Tag Archives: aldernon

Here’s what Obama’s new methane rule won’t cover

Here’s what Obama’s new methane rule won’t cover

By on May 13, 2016 4:44 amShare

On Thursday, the Environmental Protection Agency released its final regulations aimed at cutting methane emissions from new oil and gas infrastructure built after 2015. But as impressive as they sound on paper, the rule doesn’t answer the tough question: What is the United States doing about all the methane emissions from its existing infrastructure?

Between the new rule and a related set of 2012 regulations, EPA has suggested that we are currently on course for a 20 to 30 percent cut in methane emissions by 2025. However, the Obama administration has promised a 40 to 45 percent cut by that year, meaning more action is needed.

Thursday’s regulations only cover new and modified wells, and Environmental Defense Fund research suggests that by 2018, nearly 90 percent of methane emissions from the oil and gas sector will come from sources that existed before 2012.

As for these sources, EPA has issued a request that will “require oil and natural gas companies to provide extensive information needed to develop regulations” targeting emissions from existing infrastructure. Those regulations, however, likely won’t begin development until the next administration cozies up in the White House. (And depending on the administration, may never be developed at all!)

In the grand scheme of U.S. emissions, methane makes up about 11 percent of our greenhouse gases, and about one-third of that figure is from oil and gas. This is where the existing infrastructure starts to feel a little more pressing: If we take the EDF’s projection at face value, that means that the new rule will only address the sources of less than 1 percent of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

Ignoring other greenhouse gases, even the methane front alone looks a little dismal. The United States has around 3 million abandoned wells, many of which are probably leaking the gas. The natural gas sector already loses about 1 to 3 percent of its product (which is mostly methane) due to leakage.

The regulations also neglect the agricultural sector, which accounts for about 9 percent of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Methane emissions from agriculture increased 11 percent between 1990 and 2014, largely because of a 54 percent spike in greenhouse gas emissions from livestock manure management systems. Globally, agriculture is the largest source of emitted methane. EPA is currently barred from requiring livestock producers to report their emissions.

The EPA regulations do represent a step forward for curbing emissions — as well as for slashing emissions of smog precursors known as volatile organic compounds — but they’re by no means the one-size-fits-all plug for our methane leaks.

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Original source – 

Here’s what Obama’s new methane rule won’t cover

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s what Obama’s new methane rule won’t cover

BP takes Colorado to court and wins millions in tax breaks

BP takes Colorado to court and wins millions in tax breaks

By on May 11, 2016Share

It’s not too often one comes across a brand-new fossil fuel handout in 2016, but the Colorado Supreme Court just delivered the oil and gas industry a fat one. In a case pitting BP against the state’s Department of Revenue, the Court decided in late April to authorize some hefty tax deductions for the oil and gas giant. Taxpayers are now on the hook for up to $100 million in payments to BP and other companies this year — and since the ruling sets a precedent, they’ll take the hit in perpetuity.

As a company extracting natural resources in Colorado, BP must pay a severance tax to the state. However, natural gas extractors are allowed to deduct costs they can attribute to “transportation, manufacturing, and processing.” In the case, originally filed in 2005, BP argued that foregone dollars that the company “could have earned had they invested in other ventures rather than in building transportation and processing facilities” should count as these types of costs.

In other words, BP alleged that the money they theoretically could have earned, had they spent it elsewhere, represented a deductible cost to the company. And the Colorado Supreme Court agreed.

“It is absolutely a subsidy,” said Jessica Goad, communications director at Conservation Colorado. But Colorado is by no means alone in offering breaks to oil and gas companies. The United States spends some $20 billion in national fossil fuel production subsidies annually.

Colorado already has the lowest effective severance tax in the West. Under state law, oil and gas companies are able to count property taxes against severance tax payments.

In a last-ditch effort to disallow this kind of deduction under state law, Colorado House Democrats introduced a bill on Monday — but it died a procedural death on Tuesday night. Colorado’s legislative session ends on Wednesday. “It’s hard to write a brand new bill that solves a brand new problem in three days,” said Goad.

BP and others will continue to collect this windfall unless the legislature returns to the issue next session.

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Visit link: 

BP takes Colorado to court and wins millions in tax breaks

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Oster, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on BP takes Colorado to court and wins millions in tax breaks

Two senators want the U.S. to start selling war bonds — to fight climate change

Two senators want the U.S. to start selling war bonds — to fight climate change

By on Apr 28, 2016Share

What if we fought climate change with the same commitment we fight wars? The Green Party’s Jill Stein and Al Gore have long argued for a World War II-scale mobilization to fight climate change, and on Wednesday, two senators introduced a bill — the Climate Change Adapt America Bond Act — that’s the most concrete realization of this concept yet.

Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) propose issuing up to $200 million worth of infrastructure bonds to raise funds for climate change adaptation efforts like seawall construction, desalination, and drought resilience programs. The bill would leverage public interest to fend off the climate menace, modeled after the U.S. War Bonds program from World War II.

A bit like “We Can Do It,” no?

Not all observers are pleased with the bill’s focus on adaptation efforts. Margaret Klein Salamon, director of advocacy group The Climate Mobilization, called it “a defeatist strategy — as if war bonds were sold to Americans so they could better adapt to Nazi rule rather than actually attempt to win the war.”

Salamon also pointed to the scale of the proposal, noting that the $200 million figure pales in comparison to the $185 billion worth of war bonds purchased during World War II. Adjusting for inflation, that’s over $2 trillion today.

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Link to original:  

Two senators want the U.S. to start selling war bonds — to fight climate change

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Two senators want the U.S. to start selling war bonds — to fight climate change