Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 97 posts

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#71

Post by jstanley »

avip wrote: post #14

To anyone reading "“tremendous opportunity” to reduce methane emissions by developing systems to quickly detect malfunctions at oil and gas facilities" and running to the garage to connect an RPI to an off-the-shelf 5$ sensor and submit her YC2019 application: The tech is there. It's been there for years. Everything is in place, this is a political/emission tax/EPA/incentive issue per-se.

If the technology is demonstrably easy to make, and there is a clear need for it, and yet it's still not in wide use, then I would say there certainly is a "tremendous opportunity". The fact that some people have failed to take advantage of the opportunity doesn't mean other people shouldn't try.

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#73

Post by zeth___ »

jstanley wrote: post #71
avip wrote: post #14

To anyone reading "“tremendous opportunity” to reduce methane emissions by developing systems to quickly detect malfunctions at oil and gas facilities" and running to the garage to connect an RPI to an off-the-shelf 5$ sensor and submit her YC2019 application: The tech is there. It's been there for years. Everything is in place, this is a political/emission tax/EPA/incentive issue per-se.

If the technology is demonstrably easy to make, and there is a clear need for it, and yet it's still not in wide use, then I would say there certainly is a "tremendous opportunity". The fact that some people have failed to take advantage of the opportunity doesn't mean other people shouldn't try.

This is an issue about regulations.

You will not see regulations against the fossil fuel industry under a republican president, house and senate.

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#74

Post by gonvaled »

craftyguy wrote: post #61
pretendscholar wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cheap energy inputs make everything else cheaper.

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

Don't worry, the rest of the world carries the cost - more so now that the US is out of Paris.

Then the US likes to point out how "unfairly" they are being treated on trade ...

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#75

Post by gonvaled »

natch wrote: post #45
daxorid wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fracking and horizontal drilling are the only things that have kept us out of a global energy crisis. Without their application to tight oil and gas fields, the world would be firmly on the downslope of the global Hubbert peak right now. Ban it at your peril.

If we had invested the Iraq war money into solar infrastructure including batteries in the grid, we would be ahead of the game and peak oil would be moot.

And the EU would not be dealing with a migration crisis.

While the US refuses to take Sirian migrants.

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#76

Post by adrianN »

pretendscholar wrote: post #56
robocat wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The global "energy" crisis is only an oil crisis. I don't see much crisis going on with solar, efficiency improvements, or even coal and gas...

An oil crisis is an energy crisis. Half the energy used in the US comes from either Petroleum or Natural Gas. Look up how much of it is solar. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/

Maybe those fractions would be very different if oil and gas were more expensive.

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#77

Post by hcknwscommenter »

scarmig wrote: post #66
lancewiggs wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There are many embedded assumptions in your statement that do not hold up to scrutiny. Methane "breaks down" to CO2 and water? This is difficult to parse. I do not think that methane generally breaks down to much of anything at standard temperature and pressure. Do you mean the combustion of methane produces CO2 and water? The latter is true, but OP's point is that this combustion produces A LOT less CO2 as compared to the equivalent (in BTUs) amount of coal.

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#78

Post by hcknwscommenter »

wcoenen wrote: post #44
mrfusion wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it also doesn’t hang around for that long. Maybe better in the long term to release it than burn it?

For most of the ways methane breaks down, it gets converted to CO2 anyway[1]. So it's better to break it down to CO2 immediately to avoid the stronger greenhouse effect of methane. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane#Natural_si...

Your link suggests your assertion "For most of the ways methane breaks down, it gets converted to CO2 anyway" is just plain incorrect. In the atmosphere, methane becomes -CH3 (- used for dot because I don't know how to do that), the free radical eventually forms formaldehyde. Methanotropic soil bacteria can break down methane to CO2, but there is nothing to support your assertion that most of the ways methane breaks down [make] CO2.

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#79

Post by pretendscholar »

adrianN wrote: post #76
pretendscholar wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An oil crisis is an energy crisis. Half the energy used in the US comes from either Petroleum or Natural Gas. Look up how much of it is solar. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/

Maybe those fractions would be very different if oil and gas were more expensive.

Oil and Natural Gas are very difficult to replace. Look at the German Energiewende program.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energiewende_in_Germany

Re: Methane leaks from US gas fields dwarf government estimates

#80

Post by arnoooooo »

hcknwscommenter wrote: post #77
scarmig wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

There are many embedded assumptions in your statement that do not hold up to scrutiny. Methane "breaks down" to CO2 and water? This is difficult to parse. I do not think that methane generally breaks down to much of anything at standard temperature and pressure. Do you mean the combustion of methane produces CO2 and water? The latter is true, but OP's point is that this combustion produces A LOT less CO2 as compared…

According to Wikipedia, in the troposphere and stratosphere, Methane reacts with hydroxyl radicals to give CO2 and H2O.
Post reply on HN