Trump's Methane Rollback That Big Oil Doesn't Want

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

Noting that this article comes from NPR, I'm not sure whether the MSM is making a political statement (I am sure that is at least part of their spin), whether Trump's action really angers the oil industry as they say, or if the opposite is true and Trump is doing the industry a solid.  Any of you guys on the inside want to let us know your thoughts?  Also, I thought cows were supposed to be the largest source of methane.  Which is it?

Trump's Methane Rollback That Big Oil Doesn't Want

(Excerpt)

Despite opposition from the oil and gas industry it aims to help, the Trump administration is rolling back an Obama-era rule designed to reduce climate-warming methane emissions.

Methane is the main ingredient in natural gas. But when it's released before it burns, say from a leaky valve at a drilling site, it's far more potent than carbon dioxide. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the oil and gas industry is the largest source of methane emissions in the United States.

The Trump administration rule would eliminate a 2016 requirement that oil and gas companies monitor and limit methane leaks from wells, compressor stations and other operations.

[Blackbag99 + 20]

It is more potent, but it has a much shorter lifespan. So really has a much lower effect.

But the question is why an energy miner doesn't care about loss of energy, or care about pollution when it is essentially what he is looking to mine. Fracking is just farked

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,540]

14 minutes ago, Blackbag99 said:

It is more potent, but it has a much shorter lifespan. So really has a much lower effect.

But the question is why an energy miner doesn't care about loss of energy, or care about pollution when it is essentially what he is looking to mine. Fracking is just farked

9.1 yrs to be exact...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_methane#:~:text=Methane as a greenhouse gas,-Methane in the&text=Methane has a large effect,lifetime of over 100 years.

[Otis11 + 551]

My point of view @Dan Warnick, it's the different sectors having different reactions... midstream and downstream want this repealed as it's a major cost of compliance to them... much larger than the financial loss of the gas... Us in upstream? At least the groups I work with have no issue complying, most of our infrastructure is relatively new so low leaks... and in West Texas much is above ground so easy to identify and fix. We're much more worried about the bad press... hence the reluctance to repeal.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

On 8/14/2020 at 10:56 AM, Dan Warnick said:

whether Trump's action really angers the oil industry as they say, or if the opposite is true and Trump is doing the industry a solid.  Any of you guys on the inside want to let us know your thoughts? 

Generally speaking, taking a bit of a helicopter view, I believe that Trump are not helping. Historically,  regulations have helped pushed the industry to greater efficiency - a good example is Norway which despite a SUPER high cost base is still competetive. 

This type of deregulation has a tendency to hurt more in the medium to longterm than it benefits here and now; it is a bit like peeing in your pants - it warms now, but after a while it gets cold.