Britain Faces a Nasty Shock When the Global Energy Cycle Turns
Here is a middle section of this timely and informative article by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard for The Telegraph, which I managed to see while on holiday:
The BGS [British Geological Survey] thinks there are 1,300 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of gas resource in the Bowland, enough in theory to replace the North Sea and profoundly change British fortunes.
"Four or five years ago the recovery rate in the US was 10pc and now they are moving towards 20pc. I don't see why we can't do that in the Bowland," Stephen Bowler, the chief executive of IGas. Anything like that would be enough to meet Britain's entire annual consumption of 2.7 TCF through the 21st Century.
IGas is in partnership with Total, GDF Suez, and INEOS, expects initials flows in the Bowland in early 2017, building up to commercial output within two or three years.
Those on the cutting edge are exasperated by the static critiques of the hydraulic fracturing, typically five years out of date. The gains in technology, seismic imaging, computer data, and smart drills are moving at lightning speed.
New methods allow for three, six, or even ten wells to be drilled from the same pad, greatly reducing disruption. Walking rigs move on the next spot without the need for the vast fleets of vehicles that bedevilled the early years of shale. Fracking remains 'dirty', but less than a decade ago. The BGS says that most early stories of water contamination have been false alarms.
British geologists are better prepared. They have already pre-collected readings on methane levels that will enable them to detect any leakage from fracking wells. "They never had that data in the US so we will have a much better handle," said Mr Gatliff.
Burning gas emits CO2 of course - albeit half as much as coal - but fracking is still a net plus for global warming if it displaces imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from places like Qatar. LNG must first be frozen to minus 160 degrees Centigrade and then shipped across the world. A study by Cambridge Professor David Mackay concluded that LNG's carbon footprint is 20pc higher than shale gas.
Here is a PDF of AE-P’s article.
The title of the article above would be redundant if Britain moved swiftly and competently to develop its fracking potential. BGS is cautious to a fault in its forecasts for the UK’s shale gas recovery capability, but we know there is plenty of this important resource underground. It would be madness not to use it, given the rapid development in fracking technology over the last ten years.
See also: Britain Must Seize the Benefits of Fracking, an editorial from The Telegraph which I posted yesterday.
Back to top