• 5 minutes Closing the circle around Saudi Arabia: Where did Khashoggi disappear?
  • 10 minutes Iranian Sanctions - What Are The Facts?
  • 15 minutes U.N. About Climate Change: World Must Take 'Unprecedented' Steps To Avert Worst Effects
  • 3 hours WTI @ $75.75, headed for $64 - 67
  • 3 mins Censorship has a price: Google’s CEO Defends Potential Return to China
  • 1 hour Gold price on a rise...
  • 34 mins Two Koreas: U.N. Command Wrap Up First Talks On Disarming Border
  • 18 hours China Is the Climate-Change Battleground
  • 8 hours Can the World Survive without Saudi Oil?
  • 8 hours Porsche Says That it ‘Enters the Electric Era With The New Taycan’
  • 2 hours Saudis Threaten Retaliation If Sanctions are Imposed
  • 21 hours Sears files Chapter 11
  • 2 hours $70 More Likely Than $100 - YeeeeeeHaaaaa
  • 22 hours Natural disasters and US deficit
  • 2 hours Who's Ready For The Next Contest?
  • 18 hours U.S. - Saudi Arabia: President Trump Says Saudi Arabia's King Wouldn't Survive "Two Weeks" Without U.S. Backing
Alt Text

China Blinks First In LNG Face-Off With U.S.

China’s latest tariff strategy involving…

Alt Text

Is This China’s First Defeat In The Trade War?

Beijing slapped a 10 percent…

Daniel J. Graeber

Daniel J. Graeber

Daniel Graeber is a writer and political analyst based in Michigan. His work on matters related to the geopolitical aspects of the global energy sector,…

More Info

Trending Discussions

British Draft Report Dispels Shale Gas Myths

British Draft Report Dispels Shale Gas Myths

A British government report said it's unlikely that hydraulic fracturing in shale natural gas sites will lead to groundwater contamination. While the British shale story is in its infancy, the government's report said policymakers may want to monitor everything from radioactive elements to noise pollution when mulling their shale future. Spills above ground may pose a risk but the report said that threat stems from operational failures or poor regulation, not so much the drilling practice itself. Critics have long challenged the practice, dubbed fracking. With science moving ahead of the debate, however, those opponents may be forced to change their tune.

Frack Off, a grassroots group in the United Kingdom, said threats from shale gas extraction include methane leaks, groundwater contamination and radioactive contamination. A report published last week by Public Health England, an agency within the Department of Health, said "potential risks to public health from exposure to the emissions associated with shale gas extraction are low if the operations are properly run and regulated".

Related article: When will the Shale Bubble Burst?

The success of shale natural gas in the United States has pushed the country to a leadership position in terms of overall production. Last month, the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the Energy Department, said the United States is on pace to pass Russia as the world's leading natural gas producer thanks in part to shale extraction. The British government estimates the Bowland shale play, near Lancashire, may contain enough natural gas to last the country for decades to come. So far, however, there are no commercial shale gas operations in the United Kingdom.

The PHE report looks to the U.S. experience with shale exploration to assess the potential dangers from shale extraction. It found there were lingering concerns over the levels of contamination associated with fracking but discounted most of them, saying either the U.S. studies were flawed or the dangers in Britain weren't as great because of weather and topographical variances. Any problems associated with shale gas extraction in the United States seem to be linked to poor regulations as much anything, PHE said.

Despite the report, advocacy groups like Friends of Earth said there are no guarantees the future shale gas story in the country will be risk-free. Natural gas, they say, is just "another climate changing fossil fuel that needs to be left in the ground." But that too seems out of step with the latest trends. Last week, the U.S. Energy Department said carbon dioxide emissions related to energy consumption were at their lowest point since 1994 because natural gas was used more than coal in the country. The International Energy Agency, meanwhile, says natural gas is a "low-risk" fuel source that's cheaper and less polluting than other fossil fuels. Jacob Rees-Mogg, a British lawmaker, went so far as to claim it was the "doomsayers" themselves who are responsible for negative energy trends. With mounting evidence suggesting the fear of fracking is unfounded, the neophobes may have to tilt their ire at different windmills.

By. Daniel J. Graeber of Oilprice.com




Back to homepage

Trending Discussions


Leave a comment
  • David Hrivnak on November 04 2013 said:
    For those who want to "leave it in the ground" what is their suggestion for supplying their energy needs? While I have moved to an electric car and roof top solar I see few people following. If WE stop using fossil fuels then the oil companies will stop drilling. But if we keep buying thier products you better beleive they will continue to drill.
  • Jon Michaels on November 05 2013 said:
    I read the opening statement as shale critics are proved right. Poor regulation and poor practices have led to poor experiences in the US.

    Tight regulation and improved practices will lead to higher prices in the UK and EU (and countries aspiring to EU membership).

    Frackivists are not the only critics of shale gas in the UK.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News