Has now been capped. Total release was about 0.1 teragrams; compare to 110 teragrams/y total from the global fossil-energy industry. Perspective. More perspective can be found elsewhere. Current estimates for termites is 20 teragrams/y but I must say that is uncertain as it is based on about 10 of >3000 termite species. Other sources are as you'll find them; my interest is on termites. For Aliso Canyon, as it (happily) appears to have been a global yawn, I'd just like to see it restated as dollars lost because that is on somebody's account book.
I'm sure someone can covert to figure out cost of the methane. In terms of co2 if a metric ton costs $10, and a metric ton of methane is 21x ghg warming potentional then I would use $210/metric ton. The leak was 100,000 metric tons, so $21M worth of ghg leaked. Hey I would tripple it for a fine of $63M but it is small in the scheme of things, what is it ghg of half a million cars for a year, and there are hundreds of millions of cars in the us alone. The Porter Ranch Methane Leak Was the Worst in US History | WIRED Does anyone think that carb's zev mandate will reduce ghg as much as this leak increased it? Just a little perspective on ineffective legisslateion versus not handling known problems.
How many fingers does the little Dutch boy have to put in the dyke. I'm sure other weak spots in the plumbing will come along shortly. .
Methane is money. If you have a lot of it, and if right now is not the be$t time to send it to market, you need to store it. If your storage tech is not adequate, lose big money. Fix that, or whine in court in ways that make you appear less than qualified.
Sorry but I grew up in Oklahoma and remember the flare gas in the oil patches. So I have no illusions about what is happening in the Bakkan field even as we view these images: And those are the wells that actually have flare gas plumbing. When oil comes from the well, it has a lot of dissolved methane. So the flare gas burners help reduce the concentration so we don't have explosions in the oil patch. But this is far from a perfect system. The oil continues to 'out gas' methane and in quantifies that makes the California leak trivial. In the 1960s, a gas well blew out and caught fire. In the nearly 7-9 months it took to drill a cap well, I had occasion to visit "Hell's half acre" only it wasn't a half acre. The heat was so intense you could not stand to get closer than 150 yards without risking 1st and 2nd degree burns. It was the first time I realize a nuclear bomb is a thermal weapon that cooks its victims. And this was years before we had an EPA. Capping the well was just an economic exercise. Bob Wilson Bob Wilson
Nukler bomb = thermal, x-ray, and pressure waves. Which one prevails depends on target details and what the 'thing-doer' is trying to accomplish. Days to years later there are decaying isotopes making target area more or less bad for biology. Oddly enough, there are beetles that can only put eggs in burnt wood. They flock (uselessly) to oil burns, because their infrared sensors indicate 'looks like a forest fire'. Evolution has not kept up with human friskiness.
There are problems here. Many think other states should regulate methane like texas, which would make all but emergency flaring illegal. Texas did this in the 1950s, and found use for the methane ;-) California seems to be more concerned about carbon trading than regulating the real ghg. This makes it a farce. At least bakkan flares the gases on the way to get a productive product, that flaring reduces ghg impact and prevents some dangerous pollutants. This leak was about poor maintenance. No one got anything except the operator temparily saved money but not maintaing properly. I belive oklahoma has laws similar to texas's now so these things get cleaned up faster. There are heavy fines once the time gets past emergency leak. EPA does not really regulate these things well, so its been up to the states. Its probably time to change that.
Still in the news: Despite the Porter Ranch disaster, the top executive over SoCal Gas is getting an enormous bonus - LA Times If citing such a link gets this thread politified, fine. I don't care. Nobody wanted to learn about methane here anyway. (signed, Grumpy)
I am not a big fan of big executive compensation but I read somewhere the potential issue was known but the utilities regulators refused the monies to address the issue before the accident. Calls into question how we manage these types of resources.
Link concerns how/how much to pay in compensation for the amount of methane released. Direct harm to people (displaced from homes etc.) is being 'lawyered' separately. SoCal Gas says it will fix damage after methane leak—if the price is right | Ars Technica
