Gas wars - Aug 19
Click on the headline (link) for the full text.
Many more articles are available through the Energy Bulletin homepage
Turkey Plays Both Sides on Gas Pipelines
Valentina Pop, BusinessWeek
Turkey has agreed to grant access to Russia's South Stream gas pipeline through its part of the Black Sea, in a move which could hurt the prospects of an EU-backed project to reduce Russian energy dependency.
The Turkish deal is a major breakthrough for the Russian pipeline, which has to cross the maritime economic areas of either Turkey or Ukraine, but with Ukraine very unlikely to give consent.
...The European Commission also officially rejects the idea the two projects are in competition.
"We consider [South Stream] a complementary initiative to our ongoing Nabucco efforts," commission spokesman Martin Selmayr said at a press briefing in Brussels....
(11 August 2009)
Dmitry Medvedev attacks 'anti-Russian' Ukraine
Foreign staff, The Telegraph
Mr Medvedev said Moscow would not be sending a new ambassador to Kiev due to the policies of Mr Yushchenko, who was ignoring "principles of friendship and partnership with Russia" and causing the worst post-Soviet crisis in bilateral ties.
Moscow and Ukraine have had repeated spats over energy supply and the control of pipelines supplying gas to eastern and central Europe.
Mr Medvedev decried "the gathering impression that Kiev is consistently seeking a rupture in forming economic ties with Russia, especially in the energy sector...
(11 August 2009)
Natural gas, not so sustainable
John Guerrerio, examiner.com
Eureka! This is the recent cry of Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi, even Energy Secretary Chu referring to the potential of natural gas to solve America's energy crisis. They are specifically referring to shale-gas, which is stored in shale rock and is extracted using a process called hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. Deposits of the gas are strewn across the U.S., and domestic deposits have the potential to meet demand for the next 100 years.
At a recent clean energy summit in Las Vegas, Senator Reid declared his conversion to T. Boone's camp by saying that natural gas is a sensible alternative to coal for electricity generation. Nancy Pelosi went a step farther by saying natural gas was a practical alternative to fossil fuels; it should be noted that the Energy Information Administration's kid's page defines natural gas as a fossil fuel. Secretary Chu's approach seemed more sensible when he referred to the gas as a transition fuel to a transportation economy based on EVs running on biofuels.
Problem solved! No more oil imports; our cars will run on natural gas. No more dirty coal; we will generate electricity from clean natural gas. Energy independence and lower emissions, what more could we ask for from a natural resource?
...It does not appear that Mr. Podesta's plan addresses the number one concern regarding the expansion of natural gas drilling domestically, and that is the over 300 compound chemical cocktail that is injected into the ground to force the gas to the surface. (for a list of 54 known chemicals in the fracking fluids and their effects, check HERE). His suggestion of public disclosure by gas producers does not go far enough. So what if gas developers disclose the chemical cocktail that they use; they still inject it into the ground where it seeps into our domestic freshwater supply. Even if the fracking goes on far below the groundwater table level, the tailing ponds on the surface have the potential to leak topdown into the water supply...
(10 August 2009)
sent in by EB contributor William Tamblyn, who says: "unless we value "energy to run our machines" more than "water to sustain human life"
What do you think? Leave a comment below.
Sign up for regular Resilience bulletins direct to your email.
This is a community site and the discussion is moderated. The rules in brief: no personal abuse and no climate denial. Complete Guidelines.