ESG & Industry Updates

COP28: Takeaways from Dubai

Posted by Kelly Burke on Feb 2, 2024 7:00:00 AM

The UN’s Climate Change Conference, or “COP28” Summit was held from November 30 through December 13th in Dubai, UAE. The Conference consisted of 150 heads of State and Government and 85,000 participants representing countries, organizations, etc. This year’s summit focused on where the world is in relation to the goals initially outlined in the Paris Agreement (forget what that is? Refresher here: LINK). Spoiler alert – the world is nowhere near achieving the goals outlined, and the focus became how the countries involved can speed up their action on climate change mitigation through multiple avenues.

For the first time, notably, this conference dealt with if there would be:

  • An agreement to end fossil fuel use (they ended up with a loophole heavy statement on a goal to “transition away”, more on that below)
  • An inclusion for the first time of agricultural emissions in countries calculations and mitigation plans
  • A focus on funding for smaller and poorer nations to begin their transitions to renewables.
  • An agreement to triple renewables, and double the rate of energy efficiency advancements.

The sections below give a little more context and detail of the major event items, if you are curious:

“Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels”

Much of the news from the summit centers around the “historic deal” to “transition away” from fossil fuels, after a contentious battle over whether the specific language should remain in the final agreement. This inclusion was hailed by many as a huge victory and step towards serious climate change mitigation. However, the final agreement also includes language on Carbon Capture and Utilization and Storage (CCUS), Transitional Fuels, and Carbon markets, which is seen by some as a glaring loophole that would implicitly allow continued fossil fuel use on the premise that when the technology can scale (it currently cannot) those emissions would then be able to be captured, sold, offset, etc.

As a refresher, CCUS captures carbon emissions from large scale sources like refineries, power plants, etc, compresses them, and injects them into reservoirs underground to mitigate the carbon’s impact on the atmosphere). The IEA projects that even at a best-case scenario level of scale through 2030, CCUS technology will simply not be able to capture more than a third of the emissions it would need to in order to reach net-zero emissions.

Methane Emissions: Agriculture in Focus

Highlighted at the summit was agreement on the need to significantly curb methane emissions, with a goal of reaching net-zero methane emissions by 2050. For the first time officially, the organization took a good hard look at agriculture. Agriculture is responsible for 30% of global emissions.

If you’re a Netflix afficionado, you may remember the charts and footage from “What the Health” or “Cowspiracy” that illustrate just how massive the climate impact is from Industrial Agriculture. Much like the protagonist in those documentaries, many wonder why emissions discussions, particularly regarding methane emissions, don’t often include (or center on) Agriculture. The COP28 summit did in fact involve discussion of its impact and resulted in the “Emirates Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture” which, among other things, commits consenting nations to include emissions from agriculture and farming in their national climate action plans for the first time.

Climate Change Loss & Damage Fund and Green Climate Fund

The last COP summit (COP27) set up (on paper) a loss and damage fund to help mitigate financial impacts to poorer nations from Climate related impacts. During the COP28 summit, a focus was put on filling the established fund. The last summit set the fund up, but without being fully funded it was argued that the fund was essentially a meaningless gesture on the part of wealthier nations. Over the course of the two weeks of talks the fund went up to $790 million – that sounds like a lot of money to us, but the estimates on what is needed runs from $100-400 Billion, so at the end of the day, it’s still at less than 1% of target funding.

During the summit, US Vice President Kamala Harris announced the US would pledge $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund, another established fund to help offset the cost to transition to green energy sources in developing nations. It is the understanding of the organization that poorer countries will need financial input from richer nations to facilitate their transition to green energy sources, and this fund is designed to be a source of funding for that.

Renewable Energy Capacity Tripling

The final deal struck at COP28 seeks for countries to triple their renewable energy capacity by 2030. A point of major contention at the summit (and in general) has been the category of so called “transition fuels” and what counts for them. Natural gas is the main sticking point on this – many member countries say natural gas should not count as a transitionary fuel because of its emissions, it’s a fossil fuel, etc – however, for poorer developing nations it is hard to argue that fuels like natural gas are not a huge step forward from existing systems, and it is also a lot more financially in reach than options like wind and solar, not to mention infinitely more scalable.

So?

Ultimately, the view of the summit’s conclusions among members, climate activist groups, and international groups is that the summit was successful and the language included is a step forward but does not go fast enough or far enough for their liking. As an editorial aside, it is difficult to imagine an agreement that did go far or fast enough for some of the groups, so given the disparate goals of all the member nations, coming away with any remotely firm statement on transition should be seen as a positive by most of the involved participants.

Read More

Topics: methane, Climate Change, Carbon Emissions, renewable energy, paris accord

Transportation DeCarbonization: Aviation

Posted by Kelly Burke on Sep 26, 2023 7:15:00 AM

As we have been discussing, the US National Blueprint for Transportation Decarbonization breaks the Transportation sector into seven categories, each of which has its own targets for emission reduction/elimination, and strategies for how those declines in emissions will be achieved. The next category address in the Blueprint is Aviation.

Jet fuel combustion from international & domestic aviation comprises approximately 10% of total GHG emissions in the United States, with domestic emissions roughly equivalent to the emissions from international flights in & out of the country.

The “United States Aviation Climate Action Plan” is a whole of government approach to a net-zero target for aviation emissions by 2050. A key factor for the aviation sector is new technology in new aircraft engines to combat emissions. The “Sustainable Flight National Partnership” is working to develop a suite of aircraft technology to hit a 30% improvement target over today’s premier aircraft.

Aviation is a heavy demand growth sector, so in addition to new technologies for fuel economy, the overall plan for the sector includes optimizing other factors involved, such as optimizing take-off and landing patterns and surfaces, and infrastructure changes to mitigate aircraft congestion that results in wasted fuel and increases noise and pollution for nearby areas.

Sustainable aviation fuels, versus electrification type efforts, will be critical. SAF would allow a move to decarbonize without impacting the fundamental infrastructure of air travel. While drop in solutions like hydrogen and electrification are seen as viable for short distance travel – even if that were to happen 100%, flights shorter than 500 nautical miles only make up 50% of air travel and only 15% of sector emissions. The real culprit for the sector’s emissions is long 1000 nautical mile flights (largely cargo shipping) that account for 65% of emissions, despite being only 20% of total operations. Given those numbers, it's not so surprising to learn that even a 100% move to hydrogen or other carbon zero systems across all shorter flights (under 500 nautical miles) would not be expected to lower sector emissions at all, according to the UN’s International Civil Aviation Organization. As compared to this – the projected production and use of SAF (sustainable aviation fuel) across the segment could almost entirely decarbonize it by 2050, assuming the SAF industry production level of 35 billion gallons is met.

The steps outlined by the Transportation Decarbonization Blueprint are laid out for aviation as:

  • Policy & Regulation – the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) requires aircraft carriers to either use CORSIA eligible fuels or purchase carbon offsets. Because CORSIA is an international program, adherence to its regulations and rulings is critical to a global approach. Like vessels, the aviation sector is obviously international, which is a hurdle in terms of policy setting, as domestic application of new technologies and emissions regulations don’t necessarily translate into any impact on a global scale without buy-in and adoption from other nations and organizations.
  • Research & Innovation – development of new technologies and sustainable aviation fuels to lower emissions. The process will include SFNP flight simulations to enhance environmental efficiencies. Modernization of the National Aerospace System to support emerging technologies and optimize fuel efficient trajectories and patterns. Ongoing collaboration across government and private sector agencies with the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative.
  • Expand Stakeholder engagement and partnerships: much focus on this sector must deal with the international nature of aviation, as mentioned previously. Measures to lower emissions and mitigate climate impacts will need to be incentivized in a manner that encourages international adoption of, and adherence to multilateral, multinational agreements. This is obviously no small challenge and will be a critical factor in how we see changes across the segment over time.

 

              

 

 

Read More

Topics: Climate Change, Biden Administration, decarbonization

Biden Admin Releases US Blueprint for Transportation Decarbonization

Posted by Kelly Burke on Jan 13, 2023 8:09:33 AM

January 10th, 2023 the Biden Administration released the US National Blueprint for Transportation Decarbonization.

The Blueprint is an interagency developed framework of strategies and actions to take carbon emissions out of the Transportation sector by 2050, developed by the Department of Energy (DOE), the Department of Transportation (DOT), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It’s the conclusion essentially of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between those departments that they would develop the outline to drive policy decisions and regulatory updates focused on the goal of decarbonization in the sector through 2050 in a cooperative manner between federal agencies.

Another way to think about it is the blueprint is basically what the plan is for implementing actions for the investments created by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) from November 2022, and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) from August 2022. These bills established billions in funding for infrastructure and outlined aggressive action on climate change (respectively). The blueprint developed is part of the process for allocating where investment and change happens to push the country toward the enormous mitigations in emissions that the BIL and IRA legislation attempted to make possible.

As we’ve discussed previously, the Transportation sector is the nations largest source of greenhouse gas, and accounts for a third of all domestic GHG emissions, so emissions mitigation/elimination across this sector is obviously a goal in the context of Climate Change. The blueprint additionally sought to develop action plans for the sector with environmental justice in mind – the concentration of emissions and negative impacts from the transportation sector have historically been concentrated in low income, urban, and minority areas of the country and that is an additional factor that needs to be addressed.

The strategies in the blueprint are aimed at ensuring the US hits both the President’s stated commitments on emissions reduction, and the US Nationally Determined Contribution under the Paris Agreement. In order to hit both 2030 targets and 2050 goals, there is a mix of short- and long-term recommendations.

The report specifically seeks to

  1. “Increase convenience by Implementing System Level and Design Solutions”
  2. “Improve Efficiency through mode shift and More Efficient Vehicles”
  3. “Transition to Clean Options by Deploying Zero-Emission Vehicles and Fuels”

The method for doing so is split into strategies, goals, and action plans by transportation subset (or mode). They are:

  1. Light-Duty Vehicles (49% of current emissions)
  2. Medium- and Heavy-Duty On-Road Trucks and Buses (21% of current emissions)
  3. Off-Road Vehicles and Mobile Equipment (10% of current emissions)
  4. Rail (2% of current emissions)
  5. Maritime Vessels (3% of current emissions)
  6. Aviation (11% of current emissions)
  7. Pipelines (4% of current emissions)

We will go through each mode individually, and highlight what we think the important takeaways are for each in terms of what things may impact energy suppliers either directly or via end users (customers) over the upcoming weeks.

Definitely a topic to keep an eye on, because if the U.S. intends to hit the lofty goals on emissions reduction it set itself, there will likely need to be some big big changes out there in the market.

Stay tuned!

 

 

 

Read More

Topics: EPA, Climate Change, Carbon Emissions, DOT, decarbonization

Banned In Boston? City Seeks to Stop New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure

Posted by Kelly Burke on Oct 4, 2022 1:23:09 PM

In August of this year, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker signed into law House Bill 5060 “An Act Driving Clean Energy and Offshore Wind” into law

A controversial part of the bill was a provision allowing for a pilot program of 10 cities and towns to require all new building projects to be electric (with the exception of hospitals and labs). The Boston City Council in September voted to become one of those cities, after the proposal was introduced by Mayor Wu.

How the provision works is it would allow individual cities to develop local ordinances preventing new building projects (or large scale renovation/rehab projects) from using fossil fuels and enforce those ordinances by denying permits. (As an aside, you may remember that Brookline MA, one of the ten pilot cities, one night at a town meeting voted to ban oil and gas infrastructure in town in 2019 – a provision that was ultimately struck down. Essentially, the policy Brookline attempted to enact in 2019 is in some ways the blueprint for how the ordinances in the new pilot program work.)

It's unclear whether Boston will be allowed to join the program, as there are already 10 slated participants (Acton, Aquinnah, Arlington, Brookline, Cambridge, Concord, Lexington, Lincoln, Newton and West Tisbury). Conceptually, cities and towns that are not the size and population of Boston would seem to be a better fit for a pilot program of any kind – it is possible they will get approved however, because a requirement of participation is that the town meet the States 10% affordable housing target, and West Tisbury looks like it will fall short.

Speaking of affordable housing, one of the main concerns around the pilot program is that it would drive up costs for construction and extend timelines for building (particularly as multifamily dwellings are non exempt from the ordinances) which could further exacerbate Boston’s existing housing crisis, as well as continue to push lower SES community members out of the City, something that has already picked up steam post pandemic. The other half of that coin is serious reservations about the impact to union jobs in the program cities, particularly for pipefitters. 

On the other hand, 70% of Boston’s carbon emissions are from buildings, according to the City’s latest Climate Action Report, so in that sense going right to the source makes sense on some level.

I wrote an article for Oil & Energy Magazine that goes into more detail on the bill and its support/objections. You can read that article in its entirety here: Boston Seeks to Ban Fossil Fuels in New Buildings

 

Read More

Topics: Mass DOER, Massachusetts, Climate Change, Carbon Emissions, boston

Solid State Batteries Could Change the EV Game

Posted by Kelly Burke on Aug 3, 2022 2:01:43 PM

shutterstock_1614773872

We're all familiar with both the rise of electric vehicles, and the lingering concerns some have regarding their adoption - namely, driving range, time to recharge, and battery lifetime limits. It's long been assumed that solid state batteries could be the key to solving all of these issues at once, while simultaneously enhancing safety but until recently it looked like it would be quite some time before the technology got to a point where it was scalable and practical. We may have reached that point sooner than expected, however. 

So what even are solid state batteries? . Right now, most EV currently use the familiar lithium ion battery, which uses a liquid or gel electrolyte solution between positive and negative electrodes to both store and release charge. Solid state batteries instead use a solid material for electrons to pass through (ceramic, glass, etc). The lack of liquid/gel allows for holding a  larger amount energy per unit of mass, which means solid state batteries have the potential to increase range. Because of the decreased overall mass (they're roughly half the size of a lithium ion battery) auto manufacturers can allot nearly twice as many batteries to the reserved battery holding areas within the standard EV setup. Additionally, the lack of liquid means more temperature stability for the battery, and removes much of the need for added cooling mechanisms currently in place to avoid the risk of fire & overheating that is present in standard batteries. 

In terms of battery lifetime and the cost to update or replace EV batteries, some manufacturers are estimating that the prototype models they are currently running will be able to stand up to 1000 charges, and with double the battery capacity, the math works out to newer solid state running EVs potentially running a little over half a million miles prior to needing battery replacement. 

The other main highlight is that an additional long standing issue with the move to EV and general electrification has been the impracticality of lithium ion powered heavy freight, long haul trucking, aircraft, or grid level energy storage. By changing the battery variable, that equation may become solvable in time. 

We did an article for Oil & Energy magazine this issue to discuss Solid State Batteries' potential in the EV market, and specifically what Solid Power, one of the industry tech leaders, is doing. You can read that article in its entirety here: Solid State Batteries are Game Changers

For more by way of background on EV batteries and whats going on with that technology - the video below does an excellent job explaining how Lithium, Hydrogen, and Solid State batteries work, and what the benefits and limitations are of each: 

 

Read More

Topics: Climate Change, electric vehicles, battery, ev, solid state battery

Offshore Wind Breathes New Life into Old Coal Facility in MA

Posted by Kelly Burke on Mar 25, 2022 10:45:00 AM

Brayton Point in Somerset was once the largest coal-fired plant in Massachusetts, and was the last to be decommissioned in 2017.

The plan for the site has been to develop it into Massachusetts' first major offshore wind manufacturing facility, as an integral part of the Commonwealth's approach to its renewable energy portfolio. 

This February, Governor Baker and State Officials announced that a 47 acre parcel of the property would be sold to Prysmian Group, who will manufacture high tech subsea transmission cables on the site that will be used to  bring offshore wind generated electricity back on site and into the grid. 

Prysmian is looking to invest up to $300 million dollars in the Brayton Point facility, and would create a projected 250 high paying jobs on site. Part of the enticement to the project for Prysmian was assurance from Avangrid Renewables that the manufactured cables would be used for the Commonwealth Wind projects, as well as the parallel project in Connecticut (Park City Wind). Avangrid is also the joint partner with Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners on the Vineyard Wind Project. 

Vineyard Wind (off Martha's Vineyard) is set to be the first large-scale offshore wind project in the country. Approved by the Biden Administration last year, the Vineyard Wind project will consist of up to 84 wind turbines and expected to produce 800 megawatts of power, or enough to power 400,000 homes. 

Back to Brayton Point - Mayflower Wind (also off Martha's Vineyard) will generate 400 megawatts, and feed into the Brayton Point site.  Mayflower will also be building a converter station at Brayton Point to facilitate movement of wind generated electricity into the grid. Mayflower also has said its proposal includes $42 million additional dollars in on-shore development and have proposed establishing an operations and maintenance facility at a former industrial site in Fall River and plan to utilize a Somerset based company for a crew transfer vessel for employees as well.  

This investment on local infrastructure and the tax revenue that involved facilities will generate, not to mention the creation of plentiful higher paying jobs for the area is a huge positive for Southeastern MA, an area that has been impacted over the decades by phase outs of manufacturing and changes in the fishing industries that were once the lifeblood of the area.  

Overall, Massachusetts looks poised to really be in the lead when it comes to offshore wind generation as we watch multiple projects come together. As the Governor said at the gathering in February "One of the biggest challenges we will all face as we go forward from here is figuring out how to get the generation where it needs to go" - that is a problem that the development of Brayton Point seeks to help alleviate. 

I wrote an article for the March issue of Oil & Energy Magazine on the Brayton Point site redevelopment, you can read that article in its entirety here: Revisiting Brayton Point: Offshore Wind Brings New Life to Closed Coal Site 

 

(Below: Brayton Point Currently (left), and to the right, a rendering of the proposed redevelopment)

Brayton Point  - PowerBrayton Point - Rendering

 

Read More

Topics: Massachusetts, Climate Change, Clean Energy, offshore wind

Oh Truck No! Three Northeast States Adopt Zero Emission Vehicle Rules

Posted by Kelly Burke on Mar 23, 2022 10:31:17 AM

shutterstock_1535721572

The Advanced Clean Truck Rule, first adopted in California, has been adopted by three Northeastern States as well - namely, Massachusetts, New York & New Jersey. The rule requires an increasing percentage of medium & heavy duty trucks sold to be Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV), beginning in 2025. The Act requires manufacturers to participate in a credit/deficit program to increase the number of ZEVs sold in the state, and a one time report detailing in-state operation of vehicles over 8500lb to "inform future decisions about emission reductions from the transportation sector". 

Despite being a relatively small percentage of the total vehicles in the United States, medium and heavy duty trucks contribute an estimated 60% of tailpipe nitrogen and particle emissions. So far, California, NY, MA, NJ and Oregon have adopted the rule (Maine is expected to sign on later in 2022) and all combined their fleets constitute about 20% of the total vehicle class, so their adoption of the regulations is expected to have a major and relatively immediate impact. In New Jersey, their transportation sector is responsible for 40% of emissions and despite impacted vehicles (buses, trucks) only making up about 40% of their total number, they're responsible for 25% of transport related emissions. Massachusetts by 2050 expects to see a 51% reduction in nitrous oxide, 23% in particulate matter emissions, and 53% GHG emissions drops as a result of adopting this measure. If you extrapolate these expectations out, the impact of this rule's adaptation should be very significant.  

Of added significance is, as discussed with regard to current Administration concerns about environmental justice, the Advanced Clean Truck Rule is expected to be especially beneficial to historically impacted communities, as heavy transportation and its resultant particulate emissions disproportionately impact urban communities, including communities of color. The steep reduction in GHG and particulates expected from ZEV adaption will have the greatest impact where those emissions are currently concentrated most heavily. 

The rule is in effect pre point of sale, so it impacts manufacturers of these medium & heavy duty trucks. It's a little unclear yet how timelines, if any become put in place, would work for existent fleets - one can only assume that the one time reporting rule included in the ACT adoption will be used to address that question down the line. It's also unclear what exactly the mix of ZEV looks like, and how the timeline on the rules impact will impact sales cycles and equipment turnover going forward, and what impact that will have on fleets, fleet operators, and end level consumers. 

I wrote an article for Oil & Energy Magazine's Jan/Feb issue on the specifics of the rule and how it breaks out by each state that has adopted thus far in the Northeast. You can read that article in its entirety here: Oh Truck No! Three Northeast States Adopt Zero-Emission Vehicle Rule 

 

 

Read More

Topics: Massachusetts, Climate Change, Carbon Emissions, Emissions, environmental justice

Addressing Western Water Shortages

Posted by Kelly Burke on Dec 20, 2021 11:11:00 AM

Western DroughtOver 70% of the American West, Southwest and Northern Plains has been categorized as a D3 (severe) drought or higher since June. In October, the US Bureau of Reclamation issued its 5 year projections for the Colorado River, which serves 40 million people in the American West. Projections help management consultants better plan for future demands and determine allocations appropriately based on the data.

Ongoing drought conditions in the region have led to drastic and unprecedented changes in water allocations. These cuts in allocation have devastating implications for regional farmers and ranchers, their livelihood and the commodity markets their products determine pricing versus demand for more broadly. It also complicates the clean energy picture, as hydroelectric plants (which produce 40 billion kwh of energy for millions of homes and businesses in the Western region) become not only unable to enhance capacity, but become less able to meet current loads and meet demand.

Additionally, the continuing drought conditions and their impacts are a concerning sign for what is to come with climate change. Lake Powell & Lake Mead are the largest man-made reservoirs in the country, and their levels largely depend on snowpack conditions in the region. Warmer temperatures and drought conditions have caused both to dip to historic levels as well as causing a first-ever water shortage on the Colorado River. Should levels continue to drop, downstream states could become unable to access water downstream from Lake Mead and the implications of that would be devastating.

In 2019 seven regional states along the Colorado River signed a plan to prop water levels up, and portions of the infrastructure bill passed at the end of 2021 address ongoing concerns and provide funding for infrastructure improvements in the Western region to at least forestall the worst potential longer term impacts.

I wrote an article for Oil & Energy magazine that goes into more depth on the specifics of the problem, as well as how the infrastructure bill will attempt to address concerns. You can read that article in its entirety here: Drought Relief for Western States

Read More

Topics: Energy Infrastructure, Climate Change, hydro-electric

Preserving Forests is Critical to Slowing Carbon Change

Posted by Kelly Burke on Dec 14, 2021 11:55:00 AM

A groundbreaking report “Avoided Deforestation: A Climate Mitigation Opportunity in New England and New York” was released in September by a Clark University research group. The study measures the levels of climate mitigation that could be achieved in the Northeast if deforestation was prevented.

shutterstock_2041844729

New England and New York release 4.9 million tons of CO2 equivalent each year due to forest loss, while simultaneously losing approximately 1.2 million metric tons that could have been stored by the forests annually. Massachusetts alone loses an average of 5,000 acres annually (its 1 million acres across the continental United States).

Overall deforestation is equivalent to about 2% of all fossil fuel emissions in New England, so it isn’t a small issue, taking action could have a significant impact on climate projections.

There is a new online mapping tool from the Nature Conservancy that calculates the potential of intact forests across the US, which is allowing land managers and developers to determine the forest areas with the highest carbon stock and sequestration levels so they are able to make development decision with this information in mind.

I wrote an article for Oil & Energy magazine detailing the issues around deforestation and climate mitigation, particularly as the development of solar photovoltaic systems grows in volume. You can read that article in its entirety here:  Conservation Matters: Study shows preserving forests would help slow climate change

Read More

Topics: Climate Change, Carbon Emissions

Everything Old is New Again - Methane Regulations on the Agenda

Posted by Kelly Burke on Nov 4, 2021 12:21:54 PM

Methanemolecule

The Biden Administration has announced new methane regulations from the COP26 Climate Summit in Glasgow, Scotland this week. Estimates are that the new regulations will affect  up to 75% of the methane emissions in the United States. Regulations will apply largely to the Oil & Gas industry, specifically addressing “flaring” (purposeful venting) during production and leaks across the system infrastructure.

Methane is responsible for up to 30% of global warming, according to the UN Environment Program, and is estimated to be 25 times more potent than Carbon Dioxide. In recent years this had led to more focus on methane (versus Carbon) emissions, as because of the potency, decreases in methane are much more likely to have a faster and more meaningful impact on slowing Climate Change.

If this sounds familiar, it’s likely because in 2014 the Obama Administration announced similar Methane regulation controls (you can get a refresher here: Methane & Consumers Giving Nat Gas Headaches ) Those rules were enacted in 2016 and subsequently relaxed by the Trump Admin, before being reinstated by the Biden Admin. Hard to keep track of.

The oil & gas industry is responsible for an estimated 30% of methane emissions domestically, and the new rules are expected to reduce emissions from equipment, production sites, and covered areas by up to 75%. In tandem with the expanded EPA regulations, the DOT’s Pipeline & Hazmat Safety Administration is implementing the PIPES act which upgrades and expands existing pipeline setups to cut methane leakage. Other targets of emission reduction are landfills, and enhancing the abandoned mine & well closure program – orphaned mines have been an oft ignored thorn in the side of the federal government & EPA for decades, abandoned mines often leak methane and other gasses, or pollute their areas (For a refresher on that, check this article out: Accidents Happen: EPA Spill Highlights Difficulty of Mine Decontamination)

In an odd continuation of an ongoing trend, the new methane regulations will be “voluntary, incentive-based” changes in the Agricultural sector. This would seem to clash with the global concern over agriculture produced emissions, particularly those from concentrated feed lot (CAFO) based livestock production. The agricultural sector produces emissions comparable with the entire transportation sector (including airplanes) globally (14-18% for both), and agricultural emissions have increased approximately 12% since 1990, which is in contrast to the focus on emission reduction we have seen implemented (in a mandatory fashion) in other sectors. In terms of emissions, the US Agricultural sector produced approximately 698 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent in 2018, a staggering 36.2% of which was in the form of methane.

One of the items regarding agricultural emission control in the White House Proposal is investment in methane reducing practices like “alternative manure management systems”. Presumably (hopefully) this would be an investment in technology like the anaerobic digester technology we have seen make an appearance in MA, where dairy farmers have been diverting manure & food waste to be upcycled into energy. (More on that here: Mass Dairy Farmers Use Food Waste & Manure to Generate Renewable Energy)

So while we will have to wait to see how the new proposals take shape in actual regulation and enforcement, it’s worth noting that according to reports, the American Petroleum Institute (API) appears to support the proposal, with a response indicating they were “committed” to “continued progress” on methane emission reduction. 2020 methane emissions by oil & gas were down 10 percent versus 2019, but that was as a result of a collapse in production, not because of corrective action. The IEA estimates that 10% of methane could be reduced “at no perceptible cost” and where the US (along with Russia) is one of the world’s largest emitters, the new Biden regulations are an attempt to remedy that and push forward progress on a broader Climate agenda.

Stay Tuned!

 

 

 

 

Read More

Topics: methane, Climate Change, Biden Administration

Recent Posts

Posts by Topic

see all