EPA cautioned by industry associations on possible methane emissions rules

The US Environmental Protection Agency should not move too quickly to impose additional methane emissions regulations on producers, several oil and gas associations said.

EPA's proposal to add new rules for pipelines as well as producers are duplicative and costly, an American Petroleum Institute official told reporters during a recent teleconference. The Natural Gas Supply Association, meanwhile, urged EPA to more carefully consider natural gas's important contributions to reducing US greenhouse gas emissions.

"America is already leading the world in reducing [GHG] emissions," said Howard J. Feldman, API senior regulatory and scientific affairs director. "Even as oil and gas production has risen dramatically, methane emissions have fallen, thanks to industry leadership and investment in new technologies."

Methane is gas's primary component, and emissions will continue to fall as operators innovate to capture and deliver more fuel to heat homes and generate clean-burning electricity, Feldman said.

Additional regulations potentially could undermine contributions the industry has made toward reducing US GHG emissions, the organizations said.

Reductions since 2005

Feldman cited EPA's latest GHG inventory, which showed total methane emissions from US gas systems were 11% lower than in 2005. Emissions from US gas wells that were hydraulic fractured fell 79% during the same period, he said.

"Additional regulations on methane by EPA and other agencies could discourage hydraulic fracturing and the shale energy revolution that has helped America lead the world in reducing GHG emissions," he warned. "Onerous and unnecessary new regulations could have a chilling effect on the American energy renaissance, our economy, and our incredible GHG emissions reduction progress."

In comments it filed with EPA, NGSA said US gas producers cut GHG emissions since 2005 while production rose more than 30% through market-driven improvements in equipment, technology, infrastructure and best practices.

"The unique challenges of climate objectives do not justify regulatory action that risks undercutting natural gas, the most cost-effective source of carbon reductions, when voluntary methane emission reduction programs have proven effective," the association said.

Other associations chime in

The Independent Petroleum Association of America, American Exploration & Production Council (AXPC), and Interstate Natural Gas Association of America joined API and NGSA in making comments to EPA.

EPA justified its proposals as part of the Obama administration's climate action plan by setting a specific oil and gas emissions reduction target of 40-45% during 2012-25, IPAA and AXPC said in joint comments. "However, as these comments demonstrate, EPA's proposals are unnecessary, unjustified, poorly developed, and counterproductive," they said.

"Despite incredible growth in oil and natural production in the US, emissions of methane-a primary component of clean-burning natural gas-have steadily declined and will continue to fall," said Lee Fuller, IPAA executive vice-president.

"Thanks to industry leadership and investment in new technologies, America's shale energy producers have cut methane emissions by 13.3% since 2008 while increasing production by a staggering 400%," Fuller said. "Since emissions are already significantly decreasing, it raises concerns as to what the underlying target is for EPA."

'Solution looking for problem'

"The Obama administration's proposed methane regulations are nothing more than another of its solutions looking for a problem," AXPC Pres. V. Bruce Thompson told OGJ. "[It] does not seem interested in the facts when it comes to regulating oil and gas. The industry is clearly reducing methane emissions under the current scheme, so the imposition of additional, costly regulations that generate little or no additional environmental gains makes no sense whatsoever."

In its comments, INGAA said that while interstate gas pipelines historically have worked with a variety of stakeholders to reduce GHG emissions, the association feels that EPA's proposed rules would offer little, if any, environmental benefit beyond alternatives INGAA already has proposed.

INGAA warned that, if finalized, the rules would impose significant costs and create a real risk for actually increasing the amount of methane released to the atmosphere because operators in many cases would be required to "blow down" pipelines or compressors to complete mandated repairs.

EPA's proposal also could lead to service disruptions for customers, it indicated. "These costs and risks of adverse consequences are attributable in large part to the inflexible repair criteria and the lack of workable delay of repair provisions in the proposed rule," INGAA said.