Interior to replace Obama rule on methane emissions

[Stephen + 67]

The Interior Department is replacing an Obama-era regulation aimed at restricting harmful methane emissions from oil and gas production on federal lands. A rule being published in the Federal Register this week will replace the 2016 rule with requirements similar to those in force before the Obama administration changed the regulation.

[Meanwhile + 49]

Meanwhile, the oil and gas industry co-wrote the rules that the methane rules were based on, in Colorado.

[JohnAtronis + 78]

5 minutes ago, Stephen said:

The Interior Department is replacing an Obama-era regulation aimed at restricting harmful methane emissions from oil and gas production on federal lands. A rule being published in the Federal Register this week will replace the 2016 rule with requirements similar to those in force before the Obama administration changed the regulation.

I'm all for this. No one cares about methane gas. We have more important issues to solve 

[李伟王芳 + 77]

Reasoning for this dumb decision is that will allow job growth in rural America  And rural America, their voters, actually believe in it

[Stephen + 67]

Well, since 2016 Republicans and the oil and gas industry have complained since the 2016 venting and flaring rule was put in place that it is unnecessarily expensive. 

[JohnAtronis + 78]

Can anyone explain to me, the claim that methane is a 'powerful greenhouse gas.'

The IR spectrum suggests that it is a relatively weak greenhouse gas.

http://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C74828&Type=IR-SPEC&Index=1

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2012GL051542/full

[李伟王芳 + 77]

3 minutes ago, JohnAtronis said:

Can anyone explain to me, the claim that methane is a 'powerful greenhouse gas.'

The IR spectrum suggests that it is a relatively weak greenhouse gas.

http://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C74828&Type=IR-SPEC&Index=1

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2012GL051542/full

Are you disputing the wording, disputing the impact or you are just ignorant?

[Joanna + 68]

or just blame the cows

[WaytoPeace + 62]

Here’s a good explanation:  

Here’s the kicker: methane, the gas produced extensively by the livestock industry worldwide, traps up to 100 times more heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide within a 5 year period, and 72 times more within a 20 year period. The good news is that methane also leaves the atmosphere within a decade. This makes for a short-lived, but intense climate changer.

So methane warms the planet rapidly, but it dissipates from the atmosphere more quickly than carbon dioxide. According the EPA, the GWP of methane is 21, which indicates its effect over a 100 year period. A 2009 report published by The World Watch Institute stressed that the more relevant GWP figure is 72, since it’s within the next 20 years that we desperately need to act to stop climate change before a domino effect is initiated and our imbalanced bio-systems spiral out of livable conditions.

[Addy + 14]

2 hours ago, WaytoPeace said:

Here’s a good explanation:  

Here’s the kicker: methane, the gas produced extensively by the livestock industry worldwide, traps up to 100 times more heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide within a 5 year period, and 72 times more within a 20 year period. The good news is that methane also leaves the atmosphere within a decade. This makes for a short-lived, but intense climate changer.

So methane warms the planet rapidly, but it dissipates from the atmosphere more quickly than carbon dioxide. According the EPA, the GWP of methane is 21, which indicates its effect over a 100 year period. A 2009 report published by The World Watch Institute stressed that the more relevant GWP figure is 72, since it’s within the next 20 years that we desperately need to act to stop climate change before a domino effect is initiated and our imbalanced bio-systems spiral out of livable conditions.

awesome info. Thanks!