Thread by @BlairKing_ca

Time for a thread on the new "The New Gas Boom" report I have seen on virtually every media platfrom from @GlobalBC to @CBCNews

The interviews I see about this report all repeat a "factoid" about #bclng that needs to be addressed #bcpoli #cdnpoli @lngcanada @nbennett_biv

The authors of the report (an NGO that opposes LNG by the way) claim that #BCLNG is "worse than coal" becasue of fugitive emissions. This claim is simply not true and is an example of depending on one narrative-friendly study to make your argument #bcpoli #cdnpoli 2/

In this case the authors rely on a single study in Science by Alvarez et al science.sciencemag.org/content/361/63… that calculated that 2.3% of US production of LNG was lost in the form of fugitive emissions which wipes out the savings in using LNG for power #bcpoli #cdnpoli 3/

This argument is wrong on a number of fronts. The first being that the 2.3% number only erases the difference if you compare the burning of coal in the newest coal plants in China, this is not what is expected to be replaced by #bclng achemistinlangley.net/2019/01/10/why… #bcpoli #cdnpoli 4/

But more importantly, the number is wrong because it is simply not applicable to the Canadian context. The Alvarez paper relies on top-down surveys (airplane surveys) in selected US gas fields and extrapolates to the US (and Canada) #bcpoli #cdnpoli 5/

Geology and regulations matter. #BCLNG is deeper, with newer infrastructure, more sour gas and different regulatory standards than the fields being considered. All fours of these factors matter in this debate #bcpoli #cdnpoli 6/

Age of infrastructure and depth matter a lot. Older wells leak far more than newer fields and shallow field leak more than deeper fields. Moreover since much of our gas is sour (i.e. deadly) leaks are far more relevant in BC #bcpoli #cdnpoli 6/

We also have a stricter regulatory structures which essentially get rid of flaring, requires green completions and encourages the use of electricity in on-site equipment. All of which significantly reduce our fugitive emissions #bcpoli #cdnpoli 7/

Moreover, as I noted the Alvarez paper relies on airplane surveys to measure fugitive emissions. These types of surveys have well-understood issues that I address in detail in this blog post achemistinlangley.net/2019/01/28/new… #bcpoli #cdnpoli 8/

There are two that really matter. The first is detailed here agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/20… which differentiates between different sources of methane and discovers that top-down studies blame natural gas for methane from other sources in the regions studied by Alvarez #bcpoli #cdnpoli 9

The second is detailed here pnas.org/content/115/46… it points out that the top-down studies are restricted in time because they consist of airplane surveys and those surveys can only be done is specific weather conditions in certain parts of the year #bcpoli #cdnpoli 10/

Those survey times correlate exactly with the only weather conditions that allow for major work on facilities. This explains why Alvarez found so many large-emitters, because they were going by when necessary repairs were being done #bcpoli #cdnpoli 11/

Essentially what Alvarez did was the equivalent of doing road-use surveys in the middle of the weekday rush hour and then extrapolating those numbers for the entire year 24 hrs/day 365 days/yr. If you took numbers at 7:45 am on Highway 1 would that make sense? #bcpoli #cdnpoli 12

So when the anti-NGO scientists use the numbers from Alvarez to extrapolate to #BCLNG what they are doing is comparing apples and oranges. It is not relevant to our conditions/experience. Unfortunately no one appears to challenge them on their biased narrative #bcpoli #cdnpoli 13