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

EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 213 posts

Re: EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

#21

Post by natch »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #4
vkou wrote: post #3

Edit: I stand corrected.

Bernie Sanders supported not only going 100% renewables as quickly as possible, but also banning hydraulic fracturing ("fracking") [1]. Silver lining is Aramco and COVID is doing what American's politicians didn't have the fortitude to do: force the scaling down of the US oil and gas industry and the inherent reduction in fossil demand from reducing commuting and air travel (respectively). I'm unsure how anyone can a…

> due to luck

Not just due to luck. Due to a lot of hard work by a lot of people.

Re: EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

#22

Post by makerofspoons »

Dr. Peter Carter, an IPCC expert reviewer, provides one of the most concise and sobering summaries of the trajectory of our planet as methane and carbon emissions continue to rise: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa13KrOvE2s

It's one of the first things I think about when I read articles like this that demonstrate that not only are the powers that be not taking climate change seriously, they are actively accelerating it for profit.

Re: EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

#23

Post by rtkwe »

spaetzleesser wrote: post #2

It’s very hard to understand why the current administration has such an urge to roll back environmental regulations. I grew up in a time when rivers were red or green depending on what type of leather the factory upstream was processing at the time. The only fish you could see were dead. Breathing in cities was hard. Environmental regulation is a big success story that improved the lives of countless people while com…

Because people helped by something not happening don't put huge amounts of money into Republican politics and companies that have to 'properly' [0] dispose of their toxic byproducts have money to spend.

It's a problem with collective action on a lot of climate problems in particular; the benefits are in the future and dilute while the costs are concentrated and immediate. Because of that there's a LOT of money available to push off imposing those costs and no direct money available to push for imposing them.

[0] Giant air quotes here because the approved disposal method is usually a poorly maintained pond that leeches into the water anyways.

Re: EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

#24

Post by xeromal »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #18
xeromal wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly this whole situation is political but I'd make 2 points. 1. You might be surprised at the election outcome. 2. The headline is based on the article, not what people think it should be.

I can only have my confidence in the U.S. voting public renewed or absolutely shattered this November.

I definitely understand and feel the same way but I also think he's gonna win despite every fuck up he's made along the way.

Re: EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

#25

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

outworlder wrote: post #20
spaetzleesser wrote: post #2

It’s very hard to understand why the current administration has such an urge to roll back environmental regulations. I grew up in a time when rivers were red or green depending on what type of leather the factory upstream was processing at the time. The only fish you could see were dead. Breathing in cities was hard. Environmental regulation is a big success story that improved the lives of countless people while com…

> It’s very hard to understand why the current administration has such an urge to roll back environmental regulations. No, it's very easy. Environmental regulations cost money. Lots of money. It's much more profitable to keep these externalities.

Pretty much. It is annoying, but it is not difficult to understand.

Re: EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

#26

Post by jfengel »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #18
xeromal wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly this whole situation is political but I'd make 2 points. 1. You might be surprised at the election outcome. 2. The headline is based on the article, not what people think it should be.

I can only have my confidence in the U.S. voting public renewed or absolutely shattered this November.

Even the outcome I would prefer isn't going to come anywhere near renewing my confidence. If it happens at all, it will only because a catastrophe made the incumbent's incompetence affect some of his supporters directly -- many of whom will still, in fact, remain supporters.

Even before that, enormous numbers of people were harmed, but they weren't among his supporters. Indeed, for them, the negative outcomes were the desired effect. Even if they lose in the fall, they will continue to prefer to insult, harass, and even defend murder if it's of the people they don't like.

November won't even begin to fix what's wrong. It began long before 2016, and my biggest fear will be that come 2024 they'll elect somebody who is not only hateful, but also competent, and not saddled with a crisis immediately before the election.

Re: EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

#27

Post by nicetryguy »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #11
nicetryguy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

....we had a chance to really fix our country with him. I don't know when another candidate of his honesty, consistency and moral caliber will appear again; if ever. My countrymen baffle me ...I really enjoyed phone banking.

Appreciate your efforts, we have lots of work left to do as a nation. Don't give up, every election cycle the demographics shift even further [1] [2] due to younger cohorts aging into voting rights and older cohorts aging out. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/03/20/a-wider-par... [2] https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2019/11/25/u-s-public-vi...

I am far from giving up, but, i'm also licking my wounds at the moment.

Following politics right now is thoroughly disheartening; it does nothing to help my day to day, nor does it really affect it.

Re: EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

#28

Post by ngngngng »

outworlder wrote: post #20
spaetzleesser wrote: post #2

It’s very hard to understand why the current administration has such an urge to roll back environmental regulations. I grew up in a time when rivers were red or green depending on what type of leather the factory upstream was processing at the time. The only fish you could see were dead. Breathing in cities was hard. Environmental regulation is a big success story that improved the lives of countless people while com…

> It’s very hard to understand why the current administration has such an urge to roll back environmental regulations. No, it's very easy. Environmental regulations cost money. Lots of money. It's much more profitable to keep these externalities.

Where does that money go?

Re: EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

#29

Post by dmurray »

outworlder wrote: post #20
spaetzleesser wrote: post #2

It’s very hard to understand why the current administration has such an urge to roll back environmental regulations. I grew up in a time when rivers were red or green depending on what type of leather the factory upstream was processing at the time. The only fish you could see were dead. Breathing in cities was hard. Environmental regulation is a big success story that improved the lives of countless people while com…

> It’s very hard to understand why the current administration has such an urge to roll back environmental regulations. No, it's very easy. Environmental regulations cost money. Lots of money. It's much more profitable to keep these externalities.

I'd say it goes further than that. With the polarisation of American politics, rolling back environmental regulations is politically popular with one cohort of voters just because it's unpopular with the "other" side.

Repealing regulations (not necessarily environmental ones) was popular enough to be a Trump campaign promise, after all.

Re: EPA to Rescind Methane Regulations for Oil and Gas

#30

Post by busterarm »

natch wrote: post #14

>It’s very hard to understand why As republican former secretary of the interior James Watt put it, “Why worry about the environment when the second coming is at hand?”

That's not even close to the Republican mainstream now though.

The "Christian Right" is a relic that died during the first Dubya administration.

It's nothing more than a boogeyman for progressives now.

Post reply on HN