This was the title of a very interesting article in 'Die Burger' supplement 'By'. As I follow the latest developments of possible (or may I say inevitable) shale gas mining in the Karoo, this caught my eye.
The article was written by David Johnson, a former environmental lawyer, who currently writes about the impact of population growth. You can read other articles of his at: www.toomuchtoomany.co.za
The biggest message I got from this article was that sustainability is all encompassing. One cannot just look at one aspect of renewable energy/waste management or any 'green' endeavor and presume it is the most sustainable solution or alternative without looking at the entire supply chain or the bigger picture. Very often we all get very emotional about the destruction of our natural heritage and firmly state that NO development must take place. The reality is very different. Progress is a human condition. We want our investments to grow, we want to create jobs for the burgeoning populations, we want to be prosperous and put food on our families tables. And all of this requires energy. It is all so heartbreakingly contradictory and yet we have to face up to a fine balancing act between the environment, society and the economy.
What David Johnson says is that even though the environmental NGO's vehemently oppose some developments to extract natural resources to generate energy, the hunger for energy doesn't subside and they also do not give any alternatives. A while back I read a very interesting article about a company in the US called The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and how instead of stopping all new developments they find solutions with all stakeholders. The story of the sugar cane farmers in the Cauca Valley in Colombia is a prime example of how economics and conservation can work in symbiosis. By protecting the water supply upstream in the forested areas and thus conserving this area, their sugar cane industry would be preserved.
So back to the shale gas mining in the Karoo. Trade off's will need to be made. So what David Johnson recommends is select areas where less rather than more environmental damage will take place. For example, the grasslands and waterlands of Mpumalanga. Coal mines are shooting up like weeds all over there and the area has one of the most endangered environments. Why is coal mining still 'allowed' without the media uproar and not other sites where other technologies to extract resources are planned? How about an area in the Karoo which doesn't have the biodiversity sensitivity other areas have?
And another point he makes is that why hold the large multinational corporation in the negative public mindset when they will still be around if environmental damage takes place? These micro miners who are usually not around after extraction has taken place will not be able to account for the environmental damage and pay reparations thereafter.
And how environmentally friendly are the forms of renewable energy? ALL forms of energy generation has a negative impact on the environment. From wind turbine manufacturing using earth metals, which are mined and processed in China which has minimal environmental regulations (water and soil pollution in the Bautou area in China is off the charts!) to solar energy plants which require large land areas which could be feasible in countries with large land areas but not necessarily in South Africa.
So the struggle continues....there is no silver bullet which will satisfy all the environmental, societal and economic requirements. A less than perfect solution and a great balancing act is needed.
Friday, 13 December 2013
Friday, 6 December 2013
Tuesday, 3 December 2013
Waterless Fracking: good or bad?
I recently read about the 25 Best inventions in 2013 in Time Magazine and since fracking is close to our hearts in South Africa with Shell and some other petroleum giants considering prospecting in the Karoo, this extract really caught my interest. On Cape Talk 56.7 last week Mike Wills was discussing the impact this new fracking technology might have in South Africa with a specialist at the Water Research Commission (WRC), if and when (I reckon it's more a case of when than if) fracking is in full swing here.
To put this in perspective, traditional hydraulic fracturing uses water, sand and chemicals, which is pumped underground via a wellbore under high pressure to break or fracture the shale rocks to release shale gas, tight oil, tight gas and coal seam gas. Now the issues the environmentalists and the public have with this technique are the potential environmental impacts, including contamination of ground water, depletion of fresh water, risks to air quality, noise pollution, the migration of gases and hydraulic fracturing chemicals to the surface, surface contamination from spills and flow-back, and the health effects of these. With the Karoo being a very sensitive area with high water scarcity, the possibility of even excavating for shale gas has created a whole anti-fracking movement in South Africa. The Treasure the Karoo Action Group lead by Jonathan Deal has become a household name here starting in 2011 with the invocation of a moratorium on shale gas mining (SGM) based on the Critical Review of Shell's draft EMP (Environmental Management Plan). This year October saw the release of the draft technical regulations for oil and gas exploration and production from shale gas mining using hydraulic fracturing. The public were given 30 days to comment with the TKAG submitting a response to the gazetted draft regulations (of 38 pages compared to TKAG draft of over 300 pages) and requesting an extension of the public participation period. No answer from government has been forthcoming.
So far this is the the current picture of fracking in South Africa. Now let's step back and look at the new technology of waterless fracking. A Canadian oilfield service company called GasFrac has recently developed 'propane fracturing' and succesfully put it to use commercially in the USA states of Ohio and Texas as well as Canada. This technology uses gelled propane to fracture shale and thereafter the shale gas (or oil) extracted. They claim many environmental and economic benefits from this new method...but lets break it down into the advantages and disadvantages:
To put this in perspective, traditional hydraulic fracturing uses water, sand and chemicals, which is pumped underground via a wellbore under high pressure to break or fracture the shale rocks to release shale gas, tight oil, tight gas and coal seam gas. Now the issues the environmentalists and the public have with this technique are the potential environmental impacts, including contamination of ground water, depletion of fresh water, risks to air quality, noise pollution, the migration of gases and hydraulic fracturing chemicals to the surface, surface contamination from spills and flow-back, and the health effects of these. With the Karoo being a very sensitive area with high water scarcity, the possibility of even excavating for shale gas has created a whole anti-fracking movement in South Africa. The Treasure the Karoo Action Group lead by Jonathan Deal has become a household name here starting in 2011 with the invocation of a moratorium on shale gas mining (SGM) based on the Critical Review of Shell's draft EMP (Environmental Management Plan). This year October saw the release of the draft technical regulations for oil and gas exploration and production from shale gas mining using hydraulic fracturing. The public were given 30 days to comment with the TKAG submitting a response to the gazetted draft regulations (of 38 pages compared to TKAG draft of over 300 pages) and requesting an extension of the public participation period. No answer from government has been forthcoming.
So far this is the the current picture of fracking in South Africa. Now let's step back and look at the new technology of waterless fracking. A Canadian oilfield service company called GasFrac has recently developed 'propane fracturing' and succesfully put it to use commercially in the USA states of Ohio and Texas as well as Canada. This technology uses gelled propane to fracture shale and thereafter the shale gas (or oil) extracted. They claim many environmental and economic benefits from this new method...but lets break it down into the advantages and disadvantages:
- A fracking well uses on average 12 million litres of water. There is some overflow back up the well and this needs to be treated and disposed of. Gelled propane will not use this water or have the overflow = Advantage.
- Water fracturing causes formation damage in wells which closes flow pathways and inhibits the production of oil and gas. This new method causes much less formation damage which keeps productivity of the well high and more profitable = Advantage.
- The total life cycle water usage is however not clear. In order to produce and then liquify propane gas, a great deal of water is used. So even though water is not used in the fracturing process, the overall water use could still be high = Disadvantage.
- The gelled propane becomes a gas once discharged underground. This is highly explosive and if any leaks occur this could incur massive damage and safety risks. Even though GasFrac say that they have multiple safety barriers in place this still poses a major risk = Disadvantage
- GasFrac have mentioned the use of 'proprietary chemicals' in producing the gelled propane. These chemicals are released underground with the propane and could contaminate the groundwater. So in the absence of substantial information = Disadvantage.
- The cost of gelled propane is higher than water so this will have to be weighed up against the better efficiency of overall recovery and profitability of the process against water fracturing. Advantage/Disadvantage? Maybe too soon to comment.
A great deal of the data from these propane wells haven't been released by the companies using the GasFrac technology, so the profitability and efficiency of the wells cannot be quantified as yet. However, with the Karoo being a water scarce area, this might (or will) be the technology of choice when the big energy companies plan their next move.
The Treasure the Karoo Action Group must be aware of this for the next round.
Monday, 2 December 2013
Where are all the Ladies? The gap between men and women in the workplace.
One of my interests as it affects me directly....
Globally and especially in South Africa stereotypes and perceptions are keeping women back.
We see women as the nurturers. She should be at home looking after her kids. We see men as the providers: He should be out there working long hours and making money. This perception is built into us, if you look at evolutionary psychology, and how we are brought up. As society progresses (from the Stone Ages through to the Industrial Age and now the Information Age) and as countries develop there is more of a transition to a level playing field and less gender stereotyping. Society still has a way to go though.
The recent book by +Sheryl Sandberg called Lean In has brought this topic into the mainstream. She mentions many factors as to why women do not take on these leadership positions, a few that have really resonated with me:
In my circumstances I frequently have people (family and friends) commenting on how can I still be willing to work full time and not spend time with my daughter. After her birth I was confronted with problems of not being able to do it all. We have made great advances since the previous generation when all our moms stayed at home. No wonder many of them put pressure on their daughters who have kids to stay at home or to not shoot for that promotion because she will sacrifice her family and children in the process. Thank goodness my HR Manager (and perhaps we need more of these type of managers in organizations) understood my dilemma and was willing to meet me half way....if I think of what would've happened if I was not in this situation I would not be where I am now. When women exclude themselves from the workforce after maternity leave it takes many years to get back in as technology and industry advancements have moved on. The financial toll it takes is quite significant, not being able to contribute to retirement savings or save up for future education for the kids can have a profound effect.
For me having a career while being a mom isn't about the money or prestige. It's about having a purpose and being in a stimulating environment (and of course in today's time for most people one income just doesn't put bread on the table). This is obviously not for all women, some prefer to stay at home and raise a family. Some are forced to be economically active because they are the breadwinners or single parents. But the vast majority of women who have qualifications and can contribute significantly to the economy and hopefully also help other women in the work environment start leaving the workforce in droves after they have children. 92 % of men with the same level of qualifications remain in full time employment compared to 45 - 52% of women with the same qualifications after having families.
Men and women need to become aware of this in order to progress. We are getting there but the last 30 years there has been a stagnation in the upward mobility of women in the workforce. We all have choices...but if you want to get out there and have a rich fulfilling career be aware of the challenges and face them head on. No one else will do it for you.
So start small. One of us could be the one who can start the overturn of the gender gap.
Globally and especially in South Africa stereotypes and perceptions are keeping women back.
We see women as the nurturers. She should be at home looking after her kids. We see men as the providers: He should be out there working long hours and making money. This perception is built into us, if you look at evolutionary psychology, and how we are brought up. As society progresses (from the Stone Ages through to the Industrial Age and now the Information Age) and as countries develop there is more of a transition to a level playing field and less gender stereotyping. Society still has a way to go though.
The recent book by +Sheryl Sandberg called Lean In has brought this topic into the mainstream. She mentions many factors as to why women do not take on these leadership positions, a few that have really resonated with me:
- Society and gender stereotyping. Changing generally accepted ideas and how we view men and women.
- Women make choices early on in their careers to take a back seat as they see themselves having families in the future which in turn means that they will have to sacrifice their careers. (self inflicted!)
- Critical mass: if we had a society with 40-50% of senior management being women then it would be more 'acceptable'.
- Women need to see themselves as part of the decision making process and not exclude themselves.
- Women sit back and expect to be approached to take on more responsibility. Go out there and sell yourself!
- Choose your partner carefully so that the household and child duties are shared equally.
In my circumstances I frequently have people (family and friends) commenting on how can I still be willing to work full time and not spend time with my daughter. After her birth I was confronted with problems of not being able to do it all. We have made great advances since the previous generation when all our moms stayed at home. No wonder many of them put pressure on their daughters who have kids to stay at home or to not shoot for that promotion because she will sacrifice her family and children in the process. Thank goodness my HR Manager (and perhaps we need more of these type of managers in organizations) understood my dilemma and was willing to meet me half way....if I think of what would've happened if I was not in this situation I would not be where I am now. When women exclude themselves from the workforce after maternity leave it takes many years to get back in as technology and industry advancements have moved on. The financial toll it takes is quite significant, not being able to contribute to retirement savings or save up for future education for the kids can have a profound effect.
For me having a career while being a mom isn't about the money or prestige. It's about having a purpose and being in a stimulating environment (and of course in today's time for most people one income just doesn't put bread on the table). This is obviously not for all women, some prefer to stay at home and raise a family. Some are forced to be economically active because they are the breadwinners or single parents. But the vast majority of women who have qualifications and can contribute significantly to the economy and hopefully also help other women in the work environment start leaving the workforce in droves after they have children. 92 % of men with the same level of qualifications remain in full time employment compared to 45 - 52% of women with the same qualifications after having families.
Men and women need to become aware of this in order to progress. We are getting there but the last 30 years there has been a stagnation in the upward mobility of women in the workforce. We all have choices...but if you want to get out there and have a rich fulfilling career be aware of the challenges and face them head on. No one else will do it for you.
So start small. One of us could be the one who can start the overturn of the gender gap.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)