Sometimes the problem with government committees isn’t who’s at the table – it’s who isn’t. That’s the case with President Joe Biden’s new cabinet-level Methane Task Force, a body charged to accelerate the execution of the U.S. Methane Emissions Reduction Action Plan and advance a general mission of using all possible resources to strengthen methane leak detection and data transparency. The task force emerged as part of the White House’s first ever “Methane Summit,” an event from which the oil and gas industry, the group making the most headway on methane reduction, was conspicuously excluded.
The exclusion of oil and gas sector voices from major talks on methane reduction is no small oversight. Not only are America’s oil and gas producers the ones square in the crosshairs of the Biden administration’s methane schemes, they are also the men and women actually leading the charge to reduce emissions of this powerful greenhouse gas. The sector has long known that identifying and reducing methane, a gas whose potential greenhouse effect is about 25 times that of carbon dioxide, is key to climate change efforts and a smart business practice for producers hoping to optimize production.
Despite reducing methane emissions significantly, driving down their own intensity of methane and greenhouse gas emissions by 28% and 30% in 2019 and 2021, respectively, oil and gas producers are still being especially targeted by short-sighted government policy, in particular by a new proposed rule by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The rule, released in December, leans heavily on a one-size-fits-all approach to identifying and mitigating methane emissions, overlooking and maybe even jeopardizing productive efforts already working. The rule risks stopping investment in proven methane approaches and could force producers to adopt practices that are poor fits.
While America’s oil and gas producers have acknowledged the need for federal methane regulations, they are also aware of various realities in oil and gas production. Such a rule would avoid prescribing specific methane detection methods, allowing producers to choose the method that best suits their production environment and take advantage of technologies yet to come. The rule, in its current form, fails on that account and could hamper the remarkable progress producers are already delivering.
In particular, EPA’s new rule requires the use of Optical Gas Imaging (OGI), a useful and commonly utilized leak detection method in the upstream and midstream sectors of the U.S. natural gas industry. But while this technology is powerful, using a video camera filtered to an absorption band of methane to image and detect natural gas emissions, it’s not always the best choice for producers in particular oil and gas production environments. It also requires a skilled operator, limiting its potential. Experts like METEC at the Colorado State University have pointed out this weakness, saying the technology can be unreliable due to the “abilities of the surveyor that determines quality and effectiveness.” Similarly, a former geologist for the Texas Railroad Commission Bill Godsey pointed out that Colorado State University researchers found detection rates using only OGI, EPA’s chosen technology, “significantly lower than prior studies.”
Rather than foolishly force a “one-size-fits-all” technology on America’s oil and gas producers, EPA should pivot to a technology-neutral, flexible approach that creates the best chance for making critical gains in methane reduction and, thus, advancing America’s ambitious plans to do its fair share on climate. Atlantic Council Senior Fellow Dr. Ellen Wald has argued this point, stating, “Unless the EPA changes its proposed regulation to allow for more flexibility in using advanced methane detection technologies, the agency’s ambitious rule to reduce methane emissions will hamper the very technologies that can accelerate progress in cutting methane.”
It’s important we let proven approaches to methane reduction continue to work. Former Chester County, Pennsylvania Commissioner Earl Baker made this point recently in discussing Pennsylvania’s progress on methane, adding that effective technology will be key to some institutions meeting ambitious promises. He specifically pointed to promises made by Philadelphia Gas Works in 2021 to “achieve an 80% reduction in methane emissions from its natural gas distribution system by 2050” through significant infrastructure investments and advanced technology.”
EPA should acknowledge that America’s oil and gas producers are not only leading the charge on methane, but experts in applying technologies to real production environments. Producers deserve a seat at the table on the president’s Methane Task Force and a better, more flexible rule from EPA.
That’s our best chance for limiting methane emissions and winning on climate change.
