Another Green Idea

The United States Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works is holding a hearing today (4/12/11) on the practice of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) to retrieve natural gas from shale deposits. There has recently been a rush to exploit this resource, which holds the promise of low-priced energy with less emission of carbon dioxide than coal or oil.
But there have been reports that fracking has detrimental effects, including polluting groundwater and releasing large amounts of methane into the atmosphere.
Certainly the claim of lower cost energy has merit: the price of natural gas compared to oil is at historically low levels.Additional information can be found at http://www.businessinsider.com/emissions-from-shale-gas-worse-than-coal-2011-4. And it is thought that the supply in the shale deposits that underle a good deal of the United States is nearly inexhaustible.
These shale gas supplies have been known to exist for years; it is only recently that engineers have devised a method of inexpensive extraction: fracking—pumping in liquid and chemicals to break up the shale.
The negative side of fracking has been mostly ignored until recently, as the large corporations that use the process deny that it has any consequential adverse effects on the environment.
Dr. Robert Howarth of Cornell has recently completed a study of Natural Gas Drilling: Public Health and Environmental Impacts. It has not been released, but reports from those who have knowledge of the report’s contents say it concludes that natural gas drilling may be more detrimental to the environment than burning coal. Oddly, Dr. Howarth is not scheduled to be a witness at the Senate’s hearing.
Natural gas holds considerable promise for a cheaper, cleaner alternative to coal and oil, but the technique of fracking has never been properly studied. And none of the fossil fuel-burning methods of producing energy are as “clean” and “green” as solar, wind and other renewable sources.