Multisatellite data depicts a record-breaking methane leak from a well blowout

Post by dylan604 » Sat, Jul 20, 2024, 3:54 AM UTC

skybrian wrote: post #79

james_david wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Massachusetts, Lost and Unaccounted for Gas (LAUG) is estimated per mile of pipe, rather than evaluated by regulators or even industry. It is a simple multiplication problem with little bearing on reality. Consumers bear the cost of LAUG while the utilities are guaranteed a 10% profit on their infrastructure expenses. This, along with subsidies for leak prone pipe replacement, leads to needless investment in outmo…

Meanwhile in California, PG&E underfunded maintenance, perhaps because regulators squeezed too hard? Eventually we had things like the San Bruno gas explosion and wildfires so bad that PG&E went bankrupt. Finding the optimal amount of regulation seems difficult. It seems like too blunt an instrument. Incentives are no substitute for technical people who want to do what's right.

Post by thfuran » Sat, Jul 20, 2024, 4:18 AM UTC

thinkcontext wrote: post #82

Retric wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those 100 year timescale numbers are misleading as the impact is so front loaded. They only make sense when talking about an emissions that are constant through long timescales.

I've heard people argue that its both too aggressive and too conservative. I'm in the too conservative camp, we need to figure things out sooner than 100 years and the risk of a feedback loop is high with methane. Its fine to assert that a single number doesn't capture the nuances of the situation. But we have to keep in mind that 1) the heat trapped by the methane stays trapped even after it has decayed 2) methane c…

Post by downrightmike » Sat, Jul 20, 2024, 4:21 AM UTC

h0l0cube wrote: post #59

486sx33 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Irresponsibly growing your population doesn’t allow you more emissions, that’s crap!

China’s population has reached a plateau https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/population-and-demograp...

Post by throwaway290 » Sat, Jul 20, 2024, 4:51 AM UTC

OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #21

anonym29 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Short of China and India voluntarily holding themselves to the same standards as Western Europe and the US for free, we are not going to avoid catastrophic global warming. The good news is, while we may not be able to prevent climate change, we are not powerless against it. The Dutch know how to win the fight against sea level rise. Middle Eastern architecture knows how to keep people cool even with >50°C air tempera…

> Short of China and India voluntarily holding themselves to the same standards as Western Europe and the US China and India emit significantly less CO2 per capita than Western Europe and the US [0] - and that's ignoring the fact they do all of our manufacturing. [0] https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-pe...

Post by h0l0cube » Sat, Jul 20, 2024, 5:26 AM UTC

card_zero wrote: post #67

h0l0cube wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in real terms I’m not sure how better to dice up emissions then by consumption per person, and by that measure the US is clearly emitting the most https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-per-capit... Conversely China is doing the most about emissions > China commissioned as much solar PV as the entire world did in 2022, while its wind additions also grew by 66% year-on-year. https://www.iea.org/reports/r…

It's great if China is genuinely going renewable. I read about this often. But I also read that they're the biggest producers of coal (confusingly both the biggest importers and exporters, and consumers). Still, maybe that's being phased out. But why do you want to "slice up" emissions at all, if you're interested in reducing them? The problem is a big load of gas. So identify the biggest emitters (in total volume )…