World's Largest Fracked-Gas-to-Methanol Refinery Forced to Calculate Climate Impact

authordefault
on

By Stephenย Quirke

Last month one of the largest fracked gas projects in the Pacific Northwest was dealt a legal blow when its development permit was canceled for failing to fully account for the plantโ€™s greenhouse gasย emissions.

The project, backed by Northwest Innovation Works (NWIW), would refine fracked gas into methanol, an industrial feedstock used in chemical production, that would be shipped in bulk from Kalama, Washington, to China, where backers say it will produceย plastics.

Sited on the Columbia River along the Washington-Oregon border, the refinery would cost $1.8 billion to construct. It has attracted the support of Washington Governor Jay Inslee, as well as former Governor and U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke, who became chair of the company’s Global Advisory Board lastย December.

Driving the Frackingย Industry

One of the most controversial aspects of the project involves its high-volume demand for fracked gas. A recent report from the Sightline Institute, a sustainability think tank, explains how these types of gas projects in the Northwest are helping to โ€œdrive the Canadian fracking industry,โ€ even as opposition to hydraulic fracturing (fracking) has evolved from the grassroots to peer-reviewed science.

In its September 15 decision, the Washington State Shoreline Hearings Board found that the methanol projectโ€™s Environmental Impact Statement was incomplete and therefore could not support the construction permits previously issued. That’s because its original statement claimed the project would not significantly impact theย environment.

However, as the hearings board pointed out, it ignored both the upstream impacts of extracting and transporting gas and the downstream impacts of transporting and using methanol inย China.ย 

The board sent its decision back to Cowlitz County and the Port of Kalama, giving them the opportunity to complete a thorough greenhouse gasย analysis.

That analysis likely would have to account for the methane leaking from existing gas wells and transmission pipes, and could potentially include the impact of a new regionalย pipeline.

Documents from both Northwest Natural and the Northwest Gas Association show that the economics of building new regional transmission pipes depends heavily on the demand for methanol exports. The Northwest Gas Association even writes that two of NWIW‘s proposed projects would consume โ€œalmost one quarter of the region’s current average dailyย load.โ€

Yet the refineryโ€™s Environmental Impact Statement made no mention of the potential for a major new gas pipeline necessary to supply theย plant.

Including such impacts could make it difficult for NWIW to finish a project it has called โ€œone of the most environmentally responsible, advanced manufacturing plants ever built,โ€ citing the fact that the methanol is being produced from natural gas instead ofย coal.

The Cowlitz Tribe and environmental organizations such as Columbia Riverkeeper, who appealed the permit approvals to the hearings board, disagree with thisย characterization.

In April last year Cowlitz Tribal Chairman Wilham Iy sent a 10 page letter to the state Department of Ecology opposing the methanol project. He cited disrupted restoration projects, impacts to traditional foods, and the need for a โ€œbroader approachโ€ to uncover the full extent of the refineryโ€™s greenhouse gasย pollution.

Chairman Iy took particular issue with fracking as part of the project’s supply chain. Fracking is โ€œleaving behind contaminated water, polluted air, and marred landscapes,โ€ he wrote, adding that โ€œa growing body of data indicates that fracking is an environmental and public health disaster in theย making.โ€

A Passingย Gas

A new analysis of the project will have to contend with this growing scientific evidence to comply with the hearings board. It will also have to account for the fact that methane leaking from gas wells, pipes, and compressor stations across North America now appear greater than everย before.

Among fossil fuels, these leaks are significant enough to make natural gas the most serious short-term driver of global climateย change.

According to Cornell University professor Robert Howarth, natural gas is already worse for the climate than other fossil fuels once taking into account methane leaks throughout the full supplyย chain.

That’s because the climate impact of natural gas occurs primarily over a 10 to 20 year period, when unburned gas (primarily methane) rapidly accelerates short-term global warming. Methane has been classified as one of three โ€œsuper pollutants,โ€ which are slowly becoming priorities for international diplomacy and negotiatedย phase-outs.

Methane only stays in the atmosphere for about 12ย years.

According to Howarth, over the next 20 to 30 years the Earth could reach temperatures high enough to trigger a catastrophic release of methane currently locked up in Arctic permafrost. Such a result โ€œwould dwarf any possible bene๏ฌt from reductions in carbon dioxide emissions over the next few decades (e.g., switching from coal to naturalย gasโ€ฆ).โ€

Howarth’s evaluation relies heavily on our shared understanding of how much gas isย leaking.

Many sources report that if just 3 percent of natural gas in the system is leaking into the atmosphere unburned, reliance on natural gas is already doing as much climate damage as burning coal and oil. Biogeochemist William Schlesinger puts the number much lower โ€” at just 1 percent. And research indicates at least this much is already leaking.ย One study in Colorado found upstream leakage as high as 11.7ย percent.

It remains a favorite claim of the oil and gas industry to say that natural gas is reducing risks to the climate โ€” despite abundant evidence to the contrary. As companies pivot to solidify demand for gas by exporting products such as liquefied natural gas (LNG) and methanol, their promises are coming under mountingย scrutiny.

Now that the state of Washington is also pressing this claim, it remains to be seen whether NWIWโ€™s methanol export plant can stand up to the climateย test.

Main image:ย Opening of a CO2-to-methanol plant at Svartsengi Geothermal Power Plant, Reykjanes, Iceland. Credit: ThinkGeoEnergy,ย CC BYย 2.0

authordefault

Related Posts

on

Oil company was storing a fraction of advertised amount of CO2 at offshore project, data shows.

Oil company was storing a fraction of advertised amount of CO2 at offshore project, data shows.
Analysis
on

What the country craves is fewer selfies and more action to confront the emergency.

What the country craves is fewer selfies and more action to confront the emergency.
on

A look back at the yearโ€™s manipulative messaging.

A look back at the yearโ€™s manipulative messaging.
on

Policymakers and industry say the Midwest Hydrogen Hub will create green jobs and slash emissions, but environmentalists see a ploy to keep fossil fuels in use.

Policymakers and industry say the Midwest Hydrogen Hub will create green jobs and slash emissions, but environmentalists see a ploy to keep fossil fuels in use.