Germany debates lifting fracking ban as it confronts energy supply crisis
Germany’s energy supply crisis has sparked a national political debate about whether the country should lift its ban on fracking to allow development of untapped natural-gas reserves.
As a result of Russia’s war in Ukraine, there is growing concern in Germany that Moscow will completely cut off its gas supplies. Russia has already reduced gas to 20 per cent through its Nord Stream 1 pipeline that runs under the Baltic Sea to Germany.
German energy minister Robert Habeck has been travelling the planet looking for alternative energy supplies, and Chancellor Olaf Scholz will be vising Canada this month to strengthen energy ties.
The fracking debate is splitting along political lines, with left-leaning parties, including the Greens and the ruling Social Democrats, opposed. Parties representing liberals and conservatives say the move is necessary as shortages are expected to hit Germany this winter and over the next few years. They say the country should allow testing and exploration to see if fracking is viable.
“The significant expansion of domestic natural-gas production will make us independent and restore our energy sovereignty,” Michael Kruse, energy policy spokesman of the libertarian Free Democratic Party (FDP) told The Globe and Mail. “It makes more ecological sense to extract this urgently needed gas here on land in safe environments and thus reduce overseas transports,” Mr. Kruse said.
Elsewhere in Europe, fracking is also up for reconsideration. In Britain, there have been calls to lift a moratorium. In the Netherlands, there is a debate over extending fracking production in Europe’s biggest gas field, which is scheduled to end this year.
Germany is also considering extending the lifespan of nuclear plants. The European Parliament recently declared nuclear and natural gas as green energy sources under its climate plan.
Germany has extensive gas reserves, but they are not under development because of the fear of earthquakes and pollution from fracking, which injects high-pressure fluids deep underground to fracture rocks and release shale gas.
Fracking of shale gas has been banned In Germany since 2017; only four test borings for scientific purposes are allowed. But these test drillings haven’t been carried out so far.
“Test drilling in shale-gas fields has not been considered by the extraction companies because of existing political opposition,” said the German Federal Association of Natural Gas, Petroleum and Geoenergy (BVEG).
Some German states, which would have to agree to such test boring, have rejected the idea. The Lower Saxony state, which has the country’s largest shale-gas reserves, is instead pushing for new liquefied natural gas (LNG) infrastructure, some of which is currently under construction on the north coast. The LNG terminals could then import fracking gas from the U.S. or natural gas from Canada.
According to a report by the Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, the reserves of shale gas in Germany are at more than two trillion cubic metres. Extraction would only be possible through fracking. However, it is unclear whether this volume can be extracted in its entirety.
This amount corresponds to 20 times the annual gas consumption in Germany, which is 100 billion cubic metres, according to BVEG.
The potential production of shale gas would be up to 10 billion cubic metres per year. That could cover 10 per cent of German gas needs and could limit additional LNG imports, said Ludwig Moehring, BVEG’s chief executive. Reducing dependence on LNG imports would in turn put pressure on wholesale prices.
The German government’s expert commission on fracking concluded last year that the technology should be manageable and estimates the environmental risks of shale-gas extraction to be relatively low.
Technological methods for development have advanced in recent years, the commission’s report says. Drillings are closely monitored by sensors, and development prospects are now accurately predicted.
Even if the fracking ban were lifted, German fracked gas would still not be available for at least two winters.
Mr. Moehring pointed out that the approval procedures probably would need a “lead time of several years.” Also, the knowledge about the technology must be restored, he said, because German exploration companies had already abandoned fracking years ago.
Companies operating in Germany, such as Exxon Mobil, would have to draw on the expertise of their U.S. parent companies. The technology has been tried and tested many times around the world.
Fracked gas from the U.S. arrives already on the European market and reaches Germany via ports such as Rotterdam in the Netherlands.
********************************************************
Ex-Cabinet minister Lord Frost says there is no evidence world is facing ‘a climate emergency’ and Britain should end focus on ‘medieval’ wind power and go all in for nuclear and fracking
Ex-Cabinet minister Lord Frost has insisted there is no climate 'emergency' and urged the next prime minister to move away from 'medieval technology' such as wind power.
The former Brexit negotiator, who is backing Liz Truss for the Tory leadership, hit out at a 'totally unrealistic approach to climate and energy policy' over the past two decades.
He demanded Britain change tack from 'managing demand' for energy and instead put greater emphasis on fracking and nuclear power, as well as carbon capture and storage (CCS).
Calling for a 'pragmatic' response to climate change - which the Conservative peer said was just 'one of the many' problems facing the UK - Lord Frost blasted an approach that asked the public to 'up-end the whole way our societies work'.
Lord Frost's support for Ms Truss during the Tory leadership contest has prompted speculation he could return to the Cabinet - or become the new PM's chief of staff - should the Foreign Secretary win the contest to replace Boris Johnson.
He was Mr Johnson's chief Brexit negotiator before being given a Cabinet role in March last year. But Lord Frost quit the Government last December with a swipe at the 'direction of travel' of Mr Johnson's administration on Covid restrictions, net-zero ambitions and tax rises.
During the Tory leadership contest, both Ms Truss and her challenger Rishi Sunak have said they would support fracking in Britain if local communities supported it.
This has left open the possibility of a change of direction in UK energy policy under a new PM, with Mr Johnson having used his premiership to call for Britain to become the 'Saudi Arabia of wind power'.
Mr Johnson also banned fracking in England within months of taking office, although he has paved the way for a reconsideration of the moratorium on shale gas extraction amid the current energy crisis.
The outgoing PM also pledged to build a nuclear power plant a year following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which has forced Western countries to end their reliance on oil and gas from Moscow.
In a new essay for the Policy Exchange thinktank, Lord Frost outlined how a new PM could alter the Government's approach as he hit out at the 'insidious effects of 20 years of a totally unrealistic approach to climate and energy policy'.
'The current evidence does not support the assertion that we are in a climate “emergency”,' the Tory peer wrote, as he delivered a fresh swipe at Mr Johnson's climate policies.
'Rather, the effects of climate change are a problem, one of the many we face, and should be tackled in that pragmatic way rather than by asking us to up-end the whole way our societies work.
'Western society, and indeed world civilisation, depends on copious supplies of energy.
'Yet the prevailing mood is one in which individuals are asked to restrict their use of energy and in which unsatisfactory renewables technology is touted as the best solution to our problems.
'Instead of focusing on technological solutions that enable us to master our environment and get more energy in a more carbon-efficient way — nuclear, CCS, fracking, one day fusion – we have focused on managing demand so we can use medieval technology like wind power.'
Lord Frost despaired at how Britons are told by climate activists to 'stop travelling, live local, eat less, stop eating meat, turn our lights out, and generally to stop being a burden'.
'As most of us are generally reluctant to do this as individuals, the state has had to step in, with smart meters, heat pumps, LTZs (limited traffic zones), unsatisfactory electric cars, tailored taxation measures, and “nudges”,' he added.
'We have all gradually got used to this, and indeed internalised it, so that it seems normal to be lectured about the moral aspects of virtually every choice in our everyday lives.'
The peer said this had led to a 'further loss of trust in free market economics' but argued there was 'overwhelming evidence that socialist systems have worse environmental outcomes'.
Ben Goldsmith, the chair of the Conservative Environment Network, hit back at Lord Frost's claims.
'Electricity generated from the wind is four times cheaper than electricity generated from gas,' he said. 'I wonder if David Frost has looked at these figures. This article looks about two decades out of date. 'Being four times more expensive than wind, expensive gas should be used to generate power only as a back-up when needed.'
****************************************************
‘Outrageous’: EPA Agents Are Flying Helicopters Over Texas Oil Fields To Crack Down On Methane Emissions From Drilling
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Region 6 department is conducting helicopter flyovers over the Permian Basin to identify “super-emitters” of methane gas among oil and gas operations, according to an Aug. 1 news release.
The flyovers will use infrared cameras to inspect hundreds of oil and gas activities in the Permian Basin region of West Texas and southeast New Mexico until Aug. 15, according to the press release. The agency hopes to use aerial surveillance to identify large emitters of methane and excessive volatile organic compound (VOC), emitted as gases from certain solids or liquids which may cause adverse health effects, as well as address any noncompliance indicated by the flyovers through EPA administrative enforcement actions and referrals to the Department of Justice (DOJ).
“It’s just a way to intimidate the oil and gas industry,” Steve Milloy, member of former President Donald Trump’s EPA transition team, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “The EPA’s conduct is outrageous.”
A technician on board the helicopter will record the time, GPS location and other details regarding the source of emissions after detecting hydrocarbon emissions. The federal agency will use this data to locate the source of the emissions and then question facility managers about the violations.
The EPA can impose severe fines on offenders and continue to keep an eye on them to make sure they’re taking the necessary steps to address excessive emissions.
“Biden’s EPA is doing everything to make gas prices higher,” Milloy said.
The area creates large amounts of methane and VOC emissions that are contributing to climate change and poor air quality, according to the press release. VOCs can cause irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat, dizziness, nausea, migraines, as well as damage to the liver, kidneys and central nervous system, according to the EPA.
“There’s no place in the United States where air quality threatens anybody’s health, even the worst air quality may technically violate EPA standards, but none of that is a health risk,” Milloy stated.
“The flyovers are vital to identifying which facilities are responsible for the bulk of these emissions and therefore where reductions are most urgently needed,” said Region 6 administrator Dr. Earthea Nance in a press release.
The EPA proposed new regulations on the oil and gas industry’s methane emissions in November 2021. The agency is mulling whether to declare areas of West Texas and eastern New Mexico in violation of federal limits on ozone pollution.
Helicopter Surveillance of the Permian Basin, which accounts for roughly 40% of the nation’s oil supply, began in 2019.
https://dailycaller.com/2022/08/08/epa-regulators-texas-helicopters-search-methane/
**********************************************The reef strikes back
Figures released last week show record coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef. It is hardly a surprise that its demise has been greatly exaggerated.
When Greens leader Adam Bandt recently declared that ‘the Great Barrier Reef will die,’ one could confidently predict that the opposite was true. When US president Barack Obama said in 2015 that ‘the incredible natural glory of the Great Barrier Reef is threatened,’ it was as likely to be correct as his modest prediction that his nomination as Democratic presidential candidate was, ‘the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal’. When Tim Flannery said, ‘we’re heading for a future where the Great Barrier Reef is a coral graveyard,’ who could forget his advice in 2007 that because Australia’s soil is warmer and its plants are under more stress, ‘even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems’. If only.
The only person to be vindicated by the news of the reef’s rude good health is Peter Ridd, who was head of James Cook University’s physics department and Marine Geophysical Laboratory but was pilloried by climate alarmists and hounded from his job for criticising his colleagues’ alarmism.
Now, the University of Delaware has reported that one of its star scientists is guilty of research misconduct and it has accepted an investigative panel’s conclusion that she committed ‘fabrication and falsification’ in work on fish behaviour and coral reefs. The university is seeking the retraction of three papers including a study about coral reef recovery. And where does the star scientist with the fishy behaviour hail from? That’s right, James Cook University. A group of whistle-blowers say its research culture deserves more scrutiny. The investigative panel found their accounts were convincing and singled out a young scholar out for praise, noting that it is very difficult to challenge an advisor on ethical grounds and took great bravery to come forward. Sadly, few academics had the courage to speak up to defend Ridd.
The reef’s coral rebound comes even though Adani has finally started its operations and Australia is shipping more coal and gas through the reef than ever. No doubt, the good news won’t persuade Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek to reverse her decision to put a stop to a central Queensland coal project, which she blocked because it was, ‘likely to have unacceptable impacts’ on the reef.
Unfortunately, there will be no showdown over the okay coral, as Simon Collins put it in his brilliant cartoon in these pages this week. Labor will simply expect the nation to forgo $8 billion in annual export revenue and up to 500 jobs. It demonstrates that Ridd is far from the only person who is losing out because of absurd climate catastrophism. The Reef is thriving. If only we could say the same for the economy, or for our universities and their commitment to academic freedom.
https://spectator.com.au/2022/08/showdown-at-okay-coral/
**********************************************************My other blogs. Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM )
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
*****************************************
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment