Establishing difficult goals can be worthwhile if contradictions aren't so extreme that the goals become ridiculously impossible. It's still not certain whether the Obama administration avoided this pitfall when it proposed tougher methane emissions requirements for more of the oil and gas industry on Aug. 18.
This came 2 weeks after it issued its Clean Power Plan (CPP), which aims to accelerate moves away from coal-fired electricity generation to less polluting sources. Wind and solar power capacity are growing, but natural gas-which is largely methane-is still the fastest growing cleaner alternative.
Janet McCabe, the US Environmental Protection Agency's acting assistant administrator for air and radiation, saw no contradiction during a press teleconference following EPA's release of its methane emissions proposal.
EPA's proposal and the CPP are both important programs within the president's broad strategy to address global climate change, McCabe said. Both can be achieved, she insisted. She didn't mention that the task of actually implementing these new federal environmental requirements would once again fall to the state and local governments, oil and gas and other businesses, and other stakeholders.
Colorado Gov. John W. Hickenlooper (D) seemed comfortable with this. He said on Aug. 18 that the state became the first in the US to directly regulate oil and gas methane emissions in 2014, which the General Assembly adopted as law in 2015.
While the state's Public Health and Environment Department was still reviewing EPA's proposals, he said it did not expect them to interfere with steps that have been taken already. "In Colorado, protecting public health and the environment, and promoting our energy industry are not mutually exclusive endeavors," Hickenlooper said.
Officials from seven oil and gas associations, six of which are based in Denver, reminded Colorado PH&E Director Larry Wok in an Aug. 19 letter that gas is still the single best tool for reaching the more ambitious 40% carbon dioxide reductions by 2030 that the CPP established for Colorado.
'A huge difference'
Benefits from gas production growth in the state have included more revenue for schools, roads, and community services, they noted. "For towns and schools still struggling with the ripple effects of recession, the economic benefits resulting from advances in US energy production are making a huge difference," the groups said.
"The results of increased gas use continue to demonstrate that Colorado can meet the targeted emission reduction goals without disrupting electric supply while avoiding regressive price impacts to consumers," they said. "Natural gas can achieve this in a manner that improves quality of life both environmentally and economically."
Capturing more methane for ultimate sale could help if associated costs aren't excessive. That's where the challenge lies.
