The U.S. has been drilling for oil and gas for more than 160 years, and what to do with those wells once they are no longer productive has long been an issue, as they can also be significant emitters of methane, a major greenhouse gas. Today, we discuss a new approach that aims to address both issues.
The European Union (EU) appears poised to substantially increase its imports of U.S. LNG after reaching a trade deal with the Trump administration that includes a pledge to purchase $750 billion worth of U.S. energy over three years. The trade agreement and the EU’s plans to phase out deliveries of Russian LNG and piped-in natural gas by 2027 may end up being a big positive for U.S. producers. But that doesn’t mean it’s all clear sailing, thanks to competition with Qatar and uncertainty around EU regulations. In today’s RBN blog, we look at how U.S. exporters could still get squeezed on price and volume between today and 2030.
One of the biggest challenges to a significant expansion of the commercial hydrogen market in the U.S. is the lack of a comprehensive transportation network. That has spurred interest from utilities, government agencies and others interested in utilizing or repurposing parts of the existing (and extensive) natural gas infrastructure to ship hydrogen. But that approach comes with some challenges, starting with the significant differences in the physical and chemical properties of hydrogen and methane, the main component of natural gas. In today’s RBN blog, we’ll explain why moving hydrogen on the existing natural gas network — then storing and utilizing it — is no easy feat.
Cargo ships move more than 80% of the world’s internationally traded goods, making them essential to the global economy, but they’ve traditionally been fueled by heavy fuel oil or marine gasoil, both of which are emissions-intensive. With 60,000 or so ships in service, they account for an estimated 2.8% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, a percentage the International Maritime Organization (IMO) would like to reduce. At the 80th session of the IMO’s Maritime Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in July, the group adopted a provisional agreement to eliminate GHG emissions from shipping by a date as close to 2050 as possible, with intermediate goals for emissions reduction by 2030 and 2040. Clearly, radical innovations will be required to meet the IMO’s goals. In today’s RBN blog, we look at some of the initiatives directed at emissions reduction in shipping and the challenges to (and opportunities for) operational improvements, especially regarding LNG carriers.
Every day, large volumes of associated gas are flared around the world, mostly because there’s not enough infrastructure in place to transport the gas to market. This isn’t just a colossal waste of energy — flaring generates a lot of carbon dioxide (CO2) and, according to a recent study, it’s only 91% efficient (on average) at zapping methane, a particularly potent greenhouse gas (GHG). But what if there was a cost-effective way to beneficially consume the gas that’s stranded in remote parts of the Permian, the Bakken and other major production areas? It turns out there is — by using the gas onsite to produce electricity to power portable, modular data centers used to support cryptocurrency mining, artificial intelligence (AI) programs like ChatGPT, and other high-tech endeavors requiring massive amounts of computation power and energy. In today’s RBN blog, we discuss the growing use of stranded natural gas as a power source for middle-of-nowhere data centers.
By now, just about everyone is aware of and has been impacted by efforts to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions — and methane especially — as a way of meeting global climate goals, but that doesn’t mean everyone is on the same page. The energy industry is a leading source of methane emissions in the U.S., but with nearly 1 million active wells across the country and not much common ground on the actual scope of methane emissions and how best to reduce them, finding a path forward without overburdening the sector and its customers is more than a little tricky. In today’s RBN blog, we preview our latest Drill Down Report on efforts to reduce methane emissions.
The oil and gas industry is being pushed by regulators, third parties and investors to better identify and mitigate its methane emissions, especially the few “super-emitter” sites that make outsize contributions to overall emissions. But while operators are ramping up capital spending on new technology, one thing has become clear: There is no silver bullet when it comes to reducing emissions, and each option includes one or more drawbacks, including source attribution, costs, quantification, and detection limits. In today’s RBN blog, we’ll break down the advantages and disadvantages of the different measurement technologies.
Oil and gas companies across the value chain are facing new pressures to manage and reduce methane emissions. Their ability to access premium markets and buyers, appeal to investors and avoid costly fees depends on developing a credible plan to measure and reduce methane emissions. At the very least, the industry’s regulatory outlook, its non-governmental quasi-oversight and its access to capital are changing in ways that make understanding sometimes inconsistent emissions data vitally important. In today’s RBN blog, we explore the recent changes and the mounting external pressures around methane emissions.
The Biden administration’s first foray into reducing methane emissions from oil and gas operations, released in November 2021, promised to reduce emissions from hundreds of thousands of existing sites, expand and strengthen emission-reduction requirements, and encourage the use of new technologies. It was clear about one other thing too, namely that more was already in the works. And sure enough, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently followed up with a proposal that significantly broadens the initial plan. In today’s RBN blog we look at that supplemental proposal, its targeting of so-called “super-emitters,” and why third-party groups will play a bigger role in mitigating methane emissions in the years ahead.
