Can we extract coal bed methane of the North Sea ?

[Daumic]

With the search for oil and gas in the North Sea, significant coal deposits were discovered in this sea (1). 

 

The localization of these deposits in a sea-bed prohibits a traditional exploitation by mine. In situ combustion was considered with an aim of generating a combustible gas mixture easier to extract. But this technique was too polluting.

 

There is perhaps another resource to consider: the methane adsorbed in the pores of coal. This type of gas is called CBM for Coal Bed Methane (2). Several data could promise a significant and exploitable gas resource:

-       the amount of coal present under the North Sea seems significant; the amount of adsorbed methane should be in proportion,

-       part of these offshore coal deposits are sufficiently close to the coasts of England to be accessible by terrestrial drillings,

-       the technique of horizontal drilling, already used to recover shale gas, can be employed here to extract gas from coal,

-       coal is a porous rock, therefore the extraction of gas does not require hydraulic fracturing. 

 

(1)  https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2018/12/18/north-sea-ucg/

(2)  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalbed_methane#

[Sensei]

Quote

Can we extract coal bed methane of the North Sea ?

What for? Humanity should give up on fossil fuels.. and use them only minimally..

[studiot]

Thank you for the information.

 

The Wiki article you linked to seems to suggest fracturing would be needed.

[Ken Fabian]

Because of global warming those deposits are better left where they are and our efforts at building new energy supply should be focused on low/zero emissions options. Fossil fuels are too polluting.

@Sensei I tried an upvote but clicked on down due to clumsiness; removing it and changing to up either didn't work (but it said it removed it) or someone else (x2) downvoted your comment, just in those few seconds. (Just tried again - the little x was there, like it was still mine - it did remove this time. I won't try the upvote again, but take it as given - Ken)

I do think we are at or have crossed a significant tipping point on clean energy, even if it takes time to flow through sufficiently to influence those with Doubt, Deny, Delay as their climate policy. The fossil fuel supporters are doing all they can to encourage the view that we have a green energy crisis rather than a fossil fuel energy crisis - and use the sense of crisis plus the abundance of money from profiteering to encourage emissions reductions efforts be set aside. I don't think that will work.

Going by Australia, that had more than a decade of pro-fossil fuels national government, the electricity industry has already shifted to supporting renewables. The only not-renewables new energy investment now current in Australia is a single gas plant, by government decree - by the previous Australian government.

Edited October 24, 2022 by Ken Fabian

[studiot]

12 minutes ago, Ken Fabian said:

I tried an upvote but clicked on down due to clumsiness; removing it and changing to up either didn't work (but it said it removed it) or someone else (x2) downvoted your comment, just in those few seconds. (Just tried again - the little x was there, like it was still mine - it did remove this time. I won't try the upvote again, but take it as given - Ken)

Fixed.

[MigL]

2 hours ago, Sensei said:

What for? Humanity should give up on fossil fuels.. and use them only minimally..

Said like a person who will be warm this winter.
A lot of Europe will not.

I perfectly understand the reasons for looking at all types of energy sources to get through difficult times, but they need to be brought quickly online, and Methane extraction from the North Sea coal beds seems too 'long term' to be of any use this winter , or the next decade's winters.
Those kinds of investments are better made into non-fossil energy sources and renewables

[Sensei]

11 hours ago, MigL said:

Said like a person who will be warm this winter.
A lot of Europe will not.

I already said decades ago "winter is coming".. They had more than enough time to prepare..

11 hours ago, MigL said:

I perfectly understand the reasons for looking at all types of energy sources to get through difficult times, but they need to be brought quickly online, and Methane extraction from the North Sea coal beds seems too 'long term' to be of any use this winter , or the next decade's winters.
Those kinds of investments are better made into non-fossil energy sources and renewables

You don't start preparing food and shelter for winter when you see snow, but you have to do it in summer..

Democratic politicians think only about how to win the next elections. In U.S. even more than in EU - 2, 4 and 6 years terms (replaced every 2 years 1/3). When one complain ends, new one is already in progress.. They think of nothing else but "how to stay on the chair".. The result is senseless, stupid, legislation like e.g. "web cookies" & "unsubscribe mail address" (which resulted in ultra happy hackers and defrauders), "fossil tax" (which resulted in ultra happy financial sector and investors who can make yet another frauds on yet another financial instrument)..

If ordinary people were well-educated scientists, politicians would have to listen to them to get elected, and "global warming" would not exist in a few months.. the all resources used to build crap like tanks, warships, warplanes and the all other weapons would be used to build solar panels and other renewable resource..

Countries that rely on the production and export of fossil fuels are in desperate straits, resulting in what you see this year..

In the local stock market, investors have an adage "even the dead jump up" (which is used when a company's share price goes bankrupt)

[studiot]

39 minutes ago, Sensei said:

I already said decades ago "winter is coming".. They had more than enough time to prepare..

You don't start preparing food and shelter for winter when you see snow, but you have to do it in summer..

Democratic politicians think only about how to win the next elections. In U.S. even more than in EU - 2, 4 and 6 years terms (replaced every 2 years 1/3). When one complain ends, new one is already in progress.. They think of nothing else but "how to stay on the chair".. The result is senseless, stupid, legislation like e.g. "web cookies" & "unsubscribe mail address" (which resulted in ultra happy hackers and defrauders), "fossil tax" (which resulted in ultra happy financial sector and investors who can make yet another frauds on yet another financial instrument)..

If ordinary people were well-educated scientists, politicians would have to listen to them to get elected, and "global warming" would not exist in a few months.. the all resources used to build crap like tanks, warships, warplanes and the all other weapons would be used to build solar panels and other renewable resource..

Countries that rely on the production and export of fossil fuels are in desperate straits, resulting in what you see this year..

In the local stock market, investors have an adage "even the dead jump up" (which is used when a company's share price goes bankrupt)

Whilst I agree with your sentiment, I can't fully agree with your reasoning. +1

The sentiment expressed in both your posts suggests that we should be (collectively) making much better use of the resources our planet provides.  +1
I have been saying this since I first took an interest in the 1960s.

But surely the worst offenders against both global pollution and weaponisation are actually also the least democratic nations ?

Democracy is undoubtedly a less efficient organisational method in some respects, but it remians the best, perhaps the only, defence we have against totalitarianism.
As such, those who enjoy it are prepared to accept the increased 'cost' of deploying it in some form.

Finally I think you once mentioned that you are in Poland.

Do you not find it ironic that Poland now finds itself better placed to reject Russian gas than Germany, becuase of its insistence on maintaining its brown coal power source ?

 

13 hours ago, MigL said:

Said like a person who will be warm this winter.
A lot of Europe will not.

I perfectly understand the reasons for looking at all types of energy sources to get through difficult times, but they need to be brought quickly online, and Methane extraction from the North Sea coal beds seems too 'long term' to be of any use this winter , or the next decade's winters.
Those kinds of investments are better made into non-fossil energy sources and renewables

 

I also agee with MigL. +1

We need to do two things; one short term one long term.

Both of these are consistent with the long term aims of 'making the best uses of our resources' sentiments.

But we also need to take more responsibility for our individual and collective actions, and not try to shove them off onto someone else.

Sadly I don't see this revolution happening any time soon.

Sadly short-termism will hold sway for a long time to come.

[Sensei]

4 hours ago, studiot said:

But surely the worst offenders against both global pollution and weaponisation are actually also the least democratic nations ?

Looking at the statistics of who is the largest producer and exporter of weapons is, of course, the most developed countries..

4 hours ago, studiot said:

The sentiment expressed in both your posts suggests that we should be (collectively) making much better use of the resources our planet provides.  +1

These are not "resources".. They are remains of archaic cousins of man and all living creatures.. squeezed by pressure, degenerated by temperature..

4 hours ago, studiot said:

Democracy is undoubtedly a less efficient organisational method in some respects, but it remians the best, perhaps the only, defence we have against totalitarianism.

The amount of regulations and invigilation level you have in democratic countries is beyond imagination of the "politicians" of totalitarian states that existed centuries ago..

 

[studiot]

19 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Looking at the statistics of who is the largest producer and exporter of weapons is, of course, the most developed countries..

These are not "resources".. They are remains of archaic cousins of man and all living creatures.. squeezed by pressure, degenerated by temperature..

The amount of regulations and invigilation level you have in democratic countries is beyond imagination of the "politicians" of totalitarian states that existed centuries ago..

 

I realise that English is not your first language  but your English is pretty good all the same.

So I am suprised how completely you have misread my entire post.

I am sorry it was not more clear.

[Sensei]

@studiot

Didn't you notice that politicians don't answer reporters' questions?

 

Edited October 25, 2022 by Sensei

[studiot]

20 minutes ago, Sensei said:

@studiot

Didn't you notice that politicians don't answer reporters' questions?

 

Although a true statement, I have absolutely no idea what this means here or is relevent to.