now that the EPA has grudgingly begun revising US methane emission estimates upwards based on a preponderance of evidence, will they go back and revise historical emissions estimates accordingly? if so, much of the apparent post-2005 emission decline from coal-to-gas switching will evaporate 😬 - ThreadSky

kevinjkircher.com • 337 days ago

now that the EPA has grudgingly begun revising US methane emission estimates upwards based on a preponderance of evidence, will they go back and revise historical emissions estimates accordingly? if so, much of the apparent post-2005 emission decline from coal-to-gas switching will evaporate 😬

Comments

michaelwara.bsky.social•336 days ago

I've been wondering about this too. But also thinking that it doesn't really matter if they restate their accounting in the sense that correcting the error today will tell us how high emissions are today relative to 1990 or 2005.

michaelwara.bsky.social•336 days ago

I've also been wondering the degree to which our NDC would have been different (or not) if EPA had known actual (as opposed to badly estimated) emissions.

kevinjkircher.com•336 days ago

that's a great question.

kevinjkircher.com•336 days ago

yeah... i guess if emission reduction goals are framed relative to pre-fracking levels then correcting the historical record wouldn't change what's needed going forward

but admitting that today's US emissions aren't much below 2005's would certainly hurt US global standing on climate, such as it is

luemas91.bsky.social•336 days ago

It would kind of destroy their nationally determined contributions for the Paris agreement most notably. It's the correct thing to do of course, but it would mean that the US, in many ways, lost a decade of climate action.

maxtide.bsky.social•336 days ago

Will past decisions to permit methane extraction/transport be reevaluated based on updated estimates? Surely some opposition to infrastructure hinged on this very important issue.

kevinjkircher.com•336 days ago

it's a good question. surely some infrastructure that exists today was green-lit based on methane leak estimates that now look untrustworthy

maxtide.bsky.social•335 days ago

indeed. Where I live, BC, I would say our entire industrial policy hinges on this question.
Annoyingly, the gov't made the claim (LNG=climate positive) without ever putting their math down anywhere... so it's hard to actually hold them accountable.

Posting Rules

Be respectful to others
No spam or self-promotion
Stay on topic
Follow Bluesky's terms of service

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply