Flames from a flaring pit near a well in the Bakken Oil Field. The primary component of natural gas is methane, which is odorless when it comes directly out of the gas well. (Photo: Orjan F. Ellingvag/Corbis via Getty Images)
Aug 11, 2020
In a move one green group said shows the Trump EPA's approach is "manifestly inconsistent with the agency's legal obligations" and with science, the agency is under fire for preparations to roll back methane rules for U.S. oil and gas producers.
Before Friday, the New York Times reported, the EPA is expected to unveil two new rules regarding methane, a greenhouse gas with 80 times the heat-trapping power of carbon dioxide in the first two decades after emission.
One would eliminate federal regulation of methane emissions from oil and gas wells across the country and would prevent future regulation at sites built before 2015, and another would weaken remaining requirements for companies, including one directing them to locate and fix leaks in wells.
With the new rules in place, meteorologist and climate reporter Eric Holthaus said, voting Trump out of office in November will be imperative to protect communities across the country from methane emissions, which the EPA itself has said are linked to premature death, stroke, chronic bronchitis, and low birth weight as well as the warming of the planet.
"If Trump is reelected and this rule sticks, it is probably the single most consequential near-term climate decision of his presidency," wrote Holthaus on social media. "A U.S. oil and gas industry unconcerned with methane would produce a surge in global warming with essentially irreversible consequences."
Epidemiologist Eric Feigl-Ding denounced the expected rules as "sickening."
\u201cTERRIBLE HORRIBLE NASTY\u2014 Trump\u2019s @EPA is preparing to adopt new rules that would rescind regulations for methane-gas emissions, including ending requirements that oil-and-gas producers have systems and procedures to detect methane leaks. \n\nSickening. https://t.co/d2r896Xy13\u201d— Eric Feigl-Ding (@Eric Feigl-Ding) 1597134119
About 10% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions are made up of methane, and according to the Environmental Defense Fund, the EPA's new rules could result in an additional five million metric tons of methane pollution to the atmosphere per year.
The expected rollback follows other significant EPA decisions to weaken environmental protections, including ones targeting the release of toxins from coal plants and tailpipe emissions.
"Our federal methane safeguards have been in place since 2016, protecting Americans from unhealthy and climate-damaging pollution. The Trump administration's decision to reverse course is deeply and fundamentally flawed," said Peter Zalzal, lead attorney for EDF, in a statement. "Eliminating these safeguards would ignore the overwhelming body of scientific evidence documenting the urgent need to reduce methane pollution."
With public support for coal extraction waning significantly, the fossil fuel industry has in recent years promoted natural gas as a "cleaner" alternative and is concerned that methane leaks from gas wells will "undermine that marketing message and hurt demand," the Times reported.
Meanwhile, advocates for climate action are focused on promoting solar, wind, and other sustainable energy sources that don't involve fossil fuel extraction at all.
Minneapolis-based meteorologist Sven Sundgaard called the planned rollback "yet another destructive and stupid act of this administration."
\u201cMy God. Yet another destructive (& stupid) act of this administration. You cannot care for the environment in any way & support this admin. They continue to dismantle important protections. It\u2019s beyond comprehension.\n\nhttps://t.co/zN0iy5YG3i\u201d— Sven Sundgaard (@Sven Sundgaard) 1597094570
"Rather than trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to protect this planet for our children and grandchildren, this administration is now easing regulations on polluters," tweeted Sen. Angus King (I-Maine). "Let's call this what it is: environmental sabotage."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. The final deadline for our crucial Summer Campaign fundraising drive is just hours away, and we’re falling short of our must-hit goal. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
In a move one green group said shows the Trump EPA's approach is "manifestly inconsistent with the agency's legal obligations" and with science, the agency is under fire for preparations to roll back methane rules for U.S. oil and gas producers.
Before Friday, the New York Times reported, the EPA is expected to unveil two new rules regarding methane, a greenhouse gas with 80 times the heat-trapping power of carbon dioxide in the first two decades after emission.
One would eliminate federal regulation of methane emissions from oil and gas wells across the country and would prevent future regulation at sites built before 2015, and another would weaken remaining requirements for companies, including one directing them to locate and fix leaks in wells.
With the new rules in place, meteorologist and climate reporter Eric Holthaus said, voting Trump out of office in November will be imperative to protect communities across the country from methane emissions, which the EPA itself has said are linked to premature death, stroke, chronic bronchitis, and low birth weight as well as the warming of the planet.
"If Trump is reelected and this rule sticks, it is probably the single most consequential near-term climate decision of his presidency," wrote Holthaus on social media. "A U.S. oil and gas industry unconcerned with methane would produce a surge in global warming with essentially irreversible consequences."
Epidemiologist Eric Feigl-Ding denounced the expected rules as "sickening."
\u201cTERRIBLE HORRIBLE NASTY\u2014 Trump\u2019s @EPA is preparing to adopt new rules that would rescind regulations for methane-gas emissions, including ending requirements that oil-and-gas producers have systems and procedures to detect methane leaks. \n\nSickening. https://t.co/d2r896Xy13\u201d— Eric Feigl-Ding (@Eric Feigl-Ding) 1597134119
About 10% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions are made up of methane, and according to the Environmental Defense Fund, the EPA's new rules could result in an additional five million metric tons of methane pollution to the atmosphere per year.
The expected rollback follows other significant EPA decisions to weaken environmental protections, including ones targeting the release of toxins from coal plants and tailpipe emissions.
"Our federal methane safeguards have been in place since 2016, protecting Americans from unhealthy and climate-damaging pollution. The Trump administration's decision to reverse course is deeply and fundamentally flawed," said Peter Zalzal, lead attorney for EDF, in a statement. "Eliminating these safeguards would ignore the overwhelming body of scientific evidence documenting the urgent need to reduce methane pollution."
With public support for coal extraction waning significantly, the fossil fuel industry has in recent years promoted natural gas as a "cleaner" alternative and is concerned that methane leaks from gas wells will "undermine that marketing message and hurt demand," the Times reported.
Meanwhile, advocates for climate action are focused on promoting solar, wind, and other sustainable energy sources that don't involve fossil fuel extraction at all.
Minneapolis-based meteorologist Sven Sundgaard called the planned rollback "yet another destructive and stupid act of this administration."
\u201cMy God. Yet another destructive (& stupid) act of this administration. You cannot care for the environment in any way & support this admin. They continue to dismantle important protections. It\u2019s beyond comprehension.\n\nhttps://t.co/zN0iy5YG3i\u201d— Sven Sundgaard (@Sven Sundgaard) 1597094570
"Rather than trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to protect this planet for our children and grandchildren, this administration is now easing regulations on polluters," tweeted Sen. Angus King (I-Maine). "Let's call this what it is: environmental sabotage."
In a move one green group said shows the Trump EPA's approach is "manifestly inconsistent with the agency's legal obligations" and with science, the agency is under fire for preparations to roll back methane rules for U.S. oil and gas producers.
Before Friday, the New York Times reported, the EPA is expected to unveil two new rules regarding methane, a greenhouse gas with 80 times the heat-trapping power of carbon dioxide in the first two decades after emission.
One would eliminate federal regulation of methane emissions from oil and gas wells across the country and would prevent future regulation at sites built before 2015, and another would weaken remaining requirements for companies, including one directing them to locate and fix leaks in wells.
With the new rules in place, meteorologist and climate reporter Eric Holthaus said, voting Trump out of office in November will be imperative to protect communities across the country from methane emissions, which the EPA itself has said are linked to premature death, stroke, chronic bronchitis, and low birth weight as well as the warming of the planet.
"If Trump is reelected and this rule sticks, it is probably the single most consequential near-term climate decision of his presidency," wrote Holthaus on social media. "A U.S. oil and gas industry unconcerned with methane would produce a surge in global warming with essentially irreversible consequences."
Epidemiologist Eric Feigl-Ding denounced the expected rules as "sickening."
\u201cTERRIBLE HORRIBLE NASTY\u2014 Trump\u2019s @EPA is preparing to adopt new rules that would rescind regulations for methane-gas emissions, including ending requirements that oil-and-gas producers have systems and procedures to detect methane leaks. \n\nSickening. https://t.co/d2r896Xy13\u201d— Eric Feigl-Ding (@Eric Feigl-Ding) 1597134119
About 10% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions are made up of methane, and according to the Environmental Defense Fund, the EPA's new rules could result in an additional five million metric tons of methane pollution to the atmosphere per year.
The expected rollback follows other significant EPA decisions to weaken environmental protections, including ones targeting the release of toxins from coal plants and tailpipe emissions.
"Our federal methane safeguards have been in place since 2016, protecting Americans from unhealthy and climate-damaging pollution. The Trump administration's decision to reverse course is deeply and fundamentally flawed," said Peter Zalzal, lead attorney for EDF, in a statement. "Eliminating these safeguards would ignore the overwhelming body of scientific evidence documenting the urgent need to reduce methane pollution."
With public support for coal extraction waning significantly, the fossil fuel industry has in recent years promoted natural gas as a "cleaner" alternative and is concerned that methane leaks from gas wells will "undermine that marketing message and hurt demand," the Times reported.
Meanwhile, advocates for climate action are focused on promoting solar, wind, and other sustainable energy sources that don't involve fossil fuel extraction at all.
Minneapolis-based meteorologist Sven Sundgaard called the planned rollback "yet another destructive and stupid act of this administration."
\u201cMy God. Yet another destructive (& stupid) act of this administration. You cannot care for the environment in any way & support this admin. They continue to dismantle important protections. It\u2019s beyond comprehension.\n\nhttps://t.co/zN0iy5YG3i\u201d— Sven Sundgaard (@Sven Sundgaard) 1597094570
"Rather than trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to protect this planet for our children and grandchildren, this administration is now easing regulations on polluters," tweeted Sen. Angus King (I-Maine). "Let's call this what it is: environmental sabotage."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.