How much shale gas does Poland have?

[Jaga]

It looks that not that much as originally was predicted....

Poland’s shale gas divided by 5?


High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email [e-mail] to buy additional rights. blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2012/03/19/polands-shale-gas-divided-by-5/#ixzz1pcyCDOg5


Hopes that Poland could turn into an energy exporting potentate like Norway are looking fragile. The country may be sitting on Europe’s biggest shale gas deposits but it is becoming increasingly clear that early estimates of their size were much too large.
Poland was gripped by a gas frenzy in recent years after the US Energy Information Administration estimated that it may have 5.3tn cubic metres of shale gas – the largest such reserves in Europe.

The government started dreaming of patching its budget deficit with inflows of gas cash. The leading gas company started mulling the idea of converting an LNG terminal being built on the Baltic coast to handle exports of gas instead of imports. Strategists saw Poland breaking free of its energy dependence on Russia. US and Canadian energy companies specialised in the complex task of freeing gas from rock formations foresaw a lucrative market.


High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email [e-mail] to buy additional rights. blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2012/03/19/polands-shale-gas-divided-by-5/#ixzz1pcyHvPpo


Several companies including Exxon Mobil and Chevron began drilling test wells and more than 100 companies rushed to grab a share of Poland’s gas concessions.

Some of those early tests produced decent flows. But others showed quite different results from wells drilled into US shale deposits. Exxon Mobil said its two test wells did not justify commercial production.

The gloom is spreading and the government’s geological institute is expected to put out a new estimate of the country’s shale reserves by Wednesday. Local media reports say its message will be a big letdown: that Poland’s reserves are closer to just 1tn cu m.

[irishman993]

Interesting how could they made such a big mistake(I make US Energy Information Administration). Well, I think that even if it's only 1tn cu m, it's still enough to be independent from Russia for few decades.

[Jaga]

Shale gas is not that easily detected. It is trapped in rock (shale) formation.

Shale gas uses completely new technology compared to oil. I think it is much more dirty job to get it out. But Poles are used to it, since they excavate black coal for a long time producing lots of pollution. Canada is a huge country, lot of land is not even used, so excavating shale gas does not lead to that much destruction as it'd do in Poland.

here is a photo:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EIA_World_Shale_Gas_Map.png

[justjohn]

Your country needs to inform itself about shale gas extraction.

[kaima]

Besides shale gas, here is a report on oil prospects in Poland:

pubs.usgs.gov/bul/2204/d/pdf/B2204D.pdf

from the USA geologic survey.

[kaima]

A shorter powerpoint presentation of both gas and oil resources in parts of Poland, in English is at

www.mccallan-oilandgas.com/pdf/Bieszczady_deposits.pdf

A different test well result:

HOUSTON, Aug. 9
08/09/2011
By OGJ editors

A group led by Polish Oil & Gas Co. suspended drilling at 4,219 m at the Niebieszczany-1 exploratory well on the Bieszczady block in the Polish Carpathian fold belt.

Spud in mid-October 2010 as the first of a three-well program, it was projected to 4,800 m and did not reach its primary targets. Drilling was halted due to high pressure in the reservoir. The well cut 60 m of formation that yielded oil and gas-condensate on short tests and is to be placed on flow test for as long as 14 days.

Another well to be drilled in the first half of 2012 will be designed for high pressure to enable the group to reach the primary oil targets and potentially appraise the 60-m test zone.

PGNiG is block operator with 51% interest, Aurelian Oil & Gas PLC 25%, and EuroGas Inc., New York, 24%.

[justjohn]

This takes place in the US but you will experience similar problems




Scientists Link Rise In Quakes To Waste-Water Wells

by Christopher Joyce

Audio for this story from Morning Edition will be available at approx. 9:00 a.m. ET

Transcript


text size A A A
April 12, 2012

Scientists who watch for earthquakes have discovered a big increase in the number of small quakes in the middle of the country. It's an area that's usually pretty quiet geologically.

The scientists suspect the quakes are caused by waste-water wells. They plan to discuss their findings later this month at a seismology conference, but they've shared the basics with NPR.

Bill Ellsworth, a seismologist at the U.S. Geological Survey, says new technology over the last decade has given scientists a much better feel for when the Earth shakes.

"We've been watching the seismicity across most of the country very carefully for a number of years now," he says, "and one thing we had begun to notice was there was an unusual number of earthquakes occurring the middle of the country."
A water truck heads up Colorado Road 215 along Parachute Creek. Water is key to extracting natural gas from deep underground.

Quakes Caused By Waste From Gas Wells, Study Finds

Very unusual, in fact. The background rate for the mid-continent had been about 20 quakes a year. That rose to 29 by 2008. Then it really jumped: 50 quakes in 2009, 87 the next year and a whopping 134 last year.

When USGS scientists zeroed in on where they took place, they noticed clusters near waste-water wells, especially in Colorado and Oklahoma. Waste wells are deep holes where various industries pump in waste water at very high pressure. This has been a common practice for decades, and, once in a while, the pumping has created quakes.

But the boom in natural gas drilling across the country has created lots more waste water. That requires building more big wells to bury the water.

Ellsworth says in the right place, it doesn't take much to trigger a quake.

"Small perturbations can tip the scales, allowing an earthquake that might not otherwise happen for a very long time," he says.

More evidence linking quakes and waste wells keeps coming in from around the country.

Seismologist Steve Horton at the University of Memphis tracked a swarm of quakes along a fault in Arkansas in 2010 and 2011.
What's A Wastewater Well?

Hydraulic fracturing relies on high-pressure water and sand to break apart rock and extract natural gas. The wastewater generated by hydrofracking and other types of gas drilling is injected deep underground for long-term storage. Seismologists believe wastewater injection is causing earthquakes in some parts of the country. Waste wells often go deeper than gas drilling wells, down into basement rock, where faults are more common. Scientists think the water may be lubricating faults in the Earth's crust, causing them to slip.

Image showing waste wells vs. fracking wells



Credit: Alyson Hurt / NPR

"The earthquakes that happened then in a swarm followed the startup of two waste-disposal wells that were within 5 kilometers of this fault," he says.

Horton says injecting waste water into a well raises the pressure of water already trapped in the particles or rock around it.

It's kind of like sticking a straw into a soupy souffle and blowing water into it. It moves things around underground, things like a fault. That's when you get a quake.

Horton says he's convinced there was a cause-and-effect connection between the waste well and the Arkansas quakes.

"The earthquakes started after the injection at the two wells started, and they stopped after the injection stopped," he says.

Horton points out that a lot of the evidence connecting waste wells and quakes is preliminary. Since there are small quakes in most parts of the country, it's hard to be sure that a waste well is at fault.

That doesn't look to be the case in Youngstown, Ohio. There were significant quakes last year associated possibly with a waste well there. The biggest hit the day after the well stopped injecting water.

John Armbruster, a seismologist with Columbia University, has monitored the well since then.

"The number of earthquakes there has dramatically reduced, which I would think you would take as evidence that the well was triggering the earthquake," he says.

Armbruster says Youngstown was no fluke. He's seen data that reveal over a dozen small quakes in another part of Ohio, near the town of Marietta, over the past year-and-a-half. It's not a seismically active part of the state, but it has several waste wells.

Seismologists as well as industry experts point out that there are tens of thousands of waste wells in the country, and only a few create problems. But Armbruster says it's early days yet. Scientists need to put more instruments near waste wells.

"We haven't looked carefully, and we don't know what percentage of these wells would be causing earthquakes," he says.

The state of Ohio is taking action: It's tightening rules for where industry can drill waste wells to avoid quakes.

Also, the federal Environmental Protection Agency is working with the U.S. Geological Survey and other scientists to draft guidelines for waste wells in the rest of the country.

[justjohn]

One very smart state in the US. Poland should take note.


Vermont Fracking Ban: Green Mountain State Is First In U.S. To Restrict Gas Drilling Technique

AP | Posted: 05/16/2012 3:16 pm Updated: 05/17/2012 5:57 pm

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin on Wednesday signed into law the nation's first ban on a hotly debated natural gas drilling technique that involves blasting chemical-laced water deep into the ground.

The Democrat, surrounded at a Statehouse ceremony by environmentalists and Twinfield Union School students who pushed for the ban, said the law may help Vermont set an example for other states. The ban may be largely symbolic, though, because there is believed to be little to no natural gas or oil beneath the surface in Vermont.

The gas drilling technique, called hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, involves the high-pressure injection of water and chemicals into the ground to split rock apart and release natural gas or oil.

It's being used extensively in the rapidly expanding natural gas industry in several states. Critics have blamed the practice for contaminating drinking water wells of some residents living near the drilling operations, but natural gas industry officials dispute those claims.

Shumlin said the increased amounts of natural gas obtainable through hydraulic fracturing were not worth the risk to drinking water supplies.

In the coming generation or two, "drinking water will be more valuable than oil or natural gas," Shumlin said.

"Human beings survived for thousands and thousands of years without oil and without natural gas," he said. "We have never known humanity or life on this plant to survive without clean water."

Shumlin then appeared to contradict himself, saying other states should emulate Vermont's ban on hydraulic fracturing but also should be the "guinea pigs" for testing the process.

"I hope other states will follow us," he said. "The science on fracking is uncertain at best. Let the other states be the guinea pigs. Let the Green Mountain State preserve its clean water, its lakes, its rivers and its quality of life."

The Vermont Public Interest Research Group's executive director, Paul Burns, who spoke at the bill signing, said that he had traveled Tuesday to a rally in Albany, N.Y., put on by critics of hydraulic fracturing and that the crowd there was buoyed by the Vermont action. New York is one of the states, along with Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, where gas drillers have flocked because of the Marcellus Shale, a massive underground rock formation estimated to contain 84 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas, enough to supply the nation's gas-burning electrical plants for more than a decade.

Industry groups panned the Vermont ban.

The American Petroleum Institute said Vermont was pursuing an "irresponsible path that ignores three major needs: jobs, government revenue and energy security."

America's Natural Gas Alliance said the Vermont law was "poor policy that ignores fact, science and technology." It said natural gas is being produced "safely and responsibly."

www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/17/vermont-fracking-ban-first_n_1522098.html

[karl]

J.J.

It is of course, a great deal speculative thinking mixed with reality in mechanics of technology. Using hydraulic fracturing to open seams of rock strata for extraction of gas {earth gas} and related situations that may or many not accompany the action.

By natures formation that was cause in the first for natural gas/petroleum to collect, is the shale cape that is impenetrable in trapping this substance, synacline formation in geological terms {wording we had learnt studies of Geology in school days.}

Of course we do know that most any action will create a counteraction, rather it to be manageable or become out of control is to the individual situation{s} that may evolve.

The primary requisite though, is the need for energy rather it be a product of petroleum/electrical/ derived from natural sources or created by heat generated from fuel, it is a prime pre-requisite of for home and industrial. For with out, we are out in the cold.

I think perhaps to better understand the petroleum industry is to liken it to a sales persons life. For the sales person is always and always the hunt for new customers. For once one is found, then the sales person has not the privilege to stop and live off the residuals of that sale, but, by virtue of necessity, must continue the hunt for new customers.

In as well in the petroleum industry. Once a new field is discovered and developed. It has not the privilege to then stop and live off the residuals, but in this stead, must by virtue of necessity, to be always on the hunt for new fields to develop and on and on, it is the life they choose. For one, operational expenses do not stop with each new discovery. For of the various eaters of funds, goes with out saying, payrolls that must be met and related expenses in equipment and what ever.

I think perhaps though, some equations of reality is on occasions not spoken. For one is liability. Not just liability of the petroleum firm, but to the land owner as to has provided for payment, drilling rights and related liability claims that may arise in case of an accident,loss of life, misconduct in any one party to the main and/or loss encountered by act of nature.

In the case of ground water contamination by act of hydraulic fracturing is a contestable action that issues from the act of compressing water and related chemicals by action of penetration of any natural formation such as an shale cap.

This is an issue that is very difficult to prove out. For one, to properly prove conclusively that the action of drilling commensurate with compressive fracturing is cause of water contamination. Would involve actual digging to the root of the problem with hands on checking the leakage as postulated.

One resolution in the case of such action as above if to occur, is, to drill exploratory wells circumference of the suspected centre of the offending gas well, then for a time, measure for each well as to the direction of ground water flow. Once the direction of water flow is known, the at the head, it is a matter of drilling in the water table infront of the contamination as a new source of uncontaminated water source.

This above is very well known, but for those wishing to propagate their names and/or business will keep this to them selves.

Karl

[JustJohn or JJ]

Study Exposes the Folly of Fracking

Published on November 20, 2012 by Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, ND


It’s been said that the human race is the only race where most of the participants can’t afford shoes and just as many don’t even have access to clean drinking water. Unfortunately, that’s not just a clever anecdote, it’s true. More than 20% of the world’s population does not have access to suitable drinking water. That’s over a billion people and ought to be considered a crime against humanity. Theoretically, at least, I’m not quite sure exactly who we can pin it on, though a recent article in Nature sheds some light as to where some questions should be directed.

Although there’s a shortage of drinking water, one thing that there isn’t, apparently, is a shortage of water for hydraulic fracking. Fracking, if you’re unfamiliar, is a process in which hard-to-access oil is extracted from the ground by means of injecting a fluid, often water, deep underground in order to, essentially, knock it loose. Fracking, though proclaimed safe by the very trustworthy oil and gas industry, has a number of potential environmental impacts that include groundwater contamination from other drilling fluids, air pollution, and even earthquakes. One aspect in particular is the sheer amount of water required for the process.

An average fracking well typically requires 3-8 million gallons of water every week. In 2008, the Marcellus Shale required 650 million gallons of water. Skytruth calculated that during the 20 month period between January 2011 and August 2012, the United States used at least 65.9 billion gallons of water to frack for oil and gas. France and Bulgaria have banned fracking because of the water consumption. Other countries, such as Australia, are fighting against it. However, in America, fracking is a procedure that is very alive and well, especially in the recent boomtown oil fields of western North Dakota.


Proponents of fracking will often cite other examples of large water consumption in effort to “put into context” the notion that fracking doesn’t actually use that much water. Well, maybe… but, here is another way of looking at it. It’s estimated that the average adult should consume about 64 oz. of water a day, or 182.5 gallons a year. If the water used for fracking, in the United States alone, during the previously mentioned 20 month period, was diverted to those who do not have water, it wouldn’t completely solve the world’s water problems, but it could satisfy well over 300 million people, and that’s a good start.

-Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, ND, DACBN, DABFM

[JustJohn or JJ]

Fracking's Toxic Secrets: Lack Of Transparency Over Natural Gas Drilling Endangers Public Health, Advocates Say

Posted: 11/21/2012 4:13 pm EST Updated: 11/21/2012 5:27 pm EST

Some frustrated residents and anti-fracking activists are finding new names to call the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) -- "Don't Expect Protection," "Department of Energy Production" -- according to Dana Dolney of ShaleTest, a nonprofit that provides free air and water quality testing for low-income residents near natural gas wells.

The department is taking heat for providing what critics see as incomplete water quality test results to property owners who are concerned about pollution from nearby fracking operations. Withholding such information, the critics say, could endanger residents' health.

"Based on what is happening in the Marcellus Shale, we saw a huge desperate need for this kind of testing," Dolney said. "We wouldn't have to do what we do if it wasn't for the failures of the DEP."

The DEP and natural gas companies are defending the testing methods, asserting that the contaminants most likely to be associated with fossil fuel extraction are included in what is shared with the DEP and, subsequently, with homeowners.

Still, critics suggest the purported "filtering" of testing data is just one of the ways people are left in the dark about the assortment of heavy metals and other toxic contaminants that may be in their air and water as a result of drilling, hydraulic fracturing and other phases of natural gas production. Recent studies have identified more than 600 chemicals used throughout the process of natural gas production, and often left undisclosed by companies. Additionally, natural but equally hazardous substances can be released from the wells.

"The disclosing of chemicals used by the industry remains seriously incomplete. Couple that with the incomplete reports on water tests and it aggravates a situation where landowners don't have a full picture of what is going on," said Kate Sinding, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

David Headley, of Smithfield, Penn., is one of those that's been getting incomplete information about contaminates in his water.

In April 2010, four years after the first natural gas well was drilled near his home, the DEP tested Headley's drinking water and reported low levels of barium, strontium and manganese.

"We were told the water was safe to drink," David Headley said. "But we had an infant in the house, and a pre-teen. We weren't about to let them drink it."

The test results were labeled with the now-controversial Pennsylvania DEP code 942, which tells the testing lab to send back just a subset of results. Among 24 heavy metals tested, for example, results of just eight are ultimately verified and reported. Aluminum, silicon, titanium and lithium are among the excluded metals.

"A number of those other metals could be present," said Tony Ingraffea, professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Cornell University. "I know for a fact that lithium has been found in drinking water tests done on families who have complained due to nearby drilling or fracking."

Travis Windle, spokesperson for the Marcellus Shale Coalition called the accusations of manipulated test results "baseless claims." And Pennsylvania DEP spokesman Kevin Sunday told The Huffington Post that the "biggest indicators of drilling" are barium, strontium and potassium -- all included with code 942. The agency, he explained, bypasses the costly and time-intensive quality control steps for the 16 less relevant metals.

Sunday added that the agency sometimes uses a newer code, 946, which provides a slightly longer list of contaminants, including aluminum and lithium.

It's not entirely clear what contaminants a test should be looking to find. No federal laws require natural gas companies to disclose the chemicals they use in their operations, a byproduct of the so-called "Halliburton loophole," a Bush-era energy bill that exempts natural gas drilling from the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Some states have enacted their own disclosure legislation on fracking fluids -- the material blasted into bedrock to release natural gas -- but many have loopholes.

Pennsylvania's Act 13, for example, includes disclosure exemptions for any chemicals brought up naturally from the shale, formed as a reaction, or are otherwise "incidental." There are also exclusions for trade secrets.

In September, an investigation by EnergyWire found that 65 percent of disclosures made by oil and gas companies leave out information about one or more fracking chemicals that the companies claim to be confidential.

Physicians, according to a provision in Act 13, can access this exempted information if it is relevant to a patient's care, but they must first sign a confidentiality agreement stating that they won't share the information with anyone -- not even their patients.

Thanks to databases such as FracFocus and a recent project by the nonprofit SkyTruth, the information that is publicly disclosed is becoming easier to find. None of these public records, however, include information on the chemicals used during the drilling of the well or in other aspects of the operations.

The EPA, too, is focusing their current research on how fracking could affect drinking water sources -- from water acquisition to treatment and disposal of the wastewater. As the agency told HuffPost, while they "are not looking at transport or drilling, the scope of the study does include spills of chemicals used on site to formulate fluids for hydraulic fracturing."

That means the study will miss at least one likely contamination source: "Whatever is in the drilling mud fluid comes into contact with underground sources of drinking water," according Cornell's Ingraffea.

Theo Colborn, an expert in toxic chemicals and president of the Endocrine Disruption Exchange, said that fracking fluid is just one component of the huge pollution problem stemming from natural gas production.

Around wells in rural Colorado, her team recently detected high concentrations of contaminants in the air, including methylene chloride, a toxic solvent not disclosed by industry but reported by residents and gas field workers as being stored on well pads for cleaning purposes. The levels of the contaminant peaked before the fracking phase even began.

As for David Headley, ShaleTest recently looked at the air quality around his home and detected high levels of many toxic chemicals, including acetone and carbon tetrachloride.

Between contamination of the air, ground and water, Headley said he still doesn't know what chemicals his family may have been exposed to over the past few years. He added that such a lack of information has hindered the ability of doctors to pinpoint the cause of his son's stomach cramps as well as the skin rashes and chronic coughs affecting his whole family.

It makes the future look "scary," he said.

WATCH: Well Venting Near David Headley's Home:



This article has been updated to include comments from the EPA.

[gobose]

I seldom agree with Obama, but I'm 100% behind his Fracking 24/7 365 policy.

Fracking is a God send to the USA and Canada. There is a God, and he loves the USA!

What a major turn around for the USA and its energy needs. Just 5 or so years ago, the Democrats were boasting about the future of bio fuel. Too bad that it drained the underground water reservoirs severely lowering the water table and the phrase is seldom heard today.

Kind of like "Global Warming". Now its "climate change".

Same thing for those hideously ugly, and environmentally destroying, wind turbines. Glad to see that "technology" disappearing.

And what about the fallacy of "solar panels" and their very limited use. Thank God, as they create toxic waste dumps wherever they're manufactured.

[karl]

Dec 21, 2012 16:30:32 GMT -7 gobose said:

I seldom agree with Obama, but I'm 100% behind his Fracking 24/7 365 policy.

Fracking is a God send to the USA and Canada. There is a God, and he loves the USA!

What a major turn around for the USA and its energy needs. Just 5 or so years ago, the Democrats were boasting about the future of bio fuel. Too bad that it drained the underground water reservoirs severely lowering the water table and the phrase is seldom heard today.

Kind of like "Global Warming". Now its "climate change".

Same thing for those hideously ugly, and environmentally destroying, wind turbines. Glad to see that "technology" disappearing.

And what about the fallacy of "solar panels" and their very limited use. Thank God, as they create toxic waste dumps wherever they're manufactured.

With due respect of a different prospective. Wind turbine technology is vital, and with this, perhaps to take a look East off from California up the grape vine motor way of roadway 58, and what do you see upon the sky line?? Multitude of windturbin...

For some years, Wind Turbine technology has been a free source of energy close in to Cuxhaven and north east into Dänemark more of same.

www.vancouversun.com/technology/Germany+Transport+firms+turn+offshore+windmill+headache+into+profit/6919633/story.html

What is disturbing though is the noise of the blades as they rotate, this is discomforting to say the least. With this, has been over the last few years, an effort to inplace new installations out at sea.

These things are enormous, it is not until to walk up to them to realize the size...

Windturbins have been a fact of life for the last many many years in our Friesland and of Pieters Nederlandern. They have served to pump water and grind grain as an indispensable part of every day life..

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Germany

Karl

[gobose]

Dec 21, 2012 18:35:01 GMT -7 karl said:

Dec 21, 2012 16:30:32 GMT -7 gobose said:

I seldom agree with Obama, but I'm 100% behind his Fracking 24/7 365 policy.

Fracking is a God send to the USA and Canada. There is a God, and he loves the USA!

What a major turn around for the USA and its energy needs. Just 5 or so years ago, the Democrats were boasting about the future of bio fuel. Too bad that it drained the underground water reservoirs severely lowering the water table and the phrase is seldom heard today.

Kind of like "Global Warming". Now its "climate change".

Same thing for those hideously ugly, and environmentally destroying, wind turbines. Glad to see that "technology" disappearing.

And what about the fallacy of "solar panels" and their very limited use. Thank God, as they create toxic waste dumps wherever they're manufactured.

With due respect of a different prospective. Wind turbine technology is vital, and with this, perhaps to take a look East off from California up the grape vine motor way of roadway 58, and what do you see upon the sky line?? Multitude of windturbin...

For some years, Wind Turbine technology has been a free source of energy close in to Cuxhaven and north east into Dänemark more of same.

www.vancouversun.com/technology/Germany+Transport+firms+turn+offshore+windmill+headache+into+profit/6919633/story.html

What is disturbing though is the noise of the blades as they rotate, this is discomforting to say the least. With this, has been over the last few years, an effort to inplace new installations out at sea.

These things are enormous, it is not until to walk up to them to realize the size...

Windturbins have been a fact of life for the last many many years in our Friesland and of Pieters Nederlandern. They have served to pump water and grind grain as an indispensable part of every day life..

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Germany

Karl

Europe has a long tradition of windmill usage. But in the USA, "alternative energy" is all about political power and the ability to use taxpayer money to support constituents favorable to your party.

The USA will remain a 90+% traditional energy power using nation. All of this chatter about "alternatives" is to create a supply of taxpayer cash that is doled-out in the form of "government grants" to "Green" businesses and universities. All of which are run by Democrats. There is tremendous (political) power in "Green".

So, in the USA, it is a disingenuous use of a technology of very limited potential. And is usually, far more damaging to the environment than the traditional forms.

California has a wind farm that is hideously ugly and been in place since the early 90's or so. However, when you drive past that "farm", the poles are covered in oil that leaked from the motors over the years. And that farm has seen little growth over the last 20 years.

Ditto for the farms in West Texas that had been championed by T Boone Pickens as a golden child of Obama back in 2008. IN 2012, he dropped the whole concept as not being viable.

[karl]

gobose

Thank you for your very informative reply. I was not aware of the degradation of American political and economics has progressed over the time..

You are most correct with windturbin installations. If they are not properly maintained, they will leak oil. The gear boxes are the Achilles heel of those machines. There is a great amount of stress on them, with this, proper maintenance is paramount, by evidence of noticeable leakage of oil is not a good sign.

There was some time past, research in using direct drive between the power shaft to the generator, I am not sure at this time rather any progress was made. It would have eliminated much of the complexity of the machine to then place more emphasis upon blade angle to the wind as a manner of controlling rotational forces.

Karl