Trump Administration Wants to Make It Easier to Release Methane Into Air
NY
Times,
10
September, 2018
WASHINGTON
— The Trump administration, taking its third major step this year
to roll back federal efforts to fight climate change, is preparing to
make it significantly easier for energy companies to release methane
into the atmosphere.
Methane,
which is among the most powerful greenhouse gases,
routinely leaks from oil and gas wells, and energy companies have
long said that the rules requiring them to test for emissions were
costly and burdensome.
The
Environmental Protection Agency, perhaps as soon as this week, plans
to make public a proposal to weaken an Obama-era
requirement that companies monitor and repair methane leaks,
according to documents reviewed by The New York Times. In a related
move, the Interior Department is also expected in coming days to
release its final version of a draft
rule, proposed in February, that
essentially repeals a restriction on the intentional venting and
“flaring,” or burning, of methane from drilling operations.
The
new rules follow two regulatory rollbacks this year that, taken
together, represent the foundation of the United States’ effort to
rein in global warming. In July, the E.P.A. proposed
weakening a rule on carbon dioxide pollution from vehicle
tailpipes. And
in August, the agency proposed replacing the rule on carbon dioxide
pollution from coal-fired power plants with
a weaker one that
would allow far more global-warming emissions to flow unchecked from
the nation’s smokestacks.
“They’re
taking them down, one by one,” said Janet McCabe, the E.P.A.’s
top climate and clean-air regulator in the Obama administration.
Officials
from the E.P.A., the Interior Department and the White House did not
respond to emails and telephone calls seeking comment.
Industry
groups praised the expected changes. “It’s a neat pair” of
proposals on methane, said Kathleen Sgamma, president of the Western
Energy Alliance, an association of independent oil and gas companies
that is based in Denver. The Obama-era E.P.A. methane rule, she said,
“was the definition of red tape. It was a record-keeping nightmare
that was technically impossible to execute in the field.”
Ms.
Sgamma praised the Trump administration for turning the oil
companies’ requests into policy, noting that the Obama
administration frequently turned proposals from environmental groups
into policy. “It
all depends on who you trust,” she said. “That administration
trusted environmentalists. This one trusts industry.”
The
regulation of methane, while not as widely discussed as emissions
from cars and coal plants, was nonetheless a major component of Mr.
Obama’s efforts to combat climate change. Methane makes up only
about nine percent of greenhouse gases, but it is around 25 times
more effective than carbon dioxide in trapping heat in the
atmosphere. About one-third of methane pollution is estimated to come
from oil and gas operations.
The
forthcoming proposals from the E.P.A. and Interior Department would
allow far more methane to leak from oil and gas drilling operations,
environmentalists say. “These leaks can pop up any time, anywhere,
up and down the oil and gas supply chain,” said Matt Watson, a
specialist in methane pollution with the Environmental Defense Fund,
an advocacy group. “The longer you go in between inspections, the
longer leaks will go undetected and unrepaired.”
The
proposals exemplify President Trump’s policy quest to roll back
regulations on businesses, particularly oil, gas and coal companies.
While significant aspects of the president’s broader agenda —
including immigration and trade policy, and the proposed border wall
with Mexico — remain mired in confusion, and as the administration
struggles under the investigation into the presidential campaign’s
ties with Russia, the E.P.A. and Interior Department have steadily
pressed forward with rollbacks of environmental regulations.
“In
other areas of policymaking, like immigration and health care, they
appear to have brought into the administration ideologues who don’t
know a lot about policymaking,” said Cecilia Muñoz, who directed
the White House Domestic Policy Council in the Obama administration.
“But in climate change and energy, they appear to have brought in
people who know exactly what they’re doing, and know exactly where
the levers are.”
The
pace of the proposals has not been slowed by the resignation in July
of Scott Pruitt, who left the top job at the E.P.A. under a cloud of
ethics scandals. Andrew
Wheeler,
a former coal lobbyist who worked in the E.P.A. under the first
President George Bush, is now the agency’s acting chief.
The
E.P.A.’s new methane proposal, according to the draft seen by The
Times, would loosen a 2016 rule that required oil and gas drillers to
perform leak inspections as frequently as every six months on their
drilling equipment, and to repair leaks within 30 days. The proposed
amendment would lengthen that to once a year in most cases, and to as
infrequently as once every two years for low-producing wells. It
would also double the amount of time a company could wait before
repairing a methane leak from 30 to 60 days.
It
would also double the amount of time required between inspections of
the equipment that traps and compresses the natural gas, from once
every three months to once every six months. On the Alaskan North
Slope, where oil and gas companies contend that harsh weather makes
it difficult to conduct inspections, such equipment would only have
to be monitored annually.
In
addition, the E.P.A. proposal would let energy companies operating in
states that have their own state-level methane standards follow those
standards instead of the federal ones. That would include states such
as Texas, where the pollution standards have been more lax than
federal standards.
If
implemented, the proposal would recoup nearly all the costs to the
oil and gas industry that would have been imposed by the Obama-era
regulation. The E.P.A. estimated that rule would have cost companies
about $530 million by 2025. The E.P.A. estimates that the proposed
changes would save the oil and gas industry $484 million by the same
year.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.