Fracking Article in Current Issue of Harvard Magazine

Link here, sent in by a reader. Thank you.

The article states that CO2 is the most abundant greenhouse gas. If I recall correctly water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas. At least the LA Times (see below) is honest about this issue.

Sources:

• here -- water vapor accounts for 95% of greenhouse gases
• here -- water vapor is a greenhouse gas; percent not provided; "Natural sources of carbon dioxide are more than 20 times greater than sources due to human activity" (wiki)
• here -- water vapor mentioned in passing (NOAA)
• here -- water vapor -- 97% of greenhouse gases; not considered because water vapor cannot be easily "mitigated" (LA Times)
• here -- CO2 causes more evaporation --> higher water vapor concentration (The Guardian)
• here -- water vapor -- 95%; how much of the "greenhouse effect" is caused by human activity? 0.28% if water vapor is included; 5.5% if water vapor is not included
• here -- water vapor, 60%; CO2, 20%
• here -- water is a significant contributor to the greenhouse effect (NASA)

Of the CO2 in the atmosphere, 3% is anthropogenic.

The theses of the article:

• fracking must be made safe
• natural gas must be more expensive than coal but not significantly more expensive than wind (for wind to compete with natural gas at this point in time, wind requires a 2.2 cent kwh tax credit). From the article:

The cost for production of electricity using wind is about 8.0 cents per kilowatt hour [offshore wind costs 3x onshore wind]. Wind therefore can compete with $5/MMBTU gas only if it can continue to benefit from the existing production tax credit (PTC), currently 2.2 cents per kilowatt hour. If gas prices were to rise above $8.3/MMBTU, wind would be competitive even in the absence of the PTC. The problem in this case is that generation of power from coal would be cheaper than that from either gas or wind.

Natural gas futures:

Natural gas has tumbled 20.4 cents, or 5.7 percent, to $3.347 per million Btu so far this week in New York. Prices last week fell 0.3 percent and are up 12 percent this year.  -- 12/14/12, Bloomberg

$3.347 is a fair bit lower than $5/mmbtu referenced in the Harvard Magazine article.

And so it goes.