It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump admin. proposes rollback of methane rules to save industry $484 million

page: 1
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 08:42 AM
link   
arstechnica.com...


The Trump administration has been working to rollback rules...that would limit how much methane gas could be vented to the atmosphere at oil- and gas-drilling and processing operations. In a press release today, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it is proposing to relax...rules, saving the industry $484 million in avoided energy costs.

But the EPA is expected to justify its rules with analysis. That analysis (PDF) suggests that this regulatory rollback will also come with costs in the form of 308,000 short tons of methane emitted between 2019 and 2025. For context, the Aliso Canyon gas leak three years ago represented the largest accidental release of methane in US history, and over the four months that workers struggled to plug that well, 107,000 short tons of methane are estimated to have been released.

That is a serious amount of methane with serious climate consequences in the short-run. Methane is many times more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas, though it decomposes in the atmosphere more quickly. Carbon dioxide sticks around in the atmosphere for a longer time, but each individual molecule of CO2 has less of a warming effect than a molecule of methane.

The EPA's own analysis also says than an additional 100,000 short tons of volatile organic compounds and 3,800 short tons of hazardous air pollutants would also be emitted, compared to keeping the existing rules in place.

That is a serious amount of methane with serious climate consequences in the short-run. Methane is many times more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas, though it decomposes in the atmosphere more quickly. Carbon dioxide sticks around in the atmosphere for a longer time, but each individual molecule of CO2 has less of a warming effect than a molecule of methane.

The EPA's current proposed action would (PDF) not only reduce the frequency with which the oil and gas industry would have to monitor for methane leaks, it would also relax requirements for companies to have a professional engineer certify that methane emissions regulations had been met. In addition, the EPA's fact sheet suggests that the agency is considering extending the time a company has to complete an initial emissions survey after a well is placed.


So the Environmental Protection Agency is removing rules that protect the environment so gas companies, who are already subsidized by the federal government at about $20 billion/y can save $484,000,000 while causing more damage over 5 years than the worst gas leak in US history.

Not to mention the 100,000 tons of volatile organics 3800 tons of hazardous air pollutants.

This also means people working on wells or communities around wells will be exposed to higher levels of pollutants. Living near natural gas wells have already been found to have negative health effects on the people in the communities around them.

ehp.niehs.nih.gov...

But I guess giving heavily subsidized corporations even more leeway to # the world over has been pretty much par the course for the American government the past couple years. Though with most of the government agencies being ran by people either paid off by corporations or just ya know corporate ceos it kind of makes sense.
edit on 13/9/2018 by dug88 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: dug88

Hey man.
Give him a pass.

Some people bring home an extra k a year.

Who cares if we have a planet for future generations



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: dug88

The irony of this, is that in the last week, I have had to argue against the idea that lefties are by definition short term thinkers.

Well, the right wing have all the three branches of the US government in their fist, and yet this is a STUNNING example of short term thinking, with long term, damaging repercussions.

It is a constant source of amusement, how an objective analysis shows that when the left think something is too short term, and damaging in the long run, this is proven beyond any doubt, scientifically, evidenced and backed up to the hilt, and every time the right warn of something being short term effective, but being long term damaging, it gets proven to be absolute nonsense.

The right: Climate change is a lie!

The left: Oh really? Here is a heap of scientific data that you aren't qualified to read, but proves that you are dead wrong and that we need to get this fixed yesterday, or there will literally be no tomorrow.

The right: Thats Fake News, and so what if it gets a little warmer! I hate Boston weather anyway!

The left: Oh for crying out loud... Look, its not as simple as that.

The right: No, you look! You got your Gay marriage, you got your civil rights stuff done. Its our turn, and we want money, lots of money, all of it!

The left: But if you do this crap, in a few decades there will be no where for you to spend that money. We will all die as a result of these policies you are enacting, and you don't seem to care!

The right: I don't believe you.

The left: Believe it or not, its still going to happen. Tell me, if you didn't believe in gravity, would it stop effecting you?

This is literally what it feels like to watch this nonsense go on.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 08:59 AM
link   
He's negotiating and seeing who's head will explode. China tariffs are on the table again. Good fisherman keeps throwing the line out till he catches what he wants!!!





posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:01 AM
link   
He can do what he will. It won't affect my extreme methane output.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: mikell
He's negotiating and seeing who's head will explode. China tariffs are on the table again. Good fisherman keeps throwing the line out till he catches what he wants!!!




Of course he is.

8d and all



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: dug88

Methane is a very serious green house gas, much worse than carbon.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

What is is interesting is that the right does all these horrible things in search of a quick turn-around to make money, but the rich folks in the US are mostly liberal.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: dug88

Get the world to force China to reduce emissions so the rest of the world can do it as well without being unable to compete.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: TinySickTears

China's emissions are double the US emissions.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: TinySickTears

China's emissions are double the US emissions.


Source?

Last I heard they were roughly the same, with china leading somewhat. Per capita, however, the US citizen leads by far.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: JasonBillung

Thats because most rich people are also smart people. Not blue collar labor boys who could give two #s about the world so long as their paycheck gets a bump.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: JasonBillung

If you think you can show me a lefty who:

1) Wants fossil fuels to remain a vital part of the economy or the energy supply line for another hundred years

2) Prefers their own profit to the health and safety of other people

3) Sells arms and ammunition to all parties in a dispute, to ramp up business

4) Doesn't care who dies as long as they keep making money

... then I will show you a liar. Either they are lying about their affiliations, or you would have to lie to yourself, to convince yourself that they are lefties at all.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: dug88

Get the world to force China to reduce emissions so the rest of the world can do it as well without being unable to compete.


That is actually, a great idea. But I doubt that is what is happening here, China could give a rats ass about the worlds opinion on pretty much everything.

If I am proven wrong Ill admit a win for the globe with this one, but not holding my breath.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Why do these threads and linked articles never give any numbers for comparison?

308k short tons of methane over a 6 year period.

Let's round that to 52k short tons per year.

Is that alot?

Cows in 2011 put 119 million tons of methane In the atmosphere by farting...

www.popsci.com...

That's millions for cows vs thousands for gas producers.

Add in all the other methane emissions in American industries and this is barely a drop.


None of it's good but let's at least talk about it with a little perspective....

But I guess that's asking to much.

Funk trump!



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: JasonBillung

China is greater than US and Europe combined.

www.nytimes.com...

And their emissions are going up.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

The last I looked the only way to limit cow's methane output is to put them on the BBQ.
Silly analogy. Or are you advocating for less beef in our market?



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: dug88

I was hoping to be the first to make a fart joke but NO. Thanks guys


As a caring human we should be concerned about this. But let’s be honest here, we will all be dead before MAD MAX becomes reality.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Lightdhype

I think it is. It's about American competitiveness and when some countries are rewarded for polluting and others punished then those who are punished can't compete. Global markets don't work when everyone has different rules.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: JasonBillung

China is greater than US and Europe combined.

www.nytimes.com...

And their emissions are going up.


And? What can anyone do about their emissions? Or is just an excuse to allow the environment to deteriorate at higher levels?



new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join