Beyond Fracking: the next steps in the 'extreme energy' debate in - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Beyond Fracking: the next steps in the 'extreme energy' debate in Britain Paul Mobbs Mobbs' Environmental Investigations http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/

Swalcliffe Grange, North Oxfordshire, December 2012

Paul Mobbs, 2011 Do our conceptions of “fracking” encompass its 'reality'? Pro-Publica, 2008

There are many ignored issues... here's one: The 'strategic environmental appraisal' (SEA) report produced by DECC outlined a scenario for the 14 th Round PEDL licences. What the report considered was only a superficial set of environmental impact parameters...

There are many ignored issues... here's one: If we use the SEA data, and then add information for the likely effluent quality, it is possible to calculate the levels of waste generation omitted from the SEA report.

There are many ignored issues... here's one: The Government uses a higher gas production per well compared to US data. On the SEA's figures only 0.5% to 10% of the resource is produced; more realistic data would indicate 0.2% to 4%. These new figures represent a 2½ times increase – but may be two or four times more with higher recovery.

The Mackay- Stone report: The Government justifies the “low carbon” qualities of shale gas with reference to DECC's 2013 report, Potential Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with Shale Gas Extraction and Use . Question is, are the data and assumptions in the report valid?

fugitive emissions The Mackay- emissions per per well Stone report: unit of gas = gas production per well Mackay & Stone's Source: Low High figures in results are arguably Mackay/Stone 2 5 billion cu. feet one quarter of the USGS 0.03 2.8 values produced USDoE 1.4 1.8 when using more figures accepted rejected as “outlier” Paper Paper representative data. Stephenson et al (2011) 0.60% EPA (2011) 3.00% Their calculations O'Sullivan and Paltsev (2012) 0.60% Miller et al (2013) 3.00% are correct – it's Cathles et al (2012) 0.90% Petron et al (2014) 3.00% the statistics they Burnham et al (2011) 1.30% Howarth et al. (2011) 3.30% use which are EPA (2013) 1.65% Petron et al (2012) 4.00% questionable. Jiang et al (2011) 2.00% Karion et al (2013) (NOAA) 5.50% EPA (2012) 2.30% NOAA et al (2013) 9.00% Hultman et al. (2011) 2.80%

Jester's Hill, North Oxfordshire, December 2012

12,000 DECC Indigenous production Primary Energy Consumption, PJ/year Total primary projections energy consumption 7,000 2,000 0 3,000 PRIMARY ENERGY UK Primary Energy Supply – 1915 to 2013, & projections to 2035 Commodity imports DECC statistics 8,000 1930 2005 1915 1945 1960 1975 1990 2014 2035 Coal import Petroleum import Natural gas import Nuclear import Electrical power import Renewable import Coal Petroleum Natural gas Renewable Coal export Petroleum export Natural gas export Renewable exports Total consumption (PJ)

12,000 DECC Indigenous production Total primary Primary Energy Consumption, PJ/year projections energy consumption 7,000 strike UK production ~20% of 2,000 supply 0 3,000 coal production COAL combustion peaks ~1923/4 plants directive Commodity imports DECC statistics 8,000 1915 1930 1945 1960 1990 2005 1975 2014 2035 Coal import Coal Coal export Total consumption (PJ)

12,000 DECC Indigenous production Total primary Primary Energy Consumption, PJ/year projections energy consumption production 7,000 peaks 1999 2,000 0 Piper Alpha 3,000 PETROLEUM 2014 – Persian Gulf 50% imports? imports Commodity imports DECC statistics 8,000 1915 1930 1945 1960 1990 2005 1975 2014 2035 Petroleum import Petroleum Petroleum export Total consumption (PJ)

12,000 DECC Indigenous production Primary Energy Consumption, PJ/year Total primary projections energy consumption production 7,000 peaks ~2002/3 liberalisation 2,000 0 3,000 2013 – 50% NATURAL GAS imports Commodity imports DECC statistics 8,000 1930 2005 1915 1945 1960 1975 1990 2014 2035 Natural gas import Natural gas Natural gas export Total consumption (PJ)

12,000 DECC Indigenous production Total primary Primary Energy Consumption, PJ/year projections energy consumption 7,000 Calder Hall AGR PWR 'new build' 1956 Magnox 1970s 1995 2,000 1960s 0 we have no viable uranium resource – 3,000 hence all nuclear power is 'imported' NUCLEAR Commodity imports DECC statistics 8,000 1915 1930 1945 1960 1990 2005 2014 2035 1975 Nuclear import Electrical power import Total consumption (PJ)

12,000 DECC Indigenous production Primary Energy Consumption, PJ/year Total primary projections energy consumption 7,000 recessions save more carbon emissions than renewable energy does 2,000 0 in 2013 just over one-third of renewable energy 3,000 was from 'waste' – and 10% liquid biofuels RENEWABLE mostly wind & biofuels Commodity imports DECC statistics 8,000 1930 2005 1915 1945 1960 1975 1990 2014 2035 Renewable import Renewable Renewable exports Total consumption (PJ)

12,000 DECC Indigenous production Primary Energy Consumption, PJ/year Total primary projections energy consumption Putting it all back together... 7,000 2,000 0 3,000 PRIMARY ENERGY Commodity imports DECC statistics 8,000 1930 2005 1915 1945 1960 1975 1990 2014 2035 Coal import Petroleum import Natural gas import Nuclear import Electrical power import Renewable import Coal Petroleum Natural gas Renewable Coal export Petroleum export Natural gas export Renewable exports Total consumption (PJ)

12,000 ☺ political Primary Energy Consumption, PJ/year realignment ☺ 7,000 what next? 2,000 0 3,000 resource CYCLES ☹ boom-bust post-colonial ☹ cycle decline 8,000 1930 2005 1915 1945 1960 1975 1990 2014 2035 Coal import Petroleum import Natural gas import Nuclear import Electrical power import Renewable import Coal Petroleum Natural gas Renewable Coal export Petroleum export Natural gas export Renewable exports Total consumption (PJ)

12,000 DECC Indigenous production Primary Energy Consumption, PJ/year Total primary projections energy consumption 7,000 OFGEM shale gas estimates 2,000 0 3,000 SHALE GAS Commodity imports DECC statistics 8,000 1930 2005 1915 1945 1960 1975 1990 2014 2035 Coal import Petroleum import Natural gas import Nuclear import Electrical power import Renewable import Coal Petroleum Natural gas Renewable Coal export Petroleum export Natural gas export Renewable exports Unconventional gas Total consumption (PJ)

And what about US shale oil production? 6,000,000 1,600 Utica Permian Approx. 3 ½ years Niobrara Marcellus Haynesville Eagle Ford Oil production, bld 4,500,000 1,200 Bakken Rig count ~3 years ~3 years ~3 years ~3 years Rig count ~3 years 3,000,000 800 ~3 years ~3 years 1,500,000 400 0 0 Jan-13 Jan-15 Jan-09 Jan-10 Jan-11 Jan-12 Jan-14 May-15 Jan-07 Jan-08

Is US shale oil delaying “peak oil”? 4,000 'As is' BP data Oil production, mtoe 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1985 1995 2005 2013 1965 1975 Bottom 10% Next 15% (11 states) Next 25% (8 states) Iran Canada China US Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Rolling 3 year av.

Is US shale oil delaying “peak oil”? 4,000 BP data less US/Canadian 'unconventional' Oil production, mtoe 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1985 1995 2005 2013 1965 1975 Bottom 10% Next 15% (11 states) Next 25% (8 states) Iran Canada China US Russian Federation Saudi Arabia New rolling 3 year av. Rolling 3 year av.

Tadmarton Heath, North Oxfordshire, December 2012

'The Fracking Organogram' May 2013 To understand what “fracking” is about we have to look – beyond technology... beyond statistics... – at the political framework within which this evidence is considered.