1. IMPACTS OF NATURAL GAS ON ELECTRICITY & HOME HEATING MARKETS
Restructuring Roundtable
April 30, 2010
Susan Reid, Senior Attorney
Director, MA Clean Energy & Climate Change Initiative
(617)

2. About CLF
Founded in 1966, CLF uses legal advocacy, science and economics to protect the people and environment of New England.
Four program areas:
Clean Energy & Climate Change
Ocean Conservation
Clean Water & Healthy Forests
Healthy Communities & Environmental Justice
Environmental consulting affiliate: CLF Ventures

3. The climate context: 80% below 1990 levels by 2050

4. Natural Gas = Key Transitional Fuel
~ 50% lower GHG emissions as compared to coal-fired generation in New England*
Other pollutants too (PM, Pb, Hg, etc.)
Supply-side of the equation has shifted significantly
Marcellus Shale
New LNG terminals (Canaport, offshore)
New technologies and markets (microCHP)

5. But “transitional” is key:
By 2050, must significantly reduce use of natural gas
So, need to consider long-term picture for any major new natural gas infrastructure
✔Repowering coal plants with natural gas
? Other markets -- CNG vehicles
✖New LNG terminals w/out demonstrated need

6. Shale gas development

7. Waste pit/shale gas

8. Shale Gas Extraction – Environmental Impacts
Release of toxic contaminants: natural (benzene, arsenic, Hg) and chemical
Groundwater contamination – risks for drinking water supplies, including NYC’s
Lifecycle GHG emissions/studies underway
Huge volumes waste (contaminated H2O)
Destruction of land, wildlife habitat
Noise, community disruption

9. …and inadequate regulation…
Exemptions/loopholes in federal environmental statutes:
Clean Air Act (wells not aggregated)
Clean Water Act (stormwater/extent disputed)
Safe Drinking Water Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
CERCLA (Superfund)
*Pending FRAC Act would close some loopholes

10. Methane in water-CO

11. Contaminated drinking water - PA

12. Potential to improve shale gas environmental performance:
Capture air emissions
Reduce, reuse, recycle toxic substances
Substitute non-toxic alternatives
Closed-loop, pitless drilling
Prevent leaks
Well clustering, centralized operations, remote telemetry, piping systems

13. “Greener” approaches w/ cost savings benefits:
Non-toxic fracking fluids found to be effective and less costly
Closed loop drilling shown to save up to $180,000 per pit
Cost savings from capture and sale of methane
Reuse of drilling fluid shown to result in 50%+ drilling cost savings
source: NRDC

14. Shale gas v. LNG Potential GHG emission reduction benefits
Must consider lifecycle GHG emissions
Energy security – domestic supply
Environmentally responsible practices are essential in all contexts

15. For more information… Sue Reid, Senior Attorney Phone: 617-850-1740
Director, MA CECC Initiative
Phone: