@ReneJanV @BM_Visser 1/ De grootte van methaanlekkages in de VS schaliegaswinning (en schalieolie) is ondertussen een heel politiek en gepolariseerd onderwerp geworden. Ik hou het bij deze overview studie, peer reviewed en in van de beste tijdschriften:
@anotherMaxtide @simondonner @KHayhoe Depends on the leakage rate. If high rates of leakage then natural gas is just as bad as coal over a 20 year period. If leakage is low it's better than coal. https://t.co/4qC1YzzOLr
@AukeHoekstra De schattingen van upstream/midstream methaanlekkages van Howard (en daar gaat het in wezen om) liggen al 10 jaar ongeveer 2 keer zo hoog als die van andere studies. Een aantal links in: https://t.co/cf0HxMX9Qr Beste review paper over lekka
@julianhast However, Alvarez, et al., 2018 conducted a meta study that estimated the average gas supply chain leak rate to be 2.3%: https://t.co/ThgC481czQ.
@princertitude Ainsi que le stockage à proximité des puits. https://t.co/yY7zZs0UeN https://t.co/8R0c87uiXP
@AufstandLastGen @Bundeskanzler @c_lindner @Wissing https://t.co/jFp2OARRW3 Vielleicht klebt man sich besser mal an die noch offenen Bohrlöcher in den USA. Quasi direkt da wo der Schaden entsteht. Dabei würde mich noch interessieren wie die Einsparungen i
@ElizabethMay @ccpa Thinking natural gas is a solution to #climate problems requires people to close their eyes and ears to science. https://t.co/fGukLM036F
RT @MiguelEscotoTX: 6. Are these "Methane Math" guesstimates accurate? 🙂🙂🙂 Of fucking course they are not. An overly zealous math equation…
RT @MiguelEscotoTX: 6. Are these "Methane Math" guesstimates accurate? 🙂🙂🙂 Of fucking course they are not. An overly zealous math equation…
6. Are these "Methane Math" guesstimates accurate? 🙂🙂🙂 Of fucking course they are not. An overly zealous math equation by a petro engineer can cost their company millions of dollars. https://t.co/tJ1l100V7N https://t.co/qcBcJpC8JF
RT @whatisacorncob: https://t.co/4kRZrQy0iL I was right about my assumption, this article finds that true CH4 emissions from oil and gas ar…
https://t.co/4kRZrQy0iL I was right about my assumption, this article finds that true CH4 emissions from oil and gas are at least 60% higher than this estimate
@MargrietKuijper @AukeHoekstra 1/ I had this one in Dutch: https://t.co/cf0HxMX9Qr For US methane leakage I prefer this Science review paper: https://t.co/xY7DS8vjLS Methane leakage on average 2.3% ; similar to e.g., IEA Carbon Methane tracker for Russ
Les sources: Alvarez et al (2018): https://t.co/1XLkEuuzo1 Zhang et al (2020): https://t.co/GzhSoCGiXR
Studies increasingly show ch4 emissions often make fossil gas roughly as dirty as the dirtiest fuels that it was supposed to replace. 🇪🇺 can control emissions inside its borders, but most originate at extraction and upstream transmission (non EU). https://
@AlexEpstein Nope. 1) https://t.co/HbnVk1bV7J and 2) supply chain emissions were ∼60% higher than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency inventory estimate https://t.co/4tFrlFph7E 3) https://t.co/luNEHCZqiV 4) https://t.co/OR7AkzResC
RT @JillesAppelscha: @Marien_Boonman @JeroenJanse @Marckonijn 2/ Ik heb zelf het meeste vertrouwen in academische review studies als https:…
@Marien_Boonman @JeroenJanse @Marckonijn 2/ Ik heb zelf het meeste vertrouwen in academische review studies als https://t.co/xY7DS8vjLS , de IEA methane tracker: https://t.co/gAeHK8ruIc , werk van Kayross: https://t.co/UDzngOyiiS
@nilaug @ingrid_hjort Dreier seg om studier av denne typen: https://t.co/oliC91RQ7i
@mayaVirg @renepeters @EnvDefenseFund Juist die neem ik mee als mijn keuze voor een mid case estimate in het Energeia artikel! (Low case 1.4% EPA, mid case 2.2% Science, high case rond de 4%, Howarth achtige papers) 2.2% methaanlekkage - dat was indertij
RT @EvanDSherwin: One reason previous ground-based measurement studies did not see these large emissions is likely rooted in sample size. T…
RT @EvanDSherwin: One reason previous ground-based measurement studies did not see these large emissions is likely rooted in sample size. T…
RT @EvanDSherwin: One reason previous ground-based measurement studies did not see these large emissions is likely rooted in sample size. T…
RT @EvanDSherwin: One reason previous ground-based measurement studies did not see these large emissions is likely rooted in sample size. T…
RT @EvanDSherwin: One reason previous ground-based measurement studies did not see these large emissions is likely rooted in sample size. T…
One reason previous ground-based measurement studies did not see these large emissions is likely rooted in sample size. The monumental Alvarez et al. 2018 Science paper was largely based on ~1,000 measurements from years of field studies. 13/n https://t.co
@FabrizioCarfi 40 - 60 % più inquinante del gas medio USA. Perdite ca . 1.5% (quindi dovrebbe essere meno inquinante del carbone, da quel che ricordo 4% leak gas = carbone) Report tecnico: https://t.co/qSKlqgfR45
Zdroje - pokračování 👇 [9] https://t.co/Pd2GVwoKJ0 [10] https://t.co/Sa5iFAPCiD [11] https://t.co/Gb46LIIhjX
Kommentare wie dieser zeigen wieder: 1. Kommentator las den eigentlichen Beitrag hinter dem Tweet offenkundig nicht. Die Behauptung steht nicht drin. 2. Dass #Erdgas schlecht fürs Klima ist (v.a. wegen Fracking), hat die Wissenschaft längst aufm Schirm.
@MountainMoves_ @TomMoyerUT @GovCox @RepJohnCurtis Best US national estimate from 2018 is 2.3%, but that isn't every basin & some recent estimates have come out higher, so US total probably closer to 3%. 2018 US est (2.3% leakage): https://t.co/tzFjcwd
@EmilyMason1192 @climatedom NP. I have a PhD in the field and work in it. I can tell you with full confidence that existing LCA models for electric vehicles and energy production in the US are not accurate - Volvo's is closer to reality. https://t.co/q4XE
EDF and other researchers continue to find methane emissions from fossil fuel operations are higher than official estimates. / https://t.co/kcs7CJtU6l
@zukunft_gas Über die Höhe der Vorkettenemissionen gibt es unterschiedliche Auffassungen. Fakt ist aber: Sie wurden bisher eher unterschätzt. Das zeigt auch der starke atmosphärische #Methan-Anstieg. Wo gemessen statt geschätzt wird zeigen sich zudem höhe
@alexjadecove Not true, A Science paper with ground measurements and aircraft validations of 30% of US facilities suggest it leaks at ~2.3%: this is even ~60% higher than the EPA inventory. Let's separate scientific analysis from advocacy (https://t.co/rmF
@RichardMeyerDC @AukeHoekstra @TedNordhaus @emilygrubert My read was the best estimates are: Brandt et al 2014: 1.88% to 2.63% https://t.co/aTHCNOewtT Alvarez et al 2018: 2% to 2.7% https://t.co/WG4HBnGip8 That said, its a good question about the extent
RT @TedNordhaus: @howarth_cornell The guy sued his critics for pointing out serious flaws in his work. And yes, I looked quite carefully at…
@howarth_cornell The guy sued his critics for pointing out serious flaws in his work. And yes, I looked quite carefully at your paper. Sadly, @HirokoTabuchi did not. https://t.co/EaBrCmli4I
3.5% not radical at all, but rather supported by majority of top-down studies, as we carefully explain in our paper. Beyond that, we performed a sensitivity analysis with methane emissions down to 1.54% (which is as low as reasonable literature allows). O
RT @JillesAppelscha: @JMGlachant @POLITICOEurope @gnievchenko @RonnieBelmans @AukeHoekstra @MLiebreich 1/ Methane leakage rate they are usi…
@JMGlachant @POLITICOEurope @gnievchenko @RonnieBelmans @AukeHoekstra @MLiebreich 1/ Methane leakage rate they are using: 3.5%. Best review paper I am aware of in Science gives 2.3%: https://t.co/LqnyHTgAug (and that is for the full US chain, including di
@felixmatthes @PhHauser @howarth_cornell @mzjacobson @david_joffe @EnvDefenseFund Bei diesen "facility level mesearuments" wurden in den USA viel höhere Emissionen entdeckt. Daraufhin wurden dann die einzelnen Komponenten überprüft. So wird sichergestellt,
3/ Dit was vooral een bottom-up studie. De naar mijn inschatting meest uitgebreide en gezaghebbende academische review study (met meer nadruk op top down) in Science kwam uit op 2,3%: https://t.co/xY7DS8vjLS Als ik zelf één studie/getal zou moeten uitkiez
They use Howarth's radical outlier assumption of a 3.5% leak rate. Here are two widely cited studies showing much lower leakage rates. 2/13 https://t.co/OEtCthR1pp https://t.co/IfcA0kl6x3
Our last ChemAFAR meeting of the summer is next week on Tuesday, August 17th @ 1 PM EST! We will be discussing this paper: https://t.co/twd7HrAfsH We look forward to seeing you there!
RT @jeffofalberta: When I started my PhD at Stanford this was the conclusion of @EnvDefenseFund compendium of years of surveys in Science.…
When I started my PhD at Stanford this was the conclusion of @EnvDefenseFund compendium of years of surveys in Science. Apparently, the EPA was off by 2x. https://t.co/qkkVnx9mTh (4/n)
RT @arvindpawan1: This isn't quite accurate. The best scientific estimate of US average #methane leakage rate - compiled from several stu…
RT @arvindpawan1: This isn't quite accurate. The best scientific estimate of US average #methane leakage rate - compiled from several stu…
@Blueguy771 @Donbob01 @QuickWithSteel @LiosGuy @YossarianDan @yvesduv @calebmaupin "Street Journal analysis using conversion formulas from the Environmental Protection Agency and emissions estimates for 2015 published last year in the journal Science." ht
This isn't quite accurate. The best scientific estimate of US average #methane leakage rate - compiled from several studies - is 2.3% (paper: https://t.co/r6PV95oKIK) Good news is that effective regulations can significantly reduce leakage: https://t.c
@lambdadmitry @JoshuaZed1 @mattyglesias Sorry buddy - you gotta catch up.
@JoshuaZed1 @mattyglesias Natural gas leaks are incredibly underreported both in the production and distribution stage (60%) and the end-use stage (200%+). GWP of CH4 over 20 years is 86x CO2. https://t.co/dJLvMfgFDO https://t.co/rJXbiUFTiK
RT @360CNN: Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain https://t.co/AHue1XXAdB
Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain https://t.co/AHue1XXAdB
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
@ggaulier @electricityMap D'autres travaux montrent la complexité de l'analyse, d'où l'intérêt de retenir une valeur médiane et un mini/maxi https://t.co/3BicVR5tA5
RT @I_Faiella: U.S. natural gas production in 2018 had a warming impact comparable to the carbon emissions from all US passenger cars and t…
U.S. natural gas production in 2018 had a warming impact comparable to the carbon emissions from all US passenger cars and trucks. @energyathaas @ScienceMagazine https://t.co/F2IbJjpODY
For e.g., a 2018 paper showed that US methane emissions are 2.3%, about 60% higher than EPA estimates. So, are bottom-up inventory estimates inherently worse compared to top-down estimates? Is the EPA methodology wrong? https://t.co/V3GgFG2mpr https://
@RichardMeyerDC or if you have a problem with suzuki: https://t.co/DgwQn1fssf
Alvarez et al. 2018 based on bottom-up estimates, which are low, & also used way-too-low EPA value for distribution emissions. 3.6% is a better estimate, and probably still too low, as I published in August 2020. https://t.co/wOCLMWAB4P
@howarth_cornell @CostaSamaras On the question of leakage, the most authoritative review I'm aware of was Alvarez et al 2018, which suggested around 2.3% system-wide leakage. That said, there are clearly pretty big uncertainties remaining here... https://t
@lucaberta Essere pro o contro le fonti fossili non è una mera questione di gusti. https://t.co/1tDU1DZdxJ
RT @FracTracker: Also - fracking is terrible for the climate! The oil & gas supply chain leaks crazy amounts of #methane a powerful greenho…
Also - fracking is terrible for the climate! The oil & gas supply chain leaks crazy amounts of #methane a powerful greenhouse gas & the magnitude of leaks is much higher than EPA estimates https://t.co/wQ2J7nP4wC If only we had other sources of ene
@UseTechForGood And this 2018 study shows just how much methane leaks from natural gas extraction and transportation in the US. https://t.co/tryCUcihIC
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain #Methane (CH4) is a potent greenhouse gas, and CH4 emissions from human activities since preindustrial times are responsible for 0.97 W m−2 of radiative forcing...carbon dioxide (CO2)
PermianB https://t.co/3WpdwygXpa https://t.co/UmmGfk3B1l @stanfordearth scientists creating ways to quickly, accurately & cheap find NG leaks Jun 2019 https://t.co/Nd6I82VEd6 Oil $ https://t.co/5aPnhEqgyw Assessment CH4 emissions https://t.co/1VgZ8l4N
@hoteatcooltreat @CritLeft @MeryamHd2020 What data gives you this confidence? Also need to keep in mind that local urban transmission infrastructure is often many decades old. It's not just a production problem although that is still significant. https://t
@simonpickstone @emilyhholden We also warmly recommend a look at our synthesis paper, which estimates U.S. oil and gas industry emissions in 2015 were 13 Tg CH4, over 80% higher than current EPA GHGI estimates. My colleague, @lwhitt is happy to help with a
In parallel, there is also evidence that at least US O&G methane emissions are underestimated by ~60%. Is this just a coincidence or an indication that the global methane budget is under-estimating #methane emissions from fossil fuels? I'm not sure
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
We don’t have data on a mature power-to-gas RNG system, but we know fossil gas systems (the ones whose pipelines + appliances we might wish to repurpose) leak methane (https://t.co/YiQuaZbfOd), and so do mature biogas systems (https://t.co/NKiOvBbx7o).
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
@arvindpawan1 (Alvarez 2018 estimate average supply chain emissions at 2.3%: https://t.co/WG4HBnGip8)
@scooniepenn “2015 supply chain emissions is 13 ± 2 teragrams per year... ~60% higher than the U.S. EPA inventory estimate... Methane emissions of this magnitude... produce radiative forcing over a 20-year time horizon comparable to the CO2 from natural ga
@JoeBiden @Laurie_Garrett That's great Ban Fracking. https://t.co/e0GbEnOoaj https://t.co/FW36pHN4gI
@jaketapper @CNN The jury is still out on natural gas role in GHG emissions. 2018 @MIT study: ...for natural gas to be a major component to meet GHG reduction targets, methods of controlling methane leakage have to improve 30 to 90 percent. https://t.co/
@PauliJllo We mentioned fugitive leak emissions, in line with the Alvarez et al. (2018) study https://t.co/VQLYDScxFW because this is the most obvious bridge between our top-down atmospheric inversion approach and bottom-up inventories.
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
RT @ConstZerger: (6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Me…
(6/8) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Messmethoden für #Methan auch in Europa und Russland Anwendung finden. Studie hier ▶️https://t.co/UNGC6DYe8q
RT @ConstZerger: @christophbals @geipello @tazgezwitscher @Umweltbundesamt @DBI_Gruppe @DVGW @zukunft_erdgas (6/x) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe…
@christophbals @geipello @tazgezwitscher @Umweltbundesamt @DBI_Gruppe @DVGW @zukunft_erdgas (6/x) Wir bei der @Umwelthilfe fordern deshalb, dass die neuen Erkenntnisse von Alvarez et al. (Science, 2018) zu neuen Messmethoden für #Methan auch in Europa und