Op-Ed: Methane Emissions Could Cancel Out Progress On Carbon Dioxide.
According to an op-ed by Mark Buchanan in Bloomberg, “The biggest cause of global warming is all the carbon dioxide we’ve expelled into the atmosphere since the beginning of industrial
times. The greenhouse gas traps heat in the atmosphere, raising temperatures on Earth. Even so, about one-quarter of the warming we’ve had so far is due to a less notorious greenhouse gas: methane, the major component of natural gas. Methane wasn’t much of
a worry 20 years ago, but that’s changed since 2007, as methane emissions have accelerated, spiking in 2014 and again in 2018. Scientists still don’t know exactly what’s going on, and they face an urgent challenge to find out. Methane is a far more potent
greenhouse gas than CO2, even though it only lasts about a decade in the atmosphere, whereas CO2 persists for a couple of centuries. A continued rise in the amount of methane in the air could easily cancel out any near-term progress we make in reducing CO2
emissions. Methane is the low-hanging fruit in the effort to combat planetary warming. This gas has also been in the news for political reasons, as the Donald Trump administration has moved to rescind rules requiring fossil fuel companies to monitor and fix
methane leaks, despite many companies’ opposition. Fossil fuel production also contributes to methane emissions, and some studies have pointed to hydraulic fracturing, especially in the U.S., as the likely cause behind the recent spike in emissions. It’s certainly
suspicious that fracking got underway in a big way around 2007, just as the methane surge began.” [Bloomberg,
3/10/20 (=)]
Environmental Group Ramps Up Complaints Against TCEQ Despite Flaring Intensity Improvements In Permian Basin.
According to The Texan, “A November 2019 report by the New York Times stated, ‘Immense amounts of methane are escaping from oil and gas sites nationwide, worsening global warming,
even as the Trump administration weakens restrictions on offenders.’ The Times visited the Permian Basin — the epicenter of America’s oil and gas boom located partially in West Texas and partially in southeast New Mexico. Taking infrared footage of numerous
Permian Basin facilities, the report insisted methane leakage by oil and gas operations is being disregarded by those companies and the Trump administration. In 2017, the Trump administration delayed the implementation of a rule — established in the closing
weeks of the Obama administration — that would more intensely regulate methane emissions. Environmental groups responded by suing the Trump administration, a challenge from which they emerged victorious in February 2018. But the administration adjusted its
plan, proposing a new rule to accomplish the same general goal this past August. It will likely be approved and implemented this year after a public comment period spanning the latter part of 2019 since the rule was proposed. While methane is considered relatively
non-toxic — as it does not have an OSHA permissible exposure limit — those concerned about it cite its role as a greenhouse gas. Methane is 86 times more potent of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.” [The Texan,
3/10/20 (=)]
BLM Tells Court It's Done Enough To Tackle Climate Impacts.
According to E&E News, “Federal land managers say they have done enough to help curb global greenhouse gas emissions as they fight legal challenges to their analysis of the climate
impacts of oil and gas leasing. The Bureau of Land Management this week asked a federal judge to uphold the agency’s revised climate analysis for 283 parcels of land in Wyoming. BLM supplemented its climate analysis of the leases after Judge Rudolph Contreras
for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia found that the agency had failed to adequately illustrate their direct, indirect and cumulative climate risks (Energywire, March 20, 2019). The ruling has had ripple effects on oil and gas leases across
the country as BLM revises its climate analyses for development of tracts of public lands in other states. The ruling has bolstered calls from conservation groups for BLM to more closely consider the cumulative impacts of its leases across the country. In
a motion for summary judgment in the case, BLM said it has responded to Contreras’ requests but that it has limited authority and responsibility to curb global emissions. One of the approaches for measuring climate impacts the agency rejected was consideration
of a carbon budget. ‘Ultimately, the agency determined that the application of the global carbon budget analysis was not useful, finding that ‘stabilizing global temperature requires [cumulative] CO2 emissions to approach zero,’’ lawyers for the government
wrote.” [E&E News,
3/11/20 (=)]
Analysis: It's 'Oh Frack Yeah' For US Oil And Natural Gas.
According to Jakob Puckett in Real Clear Energy, “Many politicians have taken the extreme position of wanting to ban fracking, claiming that it has done more harm than good to Americans
and the environment. This couldn’t be further from the truth — the environmental and economic effects of the shale oil and gas revolution have been decidedly positive. Banning fracking, then, would be a disastrous policy decision — for many reasons. For starters,
fracking saves Americans significant amounts of money. It has doubled American oil production and increased natural gas production by 60% since 2007, dramatically lowering world prices. This windfall of cheap energy has saved America over $2 trillion in lower
energy costs over the last decade. Households save an average of $2,500 per year (or nearly $700 per person) on lower heating and electric bills, and gasoline prices are nearly $1.30 lower per gallon. The benefits of that are hard to overstate: lower heating
costs save roughly 11,000 lives per year during cold snaps. And despite the political target on its back, fracking has been a major contributor to the U.S. economy. Indeed, four million jobs nationwide are supported by fracking and related industries. And
considering that America is the world’s largest oil and gas producer (and growing), if fracking were banned, the world economy would shudder. Indeed, this would constitute the largest energy disruption in 40 years. As much oil and gas would be removed from
the world market by a major supplier as the 1973 Arab embargo and 1979 Iranian revolution, which doubled to quadrupled world oil prices and led to global recessions.” [Real Clear Energy,
3/10/20 (=)]
Salt Lake City To Building Developers: Go Electric.
According to the Salt Lake Tribune, “Salt Lake City wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to a renewable electricity supply in the next 10 to 20 years. In order
to achieve the first goal and take advantage of clean electricity from the second, the city is encouraging developers to build without natural gas and use all-electric technology for heating and cooling. ‘The building sector, not just in Utah but across the
country, is one of the largest energy-consuming sectors,’ says Peter Nelson, Sustainable Business Program Coordinator for Salt Lake City. After an extensive analysis of the barriers and opportunities to transition to all-electric energy for homes and multi-family
buildings — including converting existing properties — the city plans to focus on new multi-family construction. The economics make the most sense, saving $1,600 per unit, according to the analysis. And the environmental impact is potentially large: 91 percent
of residential permits in the city since 2013 were for apartments, according to a University of Utah study. Salt Lake is one of eight pilot cities working with the Building Electrification Initiative, a national project focused on carbon neutrality and mitigating
climate change. Noting that up to 40 percent of greenhouse gas emissions come from heating buildings, the initiative’s goal is to eliminate their burning of fossil fuels by transitioning from boilers and furnaces to high-efficiency electric air source heat
pumps and heat pump water heaters. Unlike typical heating systems, air source heat pumps don’t create heat but instead transfer it by using a refrigerant that absorbs heat from colder air, according to an initiative by Boulder, Colo., which is another BEI
city.” [Salt Lake Tribune,
3/10/20 (=)]
Trump Considers Relief For Shale Producers During Outbreak.
According to E&E News, “The White House is considering support for U.S. shale producers hit hard by an expanding new coronavirus outbreak and cratering oil prices, one source familiar
with the proposal told E&E News. It’s unclear when or how the idea will be unveiled and what the White House will include, but the source suggested it could take the form of royalty relief. The White House could also offer federal assistance in the form of
low-interest government loans to struggling shale companies whose lines of credit to major financial institutions have been choked off, three sources told The Washington Post today. More details could come to light tomorrow when President Trump meets with
Wall Street executives to discuss the effects of the spreading virus on the U.S. economy. The White House said it does not comment on internal policy discussions. Crude prices yesterday saw the biggest drop in 29 years as fears slammed the world’s economy
and a price war erupted between two major oil-producing nations. Sources have suggested U.S. shale producers could be hard hit, namely in states like Texas, New Mexico and North Dakota. Those producers could be the first affected, as their costs are higher
than in Saudi Arabia and Russia, and they’re more reliant on debt to keep drilling (Energywire, March 10). The idea drew a sharp rebuke on Capitol Hill. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said offering tax breaks to the ‘special interests’ will
do little to stop the spread of the disease.” [E&E News,
3/10/20 (=)]
Chad Ellwood
Senior Research Associate
Climate Action Campaign
202.448.2877 ext. 119