Cleaning Up: Leadership in an Age of Climate Change

Texas Hold'em: Playing Poker With Methane - Ep167: Grant Swartzwelder

Jun 19, 2024

Grant Swartzwelder, methane science expert, discusses conflicting estimates of methane leakage in the oil and gas industry, the challenges of reducing emissions, and the importance of reliable methane data. The conversation also explores the impact of methane emissions in major producing states like Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma, as well as the complexities of managing gas leaks in oil facilities and the challenges faced by companies in adhering to regulations

Ask episode

Chapters

Transcript

Episode notes

Intro

00:00 • 6min

Global Efforts and Challenges in Reducing Methane Emissions from Oil and Gas Producers

06:08 • 6min

Analyzing Methane Leakage and Natural Gas in the Oil and Gas Industry

11:50 • 4min

Exploring Emissions Management in the Oil and Gas Industry

15:22 • 2min

Oil and Gas Operations in Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma: Addressing Emissions

17:39 • 2min

Addressing Gas Leaks in Oil Facilities

19:18 • 9min

Challenges and Regulations in Preventing Methane Leaks in Oil and Gas Companies

27:56 • 9min

Navigating Environmental Regulations in Texas

37:00 • 8min

Challenges in Monitoring Methane Emissions in the Oil and Gas Industry

45:00 • 17min

Transitioning to Cleaner Energy Sources: Challenges and Implications

01:01:38 • 14min

Unintended Consequences of Consolidation in the Oil Industry

01:15:12 • 14min

Exploring Methane Emissions and Data Analysis

01:28:44 • 2min

Depending on who you ask, methane is either a useful transition fuel to a low-carbon future, or a super polluter. The science of methane says that for natural gas to have a lower climate footprint than other fossil fuels, particularly coal, there can be leakage of no more than 3.2% from end to end. Yet studies across the US show wildly different leakage rates. One of the most influential, by Robert Howarth of Cornell University, puts it at 4.8%, making methane worse for the environment than coal. The EPA tells a different story, and says leakage rates are just 0.93%. All of this really matters for the climate, especially since Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The US has become the world's biggest producer and exporter of natural gas, and hundreds of billions of dollars have been invested globally on the premise that natural gas is a cleaner stop-gap between our fossil present and our low-carbon future. So who's right? And how can we find ways to reduce those methane emissions in either case. Grant Swartzwelder, founder of OTA Environmental Solutions and ESG Dynamics, based in Dallas, Texas, joins Cleaning Up to tease out the problem.

Episode Update (Dec 2024)

The 3.2% figure refers to the relative warming impact of coal-fired power generation versus national gas with a given level of leakage on day one - when all of the methane is still in the atmosphere. As methane decays in the atmosphere faster than CO2 is absorbed, the “breakeven” level of fugitive emissions increases as you look at longer periods. If you take the standard 100-year warming period, fugitive emissions from natural gas would need to be around 8% - well above those measured in the US – for gas power to be as bad as coal power. At 20 years the figure is around 4%. (source: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1202407109)
The 4.8% figure has been modified by Professor Howarth subsequent to the release of the episode, based on critiques received when it was in pre-print. Criticism continues, however, and one proposed corrected analysis shows that 100-year GHG intensity of LNG that are at most 15% below the lowest general estimates for coal-fired power. (source: https://thebreakthrough.org/issues/energy/a-major-paper-on-liquified-natural-gas-emissions-is-riddled-with-errors)