DOCSLIB.ORG

Oil and Gas Methane Emissions in New Mexico

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oil and Gas Methane Emissions in New Mexico Oil and Gas Methane ANALYSIS Emissions in New Mexico Renee McVay Research Analyst B.S. Chemical Engineering; M.S. Chemical Engineering; Ph.D Chemical Engineering Hillary Hull AUTHORS Manager - Research and Analytics B.S. Civil Engineering; M.S. Environmental Engineering David Lyon Scientist B.A. Biology; M.S. Forestry; Ph.D Environmental Dynamics Renee McVay Research Analyst B.S. Chemical Engineering; M.S. Chemical Engineering; Ph.D Chemical Engineering Hillary Hull Manager - Research and Analytics B.S. Civil Engineering; M.S. Environmental Engineering David Lyon Scientist B.A. Biology; M.S. Forestry; Ph.D Environmental Dynamics 4 Executive Summary 6 Emission Sources TABLE OF 8 Production By Land Type CONTENTS 10 Cost Analysis 13 References/Resources Image Source: NASA In 2014, scientists working on a NASA study discovered EXECUTIVE a 2,500-square-mile cloud of methane hovering over the Four SUMMARY Corners region of New Mexico – the largest concentration of methane anywhere in the nation. Subsequent studies indicated that much methane is leaking and identify the although the San Juan Basin includes primary sources of these emissions. other methane sources such as coal mines and geologic seepage, these Our analysis of recent peer-reviewed sources are not large enough to explain methane research and other data sources the bulk of emissions, and that oil and reveals that intentional emissions gas development is the largest source of (venting), equipment leaks and other emissions contributing to this massive unintentional sources (fugitive emissions), methane “hot spot.” and the combustion of gas (flaring) results in New Mexico’s oil and gas operatos Methane is the main component of natural emitting 570,000 tons of methane every New Mexico’s oil and gas – the energy resource used to generate year – equivalent to the climate impact of about 1/3 of our nation’s electricity and approximately 12 coal-fired power plants. gas operators are an important industrial, commercial and residential energy source. But the lack Financial Loss emitting 570,000 tons of oversight of New Mexico’s oil and gas of methane every industry has resulted in a substantial To put this in terms of natural gas value, the waste of an important domestic energy system wide venting, leaking, and flaring of year -- equivalent to resource and needless pollution that natural gas has resulted in New Mexico losing the climate impact of threatens the climate and public health. between $182-244 million worth of natural gas every year. These wasteful practices cause approximately 12 coal- Scientific Breakthroughs the state’s taxpayers to lose up to $27.6 million fired power plants. in taxes and royalty revenues per year – an Recent scientific studies have enhanced amount equal to the annual operating budget our understanding of methane emissions for the state’s Environmental Protection from the oil and gas industry. Using Division, or enough funding to allow the state measurements of component-, site-, to increase Pre-K enrollment by 50 percent and and basin-level emissions, scientists enroll an additional 5,000 kids in vital early can determine with more certainty how education programs. 4 New Mexico Methane Analysis Emission Sources Opportunity for Reductions Scientists estimate that a phenomena There are proven, low-cost fixes that are sometimes known as “super emitters” – already available that could eliminate up to malfunctioning equipment at a variety half of the oil and gas industry’s pollution by of oil and gas sites that cause abnormally simply plugging these leaks. high emission rates – are responsible for a significant portion of industry’s methane This report aims to clarify the scope of pollution. A 2015 study using NASA airborne New Mexico’s methane problem in order technology found that in New Mexico’s San to identify the greatest opportunities for Juan Basin, high emitting sites make up achieving emission reductions statewide. nearly half of the region’s total point source Natural gas that isn’t wasted can be used or emissions (Frankenberg et al). Another 2015 sold, to the benefit of New Mexico taxpayers. study found high methane emissions in Requirements to reduce methane waste and the Four Corners Region using an aircraft- pollution increase funding for important balance method and concluded that oil and state needs like education, roads, and gas emissions were likely the largest source bridges, and allow companies to create New (Smith et al). Mexico jobs of the future in clean, efficient energy production. “These wasteful practices cause the state’s taxpayers to lose up to $27.6 million in taxes and royalty revenues per year.” 5 New Mexico Methane Analysis Emissions by Source following data sources and methods: are excluded from inventories. For example, malfunctioning tank controls Table 1 on the following page gives an • 1) Associated gas venting & flaring, can cause a site to have much higher overview of estimated emissions for 2) compressors, 3) dehydrators, 4) emissions than would be estimated if 2015 in New Mexico, broken out by flares, 5) hydrocarbon tank flashing, controls are assumed to be operating source category. Emission estimates are 6) liquids unloading, 7) completions, properly. We adjust our NM production drawn from the EDF-compiled baseline workovers, and well testing emission estimates by 50% (excluding inventory, created by Dr. David Lyon, – GHGRP onshore production completions, workovers, well testing, an EDF Scientist, per the methodology emissions adjusted for non-reporters and liquids unloading) to account outlined below. Note that the “Flares” and scaled from basin to state level for similar emissions missing from category in this inventory just refers to using well counts and production data our component-based estimates. estimated emissions from flaring (i.e., Although our estimate of abnormal methane stemming from inefficient • 8) Pneumatic controllers condition emissions is based on data combustion); later in the analysis, a value – Adjusted GHGRP activity data; from the Barnett Shale, basin-level and for total gas sent to flare will be used to Allen et al.3 emission factors for source-level data from the San Juan better represent total wasted gas. Note operational and malfunctioning Basin support that O&G emissions are that local distribution emissions are not low-bleed, high-bleed, and substantially higher than inventory included in this inventory. The following intermittent-bleed devices estimates.8,9 general conclusions can be drawn from the table: • 9) Pneumatic pumps • 14) Gathering Stations – Adjusted GHGRP activity data; Allen – Marchese et al.10 estimate of 2012 NM • Upstream emissions from production et al.4 emission factors for pneumatic gathering station emissions adjusted and gathering and boosting are pumps by the ratio of 2015:2012 NM gas substantially larger than downstream production emissions from processing and • 10) Combustion Exhaust transmission and storage. – Adjusted GHGRP CO2 emissions; EPA • 15) Gathering Pipelines AP-425 emission factors – Based on GHGI EFs and NM gas • Within production, the largest producing well counts emission sources are pneumatic • 11) Produced Water tank flashing controllers, abnormal conditions, – Drillinginfo water production; EPA • 16) Gathering Blowdowns and leaks. Abnormal conditions are O&G Tool6 emission factors – Blowdowns are assumed to equal malfunctions or other issues that 10% of station operational emissions, cause unintentional, high emissions • 12) Equipment Leaks which is based on the national fraction that are often excluded from emission – Production site counts and Allen of blowdowns in Marchese et al.10 inventories. et al.4 emission factors; based on approach of Zavala-Araiza et al.7 • 17) Processing Data Sources – GHGI national emissions prorated by • 13) Production abnormal conditions gas production The EDF-compiled inventory is based upon –Zavala-Araiza et al.7 found that a custom analysis combining several data site-level emissions of Barnett Shale • 18) Transmissions & Storage sources including recent studies, the EPA well pads were 50% higher than – GHGI national emissions prorated GHG Reporting Program (GHGRP)1, and component-based estimates. These by gas production EPA GHGI estimates the EPA’s GHG Inventory (GHGI)2 national emissions were attributed to abnormal T&S station emissions from Zimmerle estimates of Petroleum and Natural Gas process conditions that are the likely et al.11, but excludes their emissions Systems methane emissions. Individual cause of sites with unintentionally high from uncategorized/super-emitters. We source emissions were estimated using the emissions. These emissions typically increase the GHGI-based estimate by 34% to account for these emissions. 6 New Mexico Methane Analysis SUPPLY CHAIN SEGMENT SOURCE 2015 NM EMISSIONS % OF NM CH4 EMISSIONS (MT CH4) BY SEGMENT Associated Gas Venting and Flaring 1,200 0% Equipment Leaks 54,000 15% Pneumatic Controllers 120,000 35% Pneumatic Pumps 3,500 1% Compressors 6,000 2% Combustion Exhaust 6,500 2% Onshore Production Dehydrators 580 0% Flares 1,500 0% Hydrocarbon Tank Flashing 7,700 2% Produced Water Tank Flashing 16,000 5% Liquids Unloading 22,000 6% Completions, Workovers & Well Testing 2,500 1% Abnormal Emissions 110,000 31% Total Production 360,000 100% Gathering Stations 98,000 72% Gathering and Boosting Blowdowns 10,000 7% Pipelines 28,000 21% Total Gathering and Boosting 140,000 100% Leaks 16,000 49% Compressors 7,900 24% Processing Pneumatic Controllers 49 0% Pneumatic Pumps 130 0% Other12 8,400 26% Total Processing 32,000 100% Leaks 18,000 43% Compressors 3,600 9% High Bleed Pneumatics 700 2% Intermittent Bleed Pneumatics 540 1% Transmission and Storage Low Bleed Pneumatics 25 0% Pipeline Venting 2,800 7% Other13 6,500 16% Uncatergorized/Super emitters 9,700 23% Total Transmission and Storage 42,000 100% Total Emissions 570,000 100% TABLE 1 Methane Emissions by Source 7 New Mexico Methane Analysis PRODUCTION A look at drilling on public, private BY LAND TYPE and tribal lands Table 2 shows the percentage of oil and lands, which are not included in the state natural gas production in New Mexico by trust lands.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • November 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
    83008 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 223 / Friday, November 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 6. Interaction With EPA and State Section 3178.10 Facility and Equipment Regulations Ownership Bureau of Land Management 7. Other Provisions Subpart 3179—Waste Prevention and 8. Summary of Costs and Benefits Resource Conservation 43 CFR Parts 3100, 3160 and 3170 III. Background Section 3179.1 Purpose A. Impacts of Waste and Loss of Gas Section 3179.2 Scope [17X.LLWO310000.L13100000.PP0000] B. Purpose of the Rule Section 3179.3 Definitions and Acronyms 1. Overview Section 3179.4 Determining When the RIN 1004–AE14 2. Issues Addressed by Rule Loss of Oil or Gas is Avoidable or 3. Relationship to Other Federal, State, and Waste Prevention, Production Subject Unavoidable Industry Activities Section 3179.5 When Lost Production is to Royalties, and Resource C. Legal Authority Subject to Royalty Conservation D. Stakeholder Outreach Section 3179.6 Venting and Flaring From IV. Summary of Final Rule Gas Wells and Venting Prohibition AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, V. Major Changes From Proposed Rule Section 3179.7 Gas Capture Requirement Interior. A. Venting Prohibition and Capture Targets Section 3179.8 Alternative Capture 1. Venting Prohibition ACTION: Final rule. Requirement 2. Capture Targets Section 3179.9 Measuring and Reporting SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land B. Leak Detection and Repair 1. Requirements of Final Rule Volumes of Gas Vented and Flared Management (BLM) is promulgating Section 3179.10 Determinations new regulations to reduce waste of 2. Changes From Proposed Rule 3. Significant Comments Regarding Royalty-Free Flaring natural gas from venting, flaring, and C.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Gas and Propane Gas High Efficiency (Condensing) Warm Air Furnace
    GTHB NATURAL GAS AND PROPANE GAS HIGH EFFICIENCY (CONDENSING) WARM AIR FURNACE INSTALLATION, OPERATION & MAINTENANCE MANUAL ECR International 2201 Dwyer Avenue • Utica • New York • 13504 • USA An ISO 9001-2000 Certified Company R www.ecrinternational.com P/N# 240005603, Rev. H [11/2009] GTHB WARM AIR FURNACE IMPORTANT: THIS MANUAL MUST BE KEPT NEAR THE FURNACE FOR FUTURE REFERENCE!! R 2 GTHB WARM AIR FURNACE 1 - Warnings And Safety Symbols ..........................................................................................................................4 2 - Furnace Dimensions And Clearance To Combustibles ....................................................................................6 3 - Installation Requirements ................................................................................................................................7 4 - Furnace Components ........................................................................................................................................8 5 - Furnace Sizing ....................................................................................................................................................9 6 - Location Of Unit .............................................................................................................................................. 10 7 - Combustible Clearances ................................................................................................................................. 12 8 - Duct work .......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Analysis of Methane Emission Reduction Opportunities in the U.S. Onshore Oil and Natural Gas Industries
    Economic Analysis of Methane Emission Reduction Opportunities in the U.S. Onshore Oil and Natural Gas Industries March 2014 Prepared for Environmental Defense Fund 257 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10010 Prepared by ICF International 9300 Lee Highway Fairfax, VA 22031 blank page Economic Analysis of Methane Emission Reduction Opportunities in the U.S. Onshore Oil and Natural Gas Industries Contents 1. Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 1‐1 2. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.1. Goals and Approach of the Study .............................................................................................. 2‐1 2.2. Overview of Gas Sector Methane Emissions ............................................................................. 2‐2 2.3. Climate Change‐Forcing Effects of Methane ............................................................................. 2‐5 2.4. Cost‐Effectiveness of Emission Reductions ............................................................................... 2‐6 3. Approach and Methodology ....................................................................................................... 3‐1 3.1. Overview of Methodology ......................................................................................................... 3‐1 3.2. Development of the 2011 Emissions Baseline ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Methane Emissions: Best Practice Guide Venting November 2019 Disclaimer This Document Has Been Developed by the Methane Guiding Principles Partnership
    Reducing Methane Emissions: Best Practice Guide Venting November 2019 Disclaimer This document has been developed by the Methane Guiding Principles partnership. The Guide provides a summary of current known mitigations, costs, and available technologies as at the date of publication, but these may change or improve over time. The information included is accurate to the best of the authors’ knowledge, but does not necessarily reflect the views or positions of all Signatories to or Supporting Organisations of the Methane Guiding Principles partnership, and readers will need to make their own evaluation of the information provided. No warranty is given to readers concerning the completeness or accuracy of the information included in this Guide by SLR International Corporation and its contractors, the Methane Guiding Principles partnership or its Signatories or Supporting Organisations. This Guide describes actions that an organisation can take to help manage methane emissions. Any actions or recommendations are not mandatory; they are simply one effective way to help manage methane emissions. Other approaches might be as effective, or more effective in a particular situation. What readers choose to do will often depend on the circumstances, the specific risks under management and the applicable legal regime. Contents Summary .............................................................................................................................................................2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Hydrocarbon Emissions Characterization in the Colorado Front Range – a Pilot 2 Study 3 4 Gabrielle Pétron1,2, Gregory Frost1,2, Benjamin R
    1 Hydrocarbon Emissions Characterization in the Colorado Front Range – A Pilot 2 Study 3 4 Gabrielle Pétron1,2, Gregory Frost1,2, Benjamin R. Miller1,2, Adam I. Hirsch1,3, Stephen A. 5 Montzka2, Anna Karion1,2, Michael Trainer2, Colm Sweeney1,2, Arlyn E. Andrews2, 6 Lloyd Miller5, Jonathan Kofler1,2, Amnon Bar-Ilan4, Ed J. Dlugokencky2, Laura 7 Patrick1,2, Charles T. (Tom) Moore Jr.6, Thomas B. Ryerson2, Carolina Siso1,2, William 8 Kolodzey7, Patricia M. Lang2, Thomas Conway2, Paul Novelli2, Kenneth Masarie2, 9 Bradley Hall2, Douglas Guenther1,2, Duane Kitzis1,2, John Miller1,2, David Welsh2, Dan 10 Wolfe2, William Neff2, and Pieter Tans2 11 12 13 1 Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, 14 Boulder, Colorado, USA 15 2 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Earth System Research LaBoratory, 16 Boulder, Colorado, USA 17 3 now at the National RenewaBle Energy LaBoratory, Golden, Colorado, USA 18 4 ENVIRON International Corporation, Novato, California, USA 19 5 formerly with Science and Technology Corporation, Boulder, Colorado, USA 20 6Western Governors' Association, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA 21 7NOAA Hollings Scholar now at Clemson University 22 23 24 1 25 Abstract 26 The multi-species analysis of daily air samples collected at the NOAA Boulder 27 Atmospheric Observatory (BAO) in Weld County in northeastern Colorado since 2007 28 shows highly correlated alkane enhancements caused by a regionally distributed mix of 29 sources in the Denver-Julesburg Basin. To further characterize the emissions of methane 30 and non-methane hydrocarbons (propane, n-butane, i-pentane, n-pentane and benzene) 31 around BAO, a pilot study involving automobile-based surveys was carried out during 32 the summer of 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Gas Flaring and Venting: State and Federal Regulatory Overview, Trends, and Impacts
    Office of Oil and Natural Gas Office of Fossil Energy Natural Gas Flaring and Venting: State and Federal Regulatory Overview, Trends, and Impacts June 2019 NATURAL GAS FLARING AND VENTING: STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATORY OVERVIEW, TRENDS, AND IMPACTS 1 Executive Summary The purpose of this report by the Office of Fossil that is permitted, as described in the “Analysis of Energy (FE) of the U.S. Department of Energy State Policies and Regulations” section of this report. (DOE) is to inform the states and other stakeholders Domestically, flaring has become more of an issue on natural gas flaring and venting regulations, the with the rapid development of unconventional, level and types of restrictions and permissions, tight oil and gas resources over the past two and potential options available to economically decades, beginning with shale gas. Unconventional capture and utilize natural gas, if the economics development has brought online hydrocarbon warrant. While it is unlikely that the flaring and resources that vary in their characteristics and limited venting of natural gas during production proportions of natural gas, natural gas liquids and and handling can ever be entirely eliminated, both crude oil. While each producing region flares gas for industry and regulators agree that there is value in various reasons, the lack of a direct market access developing and applying technologies and practices for the gas is the most prevalent reason for ongoing to economically recover and limit both practices. flaring. Economics can dictate that the more valuable FE’s objective is to accelerate the development of oil be produced and the associated gas burned modular conversion technologies that, when coupled (or reinjected) to facilitate that production.
    [Show full text]
  • Opportunities to Limit Greenhouse Gas Emissions from B.C.'S Proposed LNG Industry
    Wellhead to Waterline Opportunities to limit greenhouse gas emissions from B.C.’s proposed LNG industry Adam Goehner and Matt Horne February 2014 Wellhead to Waterline Opportunities to limit greenhouse gas emissions from B.C.’s proposed LNG industry Adam Goehner and Matt Horne February 2014 Wellhead to Waterline: Opportunities to limit greenhouse gas emissions from B.C.’s proposed LNG industry Adam Goehner and Matt Horne February 2014 Production management: Kevin Sauvé Editor: Kevin Sauvé Cover photo: Flickr CC, Wester Area Power Admin ©2014 The Pembina Foundation and The Pembina Institute All rights reserved. Permission is granted to reproduce all or part of this publication for non- commercial purposes, as long as you cite the source. Recommended citation: Goehner, Adam and Matt Horne. Wellhead to Waterline: Opportunities to limit greenhouse gas emissions from B.C.’s proposed LNG industry. The Pembina Institute, 2014 This report was prepared by the Pembina Institute for the Pembina Foundation for Environmental Research and Education. The Pembina Foundation is a national registered charitable organization that enters into agreements with environmental research and education experts, such as the Pembina Institute, to deliver on its work. The Pembina Institute 219 19 Street NW Calgary, AB Canada T2N 2H9 Phone: 403-269-3344 Additional copies of this publication may be downloaded from the Pembina Institute website, www.pembina.org, and from the Pembina Foundation website, www.pembinafoundation.org. The Pembina Institute ii Wellhead to Waterline About the Pembina Institute The Pembina Institute is a national non-partisan think tank that advances clean energy solutions through research, education, consulting and advocacy.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulation of Associated Gas Flaring and Venting
    Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized A Public-PrivatePartnership Flaring Reduction Global Gas A GlobalOverviewandLessons FLARING ANDVENTING: GAS OFASSOCIATED REGULATION World Bank Group World Regulation of Associated Gas Flaring and Venting A Global Overview and Lessons from International Experience THE WORLD BANK Report Number 3 - World Bank Group Acknowledgments This report is one of the outputs of the Global Initiative on Natural Gas Fla ring Reduction (GGFR). 1 The GGFR aims to support national governments and the petroleum industry in their efforts to reduce flaring and venting of gas associated with the extraction of crude oil. The GGFR was transformed into the Global Gas Flaring Reduction Public-Private Partnership at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) held in Johannesburg in August 2002. The existing partners at the time of the WSSD were the Bank, Shell, BP, Sonatrach of Algeria, and the governments of Ecuador, Nigeria, and Norway. Since then, the governments of Angola, Cameroon, Indonesia, and the United States, as well as Chevron Texaco, ExxonMobil, Norsk Hydro, Statoil, ENI, and TOTAL, have joined the GGFR. The first Steering Committee meeting, held in December 2002, approved a three-year work program and budget for the GGFR, which included assisting countries in developing relevant gas flaring and venting regulations. This report provides a global overview of regulatory practices on gas flaring and venting and draws relevant lessons
    [Show full text]
  • Estimation of Flaring and Venting Volumes from Upstream Oil and Gas Facilities
    Guide Estimation of Flaring and Venting Volumes from Upstream Oil and Gas Facilities May 2002 2002-0009 The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) represents 140 companies that explore for, develop and produce natural gas, natural gas liquids, crude oil, oil sands, and elemental sulphur throughout Canada. CAPP member companies produce over 97 per cent of Canada’s natural gas and crude oil. CAPP also has 125 associate members that provide a wide range of services that support the upstream crude oil and natural gas industry. Together, these members and associate members are an important part of a $52-billion-a-year national industry that affects the livelihoods of more than half a million Canadians. Review by July, 2005 Disclaimer This publication was prepared for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) by Clearstone Engineering Ltd. While it is believed that the information contained herein is reliable under the conditions and subject to the limitations set out, CAPP and Clearstone Engineering do not guarantee its accuracy. The use of this report or any information contained will be at the user’s sole risk, regardless of any fault or negligence of Clearstone Engineering Ltd., CAPP or its co-funders. 2100, 350 – 7th Ave. S.W. 230, 1801 Hollis Street 905, 235 Water Street Calgary, Alberta Halifax, Nova Scotia St. John’s, Newfoundland Canada T2P 3N9 Canada B3J 3N4 Canada A1C 1B6 Tel (403) 267-1100 Tel (902) 420-9084 Tel (709) 724-4200 Fax (403) 261-4622 Fax (902) 491-2980 Fax (709) 724-4225 Email: [email protected] Website: www.capp.ca Overview This handbook is presented to assist oil and gas production companies in quantifying volumes of natural gas vented and flared at typical upstream oil and gas facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Guidance Document Number 9: Casinghead Gas Venting
    CCAC OGMP – Technical Guidance Document Number 9 Casinghead Gas Venting Modified: November 2015 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT NUMBER 9: CASINGHEAD GAS VENTING Introduction This document provides technical guidance to Partners of the CCAC Oil and Gas Methane Partnership (OGMP). It is one in a series describing a core source of methane emissions from oil and natural gas production operations. The guidance documents introduce suggested methodologies for quantifying methane emissions from specific sources and describe established mitigation options that Partners should reference when determining if the source is “mitigated.”1 The OGMP recognizes that the equipment and processes described in these documents are found in a variety of oil and gas operations, including onshore, offshore, and remote operations, and the way in which the emissions are quantified and mitigated may vary across locations and operational environments. As such, operational conditions, as well as logistical, safety, and cost considerations, must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The OGMP assumes that methane emission mitigation actions that require shut-downs of non-redundant equipment/processes (e.g., that would stop operations) would be carried out during regularly scheduled maintenance activities, unless the Partner deems the corrective action to be worthy of an early/additional shut-down. Description of Source Casinghead gas is gas that collects in the annular space between the casing and tubing in an oil well. Usually beneficial, casinghead gas forces the produced oil up the tubing. In a mature oil well equipped with a beam pump or electric submersible pump, however, this gas can begin restricting oil flow, decreasing a well’s production by vapor locking the pump.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenhouse-Gases-From-Oil-Gas-And-Petrochemical-Production.Xlsx
    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Written and Researched By Courtney Bernhardt and Alexandra Shaykevich of the Environmental Integrity Project. THE ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT The Environmental Integrity Project (http://www.environmentalintegrity.org) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization established in March of 2002 by former EPA enforcement attorneys to advocate for effective enforcement of environmental laws. EIP has three goals: 1) to provide objective analyses of how the failure to enforce or implement environmental laws increases pollution and affects public health; 2) to hold federal and state agencies, as well as individual corporations, accountable for failing to enforce or comply with environmental laws; and 3) to help local communities obtain the protection of environmental laws. CONTACTS: For questions about this report, please contact: Tom Pelton, Environmental Integrity Project, (202) 888-2703 or [email protected] PHOTO CREDITS: Cover photo: Valero at night, Port Arthur, Texas, Garth Lenz iLCP. President Donald J. Trump participates in a walking tour of Cameron LNG Export Terminal Tuesday, May 14, 2019, in Hackberry, La., Flickr/The White House. Deer Park refinery, Garth Lenz iLCP. 2 Greenhouse Gases from Oil, Gas, and Petrochemical Production Executive Summary n less than a decade, fracking and other new drilling techniques have turned the United States into the largest producer of oil and gas in the world. Historically a fossil fuel importer, the U.S. is now on the cusp of becoming a net fossil fuel exporter. This I surge of oil and gas production has led to a significant rise in greenhouse gases from the oil, gas, and petrochemical sectors. This report examines the growth of greenhouse gas emissions from three sectors, based on data reported to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Fossil Energy Extracted from Federal Lands and Waters: an Update Final
    Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Fossil Energy Extracted from Federal Lands and Waters: An Update Final Prepared for: The Wilderness Society 1615 M Street NW Washington, DC 20036 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Fossil Energy Extracted from Federal Lands and Waters: An Update Final Prepared for: The Wilderness Society 1615 M Street NW Washington, DC 20036 Prepared by: Stratus Consulting Inc. PO Box 4059 Boulder, CO 80306-4059 303-381-8000 1920 L St. NW, Suite 420 Washington, DC 20036 Contacts: Heidi Ries Carolyn Wagner December 23, 2014 SC13598 1. Introduction In April 2011, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) released the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory for the Federal Government: 2010 Data (CEQ, 2011). This report presented the total estimated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with federal government agency operations, including emissions from building electricity and water consumption, employee travel, and numerous other activities. However, the inventory did not account for emissions associated with a range of activities subject to federal agency oversight but conducted by private entities. Such activities include exploration, production, and development of fossil fuel resources on federal lands1 by private sector leaseholders. Accounting for these activities could increase the federal government’s total emissions of GHGs substantially. In 2012, Stratus Consulting produced a report on behalf of The Wilderness Society entitled Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Fossil Energy Extracted from Federal Lands and Waters in which we developed a preliminary estimate of the magnitude of ultimate GHG emissions2 associated with fossil fuels for the years 2008–2010 – for example, onshore and offshore oil and natural gas, natural gas liquids, coal, and coalbed methane – that leaseholders3 extract from federal lands.
    [Show full text]