iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Natural Gas Flaring Rises Globally, Fueled By U.S. Shale Boom

Reuters  |  Posted: 05/ 3/2012 1:05 pm Updated: 05/ 3/2012 3:14 pm


* Gas flaring rises for first time since 2008-World Bank

* Energy producers burn $100 bln of unused gas a year

* World flares more gas than Norway produces per year

* Flaring CO2 output equates to France's annual emissions

By Henning Gloystein and Alessandra Prentice

LONDON, May 2 (Reuters) - The U.S. shale energy boom is fuelling a rise in the burning of waste gas after years of decline, a World Bank source told Reuters ahead of the release of new data, giving environmentalists more ammunition against the industry.

Global gas flaring crept up by around 2 billion cubic metres (bcm) in 2011, the first rise since 2008, preliminary data from the World Bank shows.

The increase is mostly due to the rise in shale oil exploration in North Dakota, propelling the United States into the top 10 gas flaring countries along with Russia, Nigeria and Iraq.

The preliminary data - which will be released in detail later in May - shows that global gas flaring crept up to around 140 billion cubic meters (bcm) in 2011, up from 138 bcm the previous year.

Flaring is used to eliminate gas at mineral exploration sites, and is released via pressure relief valves to ease the strain on equipment.

"The challenge in North Dakota is that there is a lot of initial exploration and production going on, and often some flaring is necessary at that stage," the source at the World Bank's Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership (GGFR) said.

"We are hopeful that when the full data is released, both policymakers and companies in North Dakota will pay more attention to this issue and take the necessary steps to minimize flaring."

The data will draw further criticism to the industry, which some activists already condemn on environmental grounds.

"Environmental regulations to stop flaring are taking a real kick in the teeth because the financial crisis has put the emphasis on increasing competitiveness, while anything that is seen as diminishing competitiveness is not getting any political traction," Charlie Kronick, senior climate campaigner at Greenpeace, said.

Britain's annual gas consumption is just under 100 bcm, and Norway's yearly production just above that - which makes the 140 bcm flared globally over a third more than Europe's top consumer and producer, respectively.

In current market terms, 140 bcm of gas would be worth over $100 billion in barrels of oil equivalent.


ECONOMIC WASTE

Gas flaring has fallen more than 20 bcm since 2006 - despite a slight increase between 2008/2009 - but the rise in 2011 indicates that companies and countries must continue to scale up their efforts to reduce global flaring, the GGFR said.

Despite massive oil and gas reserves, many top flaring countries suffer from chronic power shortages and stagnating gas export volumes which experts say could be addressed if they used the gas instead of burning it.

"It is key to show producers and governments that there is a win-win solution - in many cases you're saving the gas and putting it to a positive use and sometimes you're building energy infrastructure that can be a catalyst for future economic benefit," Michael Farina of U.S. energy engineering group GE Energy said.

In Iraq, the World Bank says that the gas flared is enough to fuel all of the country's electric power needs, most of which is unmet or generated by heavy fuel and crude oils, while Nigeria also faces substantial losses from flaring.

"Nigeria loses billions of naira to wasted gas while the nation's power projects are crippled as a result of lack of gas supply," Nigerian pressure group Social Action said.

The wasted gas also causes immense environmental damage, both locally and on a global scale.

The World Bank estimates that the flaring of gas adds some 360 million tonnes o f carbon dioxide (CO2) in annual emissions, almost the same as France puts into the atmosphere each year or the equivalent to the yearly emissions from around 70 million cars.

If this waste were to take place within the European Union's carbon emissions trading scheme, the flaring would cost some 2.5 billion euros ($3.30 billion) at current market value of 7 euros per tonne of CO2.

Estimating that flaring amounts to around 4.5 percent of global industrial emissions, environmental group Greenpeace says current legislation fails to tackle the issue.

"The problem is that international oil companies are not penalized for flaring gas," Greenpeace's Kronick said.

The damage flaring does to local communities is also immense.

Social groups in Nigeria say that flaring in the Niger Delta, where some 30 million people live, has gone on for 40 years and led to acid rains, causing many illnesses.

"Flaring of gas endangers human health and reduces agricultural productivity," Nigeria's Social Action group said. ($1 = 0.7571 euros) (Additional reporting by Oleg Vukmanovic, editing by William Hardy)

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW GREEN

* Gas flaring rises for first time since 2008-World Bank * Energy producers burn $100 bln of unused gas a year * World flares more gas than Norway produces per year ...
* Gas flaring rises for first time since 2008-World Bank * Energy producers burn $100 bln of unused gas a year * World flares more gas than Norway produces per year ...
Filed by James Gerken  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 6
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:13 PM on 05/25/2012
What this article misses is that the US is the world leader in **not flaring**. The number 1 gas producer in the world, with the lowest "flare to market" ratio of any major gas producer.

The N Dakota gas will be marketed. Their building out the infrastructure to do that. Of course, since the KXL debacle, the environmental movement has decided to protest ***every single pipeline*** that this country tries to build. Lovely ethics, that.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:26 PM on 05/15/2012
This is a straw boy argument. As usual the Environment Lovers are trying to keep you from having the energy you deserve. Those flares are potential job creators.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
10:02 PM on 05/06/2012
Fracking is not natural gas. It's time to change the terminology. Fracked gas has a host of problems that "natural" gas does not.

We need to stop fraking: it is contaminates too much water.

It's ok to continue unfracked natural gas extraction ,since it can help prevent the next methane extinction.

What we need to do, is stop obsessing on the last bits of fossils fuels, and begin the massive switch to rooftop solar , offshore wind and waste bio fuels.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
azted123
12:11 PM on 05/05/2012
Is Natural gas or methane worst for the world's energy use than coal burning? Years ago they use to burn off gasoline as a waste product in the processing of crude to lighter oils and kerosene. Of course with the advent of Automobiles by Ford and others that quickly came to a end. Today that waste product produces more profit for the oil companies than any other. Money seems to be the problem with natural gas, that and the conversion of cars to use it. Pollution of our breathing air and health will out weigh profit in years to come I hope.
09:32 AM on 05/05/2012
The environmentalists' conundrum: how to explain just how bad combusting natural gas is (emits CO2) compared to simply venting the methane, when they have spent the last year hysterically screaming that methane is 20 times worse than CO2 as a GHG (it's not, the desperate argument is based on very faulty work by a Cornell professor who is not even close to being a climate scientist or energy expert, facts that were instantly apparent in his shoddy work). Their twisted logic should have them applauding the flaring, not wringing their hands.

The truth is: 1) natural gas prices are so low, there is little incentive to monetize this gas associated with shale oil production; 2) there's no infrastructure to move the gas to markets, which would help with the economics of monetization. The low gas price will take care of itself. Wells are being shut in because producers can't make money at these prices, prices will rise. The infrastructure will be slowed by environmentalist/NIMBY opposition.

Utility bills will rise because of renewable portfolio standards are a sledgehammer approach to creating market share -- production tax credits would create markets pull, eliminating the need for loan guarantees ala Solyndra. Regardless of one's feelings about renewables or the equities of those who can't afford them (remember the under/unemployed), we need the gas, both to get off coal (unless you buy the ridiculoud Howarth view) and to firm intermittent renewables.
photo
intolleft
ObamaTAX...getting you shovel ready
09:20 AM on 05/04/2012
10 years ago when natg was scarce, we where told that more drilling will not lower prices.

How's that working out?