O&G fugitive methane reductions have been a concern of mine since ~2008, & are critical to any sort of sustainable & responsible future operation of the oil & gas sector, however demand evolves. I just reviewed the🇨🇦updates announced Dec 17, & I have these comments🧵1/11 2/11 Methane is a very strong GHG, 30-80X CO2 depending on the time frame, ~20-30% of total warming to date. O&G isn't the only source, but it's ~40-50% depending on estimates.

I'm long overdue for a thread on the interlinked strategies for industrial decarbonization. Fundamentally, it's not about silver bullets (e.g., demand, electrification, hydrogen, or CCS), but sectorally specific sets of strategies & policies @ColumbiaUEnergy @mclott 1/n

https://twitter.com/ColumbiaUEnergy/status/1591101988301074432

High level Q: Industry facilities tend to last 20+ years. If we don't want to be buying a lot of $$$ CDR to offset industry to hit netzero, then all new facilities have to be ultra-low emissions by the early 2030s. Can we think systematically about policy to do this globally? 2/n

Nice piece on "markers of success" for COP26 by @ClimateChoices. Two things I'd elaborate on: 1) We have stop thinking of "Climate finance" as "charity". Developing countries need it for clean infrastructure, clean electricity build, adaptation etc for a problem We caused 1/n

https://twitter.com/rjcsmith/status/1448777478542135297

Yes, we. 🇨🇦 is probably the single largest cumulative emitter per capita. 2) Because climate finance for investment is not charity, and mostly needs to flow from the private sector, its risk profile needs to fall. We need to use the financial technology we've developed to.. 2/n

🧵To all and sundry, I'm very happy to announce the technical and policy results for netzerosteel.org are live! Starting with a global DB of steel facilities by @GlobalEnergyMon (🙏), we have produced nine separate net-zero scenarios for all steel producing regions 1/n based on their evolving demand in kg per capita ... 2/n

Friday thoughts. There's a concept in behavioural economics (via Jack Knetsch) that goes by several names, but the divergence of willingness to pay from willingness to accept (a loss) is the core. It might be helpful for understanding the persistence of "unburnable resources"

https://twitter.com/kmac/status/1443903452468310016

I originally worked in the Canadian context for about two decades, & watched the minor league oil sands turn into major league producers. Developed in the context of peak oil, the Alberta & CDN govts did everything they could speed it along. Hundreds of years of $$$ oil, jackpot!

As usual, @enviroeconomics raises some good points that provoke more Qs. Ideally, as North Americans, not just 🇨🇦s, what do we ideally want from US climate policy? My musings fall in five sectoral buckets: economy-wide policy, electricity, transport, buildings, & industry 1/n

https://twitter.com/enviroeconomics/status/1349029164024815618

1st, don't expect comprehensive climate policy to pass a 50+1 Senate. What's there is really only licence for sectoral spending policies, to be recovered later.🇨🇦's economy-wide policies will stand counterpoised to that, which means WE will need competitiveness protection 2/n

@ClimateDuncan @DoctorVive Hi all. A fair way to summarize it is there are multiple retrofit & new build pathways to reduce steel, cement, chem & other industry emissions to very low or zero, but they need 5-15yrs intensive development & commercialization, after which they must become the new min standard @ClimateDuncan @DoctorVive After there being practically none prior to 2017, their is lot of literature emerging on this, and if you leave out the silver bullet stuff it's quite consistent on us needing a portfolio of technologies for different situations and resource availabilities.