COWS BURP FOR FREE
The new US climate law has a gigantic methane leak
DONNA HENDREN/FIVE RIVERS CATTLE
By Tim McDonnell
Published August 18, 2022
The Inflation Reduction Act, the biggest climate bill in US history, marks a turning point in the battle against methane. It imposes a fee of $900 per metric ton of methane emissions starting in 2024, rising to $1,500 by 2026. It’s the first time the US has imposed a fee or tax on any form of greenhouse gas emissions.
The only problem is: The fee won’t apply to most of the country’s methane emissions.
Methane is the sneaky, dangerous cousin of carbon dioxide. Although accounting for only 11% of US greenhouse gas emissions by volume, methane is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide at warming the planet, and responsible for up to 30% of the observed increase in global temperatures since the pre-industrial era. Methane emissions are not regulated in the US, and are only sporadically measured and reported by the companies that produce them—predominantly those in the fossil fuel and livestock industries.
But the new law covers only the oil and gas sectors, which account for about one-third of emissions. Farting and burping cows, landfills, and other sources can still let loose freely.
How effective is the new methane fee?
The methane fee also applies only to sources that emit more than the equivalent of 25,000 metric tons of CO2 per year. According to an analysis by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), that threshold applies to 2,172 facilities—including wells, pipelines, and storage facilities—that together account for just 43% of the oil and gas sector’s total methane emissions.
Even that number is an over-estimate, because the law allows facilities to get away with a certain percentage of emissions for free, depending on the type of facility it is. For the biggest sources, that discount could shave a third off the total covered emissions, according to CRS.
Moreover, rather than directly measuring emissions, companies are allowed to self-report based on a federally approved estimation method that relies on assumptions about average emissions from certain types of equipment. Depending on how that method is applied, companies can dramatically underreport their emissions. Even in a generous interpretation, the federal method undercounts real methane emissions by up to 60%, according to the Environmental Defense Fund.
But methane remains in the new law’s sights in other ways. The government will make available provides $1.5 billion for research and development into methods to monitor methane emissions and plug leaky infrastructure. Federal regulators are also finalizing a broader set of rules to require oil and gas companies to monitor and reduce their methane emissions (although such regulations are notoriously vulnerable to legal challenges and could be thrown out by a future presidential administration).
Perhaps companies’ strongest incentive is the market itself: With natural gas prices reaching record heights, any methane (the main chemical component of natural gas) lost to the atmosphere through leaks or intentional flaring is money flying away.
The new US climate law has a gigantic methane leak
DONNA HENDREN/FIVE RIVERS CATTLE
Methane from livestock burps and farts is not covered by the new fee.
By Tim McDonnell
Published August 18, 2022
The Inflation Reduction Act, the biggest climate bill in US history, marks a turning point in the battle against methane. It imposes a fee of $900 per metric ton of methane emissions starting in 2024, rising to $1,500 by 2026. It’s the first time the US has imposed a fee or tax on any form of greenhouse gas emissions.
The only problem is: The fee won’t apply to most of the country’s methane emissions.
Methane is the sneaky, dangerous cousin of carbon dioxide. Although accounting for only 11% of US greenhouse gas emissions by volume, methane is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide at warming the planet, and responsible for up to 30% of the observed increase in global temperatures since the pre-industrial era. Methane emissions are not regulated in the US, and are only sporadically measured and reported by the companies that produce them—predominantly those in the fossil fuel and livestock industries.
But the new law covers only the oil and gas sectors, which account for about one-third of emissions. Farting and burping cows, landfills, and other sources can still let loose freely.
How effective is the new methane fee?
The methane fee also applies only to sources that emit more than the equivalent of 25,000 metric tons of CO2 per year. According to an analysis by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), that threshold applies to 2,172 facilities—including wells, pipelines, and storage facilities—that together account for just 43% of the oil and gas sector’s total methane emissions.
Even that number is an over-estimate, because the law allows facilities to get away with a certain percentage of emissions for free, depending on the type of facility it is. For the biggest sources, that discount could shave a third off the total covered emissions, according to CRS.
Moreover, rather than directly measuring emissions, companies are allowed to self-report based on a federally approved estimation method that relies on assumptions about average emissions from certain types of equipment. Depending on how that method is applied, companies can dramatically underreport their emissions. Even in a generous interpretation, the federal method undercounts real methane emissions by up to 60%, according to the Environmental Defense Fund.
But methane remains in the new law’s sights in other ways. The government will make available provides $1.5 billion for research and development into methods to monitor methane emissions and plug leaky infrastructure. Federal regulators are also finalizing a broader set of rules to require oil and gas companies to monitor and reduce their methane emissions (although such regulations are notoriously vulnerable to legal challenges and could be thrown out by a future presidential administration).
Perhaps companies’ strongest incentive is the market itself: With natural gas prices reaching record heights, any methane (the main chemical component of natural gas) lost to the atmosphere through leaks or intentional flaring is money flying away.
Fact-check: Does a cow emit more pollution than a car?
Andy Nguyen, PolitiFact.com
Wed, August 17, 2022
Viral Facebook post: "Bill Gates and AOC say that a cow emits more pollution than a car."
PolitiFact's ruling: False
Here's why: Microsoft Corp. co-founder Bill Gates and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., have talked in the past about the pressing need for governments and corporations to take climate change seriously, including the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the agriculture industry.
One Facebook post took this a step further by claiming the two said "a cow emits more pollution than a car."
The post features an image of Gates and Ocasio-Cortez with a cartoon illustration of a cow. Underneath the image is text that makes a reference to using an idling car in an enclosed space for carbon monoxide poisoning.
"How bout I spend the night in a garage with a cow, and they spend the night in a garage with a running car," text underneath the image reads. "Then we can meet up the next morning to discuss."
Variations of the claim have popped up elsewhere on social media.
The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed.
Greenhouse gas emissions from cows and cars
The emissions coming from a cow and those from a car are not one in the same.
A cow produces methane gas when partially digested food like grass is fermented within the rumen, one of a cow’s four stomach compartments. That gas is built up during fermentation and expelled by the cow through belching and, occasionally, flatulence.
Cars with internal combustion engines primarily produce carbon dioxide as a byproduct when fuel is burned to provide energy.
A single cow will expel an average of 220 pounds of methane per year, according to the University of California, Davis.
Meanwhile, the Environmental Protection Agency reports that a typical car will emit an average of 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide annually.
Methane gas is nearly 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide when it comes to contributing to climate change, UC Davis reports.
Despite methane's potency, it only lasts for about 12 years in the atmosphere before a majority of it is removed through oxidation. Experts at UC Davis theorize that it’s possible the amount of methane that cows emit into the atmosphere is the same as the amount that breaks down.
As for carbon dioxide, the university said it can last anywhere from several hundred to a thousand years in the Earth's atmosphere before breaking down. Meaning the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will continue to build up more and more in the atmosphere and will take centuries before disappearing.
There are an estimated 253 million passenger cars and trucks within the U.S., with about 1.8 million of them being electric powered. The U.S. has around 91.9 million head of cattle.
What Gates and Ocasio-Cortez have said about cows and climate change
A spokesperson for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation told PolitiFact Gates has never said anything about cows producing more pollution than cars. Although a representative for Ocasio-Cortez’s office did not return a request for comment, we could not find any public remarks or written statements similar to the claim in the Facebook post made by the congresswoman.
However, both have talked in the past about the link between the agriculture industry and climate change.
Gates published a research paper in October 2021 detailing the need to make green technologies more affordable and accessible than their carbon-emitting counterparts. He mentioned in the report that livestock contributed 6% of global greenhouse gas emissions while passenger cars emitted 7%.
Gates has also previously talked about the possibility of developed nations transitioning entirely to eating synthetic beef to help reduce the need for livestock, thereby lowering greenhouse gas emissions.
Ocasio-Cortez briefly came under fire in 2019 when an FAQ shared by her office regarding the Green New Deal, a proposed resolution she co-sponsored to help address climate change, included a line about "farting cows."
"We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast," the FAQ said.
The mention of "farting cows" did not appear in the resolution itself.
The resolution also mentioned the need to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, but makes no comparison to the emission of cars with those of cows.
Similar to Gates, Ocasio-Cortez has also advocated for the need to eat less meat and dairy products as a way to help address climate change.
She’s made statements about it on social media and in an interview on the canceled Showtime series "Desus & Mero."
"It’s not to say you get rid of agriculture. It’s not to say we’re going to force everybody to go vegan or anything crazy like that," she said on the show. "But it’s to say, listen, we’ve got to address factory farming. Maybe we shouldn’t be eating a hamburger for breakfast, lunch and dinner."
Our ruling
A Facebook post claims Gates Ocasio-Cortez said cows emitted more pollution than cars.
Although both have talked about climate change in the past and the roles that fossil fuels and livestock play in greenhouse gas emissions, neither have said anything resembling the claim in the Facebook post.
The methane emitted by cows is more potent in contributing to climate change, but it breaks down in the atmosphere considerably more quickly than the carbon dioxide from cars.
We rate the Facebook post False.
This article was originally posted on PolitiFact.com.
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Fact-check: Does a cow emit more pollution than a car?
No comments:
Post a Comment