Shale gas GHG footprint worse than coal

15th April 2011


Related Topics

Related tags

  • Energy ,
  • Mitigation ,
  • Generation ,
  • Conventional

Author

IEMA

Natural gas extracted using hydraulic fracturing could be more damaging for the environment than coal, according to new research from the US.

The study, from Cornell University, reveals that shale gas, as it is known, releases at least 30% more methane into the atmosphere than conventionally-sourced gas and has a larger greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint than coal.

Hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking”, releases gas trapped underground by forcing large volumes of pressurised water into the shale and fracturing the rock. According to the study, during this process, and the subsequent drilling of wells, 1.9% of the methane in the natural gas is released, compared to just 0.01% in conventional gas extraction.

It concludes that the amount of methane released when creating the wells mean that over a 20-year period shale gas has a GHG footprint that is 20% greater than that of coal.

The lead author of the study, Robert Howarth urges caution in viewing natural gas as good fuel choice for the future.

“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 story and the comparison is quite misleading,” he said.

The research has refocused the debate around the safety and sustainability of fracking.

“The UK government should be cautious about allowing further shale gas exploitation until it is convinced that our own legally binding GHG emission targets will not be compromised,” warned John Barwise, chair of the Cumbria Green Business Forum and director of QoL Environmental Management and Communications.

Meanwhile, DECC said it would “closely monitor developments and consider the need for additional research to improve our understanding of the implications for policy.”

However, the gas sector has criticised the research, questioning its use of a 20-year timeframe over the 100-year span that is considered more relevant by climate change by scientists.

“This study lacks credibility and is full of contradictions,” said Russell Jones, senior economic advisor for the American Petroleum Institute. “It is really an exercise in selective data and manipulated methodologies used to reach conclusions that deliberately contradict mainstream science.”

Subscribe

Subscribe to IEMA's newsletters to receive timely articles, expert opinions, event announcements, and much more, directly in your inbox.


Transform articles

Weather damage insurance claims hit record high

Weather-related damage to homes and businesses saw insurance claims hit a record high in the UK last year following a succession of storms.

18th April 2024

Read more

The Scottish government has today conceded that its goal to reduce carbon emissions by 75% by 2030 is now “out of reach” following analysis by the Climate Change Committee (CCC).

18th April 2024

Read more

The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has issued a statement clarifying that no changes have been made to its stance on offsetting scope 3 emissions following a backlash.

16th April 2024

Read more

While there is no silver bullet for tackling climate change and social injustice, there is one controversial solution: the abolition of the super-rich. Chris Seekings explains more

4th April 2024

Read more

One of the world’s most influential management thinkers, Andrew Winston sees many reasons for hope as pessimism looms large in sustainability. Huw Morris reports

4th April 2024

Read more

Alex Veitch from the British Chambers of Commerce and IEMA’s Ben Goodwin discuss with Chris Seekings how to unlock the potential of UK businesses

4th April 2024

Read more

Regulatory gaps between the EU and UK are beginning to appear, warns Neil Howe in this edition’s environmental legislation round-up

4th April 2024

Read more

Five of the latest books on the environment and sustainability

3rd April 2024

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert

IEMA Cookie Notice

Clicking the ‘Accept all’ button means you are accepting analytics and third-party cookies. Our website uses necessary cookies which are required in order to make our website work. In addition to these, we use analytics and third-party cookies to optimise site functionality and give you the best possible experience. To control which cookies are set, click ‘Settings’. To learn more about cookies, how we use them on our website and how to change your cookie settings please view our cookie policy.

Manage cookie settings

Our use of cookies

You can learn more detailed information in our cookie policy.

Some cookies are essential, but non-essential cookies help us to improve the experience on our site by providing insights into how the site is being used. To maintain privacy management, this relies on cookie identifiers. Resetting or deleting your browser cookies will reset these preferences.

Essential cookies

These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website. They include, for example, cookies that enable you to log into secure areas of our website.

Analytics cookies

These cookies allow us to recognise and count the number of visitors to our website and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works.

Advertising cookies

These cookies allow us to tailor advertising to you based on your interests. If you do not accept these cookies, you will still see adverts, but these will be more generic.

Save and close