Chart: EPA’s Own Data Blows Away Claims That Natural Gas Causes Global Warming

fracking towerGreen claims that America’s natural gas boom is contributing to global warming just got blown away by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data.

The Sierra Club and other environmental groups have long claimed that the environmental advantages of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, are negated by increased methane emissions.

The EPA states that only carbon dioxide contributes more to global warming than methane, which is responsible for 10 percent of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. The EPA own data shows that methane emissions have declined as fracking increased natural gas production, but the environmental agency still wants to regulate methane to reduce global warming.

“EPA claims that methane rules are needed to address climate change, yet the rule the agency is proposing would avoid a mere 0.004 degrees of warming by 2100,” Dr. Katie Brown, a spokeswoman for the energy industry group Energy In Depth, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Meanwhile, natural gas is the reason the United States has achieved such dramatic reductions in greenhouse gases, and EPA’s costly rules could end up curtailing progress. So is this really about emissions?”

The study shows that solar power is responsible for a mere 1 percent of the decline in American CO2 emissions, while natural gas is responsible for nearly 20 percent. U.S. greenhouse gas emissions have dropped by 1,022 million tons, making them significantly lower than their peak in 2007. For every ton of carbon dioxide cut by solar power, fracking has cut 13 tons.

Read rest…

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (3)

  • Avatar

    David Lewis


    The goal of the anthropological climate change movement is to keep fossil fuels in the ground, period. This supports the agendas of transforming society, more power to the government, transferring wealth to the nations that didn’t earn it, maintaining job created by this crisis, and many other hidden agendas.

    The fact that the use of natural gas actually reduces CO2 emissions when it replaces coal and oil and the fact that the methane increase is being caused by agriculture doesn’t matter.

    It is useful to understand some science. In fossil fuels hydrogen creates more energy per molecule than carbon when it is burned. In addition, when hydrogen is burnt the result is water. Methane has four hydrogen to one carbon so produces high energy for the about of carbon dioxide produced. This isn’t exact but simplistically oil and its products such a gas and diesel have two hydrogen atoms for each carbon. This means less energy for the amount of carbon dioxide produced. Coal has essentially no hydrogen and carbon doesn’t produce as much energy, so coal will have the most carbon dioxide per unit of energy.

  • Avatar

    David Lewis


    Since my last post I realized the true motive behind the EPA adding expensive regulations to natural gas production.

    Fracking has made natural gas so cheap that developing more wind and solar power is severely threatened even with government subsidies. This is a high concern among environmentalists. The answer is to artificially increase the cost of natural gas. What better way to do that than unnecessary and expensive government regulations.

    So Americans are to pay more money for natural gas so solar and wind energy, the most expensive of all energy, can continue to expand.

    The ethics of the EPA and the Obama administration that it takes direction from are so low it is difficult to find the words to describe it.

  • Avatar

    Jim Atkinson


    Does the 1% CO2 decline by wind and solar count manufacturing and installation of equipment? What about when gas or coal boilers have to run when wind and solar don,t work? What about removal costs at end of equipment life cycle? A lot of hidden CO2 and other costs do not seem to to addressed.

Comments are closed

No Trackbacks.