Measuring methane intensity is a key step on the path to net zero

Sheer madness. In the atmosphere its effects are blocked by water vapour. It has no effect on the amount of radiation received and hence no effect on global temperature

After Canada and the United States both announced new policy measures to address oil and gas methane at the COP28 climate summit — just weeks after the EU agreed to extend its methane intensity standards to imported natural gas — it is clear that global policy to address the potent climate-warming greenhouse gas is moving fast.

As policy continues to evolve and demand shifts toward cleaner forms of energy, methane intensity will be key to assessing progress and regulatory efficacy, as well as ensuring the global competitiveness of Canadian product.

Measuring methane

Methane intensity is the quantity of methane released into the atmosphere relative to the amount of oil or gas produced. Measuring it enables comparisons of environmental performance across regions, companies, facilities, production levels, fuel sources and time frames.

With this data we can see where policies and practices are driving down emissions and where improvements are needed.

To effectively target methane emissions and gauge intensity improvements, you need to know how much methane you have and where. However, studies continue to show that we lack adequate knowledge of its magnitude and distribution. Comprehensive measurement to determine methane intensity is key.

When it comes to methane intensity, some producers do a lot better than others. A study by researchers at St. Francis Xavier University’s FluxLab found a 1,000-fold variation in methane intensities among Albertan oil and gas producers.

Since Canada’s oil and gas industry consists of many different production methods and fluid types, methane intensity also varies significantly across regions.

Measurements collected by FluxLab researchers in 2021 show that methane intensity from offshore oil production in Newfoundland is quite low, likely due to a combination of technology advances (for example, flare recovery systems), regulation and high production volumes.

Natural gas produced in British Columbia also has relatively low methane intensities. Another study showed B.C.’s overall methane intensity was lower than 2019 averages for Western Canada and the United States (though, at 0.42 per cent, it’s still higher than the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act’s 0.2 per cent methane fee threshold and the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative target).

B.C. introduced regulations in 2020 to drive down oil and gas methane emissions, which the B.C. Energy Regulator is now working to strengthen.

Heavy oil regions have the most methane-intensive production in Canada. Certain production methods can have as much as 400 times the methane intensity as offshore production.

A recent study of Cold Heavy Oil Production with Sand (CHOPS) production in Saskatchewan found that methane intensity just during production was four times higher than the mean carbon intensity of Canadian oil over its entire life cycle. Saskatchewan’s overall emissions intensity is also getting worse.

Possible solutions

Fortunately, reducing methane emissions — and by extension, methane intensity — is dirt cheap. A Dunsky report found that a 75 per cent reduction in upstream oil and gas methane emissions would cost as little as $11 per ton of CO₂ equivalent.

That’s far below the federal carbon price of $65 per ton of CO₂ equivalent and rising, as well as carbon capture and storage for oilsands, which could cost between $89-144 per ton of CO₂ equivalent.

An overview of Canada’s newly announced methane reduction policy, produced by the CBC.

Canada’s newly announced amendments to its methane regulations will help drive deep methane reductions, so long as they are meaningfully enforced.

However, to credibly assess outcomes and achieve the reductions we truly need, producers and governments need to have accurate data on oil and gas methane emissions and emissions intensity. In addition:

Following the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Canada should develop stronger measurement, monitoring, verification and reporting requirements to generate a more accurate picture of emissions and emissions intensity.

Saskatchewan and Alberta should proceed with regulatory development to update and strengthen their oil and gas methane regulations in a timely manner and follow B.C.’s lead by basing models and targets on aerial survey data.

Energy regulators should apply strong monetary penalties for non-compliance in a consistent and timely manner.

Methane intensity allows various stakeholders to recognize, quantify and base decision-making on important comparisons and trends. It will be a key metric in the global transition to net-zero that will make or break producer competitiveness and, if accurately measured and reported, help governments effectively determine emissions reduction progress and priorities.

https://theconversation.com/measuring-methane-intensity-is-a-key-step-on-the-path-to-net-zero-218976#:~:text=Measuring%20it%20enables%20comparisons%20of,and%20where%20improvements%20are%20needed .

*********************************************

Eco-Warriors are now battling Christmas

In one of the season’s most predictable developments, climate activists have declared war on Christmas trees, vandalizing holiday displays in cities across Germany.

Like any new religion, the climate cult despises competition, and so its members target religious symbols — not only Christmas trees but also Raphael’s “Sistine Madonna” — as well as civic institutions, recently having defaced Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate.

With great pomp and gloom, the anti-Christmas tree group calls itself Last Generation (Letzte Generation), and, while apocalyptic youth cults do not have a very inspiring record anywhere, they have an especially ugly history in Germany — Seig heil and jackboots and all.

I do not make the comparison lightly.

There is a real debate to be had on climate policy, but these young vandals are not a part of it.

What they are about is pure millenarian hysteria, with all its usual destructive features: the cult of youth, contempt for political norms and property and an unearned sense of importance.

The German cities that endured this Christmas tree vandalism have seen this sort of thing before, from the Protestant iconoclastic riots of the 16th century to the book-burnings and church-strippings a few hundred years later.

There’s nothing new here.

As I saw for myself while attending the 2021 UN climate confab in Glasgow, what dominates the climate conversation is not policy wonkery but ritual rooted in apocalyptic mysticism.

That isn’t an exaggeration: I didn’t meet a lot of scientists or engineers at COP26, but I did meet many monks, magicians, and shamans; there was lot of incense-burning and chanting.

But there was very little talk about building a better power grid and lots of rubbish about the folk wisdom of the indigenous peoples of . . . wherever.

Climate change is a real issue that requires a real response: Ironically, our European cousins were until recently among the best positioned to actually do something about carbon-dioxide emissions.

They had the infrastructure and experience to build out the most important mitigation technology on offer: nuclear power.

Unfortunately, Europe at large — and Germany in particular — has turned away from that option.

Germany’s last three nuclear plants were shuttered in April.

The current German governing coalition includes the Green Party, which grew out of anti-nuclear protests in the Cold War era and never made peace with peaceable uses for nuclear power.

And if nuclear power gives them fits, then they absolutely go nuts at the mention of natural gas, even though expanding gas use would represent a significant carbon-footprint improvement for countries that rely heavily on coal for generating electricity.

Mitigation, adaptation, incremental improvement — that’s how constructive public policy works, but that’s not how a religious revival works.

Religious revivals require a conversion, the experience of being born again, along with pledges, acts of penance, symbolic sacrifice and striving toward personal holiness.

Such holiness even extends to Pope Francis, who’s been pressured recently to reinstate the Catholic practice of abstaining from meat on Fridays.

The pressure, however, is not coming from traditionalists looking to reinforce Catholic observances but from climate activists who argue (with some pretty fuzzy math) that this would meaningfully mitigate climate change by meat production emissions.

This would have no real effect on the climate, of course, but co-opting the pope would be a major spiritual coup.

The most recent UN climate conference just concluded in Dubai — the Rome, Jerusalem, and Mecca of hydrocarbon-enabled consumerism.

The Dubai conference produced the same thing every previous conference did: non-binding pledges by governments to mend their nations’ ways and similarly non-binding pledges to spend a lot of money helping poor countries adapt to climate disruptions.

Speaking for the United Arab Emirates, Sultan Ahmed al-Jaber said his country would commit $100 million to a climate-mitigation fund.

For perspective, consider that the figure is about 1/15th of what UAE residents spend on Rolexes and other luxury timepieces in a given year. It’s also about one half of 1% of what Emiratis spend on the gas-guzzling automobiles of which they are so famously fond — booming demand in the Arab oil kingdoms helped Rolls Royce set an all-time sales record in 2022. Not everyone in the church is a true believer.

https://nypost.com/2023/12/23/opinion/in-germany-eco-warriors-now-hate-christmas/

***********************************************

Has anyone checked on the Great White North lately?

It appears the Trudeau government has ramped up its extreme “green” efforts and is ignoring the cries of protest and suffering left in their wake.

COP 28, the United Nations’ latest climate conference, just ended, and despite Trudeau not attending the event, he and his lackeys drafted up a plan that would require their oil and gas industry to rapidly reduce carbon dioxide emissions to 35 to 38 percent below 2019 levels.

The Canadian government uses the word “pollution” over and over, no doubt to paint a picture in the uninformed public’s mind that they are merely regulating toxic chemicals and other similar emissions, when in reality, it is carbon dioxide they are targeting.

Alberta government officials have pushed back, explaining that this will be essentially a production cap that will decimate the local economy, especially since the Canadian oil patch has already significantly reduced emissions and they have been engaging in carbon pricing schemes and other similar policies to fund green energy projects and make up for what carbon dioxide is emitted.

Canada is one of the lowest greenhouse gas emitters among industrialized nations, and yet their government seems insistent that they show off to their international friends by cutting their energy industry down (sometimes followed by a meek backpedal to avoid distressing voters too much).

The Canadian Association of Energy Contractors told Bloomberg that these regulations were going to make it more difficult for companies to attract investment capital, just like what has been happening in the United States amid the Biden administration’s regulatory onslaught. It’s obvious that government hostility towards an industry would make investing capital in it less appealing. In the case of the United States, we have a president who has repeatedly pledged to end hydraulic fracturing, end drilling on federal lands, end offshore drilling, and more, so that investing in those kinds of projects would appear to be a serious risk. In Canada, it is no different. Why invest in an industry that is being “phased out” by the government? This will result in lower production and higher prices that Canadians can hardly afford.

But Trudeau’s attack on the oil industry in Canada is not enough for the bloodthirsty greens; the Canadian Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act also targets farmers, specifically those who need to use natural gas and propane to heat barns and greenhouses. If you didn’t realize, the Great White North is cold, awfully cold in the winter, and fruits and vegetables are not easily grown outdoors during the winter season. Canadian farmers have already seen their income fall 8.3 percent in 2022, while the costs of running a farm increased 21.2 percent.

If that’s not bad enough, Trudeau bizarrely called for a tax on grocery stores as food prices began to skyrocket. Grocery stores operate at very slim margins of 1 to 3 percent, depending on volume more than anything else. The only thing a tax would do is raise food costs, or pressure farmers and other suppliers to lower their prices even as the cost of operating (not to mention transportation) rises.

Outrage already caused the Canadian government to temporarily pause their tax on home heating oil, yet another burden on average Canadians, who are struggling just to pay bills.

Canada has a very high cost of living. In fact, it has become so extreme that Reuters reports recent immigrants are leaving the country and moving elsewhere to survive. Natural-born Canadian citizens, of course, can’t jump ship so easily.

All of these factors leave me with one burning question: Are Trudeau and his government incompetent, incomprehensibly stupid, or bluntly and callously evil?

Regardless of which is the case, things are not looking good for our neighbors up north. This hyper-focus on global warming has gone way too far, and it’s actively hurting people. It’s long past time for this madness to stop.

https://redstate.com/heartlandinstitute/2023/12/15/eh-whats-going-on-with-canada-n2167578

**********************************************

U.S. Climate 2023 Year in Review In One Word: NORMAL

The year is not quite in the books, but it is late enough that we can have a look-back at this year’s weather and climate extremes.

We are all well aware of the narrative that the weather is quickly getting worse. Unfortunately, data does not agree.1

The weather — and certainly the impacts — of the past 12 months in the United States was actually pretty typical, even benign, in historical context.2

The one variable that stands out among extreme weather is temperature — extreme high temperatures in summer and (in particular) winter were very high in 2023, both of which contribute to a long-term trend that the IPCC has attributed primarily to the emissions of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels.

This year will come in well below average for the total and insured economic costs of disasters in the United States, mainly because the only landfalling hurricane (Idalia) resulted in less than $1 billion in total damages, far less than the $22+ billion of an average hurricane season.

Month-by-month, 2023 ventured above and below the zero-line of the NOAA temperature anomaly time series (the USCRN). You can see from the figure above that there is no trend in this time series since December 2000, which is counter to what has occurred globally.

Hurricanes

Lots of interesting details, but as far as landfalls and damage, just Hurricane Idalia which was preliminarily classified as a Category 3 storm, but to date just over $300 million in insured damage … Zzzzzz.

Flooding

The US sees a lot of flooding every year. It is normal. This year saw its fair share but nothing unusual or particularly damaging. Disaster declarations don’t tell us anything about climate, but they do tell us something about disaster declarations — 2023 saw (to date) 19 flood-related FEMA disaster declarations, which is just about exactly the average from 2000-2022.4 You can dive much deeper into trends in US flood at this recent post. 2023 will no doubt be consistent with the trends documented there.

Drought

2023 was not particularly exceptional for drought in long-term context. In fact, compared to one year ago, 2023 has seen a markedly improvement in US drought conditions, as you can see below — with December 2022 on the left and December 2023 on the right. 2023 ends the year just about in the 50th percentile of months since 2000 for area under exceptional and extreme drought.

The figure below shows the proportion of US land area characterized as “very wet” and “very dry” from 1895 to 2023. If you squint, you can see that “very dry” has declined a bit, with extremes reduced dramatically since the 1950s, while “very wet” has increased, with more extremes since the 1980s. Fascinating, as Spock would say.

The “very wet” and “very dry” time series has a lot of month-to-month variability — in 2023 the “very wet” area ranged from 0.81% of the country (Nov) to 23.56% (Jan), and “very dry” from 3.36% (Jan) to 23.07% (Jul).

Tornados, Hail, Wind

The figures above show from left to right, tornadoes, hail and wind local storm report counts, based on preliminary data for 2023. The data shows that tornadoes are a bit above the recent average and hail is a bit below. Winds, in contrast, were exceptionally high in 2023. Given that convective storms produce tornadoes, hail and winds, I am looking forward to how meteorologists explain these contrasting trends of 2023. Economic losses from hail and wind were quite large in 2023.

Wildfire

Remarkably, 2023 has seen the fewest acres burned in the US since 1998. Everyone has heard about the record wildfires in Canada, but the quiet US season has been largely ignored.

https://climaterealism.com/2023/12/u-s-climate-2023-year-in-review-in-one-word-normal

***************************************

My other blogs. Main ones below

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM )

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*****************************************