This piece originally appeared on our EDF Voices blog.
Both science and environmentalism are changing – driven more and more by more collaboration and rapidly improving technology.
These developments offer tremendous opportunities, as they can reveal urgent threats much more clearly – as well as the paths to address them.
Yesterday the Western Governors Association, a bipartisan organization representing the Governors of the 19 western states, announced a policy resolution recognizing the importance and economic benefits of efforts to cut methane pollution from oil and gas facilities – the nation’s largest industrial source of methane.
The resolution states:
There are environmental and economic benefits of reducing methane emissions and opportunities for the beneficial use of this natural resource. Many western states – in cooperation with industry in those states – have already implemented regulatory strategies that reduce methane emissions from oil and gas operations, while expanding the use and sale of methane.
It’s summertime in California, and one thing that means is lots of sunshine. Lucky for us, the Golden State is a national leader in turning that sunshine, and other renewable resources, into electricity to power homes and business across the state.
Currently, the state is working to produce 50 percent of its electricity from clean energy resources like solar and wind and is closing in on that goal. Next month, lawmakers will get the chance to advance that goal even further – to 100 percent by 2045.
SB 100, authored by Sen. Kevin de León, is the bill that, if passed, could solidify the new, bigger, bolder target. California would be the second state in the nation to pass this high of a target – only behind Hawaii. A handful of other states are considering aiming at 100 percent clean energy, including Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Washington, and Pennsylvania.
California’s leadership could help tip the scale. California has the opportunity to show the rest of these states and countries across the world that 100 percent clean energy is possible. With climate change already affecting us, we don’t have much more time to waste. Read More
Today General Motors offers two models of electric vehicles (EVs). Within the next five years, the automotive giant will offer at least 20 EV options.
That’s just one of many signs pointing to a more efficient, connected, and electrified transportation sector, which presents a prime opportunity for Ohio companies. In fact, a recent report from Synapse Energy finds that Ohio could bring in over $6 billion in investment and net more than 9,000 jobs by expanding the state’s automotive leadership into an electrified, more efficient future.
Why Ohio?
With a thriving automotive supply chain, Ohio has a strong foundation for investment and growth by electrifying transportation. Specifically, the state is already heavily involved in the areas of the auto industry that will change the most with electrification: internal combustion engines, transmissions, and other drivetrain components.
And according to a 2017 report, Ohio has more than 27,000 jobs – and 80 facilities – building clean and fuel-efficient vehicle technology. Only the states of Michigan and Indiana have more. Read More
A new paper published in Science last week is the culmination of an extensive amount of research conducted over the past six years examining methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain. The study finds that the U.S. oil and gas industry emits 13 million metric tons of methane per year – 60% higher than the EPA Greenhouse Gas Inventory (GHGI) estimates. Some industry sources have questioned the conclusions drawn in the paper and the methods employed to which I respond below.
The 25 co-authors of this Science paper represent 16 different research institutions. These experts were collectively responsible for generating most of the data analyzed and directly involved in writing the paper, which was subjected to a rigorous independent peer review as a condition of publication in one of the world’s top scientific journals.
Informed critiques are a valuable part of the scientific process. But the key issues raised by Energy in Depth (EID) and the American Gas Association seem to reflect a deep misunderstanding of the approaches used in the paper and the underlying data. Here, I explain the methods used to avoid bias and resolve differences among multiple data sets.
A version of this piece originally appeared in Petroleum Economist.
With the annual corporate shareholder meeting season coming to a close and the World Gas Conference around the corner, one thing is abundantly clear – investors are strengthening their stance on climate, and they want the oil and gas industry to step up and reduce methane emissions.
In an open letter in the Financial Times earlier this spring, investors overseeing more than $10.4 trillion wrote they are expecting the oil and gas industry to change how it operates and transition its operations and corporate strategy to a low-carbon economy. Read More
