increase the Greenhouse Effect, and reinforce global warming. Through such a mechanism, global cooling might cause release of a greenhouse gas and result in warming. Thus gas hydrate might be part of a great negative feedback mechanism leading to relative stabilization of Earth temperatures. At present USGS scientists and others are just beginning to analyze the potential effects of this huge reservoir of methane on the global environment and much study is needed to better understand the processes and determine which hypotheses are correct. Q1.2. Do climate models include these effects, and if not, what will need to be altered in these models? A1.2. Present climate models do not include methane movements though the deep ocean floor, nor any transfers involving gas hydrates; some of these transfers may be catastrophic and of great magnitude, such as during major slumps of the seafloor. In general, only terrestrial and nearshore (estuarine) methane fluxes are included in the existing climate models. At present our understanding of the processes that cause transfer of methane in and out of the gas hydrate reservoir is so primitive that a rational modification of the climate models to respond to these factors is not possible currently. Clearly, the primary need is to develop an improved scientific understanding of the range of processes associated with gas hydrate in oceanic sediments that result in methane migration in and out of the atmosphere. SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Hearing on S. 1418: Methane Hydrate Research and Development Act of 1998 September 15, 1998 Post-Hearing Questions Submitted to Mr. Arthur Johnson Senior Staff Geologist Chevron USA Production Company Questions From Chairman Calvert Definition of “Marine Mineral Resource” in the Mining and Mineral Policy Act of 1970 to Include Methane Hydrates Q1. Al. Section 4 of S. 1418 amends the definition of “marine mineral resource” in the Mining and Mineral Policy Act of 1970 (as added by the Marine Mineral Resources Research Act of 1996) to include methane hydrates. Please provide a scientific justification for defining methane hydrates as a marine mineral resource. The American Geological Institute defines a mineral as "A naturally occurring inorganic compound having an orderly internal structure and characteristic chemical composition, crystal form, and physical properties". Methane hydrate meets the criteria of this definition. As the most common location for methane hydrate is in the deep marine environment, it is justifiable that it be termed a "marine mineral". The possible resource potential of the methane contained within methane hydrate deposits could justify their definition as a “marine mineral resource". In addition, preliminary work to date indicates that the formation of methane hydrate in oceanic sediment has a number of similarities to other authigenic (i.e., formed in place) minerals. For example, methane hydrate has been observed to form coatings on grains, fill pore space, and form veins and nodules. As such it is likely that many of the same approaches for modeling the formation of other marine minerals may be used to model the formation of methane hydrate. The comparison with other marine minerals breaks down, however, at the point of commercial extraction. Most scenarios for commercializing methane hydrate involve the dissociation of the hydrate to yield water and methane gas. When produced, the methane is not in the form of a mineral, and should be considered as a marine petroleum resource. Question From Democratic Members Private Industry Efforts into Methane Hydrate Research QI. Al. Please describe the known private industry efforts into methane hydrate research, both domestically and abroad. Are those efforts focused primarily on safety issues associated with drilling for oil or are they concentrating on methane hydrates as a possible energy resource? I am aware of several aspects of methane hydrate research being conducted by industry. The most extensive efforts involve studies of the formation of methane hydrate deposits in pipelines and other facilities, and methods to counter this problem. This research has been on-going for many years and is being carried out through industrial consortia, university research funded by industry, and at individual corporate labs. These efforts are summarized in Appendix 2 of the DOE report "A Strategy for Methane Hydrates Research and Development”. It is only in the past few years that industry has begun to recognize the commercial resource and potential safety implications of naturally-occurring methane hydrates, and that recognition is not universal. The level of industry interest and magnitude of funding for research into naturallyoccurring methane hydrate has not been announced by any company that I am aware of (either for university or in-house work). The best indicator of interest is the participation by 11 oil companies at workshops on the proposed DOE program. In addition, several research programs on naturallyoccurring hydrates are currently being initiated at universities, and it is likely that they will receive industry support. These programs address both the energy resource and safety issues. In informal discussions with industry participants at workshops and consortium meetings, the resource issue is usually mentioned as the long-term goal of hydrate research, and the assurance of safe operations is viewed as a valuable short-term benefit. Most foreign research into naturally-occurring methane hydrates is being funded by government agencies and carried out by universities, state oil companies and other government organizations. The exception is Royal Dutch Shell (Netherlands) that appears to have a significant program in naturally-occurring hydrates. The scope of this program has not been made public. Methane Hydrate Safety Issues Q2. A2. There are some safety issues associated with extracting conventional energy sources that are located close to methane hydrates deposits. Are there additional costs for drilling for oil or gas near methane hydrates, and additional precautions that must be taken? We recognize two types of naturally occurring methane hydrate deposits in the Gulf of Mexico: mounds of hydrate on the seafloor, and hydrate in sediment below the seafloor. Methane hydrate mounds are associated with hydrocarbon seeps (locations where oil and gas flow naturally out of the sea floor). The mounds have a limited areal extend, on the order of tens of meters, and are easily identified on site surveys for potential drilling locations. When mounds are identified, proposed drilling locations are moved to avoid the mound. The hazard posed by methane hydrate beneath the seafloor is speculative at this point. Chevron has had no problems with conventional oil and gas extraction in the Gulf of Mexico related to naturally occurring methane hydrates. As a result, our operations have not been restricted by the presence of methane hydrate deposits. In accordance with 30 CFR Ch. II Section 250.33 (ix), oil companies conduct surveys for potential geologic hazards prior to the commencement of drilling operations. These surveys are designed to evaluate all potential hazards, including hydrates, and the results are reviewed by geohazards experts at the U. S. Minerals Management Service prior to the granting of a drilling permit. Should the survey indicate a hazardous hydrate deposit (or a shallow gas deposit trapped beneath a hydrate deposit), the proposed drilling location would be moved to avoid the hazard. As part of Chevron's commitment to safe operations, additional precautions are taken in drilling shallow intervals where a wide range of potential geohazards could exist. Subsurface methane hydrates are just one of these factors that we prepare for. The planning and implementation of these precautions add an estimated $1,000,000 to $2,000,000 to each well, however these additional costs would be incurred even if hydrates were not an issue. How Federal R&D Results Will Complement Industry Efforts Q3. A3. How do you think the results of the federal R&D that will be supported in this bill will complement industry efforts? As noted above in the response to Q1., industry efforts in naturally-occurring methane hydrates are at an early stage. The federal R&D should stimulate increased industry interest. In addition, the proposed federal R&D will cover areas of investigation that are beyond the capabilities of most company labs. The plan to make the results of the federal R&D public will significantly complement industry efforts. Sufficiency of Proposed Budget Levels Q4. A4. In your testimony, you stated that you had concerns about the “sufficiency of the proposed budget levels and of the impact of insufficient funding on the timetable for the needed technology." Could you please elaborate on those concerns, and tell us what you think a reasonable solution would be? At the Methane Hydrate Workshop in May 1998, the DOE presented the goals for the methane hydrate program that are included in "A Strategy for Methane Hydrates Research and Development". At that workshop, it was stated that the initial funding request for the program would be $500,000. The response from the industry and academic participants was that it would be virtually impossible for any meaningful goals to be achieved with such a low level of funding. Certainly the proposed DOE timetable could not be met. As I stated in the hearing on September 15, the industry does not believe that the best approach in research is to throw money at a problem. We do not take that approach in our own research and we do not support it in government programs. However, if the funding level is too low, funds will be spent with no return on the investment. |