Andreas Späth

What does fracking smell like?

2014-10-20 10:24

Andreas Wilson-Späth

With fracking for shale gas likely to become a reality in many parts of South Africa, it’s a perfectly reasonable thing to ask. Does fracking have an odour?

Supporters will tell you that their pet technology is properly housetrained and does not give off any disagreeable scents. While that may be true for the most part, if you happen to live in an area targeted by the fracking industry, expect a significant increase of dust and diesel fumes in the air as hundreds of trucks will be shipping equipment and fracking fluid back and forth 24/7.

You should be more worried about the things you can’t smell. The assortment of volatile hydrocarbon compounds that reach the surface together with fracked shale gas may not have much of an aroma and can’t be seen without an infrared camera, but it’s not exactly good for your health. A recent study conducted in Pennsylvania, one of the centres of shale gas extraction in the USA, found that people who live close to natural gas production wells are more prone to health problems including skin conditions and respiratory symptoms.

Methane (CH4), which is the main component of natural gas, is completely odourless. It may generate significantly less carbon dioxide (CO2) when it is burned in power plants or combustion engines than oil or coal, but in its unburned state, it’s a much more potent greenhouse gas, estimated to be 30 times as effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere over a 100 year time span than carbon dioxide.

And here lies the problem. The natural gas industry is notoriously leaky. Methane escapes from a variety of places in the infrastructure that’s used to convey the stuff to the surface, to transport and store it. Exactly how much methane behaves as a ‘fugitive gas’ is a much debated questions with estimates ranging from 1% to 9% and more. It’s enough to make critics believe that, considered in its entirety; fracking is no better, or perhaps even worse, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, than burning coal or oil.

A paper published in the journal Science in February suggests that methane leaks from American natural gas operations are 50% higher than estimated by the US government’s Environmental Protection Agency. Since then, satellite data have confirmed the considerable leakiness of the industry.

Escaping methane not only makes its way into the atmosphere, but into nearby drinking water supplies as well. A little while ago, much was made in the media of a study that demonstrated that the process of fracking itself (i.e. using water under high pressure to fracture rock and release tiny gas bubbles) did not contribute to groundwater contamination, but that it was methane seeping out of the wells used to extract this gas from underground which was to blame. But that’s a bit like me telling you that the gun I’m holding to your head won’t kill you when we both know that it’s the bullet that will do the trick.

There is no getting away from the fact that a leaky natural gas industry is responsible for pollution and increased greenhouse gas emissions.

Now, new research shows that even without any methane leaks in the system, an increased use of natural gas, the majority of which will come from fracking shale gas deposits worldwide, is unlikely to result in a significant reduction (if any) in greenhouse gas emissions. This is true in the USA, the current world leader when it comes to fracking, and when projected on a global scale.

The notion that fracking is a ‘bridging fuel’ to a low-carbon energy future is bogus – marketing doublespeak from a powerful industry that’s mostly interested in fossil fuel profits begging to be liberated from below the ground.

A new EU report indicates that when all external costs (e.g. pollution, climate change, human health impacts) are taken into account, renewable wind and solar energy are substantially cheaper than natural gas, and a new life-cycle analysis shows that low-carbon energy sources are well capable of supplying global electricity demands by 2050.

We don’t need shale gas.

Methane may be odourless. But fracking stinks.

- Andreas is a freelance writer with a PhD in geochemistry. Follow him on Twitter: @Andreas_Spath
 
Send your comments to Andreas

Disclaimer:


News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.







X
NEXT ON NEWS24X

SHARE:

24.com publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Comment on this story
5 comments
Comments have been closed for this article.

Inside News24

 
/News
Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.
 
English
Afrikaans
isiZulu

Hello 

Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.


Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire 24.com network.

Settings

Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.




Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.