Suchergebnisse

Methane is, after carbon dioxide, the most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas. Governments plan to abate methane emissions. A crude set of estimates of reduction costs is included in FUND, an integrated assessment model of climate change. In a cost-benefit analysis, methane emission reduction is found to be instrumental in controlling the optimal rate of climate change. In a cost-effectiveness analysis, methane emission reduction largely replaces carbon dioxide emission reduction. Methane emission reduction reinforces the case for international cooperation in climate policy, but complicates the efficient allocation of emission reduction efforts. Methane emission reduction at the short run does not help to achieve the ultimate objective of the Framework Convention on Climate Change.

A proposed EU regulation on methane emissions must be strengthened, not diluted, to address a planet on fire.

Recently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) took a step-back in regulating the methane released during natural gas extraction. In June 2016, the EPA issued the first federal regulations on methane, estimating methane emissions would decrease by a total of 510,000 short tons in 2025, with a potential net benefit of $160 million. Yet, in October 2018, the EPA released a new proposal that weakened the 2016 methane rules, estimating methane emissions would increase by a total of 380,000 short tons in 2025, with a potential saving of $484 million. This paper explores the EPA's drastic change between 2016 and 2018 by using a multiple lenses approach to shine a light on different aspects of the methane output problem and policy change. The paper concludes by arguing that the EPA needs to strengthen the role and responsibility of state governments to control methane emissions before finalizing the proposed methane rule.

The environmental impact of methane emissions – which come from a wide range of natural and anthropogenic sources – has received growing attention. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas (GHG). Methane emissions that occur across the gas supply chain have long been seen by the industry as an unfortunate, if necessary, part of doing business. The economic cost of this activity was recognised but the cost of reducing emissions often outweighed any benefit. Furthermore, many regulatory regimes included allowances for unaccounted for gas allowed operators to pass on the cost of emissions to consumers. The environmental impact of gas emissions was at best a minor consideration and in most cases an industry blind spot. Global ambient methane levels have been rising and the coinciding growth in global gas production – and the rise of unconventional gas and hydraulic fracturing – led some to conclude that methane emissions from the natural gas industry were primarily responsible. This hypothesis received further support in 2016 when the US EPA published a major upgrade (subsequently partially reversed) in emission estimates from natural gas supply. Furthermore, the gas industry's track record in monitoring, reporting, and controlling methane emissions is arguably patchy. Industry attempts to present a united front have often resulted in obscure debates over data and impact. This has led environmental groups and some government agencies to question the, hitherto largely unchallenged, environmental credentials of natural gas as the "greenest" fossil fuel. In turn this resulted in increased demand for reporting and control requirements and greater industry focus, though initiatives have varied widely around the world. This paper summarises the main issues relating to gas industry methane emissions and examines the various activities, underway and planned, to assess and reduce them. It attempts to take a wide ranging, non-specialist, overview that covers both the technical and scientific perspectives as well as operational and ...

The Environment Agency has set out in one place what it is doing to help reduce methane emissions in England, bringing together all their work in a new Methane Action Plan (2024-26). Mark Ellis-Jones, the national Climate Change and Energy …