Skip to content

Methane again…

by on December 5, 2013

Didn’t realize that Emily H already posted the same New York Times artlicle about methane last month.  As a solid act of contrition, here’s another article that deals with increasng methane emissions in the state of Oklahoma as a result of cows and other livestock.



From → Uncategorized

One Comment
  1. It’s really difficult for me to have any definitive opinion of fracking. One day fracking does not release any methane, the next day methane levels are through the roof. Who do we believe? What facts are true? The EPA reported methane levels were down, and energy companies loved this. So did I. But now conflicting research has been released. The natural gas movement has multiple stakeholders, and with them, multiple discourses that confuse the American public. It seems inevitable that fracking and natural gas will soon take off as a new fuel dependency for our country. But if its true that methane levels are at an all-time high, this would be catastrophic. Methane has around twenty-five times the global warming potential as carbon dioxide. This means that it captures twenty-five times as much heat as the other GHG, subsequently having that much more of an effect on climate change. A great example of cross-cutting allegiances of the natural gas stakeholders is the response to the anti-fracking documentary, Gasland, by a pro-fracking documentary, FrackNation. I really do not know what to believe when it comes to the risk of our country becoming a top producer of natural gas, and it’s actually kind of frustrating.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: