'This is a really big deal': Canada natural gas emissions far worse than feared

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
'This is a really big deal': Canada natural gas emissions far worse than feared

Alberta’s oil and gas industry – Canada’s largest producer of fossil fuel resources – could be emitting 25 to 50% more methane than previously believed, new research has suggested.

The pioneering peer reviewed study, published in Environmental Science & Technology on Tuesday, used airplane surveys to measure methane emissions from oil and gas infrastructure in two regions in Alberta. The results were then compared with industry-reported emissions and estimates of unreported sources of the powerful greenhouse gas, which warm the planet more than 20 times as much as similar volumes of carbon dioxide.

“Our first reaction was ‘Oh my goodness, this is a really big deal,” said Matthew Johnson, a professor at Carleton University in Ottawa and one of the study’s authors. “If we thought it was bad, it’s worse.”

Carried out last autumn, the survey measured the airborne emissions of thousands of oil and gas wells in the regions. Researchers also tracked the amount of ethane to ensure that methane emissions from cattle would not end up in their results.

In one region dominated by heavy oil wells, researchers found that the type of heavy oil recovery used released 3.6 times more methane than previously believed. The technique is used in several other sites across the province, suggesting emissions from these areas are also underestimated.

In the second region, home to a mix of gas and light oil wells, researchers found results that were roughly equal to those reported by industry and unreported sources. However, they found that only 6% of methane emissions in this region were from industry-reported sources, with the remaining emissions, known as fugitive emissions, from unreported sources such as unintentional equipment leaks.

The finding could have major implications as Alberta and Ottawa strive to reduce methane emissions by 45% from 2012 levels by 2025, said Johnson. “It shows how much isn’t captured in current reporting requirements, and therein is a challenge and an opportunity all wrapped in one.”

The study then sought to conservatively extrapolate the findings, correcting only for sites that are home to heavy oil. What they found was in Alberta – home to 68% of Canada’s natural gas production, 47% of its light crude oil production as well as 80% of all crude oil and equivalents – total emissions were likely 25 to 50% higher than previous government estimates. The findings excluded mined oil sands, which are believed to be responsible for about 11% of methane emissions.

Canadian advocacy group Environmental Defence described the findings as alarming. “The methane gas currently being wasted would supply almost all the natural gas needs of Alberta, and is worth $530m per year,” Dale Marshall of the organisation said in a statement. “This represents an economic cost for governments in the form of lost royalties and taxes, and for industry in terms of revenue.”

Marshall pointed to the readily available solutions for controlling leaks and intentional releases of methane gas, portraying them as some of lowest cost strategies available to reduce carbon emissions.

Researchers said they have already begun presenting their findings to various levels of government, depicting it as a chance for industry and regulators to more effectively tackle emissions of methane – a gas far more potent than CO2 but which persists for less time in the atmosphere.

“When you take methane emissions and convert them to CO2 emissions so you can compare to cars, for Alberta, the total methane we’re talking about on a 100-year scale is 8 to 9.7 million vehicles. If we do it on a 20-year timescale, we’re talking maybe 28 to 33 million vehicles,” said Johnson. “This is a real opportunity.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...erta-oil-and-gas-wells-are-worse-than-thought
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,198
113
KILL the country's economy as maurice strong wanted yeah!
SCREW THE BABIES! ENSLAVE THE PEOPLE!!!

This is why the liebarrels invented a liebarrel arts degree in place of an education.
 

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
11,619
6,262
113
Olympus Mons
Huh, did Carleton U receive a grant from the Tides Foundation or something? I'm really hating the smear campaign against Canadian oil brought on by the Russians, the Saudis and the Tides Foundation. Are Venezuela's oil sands somehow GHG-free? How about the Obama approved oil sands project in Utah? What about the thick, tar-like oil found all over California? The only difference between that and ours is ours is locked up in sand.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
You are a fart Walnut.
Just because it's a leak the product should be paid for as far as Provincial royalties go. Seems like the places that own the leaky parts should pay the bill.
 

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
'This is a really big deal': Canada natural gas emissions far worse than feared

Alberta’s oil and gas industry – Canada’s largest producer of fossil fuel resources – could be emitting 25 to 50% more methane than previously believed, new research has suggested.

The pioneering peer reviewed study, published in Environmental Science & Technology on Tuesday, used airplane surveys to measure methane emissions from oil and gas infrastructure in two regions in Alberta. The results were then compared with industry-reported emissions and estimates of unreported sources of the powerful greenhouse gas, which warm the planet more than 20 times as much as similar volumes of carbon dioxide.

“Our first reaction was ‘Oh my goodness, this is a really big deal,” said Matthew Johnson, a professor at Carleton University in Ottawa and one of the study’s authors. “If we thought it was bad, it’s worse.”

Carried out last autumn, the survey measured the airborne emissions of thousands of oil and gas wells in the regions. Researchers also tracked the amount of ethane to ensure that methane emissions from cattle would not end up in their results.

In one region dominated by heavy oil wells, researchers found that the type of heavy oil recovery used released 3.6 times more methane than previously believed. The technique is used in several other sites across the province, suggesting emissions from these areas are also underestimated.

In the second region, home to a mix of gas and light oil wells, researchers found results that were roughly equal to those reported by industry and unreported sources. However, they found that only 6% of methane emissions in this region were from industry-reported sources, with the remaining emissions, known as fugitive emissions, from unreported sources such as unintentional equipment leaks.

The finding could have major implications as Alberta and Ottawa strive to reduce methane emissions by 45% from 2012 levels by 2025, said Johnson. “It shows how much isn’t captured in current reporting requirements, and therein is a challenge and an opportunity all wrapped in one.”

The study then sought to conservatively extrapolate the findings, correcting only for sites that are home to heavy oil. What they found was in Alberta – home to 68% of Canada’s natural gas production, 47% of its light crude oil production as well as 80% of all crude oil and equivalents – total emissions were likely 25 to 50% higher than previous government estimates. The findings excluded mined oil sands, which are believed to be responsible for about 11% of methane emissions.

Canadian advocacy group Environmental Defence described the findings as alarming. “The methane gas currently being wasted would supply almost all the natural gas needs of Alberta, and is worth $530m per year,” Dale Marshall of the organisation said in a statement. “This represents an economic cost for governments in the form of lost royalties and taxes, and for industry in terms of revenue.”

Marshall pointed to the readily available solutions for controlling leaks and intentional releases of methane gas, portraying them as some of lowest cost strategies available to reduce carbon emissions.

Researchers said they have already begun presenting their findings to various levels of government, depicting it as a chance for industry and regulators to more effectively tackle emissions of methane – a gas far more potent than CO2 but which persists for less time in the atmosphere.

“When you take methane emissions and convert them to CO2 emissions so you can compare to cars, for Alberta, the total methane we’re talking about on a 100-year scale is 8 to 9.7 million vehicles. If we do it on a 20-year timescale, we’re talking maybe 28 to 33 million vehicles,” said Johnson. “This is a real opportunity.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...erta-oil-and-gas-wells-are-worse-than-thought

Fuk!!!! To bad we had to install a mobile natural gas electric generator every so many miles to stabilize the grid here in Ontario to compensate for fluctuations of our electricity generation from solar farms each time a cloud rolls by.

Ontario buys and burns more natural gas for the production of electricity then anywhere else in North America.

Mentalflake #nocredibility
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
'This is a really big deal': Canada natural gas emissions far worse than feared

Alberta’s oil and gas industry – Canada’s largest producer of fossil fuel resources – could be emitting 25 to 50% more methane than previously believed, new research has suggested.

The pioneering peer reviewed study, published in Environmental Science & Technology on Tuesday, used airplane surveys to measure methane emissions from oil and gas infrastructure in two regions in Alberta. The results were then compared with industry-reported emissions and estimates of unreported sources of the powerful greenhouse gas, which warm the planet more than 20 times as much as similar volumes of carbon dioxide.

“Our first reaction was ‘Oh my goodness, this is a really big deal,” said Matthew Johnson, a professor at Carleton University in Ottawa and one of the study’s authors. “If we thought it was bad, it’s worse.”

Carried out last autumn, the survey measured the airborne emissions of thousands of oil and gas wells in the regions. Researchers also tracked the amount of ethane to ensure that methane emissions from cattle would not end up in their results.

In one region dominated by heavy oil wells, researchers found that the type of heavy oil recovery used released 3.6 times more methane than previously believed. The technique is used in several other sites across the province, suggesting emissions from these areas are also underestimated.

In the second region, home to a mix of gas and light oil wells, researchers found results that were roughly equal to those reported by industry and unreported sources. However, they found that only 6% of methane emissions in this region were from industry-reported sources, with the remaining emissions, known as fugitive emissions, from unreported sources such as unintentional equipment leaks.

The finding could have major implications as Alberta and Ottawa strive to reduce methane emissions by 45% from 2012 levels by 2025, said Johnson. “It shows how much isn’t captured in current reporting requirements, and therein is a challenge and an opportunity all wrapped in one.”

The study then sought to conservatively extrapolate the findings, correcting only for sites that are home to heavy oil. What they found was in Alberta – home to 68% of Canada’s natural gas production, 47% of its light crude oil production as well as 80% of all crude oil and equivalents – total emissions were likely 25 to 50% higher than previous government estimates. The findings excluded mined oil sands, which are believed to be responsible for about 11% of methane emissions.

Canadian advocacy group Environmental Defence described the findings as alarming. “The methane gas currently being wasted would supply almost all the natural gas needs of Alberta, and is worth $530m per year,” Dale Marshall of the organisation said in a statement. “This represents an economic cost for governments in the form of lost royalties and taxes, and for industry in terms of revenue.”

Marshall pointed to the readily available solutions for controlling leaks and intentional releases of methane gas, portraying them as some of lowest cost strategies available to reduce carbon emissions.

Researchers said they have already begun presenting their findings to various levels of government, depicting it as a chance for industry and regulators to more effectively tackle emissions of methane – a gas far more potent than CO2 but which persists for less time in the atmosphere.

“When you take methane emissions and convert them to CO2 emissions so you can compare to cars, for Alberta, the total methane we’re talking about on a 100-year scale is 8 to 9.7 million vehicles. If we do it on a 20-year timescale, we’re talking maybe 28 to 33 million vehicles,” said Johnson. “This is a real opportunity.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...erta-oil-and-gas-wells-are-worse-than-thought
An ecoterrorist study peer reviewed by other ecoterrorists. That must be really factual. NOT.
The only valid point I see is if there is a market for methane it should be harvested and sold. CO2 scam taxes should be paid by the end users, not the producer since if there was no market there would be no product.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Fuk!!!! To bad we had to install a mobile natural gas electric generator every so many miles to stabilize the grid here in Ontario to compensate for fluctuations of our electricity generation from solar farms each time a cloud rolls by.

Ontario buys and burns more natural gas for the production of electricity then anywhere else in North America.

Mentalflake #nocredibility

....

I like farts and farting.
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,198
113
A Liebarrel fart party?

I thought that was just another political convention.
:)
It smells like factory (funny) farm though.