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

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

pubs.acs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 244 posts

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

#201

Post by katbyte »

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.

Thank you for pointing out why it should be a public utility that does the right thing rather then a private company who was willing to burn the state down for profit.

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

#202

Post by thinkcontext »

Lerc wrote: post #138
thinkcontext wrote: post #31

Better satellites and other aerial survey data has determined that oil and gas related methane emissions are far, far higher than industry reports. Everywhere independent researchers look along the production, transmission, distribution and end use pipeline they find more leakage than has been assumed because industry has provided the numbers the assumptions are based on for years. Along some particularly leaky produ…

Wouldn't that mean that the impact of the methane per unit is less if the measured outcomes were assuming much lower levels. Presumably that would be good news if you could reduce the emissions to the level they thought they were.

No. The current inventory of methane sources even with these upwards estimates for industry are unable to account for what is observed in the atmosphere. This is a big topic of current research.

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

#203

Post by sdenton4 »

gruez wrote: post #93
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…

>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 Isn't both ends of a pipe metered? Even if not every pope is metered, at the very least there should be metering at the point of bulk purchase (eg. from a LNG ship) to the end user (gas meter at a home). How har…

For far too long we have put up with unmetered popes. Lemme give you 95 reasons why all popes should be metered...

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

#204

Post by closewith »

idiotsecant wrote: post #192
closewith wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Measurement error in gas networks can be 15% of volume, so not precise enough for this work.

When accurate metering is called for we have the tech to do it just fine to far less than <1% error. This is a classic case where regulation is required. Rational capitalist enterprise is not going to fix this on their own. They don't currently have the right incentives.

To 1% volume, like rotary meters, but not 1% mass. At least not at reasonable cost.

But you are right that regulation is the answer, although personally I think direct leak detection is more realistic than measuring gas flows accurately in a system that's already built around low accuracy metering.

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

#205

Post by bagels »

forgetfreeman wrote: post #125
bagels wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Viable? Effective at reducing emissions, but is stopping all industrial output viable?

Depends on your appetite for making the money sad.

I have no idea about how to measure the happiness of money.

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

#206

Post by whall6 »

closewith wrote: post #139
gruez wrote: post #93

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 Isn't both ends of a pipe metered? Even if not every pope is metered, at the very least there should be metering at the point of bulk purchase (eg. from a LNG ship) to the end user (gas meter at a home). How har…

Measurement error in gas networks can be 15% of volume, so not precise enough for this work.

Source?

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

#208

Post by consp »

czbond wrote: post #191

Let's say I have free time on my hands. How could I maximally remove methane from the atmosphere?

Eat a cow, do not replace it, and wait for it to escape the atmosphere or decompose naturally. And lighting a methane leak on fire can also help.

(sarcasm tag)

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

#209

Post by graeme »

czbond wrote: post #194
graeme wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2023 is 37.4, which is a fair increase on 2019. More importantly the chart that matters is total CO2 in atmosphere. You can't even see 2020 on here. That was a one off 5% decrease. Imagine if you had $1,000,0000 in your bank account and were spending $100,000 per year, except one year you spent $95,000. That's 2020. This methane news is on top of CO2 as it has its own added impact. Proper optimism that we can do it f…

Interesting - thanks for the CO2 concentration link. I am curious what prior to 2019 looked like (eg: if it was a comparable size, yet dipped in 2019-2021) and is back to normal.

Have a look at the right hand chart. That shows the increase from 1960 until now. You couldn't spot 2020 by eyeballing the chart.

2020 was a 5% dip in the pace of the increase. It's like someone gained ten pounds in 2019, 9.5 pounds in 2020, and 10 pounds in 2021. CO2 emissions are analogous to a total gain, so a 5% one off cut isn't very meaningful.

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

#210

Post by klyrs »

HPsquared wrote: post #159
FeepingCreature wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Probably one of the only short term options between now and 2100 will be solar radiation management -- a largely untested tech that is surely a terrible outcome. Maybe it's time to put a billion or two into testing all these untested techs then.

That's what I find so baffling. Why aren't we putting serious resources into geoengineering, adaptation and mitigation? It's so underfunded in comparison to what we're spending in a futile attempt at emission reduction.

> Why aren't we putting serious resources into geoengineering, adaptation and mitigation?

Are you running for president of the US? What do you think would happen to either candidate if they made this central their platform in today's political environment?

Spoiler: rich old people will not suffer, if anything, they'll just stop moving to Florida and Arizona.

Post reply on HN