Bingaman: Emissions question on shale gas must be settled

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) called Tuesday for more study of greenhouse gas emissions from the booming development of natural gas from shale formations in several states.

Natural gas is widely touted as a climate-friendly alternative to oil and coal because it releases much less carbon when burned for energy.

But a recent, contrarian paper by Cornell University researchers claimed that the climate footprint of shale gas is actually worse than other fossil fuels due to “fugitive” emissions of methane — a potent greenhouse gas — at well sites.

Bingaman’s remarks touted the promise of U.S. natural gas development but said the emissions question must be settled.

“Some experts have claimed that fugitive [methane] emissions from natural gas extraction are routinely high enough that switching to natural gas could actually be worse than continuing to use coal, while many other experts have disputed these claims,” Bingaman said at an Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing on shale gas development.

“If natural gas is to be used as a lower-carbon alternative to other fossil fuels, the issue of fugitive emissions is one that we must quantify and understand more fully and address appropriately,” he said.

The Cornell paper drew strong pushback from the natural gas industry.

In August, the prominent industry consulting firm IHS-Cambridge Energy Research Associates issued a report alleging that recent Environmental Protection Agency and Cornell University estimates of greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas development are vastly overstated.

Also, an Energy Department advisory panel issued a wide-ranging report in August on development of shale gas using hydraulic fracturing. They noted that the Cornell researchers’ conclusion is “not widely accepted” but said more data is needed, noting there have been relatively few analyses.

The Tuesday hearing is exploring the report by the Energy Department advisors, who took a wide-ranging look at the promise and environmental risks of developing shale gas with hydraulic fracturing, dubbed “fracking.”

Fracking, which is enabling the U.S. gas boom, involves high-pressure injections of chemicals, water and sand to break apart rock formations and enable trapped gas to flow. It has led to concerns about groundwater contamination and other risks.

“I expect that the environmental and human health and safety concerns related to developing unconventional resources can be managed, but only if they are addressed through a transparent, diligent and safe approach to well site and wastewater management throughout each stage of the gas extraction process,” Bingaman said.