Shale Gas and Coal

Once upon a time a person could enter any of fifty hotels in Pithole, Pennsylvania and pay for a shot of

whiskey with a gold coin. Today, Pithole is an empty field in Venango county indicating little of its importance as the epicenter of the world's first oil boom. The oil boom in Pithole had little effect on the state's coal industry which had operated for nearly forty years and was quite stable.

Today's Pithole 2.0, known as the Marcellus shale gas play, seems poised to strike the death knell for Pennsylvania coal with the endlessly abundant supply of this fracked methane supply.

NPR Link:  http://goo.gl/MzwI17

Power developers have rushed into the region to build gas-fired combined cycle plants as replacements for an aging fleet of coal-fired utilities across the state. The claims being made for these projects are almost as epic as the Pithole story must have been in 1860.

We are told that shale gas-fired plants offer a more environmentally friendly; less carbon-laden and more reliable approach to electrical production. But is that really true?

Natural gas burns cleaner, they say. Gas is a natural partner to the renewable energy sector, they say. What they don't say is that the full lifecycle of shale gas production from spudding-in to production brings a myriad of serious environmental and carbon impacts that rarely get mentioned- fugitive methane emissions, to name but one. And, let's not forget that gas plants have no means for onsite fuel storage like coal or nuclear facilities. If the fuel doesn't arrive for any reason, the plant doesn't operate and that should dispel the myth of reliability.

Seeking to displace the availability and reliability of coal as a foundation fuel for Pennsylvania and the PJM with a fuel source which could turn out to be another Pithole is just not wise.

Let's not buy a shot of whiskey with that gold coin just yet.