this to BOF.