The fracking market worldwide can be divided into two main segments: the United States on one side and the rest of the world on the other.

So anyone interested in the future global expansion of hydraulic fracturing should take a closer look at the United States.

Größere Kartenansicht |  Fracking Gebiet | Wyoming USA 2012

Indeed, after the re-election of the Obama administration, it’s likely that safety regulations on fracking will become more strict.

At the same time, Obama announced that he favors a robust exploration of natural gas, in part because it is “plentiful and cheap and in part because it produces only about half the greenhouse gas emissions that coal does.”

Thanks to fracking, the United States do in fact face the bright prospect of becoming the world’s largest gas producer within a few years.

According to Edward Morse, Global Head of Commodities Research at Citigroup, the US is the fastest growing gas facilitating nation on the globe:

“America is on its way to challenge the Middle East as leading energy nation in 2020.”

If we take a closer look at the rise of gas fracking globally, we get a rather heterogenous image: It looks like Europe is struggling with itself. The European countries’ policies on fracking diverge.

Germany wants to allow fracking only under strict safety regulations – several large scale enterprises have already backed up their rights of extensive test drillings. France  banned fracking last year temporarily due to safety concerns. Poland has a large reserve of shale gas and intends to cut its reliance on gas imports, especially from Russia. Ireland is waiting for further research results. Meanwhile, the UK is discussing a probable expansion of fracking within the country.

The largest shale gas reserves are found in China but the technical expertise is not yet on par with that of the US.  Experts disagree on whether China will catch up with the USA around 2020. It seems to be a serious option.

In South America, Argentina has provided evidence that it will jump on the fracking bandwagon soon.

Australia seems to be going in the other direction: Just recently, it stopped any further fracking through a moratorium. Governments always have the option to put projects under moratorium when they are strongly discussed or are too complicated. But moratoriums are always temporary. In most cases, governments simply postpone such decisions as is the case in South Africa: a 14-month fracking ban was lifted recently.

On the whole, fracking is on the rise around the world. Development is still spotty, but the international future of fracking still looks promising. Canadian investigative journalist Joyce Nelson interprets the whole process a little differently:

“[But] shale gas has become extremely controversial in Canada and the US where it was first developed. The industry is planning to go global quickly before the controversy spreads.“

Is that really the case?

In our third part “Fracking – The Controversy” find out  what the fracking controversy is all about and what exactly are the pros and cons.

 

FRACKING or HYDRAULIC FRACTURING – a sought-after gas development method appears to be on the brink to capture the globe.

With a multiple blog series Global Ideas wants to bring a complex issue into focus: How did it come to this development, will fracking play an important and necessary key role in the future of the global energy supply and can it be taken seriously in an ecological context?

But first of all: why is natural gas “fracked” and what exactly does that mean?

Natural gas is one of the main energy resources worldwide. It had barely a one-quarter share in the global energy supply mix after oil and coal in 2011. The fossil fuel energy source provides primarily heating and electricity.

 

Conventional natural gas – consisting primarily of methane – occurs under the earth in coal beds and is stranded and extracted in natural gas fields. It is mostly transported through huge pipelines or via tankers and trucks from the delivering country to the importing country which is buying and consuming it. Natural gas is on the one hand often considered to be the cleanest burning fossil fuel energy, producing less carbon dioxide then either coal or oil. But critics like Tom Wigley, researcher at the US National Center for Atmospheric Research are saying it’s the opposite, if you consider the methane leaks of natural gas production amongst other aspects.

Noneetheless, it is important to make a difference between conventional gas, which can be produced more easily as it naturally occurs in gas or oil fields, and unconventional gas (“shale gas”), which is trapped underground by impermeable shale rocks and needs to be isolated from the shale. The production methods are different and so are the effects on climate. We will examine more in detail later on to which degree and extend.

Fracking describes the whole process of delivering and bringing the unconventional gas to the earth’s surface: artificial flaws are busted into the deep-lying layers so the gas can escape and different chemicals are used to keep the korridors open.

Have a look here how it works: 

 

This method isn’t new anymore but thanks to an advanced technique higher profiled then ever before.

Due to the new technology shale gas and a part of some oil deposits can be accessed. Therefore fracking is often described as promising solution to overcome global energy crisis:

As a job procurement source, an alleged carbon dioxide reducer and a guarantee for a larger energy self-sufficiency fracking could become the redemption for several countries with significant shale gas occurrence.

There are different motivations, needs and ambitions associated with hydraulic fracturing depending on a country’s geopolitical position, as well as diverse attitudes on resolving energy crisis. A concise and vigorous statement about the benefits of natural gas and fracking comes from Aubrey McClendonin, chief executive officer of the gas and oil compnany Chesapeake Energy, the second biggest producer of gas in the USA:

“We’re going to be able to say in the next 10 years, ‘To hell with OPEC‘ “

Blatant high hopes for fracking as it appears –

Get an overview in the upcoming 2nd part of our Blog Series: Fracking Worldwide: Which countries are fracking, which are about to frack and why is hydraulic fracturing banned temporarely in others?

Author: Julian Claudi
Editor: Klaus Esterluß

 

 

It takes a village, goes the saying – and in fighting climate change, many environmentalists say it will take the world. A group of Southern African countries are teaming up to better respond to the challenges of climate change by combining climate studies across the entire region. Angola, Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zambia have all agreed to be part of “SASSCAL,” or the Southern African Science Service Centre for Climate Change and Adaptive Land Management. The project is being funded by Germany.

Because climate change is affecting so many millions of people across Africa, SASSCAL countries want to figure out ways to adapt, to manage the wealth of natural resources in the region. to institute sustainable land management and improve living conditions. That’s no easy job, but with research institutes from every participating country working together to study climate change and its impact on resources, the organizers believe a lot can be achieved. And, it sets an important example for the rest of the continent and the world…

As South Africa prepares for the upcoming climate talks in Durban, the country is also trying to improve its own climate profile by making South Africa a more environmentally-friendly place. And Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, the country’s minister of international relations, says women will need to lead the way.

It’s not the first time women have been described as the key to fighting climate change – and other global issues, for that matter. The UN says women make up the biggest share of the poor across the world. And it’s most often women who are dependent on natural resources to find food, water and energy to take care of their families. So naturally, they end up taking the brunt of the effects of climate change, which makes it harder to get those resources.

Yet women in many parts of the world have little power to effect social, political or economic change. Maite Nkoana-Mashabane says we need to empower the world’s women to make those changes, by giving them the support needed to cope with climate change and listening to their voices. And she says any climate agreement has to take women into account.