Natural gas is believed by many to be a major alternative source of energy. It is a gaseous fossil fuel consisting primarily of methane but including significant quantities of ethane, propane, butane, and pentane—heavier hydrocarbons removed prior to use as a consumer fuel — as well as carbon dioxide, nitrogen, helium and hydrogen sulfide. It is found in oil fields (associated) either dissolved or isolated in natural gas fields (non-associated), and in coal beds (as coalbed methane). It is considered a major alternative source of energy for a variety of reasons: 1. Natural gas burns cleaner than gasoline and coal so can help replace these fuels in the fight against global warming, 2. It is abundant and easily extractable, 3. It is transportable so can be a cleaner source of fuel for cars, and 4. it is already fairly developed with strong supporting infrastructures. Natural gas is opposed primarily on the grounds that, while cleaner than other fossil fuels, natural gas still releases a significant quantity of CO2 when burned. In addition, natural gas is Methane - a significant greenhouse gas - and can be released into the atmosphere when drilling or transporting it in pipes or on ships. Natural gas, therefore, is considered a contributor to global warming in terms of the absolute quantity of greenhouse gases that it releases into the atmosphere. This is considered by some to be unacceptable in the context that 0-emission energy alternatives exist, such as wind, solar, hydro, and possibly nuclear. Much of the debate about natural gas, therefore, surrounds comparing natural gas with the available 0-emissions alternatives. Is it unacceptable to develop natural gas when it contributes to the global warming crisis (albeit by less than other fossil fuels)? Does this mean that we should focus on investing in and developing 0-emission alternatives (which do not contribute to global warming in the process of electricity-generation? Are these alternatives ready to be deployed on a massive scale? Are they close? Are they just as close to wide-scale use as natural gas, meaning that we are at a fork in the road? What choice should we make? Should we choose to make natural gas a major component of 21st century plans to combat global warming??
