5 ms·

unfortunately this isn't really the case. the industry knows its throwing away massive amounts of methane from the active fracking based wells. texas railroad c

unfortunately this isn't really the case. the industry knows its throwing away massive amounts of methane from the active fracking based wells. texas railroad commissioner is on the record defending it as carbon neutral because if you leak it or capture and burn it, it adds the same carbon footprint. methane flares are permitted at huge volumes. and if you drive i-10 between el paso and san antonio, its starkly clear

snewman 3y ago
And to be clear (for anyone who doesn't know, I presume parent does and simply didn't think it necessary to explain), this "carbon neutrality" argument is entirely bogus, because one molecule of methane has far more climate impact than one molecule of carbon dioxide, even though they each contain a single carbon atom (CH₄ vs. CO₂). Apparently, the underlying science is basically that "wigglier" molecules have more propensity to intercept photons, and that's why molecules like methane and refrigerants have more impact than the relatively simple CO₂.
- dtgriscom 3y ago
  > "wigglier" molecules Don't get technical with me.
- hkt 3y ago
  The proper "exchange rate" between CO2 and other molecules is known as the GWP, Global Warming Potential: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential Methane is 25x worse than carbon dioxide - despite having the same amount of carbon.
- dylan604 3y ago
  And to be even more clear, if it is a statement about global warming, climate change, green energy or any thing along those lines coming from an official from Texas, you know it is just going to be "wigglier" than any molecule.
JohnFen 3y ago
> carbon neutral because if you leak it or capture and burn it, it adds the same carbon footprint. That's a very... ummm... interesting definition of "carbon neutral".
mturmon 3y ago
Agree, and furthermore, the tech to detect these large point leaks is very available to those who care. Unlike diffuse sources, these concentrated leaks show up readily to ground, airborne or remote sensing instruments.
coding123 3y ago
Yes driving the i10 down there is straight out of some apocalyptic sci-fi world, but it's happening.
- lurquer 3y ago
  as you are driving, perhaps you should consider what's filling your tank.
  - coding123 3y ago
    Oh I do. Just commenting on the visual that is the area. There are better ways to handle it. However pipelines are expensive to build.
jofer 3y ago
TX RRC is an elected, political position. Don't confuse who's in that office with anyone actually working in the industry. You might as well say "the TX lt governor" or something similar. It would have the same implication for familiarity with the office they're in, sadly.

snewman 3y ago

And to be clear (for anyone who doesn't know, I presume parent does and simply didn't think it necessary to explain), this "carbon neutrality" argument is entirely bogus, because one molecule of methane has far more climate impact than one molecule of carbon dioxide, even though they each contain a single carbon atom (CH₄ vs. CO₂). Apparently, the underlying science is basically that "wigglier" molecules have more propensity to intercept photons, and that's why molecules like methane and refrigerants have more impact than the relatively simple CO₂.

dtgriscom 3y ago
> "wigglier" molecules Don't get technical with me.
hkt 3y ago
The proper "exchange rate" between CO2 and other molecules is known as the GWP, Global Warming Potential: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential Methane is 25x worse than carbon dioxide - despite having the same amount of carbon.
dylan604 3y ago
And to be even more clear, if it is a statement about global warming, climate change, green energy or any thing along those lines coming from an official from Texas, you know it is just going to be "wigglier" than any molecule.

JohnFen 3y ago

> carbon neutral because if you leak it or capture and burn it, it adds the same carbon footprint. That's a very... ummm... interesting definition of "carbon neutral".

mturmon 3y ago

Agree, and furthermore, the tech to detect these large point leaks is very available to those who care. Unlike diffuse sources, these concentrated leaks show up readily to ground, airborne or remote sensing instruments.

coding123 3y ago

Yes driving the i10 down there is straight out of some apocalyptic sci-fi world, but it's happening.

lurquer 3y ago
as you are driving, perhaps you should consider what's filling your tank.
- coding123 3y ago
  Oh I do. Just commenting on the visual that is the area. There are better ways to handle it. However pipelines are expensive to build.

jofer 3y ago

TX RRC is an elected, political position. Don't confuse who's in that office with anyone actually working in the industry. You might as well say "the TX lt governor" or something similar. It would have the same implication for familiarity with the office they're in, sadly.