You should read the article. The issue is that CH4 is a vastly more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2, because of how strongly it absorbs IR [0]. Even small meth

You should read the article. The issue is that CH4 is a vastly more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2, because of how strongly it absorbs IR [0]. Even small methane leaks are significant. This is counterbalanced by methane * Being less carbon-rich [than coal] -- looking at the right side of your equation, about half the energy comes from fusing hydrogen (H-O) as opposed to carbon (C=O) [1] * Allowing more efficient combustion (Muller says 60% vs. 44%) You cannot come to any conclusion here without doing the math! [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global-warming_potential#Values https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global-warming_potential#Value... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_enthalpy_change_of_formation_(data_table) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_enthalpy_change_of_fo...