4 ms·
Our Methane Problem Could Be Bigger Than Scientists Thought
- dmix 7y agoWhy do I feel like I've read this headline a bunch of times before?
- aqme28 7y agoSame. This article was less than two weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22268611 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22268611
- exochrono 7y agoNot surprising to me - the NYT article last year where they went around filming giant methane leaks from seemingly innocuous natural gas wells made it seem like the industry is treating it like a giant head in the sand kind of problem. If they don't measure it then they can't be accountable to it, but it's pretty easy to see the problem is huge. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/12/climate/texas-methane-super-emitters.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/12/climate/texas...
- harry8 7y agoHow does this support Bloomberg's political aspirations? Not at all? Purely coincidental? I don't know how seriously to take this methane issue and I'm sure I can't find out from reading in the same section of bloomberg's propaganda (bloomberg news announced this themselves, remember), a section that had a list of billionaires who made their money saving the planet from global warming including Pratt and his inherited packaging company because they claim some recycling tax credits & subsidies as though landfill were not extremely remote from global warming. So where do we go to get the news on it all where it isn't redolent with ideology and/or extreme self-interest? Genuine question.
- millstone 7y agoThe headline makes it sound like this is bad news, but isn't this actually pretty good news? Total methane emission estimates are unchanged, but now we know that humans are responsible for a larger fraction. This means that we have the potential to reduce total emissions more than previously believed!
- british_india 7y agoNature bats last.
- BlueTemplar 7y agoNot surprising, considering the massive increase in natural gas extraction in the recent years...