Já mencionei o gás xisto. O Telegraph indica os grandes níveis de dívida das empresas:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...danger-levels-to-cover-shortfall-in-cash.html
Em gráfico:

É caro, destrutivo e é apenas solução de curto prazo. A seguir será o fracking em águas profundas.
Outro gráfico que demonstra a brevidade de cada poço:

E mais um gráfico que demonstra que a independência energética dos EUA é um mito (se bem que tem reduzido de forma dramática as importações e tem impedido a implosão da economia):

Por fim, a destruição do xisto está disponível em muitos países:

Sendo que em Oklahoma o fracking provavelmente é responsável por um aumento da intensidade dos sismos:
http://www.businessweek.com/article...ncreasing-earthquakes-are-a-boon-for-insurers
The world’s leading oil and gas companies are taking on debt and selling assets on an unprecedented scale to cover a shortfall in cash, calling into question the long-term viability of large parts of the industry.
The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) said a review of 127 companies across the globe found that they had increased net debt by $106bn in the year to March, in order to cover the surging costs of machinery and exploration, while still paying generous dividends at the same time. They also sold off a net $73bn of assets.
(...)
The major companies are struggling to find viable reserves, forcing them take on ever more leverage to explore in marginal basins, often gambling that much higher prices in the future will come to the rescue. Global output of conventional oil peaked in 2005 despite huge investment.
Steven Kopits from Douglas-Westwood said the productivity of new capital spending has fallen by a factor of five since 2000. “The vast majority of public oil and gas companies require oil prices of over $100 to achieve positive free cash flow under current capex and dividend programmes. Nearly half of the industry needs more than $120,” he said.
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...danger-levels-to-cover-shortfall-in-cash.html
Em gráfico:

É caro, destrutivo e é apenas solução de curto prazo. A seguir será o fracking em águas profundas.
Outro gráfico que demonstra a brevidade de cada poço:

E mais um gráfico que demonstra que a independência energética dos EUA é um mito (se bem que tem reduzido de forma dramática as importações e tem impedido a implosão da economia):

Por fim, a destruição do xisto está disponível em muitos países:

Sendo que em Oklahoma o fracking provavelmente é responsável por um aumento da intensidade dos sismos:
Earthquakes used to be rare in Oklahoma, a handful per year or so. Not anymore. So far this year, the state has experienced some 2,300 earthquakes, according to the Oklahoma Geological Survey, an average of more than 11 per day.
Accordingly, the number of Oklahomans with earthquake insurance has jumped a startling 500 percent in less than three years, reports the Oklahoma Department of Insurance. While the cause of increased tremors in the Plains States remains under contention, residents, at the least, are preparing for the worst.
(...)
As the frequency and intensity of seismic activity has increased throughout the central region—add Arkansas, Colorado, Ohio, and Texas—so has speculation that hydraulic fracturing is to blame. As part of the process of extracting oil and gas from rock, wastewater is pumped back into the ground, a process scientists say could be exerting undue pressure and triggering quakes.
The U.S. Geological Survey cautions that more research is needed; its own research so far indicates that fracking may not be responsible for the increase in small quakes, but it may be to blame for boosting the magnitude of the biggest quakes. In Oklahoma, the largest quakes occurred near injection wells.
http://www.businessweek.com/article...ncreasing-earthquakes-are-a-boon-for-insurers









