Michael raises the crucial issue: *Should the oil and gas industry be relied upon at the geological time scale needed for massive CO2 sequestration?
*There are measurements Sherry Rowland told me about ~5 years ago, made by his group at UCI, of the methane content of air across Texas & Oklahoma. *He found no difference in methane levels in cities vs oil fields and farms. * He inferred that many oil wells, including spot drillings that yielded no oil, but penetrated fairly deeply, were leaking methane into the air. No one has contradicted this. That made me forget CCS in such domes. Thus I went back to working on CROPS, where we know it takes ~1000 years to return to the atmosphere. Gregory Benford On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Michael Hayes <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > After reading Greg's post, I have spent some time looking into the > methane release being caused by "Fracking". Here is a link to a resent film > on the subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZe1AeH0Qz8 If you are > interested in the methane issue in general, I encourage you to take the time > to view this film. I do realize that any "media" based documentary is > subject to dispute and debate. However, I bring this to the group for 2 > reasons. > > 1) These are the same oil fields that are being proposed for massive CO2 > geological storage. Fracking is rapidly taking that option off the table. I > have never believed oil field CO2 sequestration was practical. However, this > type of information should raise profound questions about the entire concept > of geological CO2 sequestration. > > 2) The methane release (GHG effect) from such wide spread use of this > drilling method can equal all other anthropogenic GHG sources at > the regional level. > > Fracking is a methane wild card which can not be ignored. And, oil field > CO2 sequestration is in direct opposition to the current oil and gas > industry activities. I believe the question of; *Should the oil and gas > industry be relied upon at the geological time scale needed for massive CO2 > sequestration?*, should be asked. The issue of fracking related pollution > is important and should not be ignored. However, the issue of paying this > industry to provided centuries of massive CO2 sequestration should be viewed > with skeptical eyes usually reserved for used car salesmen. I do apologize > to all used car salesmen for the comparison. > > Thanks for your patience. > > Michael > > > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/NGdwcTZVTVBhVkFK. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.
