Thread by @wang_seaver

Since my colleagues @hausfath and @atrembath’s piece in @politico on reasons to question the utility of a US public lands fracking ban has been generating a lot of buzz, I thought I’d highlight aspects of #energytwitter discussion so far. (THREAD)

https://twitter.com/hausfath/status/1318213000499662851?s=20

First, worth noting upfront that @politico’s editorial choice of title is extreme - far from @hausfath + @atrembath’s original title.

Their original title was: "Why Biden and Harris Are Right to Be Skeptical of a Fracking Ban”

That acknowledged, the discussion so far: (1)

Important point: Only 1/3 of US gas production goes to electric gen. 1/3 is used for industrial (fertilizer production, chemicals, etc), rest is mostly residential/commercial use. So most gas use is harder to substitute with clean tech than is the case for electricity. (2)

Important critique: As said by @CostaSamaras, @RyanMKellogg, others, re: fracked gas, one should also discuss fracked oil. Decarbonization of oil in transport/elsewhere is a difficult work in progress, but fracked oil + oil co-production won’t help. (3)

https://twitter.com/CostaSamaras/status/1318371895184658433?s=20

Important point: Ban on public lands fracking carries immediate political risks + is probably difficult to politically enact. Given that overwhelming majority of O+G fracking is on private, not public, lands, the gesture would be largely symbolic. (4)

https://twitter.com/gilbeaq/status/1318308747035484161?s=20

Important critique: @gilbeaq argues that today, reducing fracking of gas probably would only reduce US LNG exports rather than influencing gas-fired US electricity, so this would neither spare US coal from death or slow renewables deployment. (5)

https://twitter.com/gilbeaq/status/1318307580280770561?s=20

Important point: the piece points out the risk that a poorly-implemented public-lands fracking ban may harm efforts to develop clean enhanced geothermal energy, which has high resource potential on Western US public lands and uses similar drilling technology. (6)

Important critique: We must acknowledge that actors in the gas fracking industry continue to flout many enviro protections and oppose greater accountability for methane leaks + local enviro impacts. The gas industry needs to be consistently held to far higher standards. (7)

Important point: The article does point out that we are rapidly approaching the tail end of the trend of gas killing off coal in the US, and underlines the importance of meeting a net-zero power sector by 2035 as proposed by Biden/Harris. (8)

Important critique: As @J_Lovering points out, gas isn’t good news for clean energy across the board, and is also responsible for driving existing nuclear out of the market and dissuading new nuclear projects. (9)

https://twitter.com/J_Lovering/status/1318599446519709696?s=20

Important point: It is good to highlight that gas + CCS in electricity + industrial sectors can play key roles in deep decarbonization + a clean energy future. Things like gas-associated infrastructure, chemical industry, have potential roles too. (10)

thebreakthrough.org/issues/energy/…

Overall, #EnergyTwitter has identified many good, valid critiques. All the same, @hausfath and @atrembath still raise important points that deserve consideration + discussion. And as all political analysis indicates, a US fracking ban is political fantasy anyways. (11)

At any rate, the core of Biden/Harris climate plan is that by 2035, we will no longer be burning gas for electricity (at least not without CCS), or any other fossil fuel.

That’s hugely important, and next to that a fracking ban on public lands is frankly insignificant. (END)