Live data from Hacker News

Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

nature.com

61–70 of 97 posts

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What has energy independence actually done for America? We are still fighting wars in the Middle East. For decades people were saying we need to end reliance on foreign oil. Well, we've ended it. What has that gotten us besides underpriced gasoline?

Cheap energy inputs make everything else cheaper.

Financially cheap (in the short term), but environmentally very, very expensive.

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#62

This is so sad. Any ideas on how stuff like this could realistically be fixed? Are there any incentives that could be put in place? What would be the incentive for the people that have that power to make those changes?

Founded rigup.com to try address this issue. Improving the quality of the cement casing is a huge factor, along with hiring competent workers and scheduling inspections.

It all comes down to creating financial incentives. IIRC, Obama's proposed fracking regulation (that most presumed Hilary would run with) called for regular visits of sites. Sadly it never passed.

Once Trump undid the only thing Obama got through, federal land methane restrictions, companies had no incentive to worry anymore. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/12/climate/trump-methane-rul...

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#63
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not saying there are really no bad or incompetent actors.. but it costs the industry $2 billion per year because of these loses. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/21/climate/methane-leaks.htm...

And if they could fix that for $1B/year, they'd do so. Instead, you can find industry groups quoted in that article complaining about the study.

The problem is that, given the greenhouse forcing, those leaks will arguably cost society much more than a few $billion per year. It's just that the gas industry isn't legally responsible for that. And that's why they don't want to stop the leaks.

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#65
post #4

In case you're wondering, burning natural gas does produce ~half the CO2 you would release from burning various types of coal, [0] the dirtiest (yes, much worse than all of the nuclear power accidents combined[1]) of all methods of electricity production. But it still produces CO2! And at the rate at which natural gas is taking over a greater share of the energy production of the world economy, we are still looking a…

In a five year period Methane traps ~100 times more energy than the equivalent quantity of CO2, so not burning Methane because it escapes is far worse than burning it! http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/methane-vs-ca...

The comparative effect between CO2 and methane varies as we vary the timeframe. One thing we do know - reducing methane will have an immediate impact, whereas reducing CO2 will have a lasting impact. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-018-0026-8

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a five year period Methane traps ~100 times more energy than the equivalent quantity of CO2, so not burning Methane because it escapes is far worse than burning it! http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/methane-vs-ca...

The comparative effect between CO2 and methane varies as we vary the timeframe. One thing we do know - reducing methane will have an immediate impact, whereas reducing CO2 will have a lasting impact. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-018-0026-8

Methane breaks down into CO2 and water, so we get the carbon dioxide regardless.

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also much more on methane in particular: https://motls.blogspot.com/search?q=methane

Scott Aaronson's response to Lubos Motl's skepticism is informative: "My position is an incredibly simple one: just like with the link between smoking and cancer, or the lack of a link between vaccines and autism, or any other issue where I lack the expertise to evaluate the evidence myself, I’ll go with what certainly looks like an overwhelming consensus among the scientists who’ve studied the matter carefully. Peri…

https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1720 is probably even better for a HN audience. (Lubos apparently claims that P=NP is equally likely to P!=NP).

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#69
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not saying there are really no bad or incompetent actors.. but it costs the industry $2 billion per year because of these loses. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/21/climate/methane-leaks.htm...

And if they could fix that for $1B/year, they'd do so. Instead, you can find industry groups quoted in that article complaining about the study.

Many companies don't do shit as long as they operate with a profit.

What happens often is that s small player seizes the opportunity and then gets bought.

Maybe there are regulations that keep smaller and / or separate entities from acting in this regard.

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#70

This is so sad. Any ideas on how stuff like this could realistically be fixed? Are there any incentives that could be put in place? What would be the incentive for the people that have that power to make those changes?

Founded rigup.com to try address this issue. Improving the quality of the cement casing is a huge factor, along with hiring competent workers and scheduling inspections. It all comes down to creating financial incentives. IIRC, Obama's proposed fracking regulation (that most presumed Hilary would run with) called for regular visits of sites. Sadly it never passed. Once Trump undid the only thing Obama got through, fe…

> companies had no incentive to worry anymore

I know what you are saying, but I want to add that it's insane: The owners of the companies have to live in this world, as do their decedents. Also, they are not all sociopaths who don't care if people die and suffer.

I think it's a mistake to think they cannot be persuaded otherwise. Perhaps it's the powerful propaganda machine that runs through the WSJ and other business publications, but whatever the cause, it's a problem that I think can be overcome.

Post reply on HN