Satellites discover huge amounts of undeclared methane emissions | Space
https://www.space.com/satellites-discover-huge-undeclared-methane-emissions
I shared that with a couple of Oil Industry (Exploration Geologists) I know.
A bit of a "Lets put in the cat with the pigeons " :)
The response was interesting I thought.
Basically, its no surprise..... and have a look at the north sea... you wont see much escaping there.
Also, old coal mines... loads of CH4 leaks I am told. In fact some people are apparently trying to harvest it (No citation)
And the warming permafrost.. It coming out there too as it defrosts... ( I remember that from way back).
And that refuse dumps are using old marine engines to reuse the CH4 coming off them (No citation)
there was a daring suggestion, with a wink, to say that sewage has the same issue, (Methane production) and thats really recycled methane... Just like the oil and gas underground, but on a shorter timescale.
I would love to see if the cows are registered on these satellites.
Not being mentioned seems an omission.
Ask, and thou shalt receive...
Data from the satellite helped Harvard University researchers determine that livestock emitted more methane than oil and gas did in 2004, according to a new study — the first to use high-resolution satellite data to study methane emissions in the U.S.
Measuring Cow & Pig Emissions Goes to New Heights | Climate Central
https://www.climatecentral.org/news/livestock-methane-emissions-satellite-co2-17749
Oh, I wont share that with my Geologist friends :) haha!
I was going to say I would keep eating meat, but that rather kills that argument.
>>cows
This is quite controversial. Traditionally, ag has been exempted from rules on methane pollution. If that changes and we put a price on methane, it will be interesting to see what happens.
>>meat
I don't eat meat, but I do eat dairy and that's about half as bad as beef in terms of CO2 output for a given amt of nutrition (sometimes measuring calories, sometimes measuring protein). So dairy is about as bad as poultry in terms of climate if I recall.
I haven't kept up on this, but there was a study a while back saying that free-range grass-fed cattle actually produce more methane because grass is harder to break down and doesn't fatten up as quickly as the grain/hormone/whatever cocktail fed to factory farmed cattle. So it's possible (I would need to check up) that there is a cruelty/carbon tradeoff and it could get worse in terms of price if there were a price on methane. There are tradeoffs though - certain grazing regimes and livestock choices can dramatically change how much carbon gets sequestered in the soil. If I recall, native perennial prairie grasses plus bison put a fair bit of carbon into the soil because of the deep roots and narrow hooves.
I have not looked into it see how much of that is correct or what current thinking is, so take all that with several grains of salt.
> bison
Bison burgers are tasty.
Honestly, I'd like to see us tackle the industrial/commercial sources first. You know, the guys rich enough to hire lobbyists before we start culling the cattle herds. We have enough problems with food supply from the alleged supply chain.
I think the reality is you have to start with the biggest wins first, wherever they are. I don't know where that is and that's why I so strongly support a price on carbon. That would help reveal the big wins. It's not enough, but it points the way.
And in the end, it all has to get fixed. We can't get to net zero and continue to eat the same foods grown using the same old methods, especially not massive quantities of beef and raspberries flown in from Chile. Potato chips are a guilty pleasure. They often have a huge carbon footprint per calorie because they are so inefficient to ship.
Of course, the biggest carbon footprint per calorie, bar none, is bottled water and diet soda!
Talking to someone a AG school at the moment in the UK, (Cirencester) he was telling me that they can change the cows diet to be low belch... They can also potty train them now, and separate urine and sh1t for processing.
QuoteI don't know where that is and that's why I so strongly support a price on carbon.
I am unclear how this works, is methane considered a multiple of carbon? (In theory of carbon pricing or in actual)
>cows diet
"new research finds that adding seaweed to beef cow diets can reduce their methane emissions by as much as 82 percent
Seaweed-Fed Cows Burp Less Planet-Warming Methane | Smithsonian Magazine
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/seaweed-fed-cows-burp-less-planet-warming-methane-180977296/
good find :)
OK, so how do kangaroo steaks taste?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo#Absence_of_digestive_methane_release
>>OK, so how do kangaroo steaks taste?
Hmm, might have to report back: https://www.fossilfarms.com/collections/kangaroo-meat
catchy headline du jour:
'Cows Are the New Coal.' How the Cattle Industry Is Ignoring the Bottom Line When It Comes to Methane Emissions
To Save Itself, Meat Inc. Needs To Track Methane Emissions | Time
https://time.com/6125014/cows-agricultural-emissions/
Quote from: Rupert on November 19, 2021, 08:33:31 AM
QuoteI don't know where that is and that's why I so strongly support a price on carbon.
I am unclear how this works, is methane considered a multiple of carbon? (In theory of carbon pricing or in actual)
Yes. They talk in terms of CO2e = CO2 equivalents. The one thing about equivalents is that you have to decide on a time horizon. Methane is vastly more damaging in the short term, but has a shorter effective time in the atmosphere. So there are some subjective judgements (i.e. is your target date 2050 or 2040 or 2100?)
How satellites are challenging Australia's official greenhouse gas emission figures - ABC News
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-03/satellites-are-challenging-australias-coal-mining-industry/100663676
"No one expects that pipelines are sometimes wide open, pouring gas into the atmosphere," he says.
Yet they were. Over the course of two years, during 2019 and 2020, the researchers counted more than 1,800 large bursts of methane, often releasing several tons of methane per hour. Lauvaux and his colleagues published their findings this week in the journal Science.
The researchers consulted with gas companies, trying to understand the source of these "ultra-emitting events." They found that some releases resulted from accidents. More often, though, they were deliberate. Gas companies simply vented gas from pipelines or other equipment before carrying out repairs or maintenance operations.
According to the researchers, the large releases of methane that they detected accounted for 8-12% of global methane emissions from oil and gas infrastructure during that time.
Satellites have detected massive gas leaks : NPR
https://www.npr.org/2022/02/03/1077392791/a-satellite-finds-massive-methane-leaks-from-gas-pipelines
Just come away from a weekend with our "North Sea Gas" friends.
They are convinced that North Sea Gas (Is on its last life) and that it is carefully monitored, and controlled.
Imported gas on the other hand, has a carbon footprint at least twice as big.
> North Sea Gas ... is carefully monitored, and controlled.
That appears to be the case.
"The countries where bursts of methane happened most frequently included the former Soviet republic of Turkmenistan, Russia, the United States, Iran, Kazakhstan and Algeria. Lauvaux says they found relatively few such releases in some other countries with big gas industries, such as Saudi Arabia."
Is it fair to judge a person/country by they company they keep?
...automated technique that uses satellite imagery...
...this technique could be used to establish lagoon construction dates for any area....
Satellite imagery gives researchers timeline of when swine waste lagoons were built
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/943330
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/may/02/methane-emissions-gas-flaring-hidden-satellite-monitors-oil-gas
Methane emissions from gas flaring being hidden from satellite monitors | Climate crisis | The Guardian
Quote"If you enclose the flare, people don't see it, so they don't complain about it. But it also means it's not visible from space by most of the methods used to track flare volumes."
Without the satellite data, countries were forced to rely mostly on self-disclosed reporting from oil and gas companies