ARCHIVE Official reports (2011-2013)

Share Button

HEALTH                                    tarapse IngraffeaNew BrunswickBamberg
WATER Gone for Good
ENVIRONMENT EPA  farming, Aberdeen report
CLIMATE –  ng.dominated electricity system;  air   Trouble in  fracking land
COMMUNITIES social costs of fracking
ECONOMY gas prices
MYTHS – Bubble
POST CARBON   Drill baby drill, shale bubble



TheftThe first comprehensive report on government plans to roll out UCG across the UK right now

Theft Of Austerity Britains Coal

uNFAIR UNSUSTAINABLE and under the radar

Report – 
The Author

Thomas is originally from Dublin, Ireland. He obtained his masters degree from the School
of Politics & International Relations at University College Dublin in 2006. He has worked at
various grassroots organisations in Latin America including research and communications
support for a Colombian food sovereignty campaign in 2011. He has worked at the De
mocracy Center in Bolivia since early 2012 where he coordinates the Network for Justice in
Global Investment, assists with advocacy training projects and provides research support for

the Center’s climate change work

back to top

phe report

Fracking poses low health risk if operations are well-run, study finds
Shale gas extraction emissions are a ‘low’ risk to public health
The report published today (31 October) reviews the potential health impacts of shale gas extraction.
This review of the scientific literature focusses on the potential impact of chemicals and radioactive material from all stages of shale gas extraction, including the fracturing (fracking) of shale.
As there is no commercial shale gas extraction in the UK, the draft report looks at information from countries where it is taking place.

ANHE has developed 3 “Fractsheets” that address the health impacts of fracking. In addition to describing the health effects, the fact sheets provide suggestions on how to reduce exposures and provides suggestions on ways health care providers, the public, and legislators can become engaged on this issue. These sheets can be used in clinical practice, for patient education, at advocacy events, and with policymakers.
ANHE Fract Sheets

Fact on Fracking - ProvidersFact on Fracking – Providers
Facts on Fracking – Providers This fact sheet was developed by ANHE to assist health care providers and other advocates in gaining a basic understanding of the health impacts associated with fracking. It also provides suggestions on how to incorporate this information into their practice and becomes more engaged on this issue.


Fact on Fracking - PublicFact on Fracking – Public

Facts on Fracking – Public This fact sheet was developed by ANHE for providers to use in their practices as a teaching tool with clients. It can also be used to provide the general public with information on the health impacts of fracking and how they can become involved around this issue.


Fact on Fracking - LegislatorsFact on Fracking – Legislators
Facts on Fracking – Legislators This fact sheet was developed by ANHE to assist health care providers and other advocates to provide information on the health impacts of fracking to their policy makers. It also provides suggestions on how legislators can work to protect the public health when considering fracking legislation and policies.


Symptomatology of a gasfield2013-04-symptomatology_of_a_gas_field_Geralyn_McCarron

Report compulsory acquisition of lands at Charlesland Co Wicklow word doc SORRY THIS LINK IS NOT AVAILABLE
Appendix 1-Report of independent review-Compulsory acquisition at Charlesland Co Wicklow pdf  SORRY THIS LINK IS NOT AVAILABLE

. A Must-Read for anyone researching the health effects associated with the natural gas and oil drilling process of high volume slick water hydraulic fracturing. fracking_final-low-1 (pdf) New Report Finds Fracking Poses Health Risks to Pregnant Women and Children

Fracking final reportfracking_final-low-1 pdf

pse Ingraffea

Health benefits from reducing short-lived air pollutants and methane concentrations (DG ENV, 14.12.12) – SORRY THIS LINK IS NOT AVAILABLE
Source: Science for Environment Policy, 14 December 2012 A recent global study has estimated that, each year, 1.5 million people die early from cardiopulmonary diseases and 0.1 million people die early from lung cancer caused by exposure to PM2.5 pollution. A further 0.4 million people are estimated to die early from respiratory diseases caused by exposure to surface ozone (O3) pollution. Although short-lived air pollutants have the largest influence on air quality and premature deaths, controlling methane emissions as well would improve air quality and reduce the number of people dying prematurely each year, the study suggests. In this study, researchers modelled changes in air quality during the ‘industrial period’, defined here as the years between 1860 and 2000, and linked these changes to premature human deaths. They considered three main drivers of air pollution: 1) short-lived air pollutants (such as sulphate and various carbon aerosols) emitted from human activities and biomass burning; 2) climate change and 3) increasing methane concentrations (e.g. from energy production and distribution, agriculture); and assessed how changes in each of these factors influenced changes in concentrations of O3 and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). To estimate the effects of air pollution on human health, the researchers used data from long-term epidemiological studies from the American Cancer Society conducted in the United States, under the assumption that they are relevant worldwide. From 1860 to 2000, total PM2.5 and health-relevant ozone concentrations were estimated to have increased worldwide by approximately 8 µgm-3 (micrograms per cubic metre of air) and 30 ppbv (parts of O3 per billion parts of atmosphere) respectively. Globally, increased industrial PM2.5 pollution (from all three drivers of air pollution considered in the study) was estimated to be responsible for around 1.53 million premature deaths from cardiopulmonary disease and 95,000 premature deaths from lung cancer each year. Increased industrial surface O3 was responsible for around 0.4 million early deaths from respiratory diseases each year. Increased emissions of short-lived pollutants alone, accounted for 94% of the total change in PM2.5 levels, and this is reflected in the 1.49 million avoidable early deaths from cardiopulmonary disease and the 92,000 early deaths from lung cancer from exposure to higher levels of PM2.5. Greater emissions of short-lived pollutants also accounted for 83% of the total increase in surface O3 during the period, and was associated with 0.33 million (or about 85% of the total 0.4 million) early deaths caused by this pollutant. Climate change also affected air quality by increasing concentrations of PM2.5 by approximately 0.4 µgm-3, which accounts for 5% of the overall increase in PM2.5 concentrations. Climate-related increased exposure to PM2.5 was associated with 91,000 early deaths from cardiopulmonary disease and 5,000 early deaths from lung cancer. In addition, climate change was found to increase the concentration of surface O3 by about 0.5ppbv, which is less than 2% of the total changes in surface O3 levels. These ozone changes were related to 7,000 early deaths from respiratory diseases. Increased concentrations of methane during the industrial period have been highly influential on atmospheric chemistry and have contributed to increases in O3 concentrations of 4.3 ppbv, or about 15% of the total increase in O3 levels during this time. Methane increases resulted in only tiny changes in PM2.5 levels (0.04 µgm-3). Increased methane concentrations consequently had an insignificant effect on early deaths associated with PM2.5 exposure, but caused about 50,000 early deaths from respiratory diseases related to exposure to O3. Methane changes have significantly contributed to increased surface O3 pollution during the industrial period. As methane is an O3 precursor and global methane concentrations are expected to keep rising, early deaths associated with surface O3 pollution from methane are also likely to increase, suggesting that efforts to lower methane levels will not only slow the rate of climate change but will improve air quality and provide health benefits globally. Source: Fang, Y., Naik, V. Horowitz, L. W., and Mauzerall, D. L. (2012) Air pollution and associated human mortality: the role of air pollutant emissions, climate change and methane concentration increases during the industrial period. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions. 12: 22713-22756. Doi:10.5194/acpd-12-22713-2012. This study is free to view at: Contact:;

New Brunswick

Chemicals in Natural Gas Operations

Natural Gas Operations from a Public Health Perspective


Shale gas Final study – shale-gas-pe-464-425-final eu on health

BAMBERGER REPORTBamberger_Oswald_NS22_revised_in_press

Bamberger report[2012.01]_Impacts of Gas drilling on human and animal health_[Bamberger_Oswald]

The Oswald and Bamberger study is a real reference concerning the impacts that fracking can have on the farming sector. You can find the study enclosed, it’s not too technical and will give you a lot of factual and very useful analysis and conclusions.

Hydrofracking impact on Health – (Blog, 10 Jan 2012)

Gas patch roulette: how shale gas development risks public health in pennsylvania

How Shale Gas Development Risks Public Health in Pennsylvania Published: October 18, 2012
By: Nadia Steinzor, Wilma Subra and Lisa Sumi
The full report’s introduction:Where oil and gas development goes, health problems often follow.For many people across the United States, this statement has rung painfully true for a long time. As the drilling boom picks up speed and reaches more places, it is now resonating in new communities.From a growing number of stories told by individuals nationwide to conferences held by academics and public agencies, the “dots” between health symptoms and gas facilities are very slowly but surely being connected.
The health survey and environmental testing project described in the following pages is part of this critical process. Between August 2011 and July 2012, Earthworks’ Oil & Gas Accountability Project (OGAP) investigated the extent, types, and possible causes of health symptoms experienced by people living in the gas patches of Pennsylvania.
The findings of this study stand in strong contrast to statements—often made by industry representatives and policymakers seeking to expand drilling—dismissing claims of health impacts as “personal anecdotes” and isolated incidents. Directly impacted people are frequently told that what they experience is a random occurrence and that some other source—traffic, lifestyle choices, family disease history, household products—is to blame.
We know that the gas and oil industry uses toxic substances that harm human health. For example, of about 300 compounds identified as being used in hydraulic fracturing to extract gas, 65 are listed as hazardous by the federal government. In turn, this creates a real potential for negative health effects in any area where gas development occurs. While general scientific links regarding the effects of such exposure have been established, research on the direct relationship between health problems and gas and oil activities has been limited and inconsistent.
Even as knowledge of impacts evolves slowly, gas and oil extraction and production continue to accelerate rapidly—allowing industry to put still-emerging technologies to use without first establishing their safety. State regulations remain too lax and outdated to prevent the impacts of modern-day energy development, and regulatory agencies are often unable to conduct the oversight and enforcement needed to protect air and water quality and, in turn, health and communities. Magnifying the consequences of this situation are special exemptions in provisions of the nation’s bedrock environmental laws, which allow the industry to stifle key information and pursue risky practices.
The overall result is that the burden of proof remains heaviest for impacted individuals and communities themselves. Companies can continue to avoid responsibility and downplay health- related concerns. Decisionmakers can continue to sidestep the need to recognize the damage and hold companies accountable.Yet the realities, including those described in this report, can be documented—and when they are, they can no longer be denied. When many people in many places where gas development is occurring have similar health complaints, something is clearly wrong. Earthworks believes that when health problems occur, action to solve and prevent them must follow.


END of health

back to top

Microsoft Word – NYS_DEC_Proposed_REGS_comments_Ingraffea_Jan_2013 _2_


Shale gas and water related issuesShale-Gas-and-Water-Related-Issues

Robert Jackson (Duke U) study on methane in Pennsylvania water Abstract: Full text:

Duke document_ew_01(pdf) Article:

Duke report (2 May 2011)


Plan to study the potential impacts of HF on Drinking water resourses – (November 2011)

Fracking, the new global water crisis – FrackingCrisisUS- the new global water crisis
( 7 March 2012)

investigation of ground water contamination near Pavillion Wyoming (Draft report) – New York Times: Epa links Tainted Water in Wyoming to Hydraulic Fracturing for Natural Gas-

Groundwater investigation (related to Wyoming)

back to top

UniAberdeen_FrackingReport pdf
EPA Aberdeen report

Report –NovaScotiaFrackingResource&ActionCoalition_OutofControlReport_April2013

shale gas and fracking report SN06073

Review – FileDownLoad,26491,en review of the epa (pdf) Here is that report that has not been implemented that calls for the EPA’s immunity to be removed. A review of the EPA (may 2011),26491,en.pdf
THIS LINK IS RE MOVED but we have the report, see below!
REPORT – UniAberdeen_FrackingReport

INDEPENDANT GERMAN REPORT HF risk assessment – ( September 2012) The reporters had to confirm that they have no connections with oil/gas companies. It also contains an interesting climate footprint calculation beside many environmental analysis.

Short version in English of the German report – SORRY THIS IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE

Here we will highlight some of the pluses and minuses of environmental conditions in the RoI as revealed by the IE2012.

EPA website:,33606,en.html
sorry this link is removed


Generic Environmental Impact Statement of the Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory Program All about hydraulic fracturing, wells, chemicals used etc. Final GEIS (Generic Environmental Impact Statement on the Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulatory Program) Generic Environmental Impact Statement from New York
Findings statement-
Together, the Draft and Final GEIS and this Findings Statement will provide the groundwork for revisions to the Oil, Gas and Solution Mining Regulations (6NYCRR Parts 550-559).

Fact based – ei_shale_gas_regulation120215  February 2012

Fact based summary
Summary of findings- ei_shale_gas_reg_summary1202 pdf

Natural Resources Defence Council: First impressions of NY envirionmental Study of Fracking (GEIS)

Note: Impacts on Local Communities from Rapid Industrialization – The state’s draft study does not provide an effective mechanism to insure that local communities will be protected from the overwhelming industrial onslaught that comes with fracking (from heavy drilling and excavating equipment, to traffic, air and water pollution, and the like) should drilling proceed in a particular area.

Study suggests hydrofracking is killing farm animals, pets– (7 March 2012)

back to top

Read more on this topic and lots of links in SHALE GAS BULLETIN IRELAND  – issue 14

Barnett Shale – Rawlins report.
The conclusions are clear.  “The regulation of hazardous air emissions from gas operations is based largely on questions of cost and available technology. There is no comprehensive cumulative risk assessment to consider the potential impact to public health in urban areas.”

Gas ceiling

The Climate Risks of an Overreliance on Natural Gas for Electricity
Gas Ceiling – report: climate-risks-natural-gas

trouble in fracking paradise

Trouble in fracking paradise – 7 august 2013
with lots of graphics etc. By Chris Nelder
Chris Nelder is an energy analyst and consultant who has written about energy and investing for more than a decade. He is the author of two books on energy and investing, Profit from the Peak and Investing in Renewable Energy, and has appeared on BBC TV, Fox Business, CNN national radio, Australian Broadcasting Corp., CBS radio and France 24.

Shale gas and climate impacts – New figures: Now up to 12% of methane leakage !
Reporter: antoine simon, Friends of the Earth europe
The peer-reviewed results of a new study lead in the US by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have just been announced.
You probably remember that, beginning of this year, the same NOAA published findings showing that up to 9% of the methane produced in areas where shale gas was exploited could leak and pollute the atmosphere.
They made similar studies in another shale gas basin, the Uinta Basin, and found out that between 6 percent and 12 percent of the Uinta Basin’s natural gas production could be escaping into the atmosphere. The basin’s oil and gas infrastructure that was analysed serves 6,000 wells. While the team was recording the measurements, the drilling site was found leaking 60 tons of natural gas an hour…

Remember that, according to peer-reviewed studies, shifting to natural gas from coal-fired generators can have climate benefits only if the cumulative leakage rate from natural-gas production is below 3.2%. We’re almost 4 times above this threshold now…

If you want to read more about this study, you can read articles here and there, or read directly the study here.


A commentary on “The greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas in shale formations” by R.W. Howarth, R. Santoro, and Anthony Ingraffea

Abstract report Cornell Univeristy (Jan 2012) abstract commentary on the greenhouse gas footprint

Shale gas a disaster for Climate (29 January 2012)

Howarth/Ingraffea report – (29 January2012)

Cornell professors duel over fracking research (7 Febr 2012)

Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint Robert W. Howarth, Renee Santoro, Anthony Ingraffea – Cornell University – Published in Climactic Change journal – April 2011

Tyndall report

The Tyndall Centre University of Manchester, commissioned by The Co-operative – January 2011 Tyndall report update on Shale gas – Broderick2011_ShaleGas_ExecSummary_Conclusions1

Tyndall final press release 23 November 2011
Tyndall final press release
Updated report – (Nov 2011)

Venting and leaking of methane from shale gas development. Howarth – venting and leakingof methane from shale gas development Shale gas and U.S. National Security

Shale gas and Fracking – Fracking report (2 Nov. 2011)

Introducing State Impacts New Marcellus Shale App –

Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of Marcellus shale gas –
Mohan Jiang, W Michael Griffin, Chris Hendrickson, Paulina Jaramillo, Jeanne VanBriesen and Aranya Venkatesh – Carnegie Mellon University – August 2011

back to top

Hydraulic Fracturing Report 4 18 11 chemicals More chemicals on:

back to top

social costs of fracking - food and water watch

The social costs of fracking

Community and Economic ImpactsSocial and economic impacts

back to top


A Human Right Assessment of HF for Natural Gas – EHRA frac rpt 111212-1 final senate testimony 121211 (12 December 2011)

ECONOMY gas prices
back to top

wolrd energy outlook 2013

Prices_fossil-fuels_Kapitel1IEA (1)



Was the decline in natural gas prices orchestrated? Executive summary In 2011, shale mergers and acquisitions (M&A) accounted for $46.5B in deals and became one of the largest profit centers for some Wall Street investment banks. This anomaly bears scrutiny since shale wells were considerably underperforming in dollar terms during this time. Analysts and investment bankers, nevertheless, emerged as some of the most vocal proponents of shale exploitation. By ensuring that production continued at a frenzied pace, in spite of poor well performance (in dollar terms), a glut in the market for natural gas resulted and prices were driven to new lows. In 2011, U.S. demand for natural gas was exceeded by supply by a factor of four. It is highly unlikely that market-savvy bankers did not recognize that by overproducing natural gas a glut would occur with a concomitant severe price decline. This price decline, however, opened the door for significant transactional deals worth billions of dollars and thereby secured further large fees for the investment banks involved. In fact, shales became one of the largest profit centers within these banks in their energy M&A portfolios since 2010. The recent natural gas market glut was largely effected through overproduction of natural gas in order to meet financial analyst’s production targets and to provide cash flow to support operators’ imprudent leverage positions. As prices plunged, Wall Street began executing deals to spin assets of troubled shale companies off to larger players in the industry. Such deals deteriorated only months later, resulting in massive write-downs in shale assets. In addition, the banks were instrumental in crafting convoluted financial products such as VPP’s (volumetric production payments); and despite of the obvious lack of sophisticated knowledge by many of these investors about the intricacies and risks of shale production, these products were subsequently sold to investors such as pension funds. Further, leases were bundled and flipped on unproved shale fields in much the same way as mortgage-backed securities had been bundled and sold on questionable underlying mortgage assets prior to the economic downturn of 2007. As documented in this report, emerging independent information on shale plays in the U.S. confirms the following: Wall Street promoted the shale gas drilling frenzy, which resulted in prices lower than the cost of production and thereby profited [enormously] from mergers & acquisitions and other transactional fees. U.S. shale gas and shale oil reserves have been overestimated by a minimum of 100% and by as much as 400-500% by operators according to actual well production data filed in various states. Shale oil wells are following the same steep decline rates and poor recovery efficiency observed in shale gas wells.. The price of natural gas has been driven down largely due to severe overproduction in meeting financial analysts’ targets of production growth for share appreciation coupled and exacerbated by imprudent leverage and thus a concomitant need to produce to meet debt service. Due to extreme levels of debt, stated proved undeveloped reserves (PUDs) may not have been in compliance with SEC rules at some shale companies because of the threat of collateral default for those operators. Industry is demonstrating reticence to engage in further shale investment, abandoning pipeline projects, IPOs and joint venture projects in spite of public rhetoric proclaiming shales to be a panacea for U.S. energy policy. Exportation is being pursued for the arbitrage between the domestic and international prices in an effort to shore up ailing balance sheets invested in shale assets It is imperative that shale be examined thoroughly and independently to assess the true value of shale assets, particularly since policy on both the state and national level is being implemented based on production projections that are overtly optimistic (and thereby unrealistic) and wells that are significantly underperforming original projections. Geert Decock Policy Officer – Food & Water Europe Tel: +32 (0)2 893 10 45 Mobile: +32 (0)484 629 491 Email: Follow us on Facebook and Twitter @FoodWaterEurope Website:


Are we entering a golden age of gas?

The Costs of FrackingThe Costs of Fracking The Price Tag of Dirty Drilling’s Environmental Damage Over the past decade, the oil and gas industry has fused two technologies—hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling—to unlock new supplies of fossil fuels in underground rock formations across the United States. “Fracking” has spread rapidly, leaving a trail of contaminated water, polluted air, and marred landscapes in its wake. In fact, a growing body of data indicates that fracking is an environmental and public health disaster in the making. The Costs of Fracking vUS

back to top

Report: Shell, Global Megafrackers:  Shell-Global-Megafrackers

Shell’s Peter Voser “Shale and Renawables Combined Will Drive Our Energy Future”

back to top

Hydraulic fracturingHydraulic-Fracturing-Technology–Safeguards-and-Remaining-Issues

Considerations from a Fracking Expert – Anthony Ingraffea If you want to talk fracking, then Cornell engineering professor Anthony Ingraffea’s your guy. After all, he got his PhD in rock fracturing and conducted hydro-fracturing research with Schlumberger. So EPA has invited Ingraffea to their technical workshop focusing on the engineering aspects of drilling, fracture design and stimulation, and mechanical integrity in gas wells. The March 10 workshop is one of four that EPA is holding as part of the Hydro-fracturing Study.

Shale Gas Production Subcommittee Second Ninety Day Report – Press release – second and final ninety-day report reviewing the progress that has_press_release

Improving the Safety & Environmental Performance of Hydraulic FracturingImproving the Safety word doc. Improving-the-Safety-1 ( pdf doc.)

back to top

analysis and presentation of the results of


Shale gas consultation_report

Stakeholder event – Unconventional fossil fuels (e.g. shale gas) in Europe – (FMN 111)

Presentation_07062013 – eu stakeholders meeting results  (7 June 2013 FMN 111)

EST93050 EU report

MYTHS – Bubble
back to top

The Shale revolution in the United States143389069-The-Shale-Revolution-in-the-US-Myths-Realities

The shale gas revolution in the US, options for the EU

New shale report questions fracking’s short term benefit

New report in Spain “the blight of hydraulic fracturing” Fracking, the New Speculative Bubble The report “The blight of hydraulic fracturing” shows that hydraulic fracturing techniques are unsustainable on both an energetic and economic basis. Opting for non-conventional natural gas extracted via hydraulic fracturing is a decision doomed to failure on energy , economic, ecological and strategic grounds. Every day evidence arises that a new speculative bubble is growing up around this type of extraction, also known as fracking, as Ecologists in Action reports, today. Hydraulic fracture has been systematically based upon overestimations of reserves, always proven to be much higher than what could ever actually be extracted. In fact, in the case of the USA, the only country in the world which has developed the extraction technique on a massive scale, estimations are out by up to 100-400 per cent. To this you have to add the fact that fracking has a worrying low Energy Return on Investment (EROI) (of 2-3:1) which means, energetically speaking, a future based on this type of fuel is inviable. To speak of reserves which will last Spain for 70 years, as the ACIEP, the association which represents companies involved in hydrocarbon research and drilling of has claimed, is to fall into the same trap of disproportionate over-calculations,” explained Samuel Martín Sosa, during the presentation of the report. Similarly, according to the latest shale gas figures in the US, the extraction curve has shown a notably decreasing tendency for some months now. So, gas only lasts a few years, and the five largest source zones in the US are in decline right now. The report by Ecologists in Action explains this fact in its report “The blight of hydraulic fracturing” which it presented ahead of a nationally-coordinated demonstration against fracking in Burgos on Saturday. According to the figures, some 80 per cent of US wells are non-viable economically. They are run by large operational groups which have substantial debts, which in turn leads to an increase in mergers and acquisitions, all of which benefit the financial speculators of Wall Street (and few others). The profitability of the wells is in freefall,” says Martin-Sosa, “new wells are being opened constantly – companies in the US have now started drilling more than half a million in a pointless race which only serves to enter these companies into an alarming circle of speculation and debt. There is more evidence each day to show that there is a speculative bubble forming around the industry of hydraulic fracture which is unsustainable on a real basis, and where the only benefits to be extracted are those gained by the big players in financial speculation.” For Ecologists in Action, there is a absolutely no environmental, energetic, economic and strategic sense in mortgaging the future of the regions affected to this industry, since even the promise of a viable energy source is a false one. The best answer, energetically speaking is the adaptation to the physical conditions of the territories, and the harnessing of the resources to renewable technologies, while, where energy questions are concerned, taking decisions through truly democratic management structures. The complete report (in Spanish) can be downloaded at: Samuel Martín-Sosa Rodríguez Responsable de Internacional/International Coordinator Ecologistas en Acción Marqués de Leganés 12 28031 Madrid teléfono: +34 91 531 27 39 fax: +34 91 531 26 11 web: skype: internacionalecologistasenaccion twitter: SamuelMSosa

back to top

they tellus - post carbon institute

Shale bubble

Drill baby drill –

back to top

back to top

Fracking Bulgaria, Ingraffea-

back to top

Marcellus Shale Gas Report  6 -12- 08

Governor’s Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission – Governor’s Marcellus Shale Report 2011 (22 July 2011)

Introducing State Impacts New Marcellus Shale App –    

Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of Marcellus shale gas –
Mohan Jiang, W Michael Griffin, Chris Hendrickson, Paulina Jaramillo, Jeanne VanBriesen and Aranya Venkatesh – Carnegie Mellon University – August 2011

PredictionsComparisonsWhitePaperFINAL Source: