Study sums up the extraordinary performance – and potential – of U.S. shale gas

Bookmark the permalink.

Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.

You can post a comment.

11 comments for “Study sums up the extraordinary performance – and potential – of U.S. shale gas”

  1. Gravatar of KENNETH

    KENNETH

    Posted Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 11:03:25 PM

    NEED TO INVEST STOCK PICK IN SHAEL OIL PLEASE NAME THE BEST WAY TO BUY STOCK, THANKS KEN

    best drilling companies

  2. Gravatar of Joseph Kent

    Joseph Kent

    Posted Sunday, January 29, 2012 at 12:05:01 AM

    Can loyal, hardworking, currently unemployed
    American workers expect to see any changes to their status, as a result of shale gas production?

    Joe

  3. Gravatar of Adam Fink

    Adam Fink

    Posted Thursday, February 02, 2012 at 1:30:48 AM

    I live in Louisiana, home of the haynesville shale, and we have plenty of jobs here. Joe, if you are willing to go to the jobs, here is where they are, I work at a CNC machining company, Sanders Machine, and we have a hard time finding workers.

  4. Gravatar of Ginger

    Ginger

    Posted Monday, February 06, 2012 at 2:51:33 AM

    Yeah, if you don't mind the neighbors for miles around being able to light their water on fire. Fracking is f-ing up our planet.
    Go Solar!

  5. Gravatar of Virginia

    Virginia

    Posted Monday, February 06, 2012 at 4:19:11 AM

    @Ginger that wouldn't be happening if Cheney hadn't convinced Congress to exempt hydraulic fracturing from the Clean Air Act (and others). There needs to be a determination regarding the minimum distance between fracking and homes. It's retarded the way things are now but fortunately Congress will close the Halliburton Loophole and those homes can become livable again. I don't entirely dismiss fracking as an energy source but I agree that solar and wind are best when possible.

  6. Posted Monday, February 06, 2012 at 12:38:36 PM

    Ginger - many people are under the false impression that flaming tap water is the result of natural gas drilling. After one such report the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Colorado's regulatory authority, found that the methane was naturally occurring. You can read their report here - http://bit.ly/ox9a6X

  7. Gravatar of Dr. Randall Norris, Ph.D.

    Dr. Randall Norris, Ph.D.

    Posted Wednesday, February 08, 2012 at 2:45:29 AM

    I think we should let BP set the safety standards for the shale oil industry. That way they can say they screwed up the environment for the entire United States. Also, which flame is best for lighting your water spicket in the kitchen when these folks get done? A match or barbecue lighter? Safe development? Look at Nigeria and Venezuela. There's your "safe" development. Or, you can just get some shrimp from the gulf and squeeze them out to change your oil. I don't know if they sell them now as 10/W 30 or 5W/40. Either should work, as long as they keep getting richer and we keep dying from environmental pollution. Probably less of us die if we keep fighting wars to hold up their stock prices. So hard to make good decisions these days!

  8. Gravatar of Art

    Art

    Posted Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 2:00:56 AM

    For all the money I make on gas royalties we can afford to move if they screw up the well!

  9. Gravatar of Gary

    Gary

    Posted Monday, February 13, 2012 at 12:58:20 AM

    This new energy source is very encouraging. More energy independence and more jobs. Plus we are getting this gas out of the ground and using it productively instead of letting it pollute well water for the rest of time. Many states used to have naturally occurring oil slicks, until the petro companies removed the oil. Great news all around.

  10. Gravatar of Michael

    Michael

    Posted Tuesday, February 14, 2012 at 5:48:40 AM

    What I fail to understand is why local, state and federal government agencies aren't working with automakers to make the switch from gasoline and diesel to natural gas. Natural gas burns at least 70% (if not more) cleaner with FAR less pollution and/or greenhouse gases. I recently visited Brazil where Fiat builds cars than can run on gasoline, E85 (ethanol) or natural gas allowing you to fill up with whichever fuel is cheapest, which is almost always natural gas. A few simple fuel routing, mixture and "plumbing" changes, a reprogrammed or updated electronic engine computer and the addition of a safe mid-vehicle LNG (liquified natural gas) tank is all it takes. Even if every current gasoline & diesel vehicle in the US was converted or built to run on LNG we'd still have enough natural gas to last for 150 years. Why are city buses and the Honda Civic GX fleet vehicle the only ones burning natural gas? Costwise, the LNG equivalent to 1 gallon of unleaded 87 octane gasoline is about $0.89. By the time the same transportation taxes are added we're still talking the equivalent of $1.28/gallon. And because LNG is liquid, very cold and dense, a vehicle roughly equivalent to a Honda Accord/Toyota Camry/Hyundai Sonata could potentially go 1000 miles on one tank of LNG, depending upon density, volume & pressure of stored LNG the would cost approximately $22. So automakers and infrastructure . . . where are you when we need you? For approximately $850 you could convert your vehicle to natural gas but you'd need a home natural gas line to fill-up.

  11. Gravatar of Chris

    Chris

    Posted Saturday, February 18, 2012 at 6:11:42 AM

    Folks, if you can't understand the pie chart above I'll help.... Obama doesn't want oil & gas jobs because they only contribute (according to the pie chart in 2035) 1% of employment to the government bureaucracy! If you don't wornk directly for him he doesn't have so much control over your vote, life, lifestyle, income level, on and on... To most of us educated and informed people we do understand the value of domestic oil & gas production! I live in Texas and sell industrial equipment to the oil & gas industry as well as other industries and none seems to produce as many good paying jobs as oil & gas jobs. In my opinion that is why Obama is against the oil & gas industry; he only makes the claim of environmental protection to mask the long term objective of getting everyone to be dependent on the government for their jobs.

Post a comment

Comment on this Post