…surely it’s a good thing. That’s what Peter Foster at the Financial Post thinks:
The growing fallout of the shale revolution
A sign that shale gas has great potential is that greens are trying to shut it downAlberta Energy Minister Ron Liepert said this week that Alaskan natural gas would likely flow through the province ahead of gas from the Mackenzie Delta. Not so long ago, such a statement would have been regarded as treasonable. Now it appears merely common economic sense. In fact, the real issue is whether either source of Arctic gas will be developed before the age of hydrocarbons ends. That is due to the stunning improvements in the technologies of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling that have made the production of vast amounts of shale gas feasible.
This gas not merely presents the possibility of an economic bonanza in many areas, including B.C. and Quebec, but of enhancing much-coveted U.S. energy independence. It also promises to rearrange energy geopolitics…
So much for running out of hydrocarbons.
As for the geopolitical implications, shale gas, which is also present in large volumes in Europe, promises to reduce the significance of both Russian and Iranian gas, along with those suppliers’ potential for causing trouble. It also augurs a huge boost to gas-fired electricity, and further undermines the economics of nuclear, wind and solar power…
Another sure sign that shale gas has great potential is that environmental activists are trying hard to close it down (or at least use it as a new source of fundraising). At the World Energy Congress, protestors covered in oily-looking molasses (Where’s a hornet’s nest when you need one?) carried banners that read: “No to shale gas.”..
…the Quebec government being hoist on its own green petard. Mr. Charest has made a great point of posturing over climate change, going so far in Copenhagen last December as to criticize Alberta and Ottawa for their wicked ways. Now this pose is coming back to bite him, since gas production will inevitably mean more provincial emissions, about which green groups are publicly fretting…
American energy pipedreams…
Mark
Ottawa
When will we stop tolerating these eco-bastards?
“Charest has made a great point of posturing ….. to criticize Alberta and Ottawa ….this pose is coming back to bite him”
Oh please, he will contort and spin until he finds a way to condemn Alberta, demand more of Alberta’s money, promote Quebec fossil fuels, deny Quebec fossil fuels have a negative eco-effect, demand a share of NFLD’s off shore energy but at the same time condeming NFLD.
This weasel is shameless.
He is, after all – a Quebecer.
Natural gas has no significant emmissions, other than carbon dioxide. It produces less C02 per unit of energy than coal or oil. Unlike nuclear, there are no hazardous by-products. It is cheap and plentiful, and supplies are growing to a point of driving prices down to a fraction of the equivalent energy relative to oil. There is no significant downside to natural gas.
It has to go.
Shale gas is not as benign as many think. There are real issues with the chemicals in the fluids they use in the frakking process. Water tables in some areas are being poisoned as a result.
That said, the problems are not insurmountable. But they will have to be dealt with if we are to harness the full potential of this resource.
Jean Charest the “extorsionest in chief” of the most corrupt jurisdiction in North America,now wants to lecture the rest of us on environmental ethics.This would be like Dracula pointing out the evils of the RED CROSS,crawl back under your rock Charest you reptile.