Methane leakage from the US oil and gas industry is 60% higher than the EPA has estimated, according to a compilation of recent studies coordinated by the Environmental Defense Fund: ft.com/content/2cce79… via @financialtimes
Reactions to this study have split along predictable lines. The API: This shows that methane emissions are low - 2.3% of gas production - and supports role of coal to gas switching to cut CO2 emissions
Earthworks: This shows gas-fired power is no better for the climate than coal, we need to push on to 100% renewables as soon as possible.
The @EnvDefenseFund's position is to triangulate from those opposing positions. Steve Hamburg, it's chief scientist, says: "We have a big problem . . . The good news is that it is an addressable problem, which can be tackled in very cost-effective ways."
One reason why the (net) costs of stopping methane leakage are low is that if you capture the gas, you can sell it. The EDF calculates the lost gas from the US industry is worth $2bn a year at today's prices
The IEA estimates that about half the world's methane leakage could be stopped for zero net cost. The low-hanging fruit is probably largest in emerging economies, but there seem to be some pretty cheap solutions in the US, too
The full study is here: science.sciencemag.org/content/early/… (ENDS)
