The Gas That Is Cooking the Planet But Saving the US from China
Published in Il Fatto Quotidiano
(Italy) on 21 December 2012
by Mario Agostinelli (link to
original)
In a series of articles in La Republicca, Federico Rampini exposes the strategy of the U.S., led by Obama, to maintain geopolitical and military hegemony in the face of China’s furious growth. The shale mining project is a significant part of this strategy. The project would push the U.S. and Canada to replace the Arab countries and Russia in fossil fuel achievements, presenting a strong position in the economic competition with Beijing.
But at what cost for the planet and the future? And what is the catch of a low-cost product that requires more energy to obtain than can be gained from it? These questions are worth touching on in this first post and in another post to follow. It will then be easier to understand the opportunistic and proud opposition of Washington and Ottawa to the signing of the Kyoto Protocol, and the consequent dip of the recent Doha conference.
Shale gas is obtained by hydraulic fracturing of rocks that contain dispersed bitumen. It involves horizontal penetration of shale deposits up to three kilometers deep, pumping in large quantities of lubricants, water, sand and chemicals at extremely high pressure. Aside from devastating the land and soil, the process carries a high risk to human health and the environment due to carbon dioxide and methane emissions. And this is on top of the greenhouse effect! It also causes disastrous contamination and depletion of ground and surface water and soil degradation. It affects biodiversity, air quality, and seismic conditions, and not-insignificant levels of radioactive material are brought to the surface.
The European Union currently opposes the practice, despite pressure from Poland, which wants to obtain energy independence at any cost, and from lobbyists such as Shell, who want to commence mining of marine schists. Not to mention the frantic activity of Canadian government representatives, who between September 2009 and July 2011 organized over 110 events in Brussels – more than one a week!
What would be the reward for the U.S. and Canada (with whom Monti’s government evidently agrees, having proposed a National Energy Strategy founded on petroleum and gas mining) in the face of an acceleration of the climate crisis? (N.B. An EU research group attributes to the shale gas greenhouse effect a value of 107 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of carbon, compared to petroleum with an average of 87.5 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule.)
Paradoxically, the advantage lies in a market cost less than one third of that of traditional gas. This is obtained artificially through bank tricks and speculation behind the construction of mines and gas ducts, and the launch of LNG carriers and regasification plants. In the end, these operations are paid for by cuts in pensions, worsening health and living conditions, and disruption of nature due to climate change. A beautiful modern story, somewhat unspoken by the media although they have known for a long time – and the media is the subject to which we will turn in my next post.
But at what cost for the planet and the future? And what is the catch of a low-cost product that requires more energy to obtain than can be gained from it? These questions are worth touching on in this first post and in another post to follow. It will then be easier to understand the opportunistic and proud opposition of Washington and Ottawa to the signing of the Kyoto Protocol, and the consequent dip of the recent Doha conference.
Shale gas is obtained by hydraulic fracturing of rocks that contain dispersed bitumen. It involves horizontal penetration of shale deposits up to three kilometers deep, pumping in large quantities of lubricants, water, sand and chemicals at extremely high pressure. Aside from devastating the land and soil, the process carries a high risk to human health and the environment due to carbon dioxide and methane emissions. And this is on top of the greenhouse effect! It also causes disastrous contamination and depletion of ground and surface water and soil degradation. It affects biodiversity, air quality, and seismic conditions, and not-insignificant levels of radioactive material are brought to the surface.
The European Union currently opposes the practice, despite pressure from Poland, which wants to obtain energy independence at any cost, and from lobbyists such as Shell, who want to commence mining of marine schists. Not to mention the frantic activity of Canadian government representatives, who between September 2009 and July 2011 organized over 110 events in Brussels – more than one a week!
What would be the reward for the U.S. and Canada (with whom Monti’s government evidently agrees, having proposed a National Energy Strategy founded on petroleum and gas mining) in the face of an acceleration of the climate crisis? (N.B. An EU research group attributes to the shale gas greenhouse effect a value of 107 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of carbon, compared to petroleum with an average of 87.5 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule.)
Paradoxically, the advantage lies in a market cost less than one third of that of traditional gas. This is obtained artificially through bank tricks and speculation behind the construction of mines and gas ducts, and the launch of LNG carriers and regasification plants. In the end, these operations are paid for by cuts in pensions, worsening health and living conditions, and disruption of nature due to climate change. A beautiful modern story, somewhat unspoken by the media although they have known for a long time – and the media is the subject to which we will turn in my next post.
Previous article![]( "Why I Do Not Believe Them")
