Contents

Talk:Natural gas

This  level-3 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Energy Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Climate change High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Should have a link to fracking in sources. The Helium comes from Radioactive decay and is usually accompanied by significant amounts of Radon gas, also from radioactive decay. Fracking increases Radon gas above the fracking area. People doing pipeline/equipment maintenance are required to wear a dosimeter when working around Propane seperation since Radon has a similar boiling point as Propane. Although Radon has a short half life, its daughter isotopes deposit as solids on the equipment. Radon itself is highly carcinogenic. TaylorLeem (talk) 04:18, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to edit the article Chidgk1 (talk) 15:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Am I reading this article wrong, or is it full of biased statements and edits about how natural gas is bad?

E.g. the "safety concerns" section on explosions spends a whole paragraph about how big a risk it is, how governments are banning putting the pipes in walls, etc, and then in the last sentence takes it all back by saying, well, millions of buildings use it and only a tiny number ever blow up, so the risk really is minimal.

Or the section on "Added odor" -- how is that a safety concern?

Or there are paragraphs and paragraphs about Fracking, but nothing about how that makes a safety risk. And the last sentence of that section is utterly irrelevant: "Historically low gas prices have delayed the nuclear renaissance, as well as the development of solar thermal energy." That's not a safety concern about fracking, that's some editor wishing that their preferred technology didn't have to compete with natural gas.

The "Depletion" section seems to be misnamed, but seems to be implying that gas is being depleted. However, it then talks about other things (rates of use varying over time) and never discusses depletion.

There is a large section on the uses of natural gas, which says that north america and europe are major users of natural gas, but doesn't say why (because it was the cheapest, most convenient and least polluting way to produce energy for its users). Saying that would mean that it wasn't bad though, so the statement isn't there.

The section on Power Generation spends all its paragraphs on CO2 production and very little text about why and how natural gas is good for electric power generation (except to conclude without a source, that it is "well suited for a combined use in association with renewable energy sources", without mentioning that it is well suited for generating power WITHOUT the use of renewable energy sources, its primary use in power generation.) Because renewable = good, while nonrenewable = natural gas = bad.

The History section for some reason tries to project the total "recoverable reserves" and then divide that by consumption to come up with an estimate of "how long before all the gas runs out". But what is that projection about possible futures doing in a History section? It's just another way to say "natural gas bad". Also, "economically recoverable proven reserves" is such a misleading concept (as over time technologies for extraction and processing change, and as demand and thus price changes, and as price rises result in new sources being explored and proven) that it has no useful place in a neutral encyclopedia article.

That's just a sampling. Am I off base here, or should there be some serious re-balancing? Gnuish (talk) 12:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gnuish Feel free to go ahead and edit the article. Suggest you do so in lots of small edits with good comments then if anyone disagrees they can revert particular changes or change or discuss on talk page. Also suggest you start with the body text then any disagreements could be discussed and sorted before the lead was changed. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:28, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe you're reading this article wrong. It does indeed have an unwarranted anti-natural-gas bias, with very little acknowledgement of trade offs. In other words, bad ... compared to what? And perhaps that is the right way to re-balance the article; compare natural gas, say, with coal, which is objectively far more polluting and a more significant health risk. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 16:08, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to edit the article Chidgk1 (talk) 15:02, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Natural gas is used as an industrial and domestic fuel. It is used in thermal power station It is used in electricity generation 106.211.236.252 (talk) 13:43, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to edit the article if it does not say that already Chidgk1 (talk) 15:03, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no point in editing because the hard-core "fossils" simply revert edits without discussion. Often times, as in this article, the Discussion page is more useful than the article itself because the "fossils" are discouraged from mindlessly reverting. Henrilebec (talk) 23:05, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The title says it all. 155.4.221.27 (talk) 09:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are no mentions of the problems that can occur, with gas pipes and the such. Such as a fire or explosion, or just inability to use gas powered things, due to a broken pipe. Also any other issues, that would cause damage, stoppage, or the like. 155.4.221.27 (talk) 09:37, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How is it that the largest known lake in our solar system, Kraken Mare, is mostly methane with nitrogen ethane and other trace gasses? What life donated it's bodies on Titan to make a natural gas lake? 2600:100B:B134:F9AC:0:4:3734:F001 (talk) 02:38, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]