Japan, US to test methane hydrate reserves

FBaggins

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Oct-19-11 11:57 AM
Original message

Japan, US to test methane hydrate reserves

Edited on Wed Oct-19-11 12:00 PM by FBaggins

Japan's semi-governmental energy body and a major US energy company have sealed a deal to test for methane hydrate reserves in the northern part of the US state of Alaska. Methane hydrate is a type of natural gas formed from methane and water.

Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation, or JOGMEC, made an agreement with the US energy firm, ConocoPhillips, to carry out testing from January next year. The 2 entities will back a project to dig a well up to 1,000 meters that will gauge the amount of gas contained in the area.

Methane hydrate reserves have also been identified in sea beds off Japan's coast. Some experts say the amount is potentially so great it could meet Japan's gas requirements for one-hundred years. Japan is seeking ways to efficiently extract these natural gas molecules. It's hoped the joint experiments with the US firm will pave the way.

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/19_05.html

Wasn't methane hydrate once postulated as a cause for many "Bermuda Triangle" losses? Might make for some difficult extraction scenarios.

Refresh | +5 Recommendations

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

sakabatou

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Oct-19-11 12:04 PM
Response to Original message

1. If the is in't done right, global warming would accelerate

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

FBaggins

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Oct-19-11 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #1

2. Yep.

But if there's a clean way to recover it, it may cut down on the fracking that also raises concerns.

Both are preferable to coal and crude oil of course... and it doesn't hurt economically if we can recover these kinds of resources at home rather than pay the Saudis.

But you're right. To the extend that this (and fracking) open up massive new sources of energy, it gets rid of some of the driving force behind cleaner (but more expensive) energy sources (and thus, hurts the climate).

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Arctic Dave

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Oct-19-11 12:53 PM
Response to Original message

3. They did a test project on this last winter also.

Must have been positive if they are putting more money in to it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Terry in Austin

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Oct-19-11 02:12 PM
Response to Original message

4. Oh, they're "reserves" now, are they?

I thought that crap was just an eco horror waiting to happen. Silly me.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

FBaggins

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Oct-19-11 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. It's a pretty standard use of the term

Edited on Wed Oct-19-11 02:46 PM by FBaggins

They know some amount is there in place... they're going to reserch how much of it is economically recoverable.

Whatever that amount is... is "reserves". The body of the article spells out that they're testing for reserves.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Terry in Austin

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Oct-20-11 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #5

7. Yeah, yeah, I got that...

The point is: bad assumptions about what to do with the stuff.

The term "recoverable" = "able to be recovered."

Quite a different matter than "should be recovered."

To be clear: it shouldn't.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Nihil

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Oct-20-11 04:17 AM
Response to Original message

6. Junkies desperate to get another fix.

Pathetic really.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Terry in Austin

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Oct-20-11 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #6

8. +1

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

OKIsItJustMe

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Oct-20-11 03:40 PM
Response to Original message

9. I’m surprised they feel they have to check

Previous surveys seem to indicate that if you have a continental shelf, you have methane hydrates.

Are they trying to mine it on land? Is that the difference?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

FBaggins

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Oct-20-11 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #9

10. The article isn't as clear as it could be.

They aren't looking to see if they can find it or even measure how much there is... they're starting a trial production (presumably what the author meant by "test"). Having a good idea how much there is in a given area and then what levels of production they can sustain... should give them a first estimate on how much of it could be "reserves".

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:24 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.