RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Passing gas, no matter what

View the article’s original source
Author: Charley on the MTA

Kinder Morgan announced its intent to build its gas pipeline through New England, despite not having sufficient orders to make it profitable.  Why? Is this in order to make it seem like a fait accompli  in order to gin up more orders and discourage local opposition? Are they really that committed to an old-industrial white elephant for all of us to enjoy? It’s really hard to figure.

Two things to consider:

… Trancik and one of her graduate students developed a new metric for assessing GWP [Global Warming Potential] that accounts for how far out that target “stabilization year” is and thus reflects the increasing urgency of our situation. With their metric, the benefits of natural gas decreaseover time as we get closer and closer to the point of no return. “At current methane leakage rates, about half the advantage of natural gas over coal is lost within two decades,” Trancik says, meaning however good natural gas looks compared to coal now, it’ll look only half as good in 20 years.

Emissions assessment of a variety of fuels using a100-year GWP (left) and a 20-year GWP (right). Here, CNG is compressed natural gas, and LNG is liquified natural gas.

Emissions assessment of different fuel sources using a 100-year GWP (left) and a 20-year GWP (right). Here, CNG is compressed natural gas, and LNG is liquified natural gas. 
Edwards and Trancik

So we don’t need it + they can’t sell enough to make it worthwhile = PROFIT?

Surely I’m missing something.

Trackback URL



Post a Comment