Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Earth Science

Fracked Shale Could Sequester Carbon Dioxide 235

MTorrice writes "The same wells that energy companies drill to extract natural gas from shale formations could become repositories to store large quantities of carbon dioxide. A new computer model suggests that wells in the Marcellus shale, a 600-sq-mile formation in the northeastern U.S. that is a hotbed for gas extraction, could store half the CO2 emitted by the country's power plants from now until 2030."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Fracked Shale Could Sequester Carbon Dioxide

Comments Filter:
  • Re:interesting (Score:5, Informative)

    by zzottt ( 629458 ) on Thursday September 19, 2013 @03:18PM (#44896145) Journal
    Will it help slow down our oil consumption? and deforestation? and air/water pollution? No? There is your answer.
  • Re:interesting (Score:0, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 19, 2013 @03:19PM (#44896151)

    It kind of puts the environmentalists in a bit of a clamor. They wont know which way to go with this

    Except given that fracking is polluting ground water and wells, any scheme oil companies come up with to try this is likely to pollute just as badly.

    Trusting the oil companies is generally a bad idea.

  • Re:interesting (Score:0, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 19, 2013 @04:02PM (#44896539)

    I didn't realize that corporations were the ones who made up pollution. I guess you learn something everyday.
     
    BTW: The fact that you're using a computer means you're consuming corporate goods. That makes you guilty too.

  • Re:interesting (Score:5, Informative)

    by danbert8 ( 1024253 ) on Thursday September 19, 2013 @04:55PM (#44897055)

    I listened to the NPR piece by Diane Rehm and it is SOOOO horribly biased. She only asks the one not very official spokesperson for fracking loaded questions and then cuts him off and lets the director of GasLand (and sequel) pretty much give a sales pitch on his movie. I'm not saying there aren't environmental consequences from fracking, but when the director of the documentary is saying the EPA, USGS, and other government studies showing the fracking isn't to blame can't be believed, then who DO you believe?

    http://www.iogcc.state.ok.us/Websites/iogcc/Images/2009StateRegulatoryStatementsonHydraulic%20Fracturing.pdf [state.ok.us]
    http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=3489 [usgs.gov]

    Now I'm not saying oil and gas extraction can't pollute the water supply. It can and frequently does. But even if there is contamination around fracking sites, it isn't due to the fracking itself, but poor environmental controls in the supporting operation. The key here is not to fight fracking, but to fight to keep all the processes associated with well drilling within the rules of existing environmental regulations.

    Blaming fracking for well contamination is equivalent to blaming GM because your gas tank leaks. (Obligatory Slashdot car analogy)

"I've got some amyls. We could either party later or, like, start his heart." -- "Cheech and Chong's Next Movie"

Working...