The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
(Page 2 of 2)
While the USGS has not yet calculated the total size of the potential methane hydrate reserve in the Gulf of Mexico, Collett and his colleagues have calculated the scale of another much more accessible reserve where they hope to perfect the technology required for long-term production of methane hydrates: Alaska's North Slope.
The North Slope is already home to a great deal of conventional oil and natural gas extraction (it's the northern terminus of the trans-Alaska pipeline), and it is, not coincidentally, just a few hundred miles west of Mallik.
The USGS used sophisticated three-dimensional modeling and assessment techniques to estimate the probable amount of recoverable gas from Alaska's North Slope: the median yield was calculated to be 85.4 trillion cubic feet, or four times as much natural gas as the United States uses in a year. The model was built using seismometers that peer into the earth like sonar, listening for the propagation of sound waves generated by a controlled source; recordings of that data can be turned into a complete picture of the size and shape of the hydrate reserves.
"This would be the single largest assessed volume of gas resources in the U.S.," says Collett, who cautions that his calculations reflect only what is technically producible from the field but don't take into account whether or not it will be economical to do so.
Mallik has taught scientists how to produce gas from methane hydrates, and the reservoirs in Alaska's North Slope and the Gulf of Mexico suggest that Mallik is not a unique case. The real challenge, however, will be figuring out how to extract sufficient gas economically. This depends on the proximity of the hydrates to existing pipelines and the price and availability of natural gas: no one will pay to develop new resources, after all, until the old ones have become sufficiently expensive.
To date, none of the world's extraction or assessment attempts have been primarily funded by industry. Companies that have participated in methane hydrate field research in North America include Chevron, ConocoPhilips, and BP.
"The question is, does the industry have the ability to stand on its own without government support?" says Collett. "At some point, they will be, and we think we're now nearing that breaking point."
The United States is not the only country with plans to attempt long-term production tests of methane hydrates. Japan is spending by far the most money on methane hydrate research; it provided most of the funding for the Mallik tests, which were sponsored by the Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation and by Natural Resources Canada, with field operations by Aurora College/Aurora Research Institute and support from Inuvialuit Oilfield Services.
According to the Center for Hydrate Research's Koh, Japan is investing heavily in attempts to harvest deep-sea hydrate reserves discovered off the southern coast of Japan in the Nankai Trough.
"The Japanese are planning commercial production from the Nankai Trough by 2017," says Koh. If they succeed, Japan will tap the first domestic fossil-fuel reserves the country has ever known.
Nothing said about what it costs for under sea mining - been there and done that for other minerals and its a tough nut to crack. A little research would tell readers that the latest on methane is that there may be "too much" natural gas reserves, i.e. tight gas, shales and offshore that are being developed. The fear is another gas bubble that will reduce current natural gas prices too fast, too rapidly.
John Ruby
mining minerals undersea- manganese nodules is what you're referring to, i believe- the problem was that they were so deep, usually 4000-5000 m below the surface, whereas these hydrates are relatively near the surface of the shallow continental margins.
The technique is so simple and yet so elegant. Wonder whats stopping them !! Russia has the biggest advantage here, most of Siberia is under permafrost, and as the ice melts the methane there is beginning to leach into the atmosphere and its worse than carbon dioxide. They should start soon.. its a much simpler task given that they have good knowledge of the land and the technology is existent ...
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
killian
74 Comments
there goes the atmosphere
Burning methane hydrates is better than burning coal, but doing so will still cause global warming. Worse, if the methane escapes, e.g. in an accident, it causes 25x the global warming as CO2. We should leave the stuff where it is buried. Haven't we learned anything from our previous fossil addictions?
Reply
pkassoc
3 Comments
Re: there goes the atmosphere
good god, another global warming savant.....seemingly endless supply of these deluded people....
Reply
devassocx
111 Comments
Re: there goes the atmosphere
Without energy, our society, as we know it, is finished.
Although energy in this form has been found in other places, this find appears convenient and very significant.
Don't let the alarmists win...the only evidence of Global Warming seems to be within certain political minds and not in that of the
thinking scientific community.
There are much more serious things to worry about.
Reply
erbium
340 Comments
"Without energy society is finished"
certainly we need energy, and we can develop alternate sources. but it is as simple as if we dig up all the fossil fuels and spew the CO2 from burning them into the atmosphere, there would be 7x the amount there now.
I would submit that
"without atmosphere society is finished"
carbonic acid, which is CO2 from the atmosphere dissolved in the ocean is destroying the sea life. Good luck when it dissolves the phytoplankton that produce 70% of the earth's oxygen.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090609/sc_mcclatchy/3249010
If you don't see the damage you are ignorant. Not necessarily stupid but too caught up in your own field to see the evidence everywhere both outside and in peer reviewed journals.
If you get your info from Rush Limbaugh who pulls info from his nether regions, maybe you have different "facts"
As per mining methane hydrate for energy, if the stuff would cascade evaporate from the ocean floor into the atmosphere as the planet warms, might make sense to use it for energy. Then the resulting carbon is in the atmosphere as CO2 after burning instead of methane as it would evaporate. Methane is 25x more potent as a GHG.
And if we burn it we have the option to recycle the carbon output from the plant into any captureable form such as feedstock for plastics, carbon fibers, more fuel, etc.
Reply
chir0pter
17 Comments
Re: there goes the atmosphere
where do you people come from? and why are you reading a technology blog if you don't believe in science?
nut. jobs.
Reply
sougatapahari
18 Comments
Re: there goes the atmosphere
Unfortunately, Killian, this time it is a necessity, the rising ocean temperatures will result in the sublimation of the hydrates and they are worse than CO2. If only they were as remote as the fossil fuels ! or as piled up. Being so spread out, we'll never be able to mine it all. Its like a ticking time bomb. God forbid that theres an earthquake or volacanic eruption in one of these regions.. think of the consequences.
Reply
killian
74 Comments
Re: there goes the atmosphere
I don't see the logic. You admit they are too spread out to mine, and they are also too large to mine quickly. Nor can we predict earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and mine only the deposits so threatened. So mining them doesn't remove the ticking time bomb. Since mining doesn't help, and it does hurt, why do it?
The only answer to the ticking time bomb is to get atmospheric CO2 levels down to reasonable levels (350 ppm is one such target). Mining the hydrates works against such a goal.
Reply