1. SHALE GAS VS. RENEWABLE
ENERGY

2. Indicators
 CO2 emissions
 Social impacts
 Shale technology
 Water pollution

3. CO2 emissions from Shale
 Natural gas is composed largely of methane, and 3.6% to 7.9%
of the methane from shale-gas production escapes to the
atmosphere.
 Compared to coal, the footprint of shale gas is at least 20%
greater and perhaps more than twice as great in the long
run .

4. Shale vs. Renewables
 Renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass,
geothermal, hydropower, solar, wind) provided 14.3
% of net U.S. electrical generation.
 Shale production provided at least 30%

5. C02 emission comparison
 Average emissions rates
in the US from natural
gas : 1135 lbs/MWh of
carbon dioxide
 The average emission
rates from coal-fired
generation are: 2,249
lbs/MWh
 Emissions associated
with renewable energy
are negligible because no
fuels are combusted.

6. …of Shale Gas
 Shale gas creates dependence
 Impact on state budget
 Frustration of society
 Different cultural stance
 Return on investments

7. Social benefits of renewable
energy
 Creating a long term energy solution
 Attitude towards shale gas vs.
renewables in the US and Europe
 Environmentally friendly
 Impact on quality of life

8. Shale technology
 Shale technology is underdeveloped/uncertain
 Searching for alternative techniques for Shale production
 The cost of investing in Shale production is lost investment
in renewable sectors

9. Renewable energy technology
 Solar energy production costs dropped by
60% in the last 2 years in the U.S
 Hydro costs have dropped 43 % since 2009
 Wind energy production costs have dropped
43 % since 2009

10. Green idea
To replace gas by electric energy for heating –
infrared heaters and destic use.
Electric energy provided by three diverse
renewable energy sources:
sun (photovoltaics)
wind (ROPATEC Bolzano – vertical listels)
small water energy plants

11. ROPATEC

12. EXAMPLE FROM THE S.R.
Hydropower (hydroenergetic) potential of the
Slovak Republic (rivers): 450 locations for
small water energy plants.
 Additional advantage: employment for local
inhabitants and local companies/suppliers
during the process of building but also during
the operation and maintenance of the small
water energy plant.

13. EXAMPLE
 Surface water (from river) spins
Kaplan‘s turbine and returns back to
the watercourse.
 Ichtyofauna is protected by „Fish-
path“ respecting the movement and
activities of fishes during all seasons.

14. Conclusion
 Pros: Employment, attainable in large quantities,
improve balance of trade (US)
 Cons: Expensive, not sustainable in long run,
negative social impacts, not environmentally
friendly
 US gas production is booming due to Shale gas.
However it isn’t sustainable or a solution for the long
run.
 Europe finds it unbeneficial to enter the Shale