Energy Exchange

A Powerful Proposal To Increase Groundwater Knowledge In Wyoming

By Jon Goldstein / Published: September 3, 2013

Jon Goldstein The Latin phrase “Scientia potentia est” may not ring a bell, but its translation should: knowledge is power.

The oil and gas industry spends millions every year to expand its knowledge of underground energy reserves. That is because better geologic knowledge is powerful stuff, it can mean the difference between a very profitable well or a very expensive dry hole.

Doesn’t it make sense then for the industry to also invest in better knowledge of local water resources? Investing a small amount in understanding local groundwater quality before you drill, and following up to monitor whether that water is potentially impacted once energy production commences is also incredibly powerful for local residents, state regulators and the industry alike.

Wyoming oil and gas regulators have proposed a testing program that aims to do exactly this – establish a groundwater quality baseline in areas where oil and gas development is planned, and then follow up with two sets of tests to monitor for potential impacts from this specific activity. Read More »

Good News On Clean Air To Beat The August Doldrums

By Tomas Carbonell / Published: August 13, 2013

Source: Sage Metering

August is typically a quiet time of year, and particularly so for work that concerns the nation’s capital. But amidst the dog days of summer, federal regulators made a fairly significant move this month to preserve stricter emissions controls for thousands of large storage vessels used to temporarily house crude oil, condensate and other liquids.

Last Monday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a rule that keeps in place an important aspect of its oil and gas pollution standards (or New Source Performance Standards, NSPS) issued last year, including provisions for storage tanks that emit six or more tons of ozone-forming air pollutants annually. These standards were intended to help reduce ground-level ozone and methane emissions in areas where oil and gas production occur. EPA proposed revisions to these standards in April of 2013 in response to industry petitions for less stringent requirements that would have considerably diminished important gains made by the NSPS to protect public health and the environment. EDF and five other environmental organizations joined together to strongly encourage EPA’s reconsideration, opposing these revisions in detailed technical comments filed with the agency.

EPA’s final rule is good news in the fight for cleaner, healthier air. Whereas the April 2013 proposal would have created a broad exemption from emission controls for thousands of recently-built tanks, the final rule ensures that operators of all new storage tanks that pass the six ton threshold will be required to reduce emissions by 95 percent. Controlling emissions from oil and gas storage tanks is important. Roughly 20,000 newly constructed tanks have been added in the field since August 2011 and these receptacles, if not properly managed, could be a large source of ozone forming pollution, as well as climate altering methane emissions. Had EPA proceeded to establish a broad exemption for these tanks, millions of tons of additional ozone-forming pollution and hundreds of thousands of tons of methane would have been released into the atmosphere. Read More »

Also posted in Methane / Read 1 Response

New Warnings About Methane Emissions

By Steven Hamburg / Published: August 5, 2013

Concerns about the methane problem associated with the U.S. natural gas boom are mounting with each study released. This week scientists with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the University of Colorado (UC) at Boulder published a new paper on methane leakage in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. It reports an alarmingly high level of methane emissions in the Uintah Basin of Utah — 6.2 to 11.7 percent of total production for an area about 1,000 square miles. Findings are based on readings from airplane flights that measured methane in the air on a single day and estimated the proportion of those emissions that came from the oil and gas infrastructure —production, gathering systems, processing and transmission of the gas out of the region. The authors calculated the uncertainty of their measurements, finding a 68 percent chance the leak rate is between 6.2 and 11.7 percent, and a 95 percent chance it is between 3.5 and 14 percent.

This follows two other regional studies conducted by scientists at the same organizations. One released last May in the Journal of Geophysical Research reported a 17 percent methane leak rate for the Los Angeles Basin, which has received quite a bit of attention although, as I’ll explain below, the figure can be misleading. The second study, conducted over the Denver-Julesburg Basin in 2008, found 4 percent of the methane produced at an oil and gas field near Denver at that time was escaping into the atmosphere. Taken together, these studies are troubling. They should be regarded as alarm bells ringing in our ears. Action by policymakers and industry is needed now.

Any amount of methane lost from the natural gas supply chain should be eliminated whenever possible. That’s because methane retains heat much more effectively relative to carbon dioxide: Over the first 20 years, an ounce of methane traps in heat 72 times more efficiently. Even small amounts vented or released as “fugitives” – unintentional methane leaked as gas moves from the field to your doorstep – can reduce or eliminate the climate advantage we think we’re getting when we substitute natural gas for coal or oil.

Also posted in Climate, General, Methane / Read 3 Responses

Where Is All Of The Water Going? A Look At Which Energy Resources Are Gulping Down Our Water

By Kate Zerrenner / Published: July 25, 2013

If you’re like so many conscientious consumers, you’ve experienced the disappointment that comes when you realize the lean turkey breast you bought has 300% of your daily value of sodium, negating the benefits of its high-protein and low-fat content. Instantly, food choices feel more complex; you’ve learned the hard way that the pursuit of a low-fat diet is not the same as a healthy diet.

The Energy-Water Nexus shows us that our energy choices are much like our food choices: The environmental benefits of an energy diet low in carbon emissions might be diminished by increased water consumption (or waste), and the unforeseen tradeoffs between the two resources (i.e. more sodium in lieu of less fat, can hurt us in the long run).

Water Intensity

As we have mentioned before, roughly 90% of the energy we use today comes from nuclear or fossil fuel power plants, which require 190 billion gallons of water per day, or 39% of all U.S. freshwater withdrawals (water “withdrawal” indicates the water withdrawn from ground level water sources; not to be confused with “consumption,” which indicates the amount of water lost to evaporation.)

Also posted in Energy Efficiency, Energy-Water Nexus, Texas / Tagged energy, Energy Policy, Energy-Water Nexus, environment, Solar, texas, Water | Read 7 Responses

On The Road To Better Data

By EDF Blogs / Published: June 28, 2013

Source: Bulk Transporter

This blog post was written by Jason Mathers, Senior Manager of EDF’s Corporate Partnerships Program.

The International Energy Agency weighed in last week as bullish on the future of natural gas as a transportation fuel.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the IEA “expects natural gas use in road and maritime transportation to rise to 98 billion cubic meters by 2018, covering around 10 percent of incremental energy needs in the transport sector.”

Three factors are behind this increase in the use of natural gas for transportation, according to Maria van der Hoeven, the IEA’s executive director. These are the fuel’s “abundant supplies as well as concerns about oil dependency and air pollution.” The cost factor is particularly a driver for commercial fleet operators where current fuel prices have become more favorable for natural gas over diesel.

In the U.S., all new trucks fueled by diesel or natural gas must meet the same standards for emissions of particulate matter and nitrogen oxides. Natural gas engines for medium- and heavy-duty trucks have surpassed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s stringent standards for particulate matter emissions by as much as 80 percent and for nitrogen oxides by up to 35 percent. Cummins Westport, the leading producer of natural gas engines, is investigating the feasibility of reducing NOx emissions from its spark-ignited natural gas engines to levels significantly below the current federal emissions standard.

Natural gas trucks have the potential to deliver tangible greenhouse gas emissions benefits over their petroleum-based counterparts. This certainty that natural gas vehicles are able to consistently deliver on their potential climate benefits in part depends on minimizing methane leaks caused by vehicle operations, refueling and maintenance. Read More »

Posted in Natural Gas / Comments are closed

Strong Federal Air Measures Still Needed

By EDF Blogs / Published: June 21, 2013

This blog post was written by Tomás Carbonell, Attorney in EDFs Climate and Air Program. Jack Nelson, a legal intern in EDF’s Washington, D.C. office, assisted in the preparation of this post.

Source: EPA

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency put in place last year important standards to protect public health and reduce emissions of harmful air pollutants from oil and gas storage tanks and related equipment. EPA wisely issued those standards after thousands of comments were provided by concerned public advocates for cleaner air. With oil and gas production expanding quickly, tough standards are needed now more than ever to assure air quality protections for people living near oil and gas producing areas.

Recently, EPA proposed changes to standards for storage tanks in the oil and gas sector — a major source of pollutants that contribute to smog, climate change, and other threats to public health and the environment. These changes would undermine the progress made thus far and would lead to significant and unnecessary increases in emissions of volatile organic compounds, methane, and other pollutants. EDF is urging EPA not to finalize the proposed revisions in comments filed together with Clean Air Council, Clean Air Task Force, Environmental Integrity Project, Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club.

Proposed Changes to the Storage Tank Standards

Last fall, oil and gas industry groups petitioned EPA for changes to the storage tank standards, arguing that less stringent standards are needed because these tanks are even more numerous and emit at higher levels than EPA predicted when it was developing the current standards. If anything, this new information indicates the need to maintain or strengthen health-protective standards for storage tanks. EPA’s proposed changes would instead: Read More »

Also posted in Methane, Washington, DC / Comments are closed