3 results
A review of water and greenhouse gas impacts of unconventional natural gas development in the United States
- Douglas Arent, Jeffrey Logan, Jordan Macknick, William Boyd, Kenneth Medlock III, Francis O'Sullivan, Jae Edmonds, Leon Clarke, Hillard Huntington, Garvin Heath, Patricia Statwick, Morgan Bazilian
-
- Journal:
- MRS Energy & Sustainability / Volume 2 / 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 04 June 2015, E4
- Print publication:
- 2015
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
This paper reviews recent developments in the production and use of unconventional natural gas in the United States with a focus on water and greenhouse gas emission implications. If unconventional natural gas in the U.S. is produced responsibly, transported and distributed with little leakage, and incorporated into integrated energy systems that are designed for future resiliency, it could play a significant role in realizing a more sustainable energy future; however, the increased use of natural gas as a substitute for more carbon intensive fuels will alone not substantially alter world carbon dioxide concentration projections.
This paper reviews recent developments in the production and use of unconventional natural gas in the United States with a focus on environmental impacts. Specifically, we focus on water management and greenhouse gas emission implications. If unconventional natural gas in the United States is produced responsibly, transported and distributed with little leakage, and incorporated into integrated energy systems that are designed for future resiliency, it could play a significant role in realizing a more sustainable energy future. The cutting-edge of industry water management practices gives a picture of how this transition is unfolding, although much opportunity remains to minimize water use and related environmental impacts. The role of natural gas to mitigate climate forcing is less clear. While natural gas has low CO2 emissions upon direct use, methane leakage and long term climate effects lead to the conclusion that increased use of natural gas as a substitute for more carbon intensive fuels will not substantially alter world carbon dioxide concentration projections, and that other zero or low carbon energy sources will be needed to limit GHG concentrations. We conclude with some possible avenues for further work.
12 - Political and economic influences on the future world market for natural gas
-
- By Peter Hartley, Chair, Department of EconomicsRice University, Kenneth B. Medlock III, Research FellowJames A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, Rice University
- Edited by David G. Victor, Stanford University, California, Amy M. Jaffe, Rice University, Houston, Mark H. Hayes, Stanford University, California
-
- Book:
- Natural Gas and Geopolitics
- Published online:
- 22 September 2009
- Print publication:
- 29 June 2006, pp 407-438
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
The base case model, discussed in chapter 11, assumed uniform rates of return across countries but allowed for different rates of return on different categories of investment. Specifically, we assumed that pipeline investments were least risky, followed by LNG regasification and liquefaction terminals, and then by mining projects (or exploration and development). The risk associated with pipeline investment is low as regulation often keeps the costs associated with transporting gas via pipeline quite stable. By contrast, since LNG liquefaction and regasification terminals embody less mature technologies, their costs of construction are likely to be more variable. Some of the risks associated with LNG, however, may be ameliorated by “bankable” contracts for LNG sales that limit variability in returns. The resource-mining projects are most risky because there is substantial geological uncertainty (such as initial reserve assessment, ultimate recoverability, and so forth), as well as economic uncertainty resulting from variation in commodity prices.
Assuming that rates of return on a given category of investment are uniform across countries ignores political factors that can greatly affect the risks of investing in different countries. These differing risks are a major reason that resources in some countries remain undeveloped. The relatively small amount of capital currently invested in such countries should make the return to capital relatively large and attract new investments, but the political risks may more than offset the higher expected return.
11 - The Baker Institute World Gas Trade Model
-
- By Peter Hartley, Chair, Department of EconomicsRice University, Kenneth B. Medlock III, Research FellowJames A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, Rice University
- Edited by David G. Victor, Stanford University, California, Amy M. Jaffe, Rice University, Houston, Mark H. Hayes, Stanford University, California
-
- Book:
- Natural Gas and Geopolitics
- Published online:
- 22 September 2009
- Print publication:
- 29 June 2006, pp 357-406
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Natural gas increased from roughly 19 percent of world primary energy demand in 1980 to about 23 percent in 2002 (EIA 2004) and is now produced and consumed in forty-three countries around the world. Moreover, the International Energy Agency (IEA) (IEA 2004) predicts that world natural gas demand will be about 90 percent higher by 2030. It also projects that the share of gas in world primary energy demand will increase from 23 percent in 2002 to 25 percent in 2030, with gas potentially overtaking coal as the world's second largest energy source. The IEA predicts that the power sector will account for 60 percent of the increase in gas demand.
Much of current world production of natural gas comes from mature basins in the United States and the North Sea. Russia, where production rivals that in the United States, currently accounts for almost one-quarter of world production but, unlike the United States, has substantial reserves that remain untapped. Furthermore, Russia and the countries of the Former Soviet Union (FSU) rank first globally in undiscovered natural gas potential (USGS 2000). These countries already export considerable quantities of natural gas to Europe, and they are expected to become important suppliers to the growing needs in Asia.
The countries of the Middle East also have substantial natural gas resources, both proved and potential, which are relatively untapped.