The Value of Pursuing a Rational Middle in Polarized Times

rational-middleAt Energy Dialogues’ North American Gas Forum last month, I had the opportunity to participate on a panel moderated by Gregory Kallenberg of the Rational Middle. While the panel pre-dated the presidential election, the topic of constructive engagement through rational discourse is now more important than ever.

We explored how environmental groups, industry, and other stakeholders need to come together to rationally discuss and collaboratively act on the challenges of meeting rising energy demand while addressing real and growing environmental risks.

The still principally fossil-based energy system, which includes natural gas, is not the only cause of climate change, but it is the largest. And so a range of stakeholders, from protesters holding signs, to investors with a long term interest in the future of natural gas, to industry consumers, are looking with increasing criticism at fossil fuels. That was true before the election, and it’s true today. They’re asking: How can we reconcile the environment we want to protect for the future with the traditional energy and feedstock resources we are using now?

Unfortunately, industry, when pressed with concerns and asked to act, has often come up short. For example, with precious few exceptions, oil and natural gas companies have declined to set quantitative methane reduction targets – of their own choosing, and for their own product. And they have declined to join their counterparts’ support for a 2 degree limit on temperature rise. Too often, industry has failed to engage with the real concerns of their customers and communities.

But there’s a better way.

As Sarah Sandberg, from the Colorado Oil & Gas Association, said on the panel, “You’re either at the table or on the menu.” As panelist Michael Crothers from Shell observed, industry must engage directly and responsively with the legitimate climate concerns of the general public. And they’re right.

At Environmental Defense Fund, we work to create opportunities for diverse stakeholders to come to the table and have the conversations that feed the actions – whether establishing public policy, catalyzing technology innovation, or making best practice standard practice – to address environmental challenges and protect our future.

There have been bright spots of industry leadership, like energy companies joining the table in Colorado to help craft the first methane regulations, or Shell Canada supporting Alberta’s new climate strategy, including a methane goal backed by regulations. Unfortunately, such constructive engagements have been the exception to the rule. All too often, industry’s response to environmental concerns and opportunities has amounted to “Just Say No”.

A better response? “Just Say How.” For example:

  • How will operators demonstrate that they hear and are addressing in practical terms, the air and groundwater pollution concerns of the 15 million Americans who live within a mile of a well?
  • How will industry leaders acknowledge and finally engage on public policy to reduce their contribution to climate change?
  • How will they make unnecessary methane emissions a thing of the past, by finding and fixing leaks?
  • How will the companies that do step up and lead on these issues maximize the competitive advantage of being cleaner companies in a world that demands it?

Let’s hope industry can take the real issues head on and start showing how we can make positive changes by working together. Pressure on industry is not going away, and rational engagement can help cut a productive path through polarization.

America knows better: Addressing climate change is good business

President-elect Donald Trump made claims of his own business smarts a cornerstone of his campaign. Vote for him, the logic went, and send a first-rate businessman to the Oval Office to apply business acumen to make America great. Unfortunately, Trump’s actions to date on climate and energy – notably charging a climate change denier with leading the EPA transition and signaling desire to abandon the historic Paris climate accords – send a message of business obliviousness.

In contrast, a smart business approach would embrace tackling greenhouse gas emissions and supporting clean energy. Here are four reasons why:

  1. Create American jobs – The opportunity to create new American jobs in the transition to clean energy is tremendous. There are now more jobs in solar energy than in coal mining, and the number of solar jobs has grown more than 20 percent in each of the last three years. States like Florida and Nevada are bountiful in sun and can contribute to American energy self-sufficiency.Moreover, just as smart action to nurture domestic clean energy can accelerate jobs in the renewable sector, there are jobs on the line helping the oil and gas industry reduce its air pollution in a cost effective way. Environmental Defense Fund found that there are over 70 American firms employing Americans to help keep potent methane emissions in natural gas pipelines and out of the atmosphere. These jobs, thriving in states like Texas and Pennsylvania, are mainly small business and above average wages – exactly what we all want to see more of. Of course, it’s a competitive global economy, and taking our foot off the pedal in creating green jobs could well cede the space to others like China, which already leads the United States in clean energy investment. Whatever a politician’s personal views on climate change, it is undeniable that global demand is growing for clean energy solutions. Growing demand means growing commercial opportunity for the United States in terms of innovation and exports. But only if we seize it.
  1. Listen to leading American businesses – Savvy business people listen to each other. So Mr. Trump should be interested to learn that 154 American businesses supported the American Businesses Act on Climate Pledge in the run-up to the Paris climate accords. These businesses are a part of the backbone of the American economy, employing nearly 11 million people across all 50 states, with a then market capitalization of over $7 trillion. Participating companies of particular interest: 21st Century Fox, Dupont, Wal-Mart, even a name that will be familiar to any casino magnate – MGM Resorts.These companies not only voiced support for a strong Paris outcome, they committed to increase their low-carbon investments in line with the direction of America’s leadership. Pulling out the rug from American businesses investing in low-carbon would send a destabilizing signal to the market. More recently, 365 companies including Unilever, Intel, General Mills and others reinforced that “implementing the Paris Agreement will enable and encourage businesses and investors to turn the billions of dollars in existing low-carbon investments into the trillions of dollars the world needs to bring clean energy and prosperity to all”. In sum, the overwhelming voice of businesses who have weighed in on the Paris talks are supportive of climate action. This business groundswell cannot be ignored. Nor should Trump ignore his own prior signing of a 2009 letter that failure to act on climate and the environment would cause “catastrophic and irreversible consequences for humanity and our planet.”
  1. It hits home – Continued American leadership on climate change can help mitigate physical risks to some of Mr. Trump’s most cherished investments, for example the Mar-a-Lago golf club in Palm Beach. NOAA found that “tidal flooding is increasing in frequency within the U.S. coastal communities due to sea level rise from climate change and local land subsidence.”Just a week before the election, the Palm Beach Daily News reported that the local Shore Protection Board unanimously recommended a six-figure “coastal vulnerability evaluation” as flooding has remained long after high tide in certain cases.
  1. Voters want clean energy – One of many things that will change for Donald Trump is that going from CEO to President means having a boss – actually about 300 of million of them. A recent Gallup poll found that 64% of Americans worry “a fair amount” or “a great deal” about climate change, an increase from last year, and including 84% of Democrats, 64% of independents, and 40% of Republicans. Clean energy is also wildly popular, with over 80% of Americans saying they support increased wind and solar, according to a recent Pew Poll.

Early on the campaign trail, Donald Trump often used his association with his alma mater, the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, as Exhibit A in establishing his business smarts. Political leaders including Mr. Trump must learn from experts like Wharton’s Professor Eric Orts, who noted that moving away from President Obama’s climate change polices would come with stiff costs.

From missing out on job creation to ignoring business leaders who have studied the issue and have a stake in its resolution, and from fueling risk to Trump’s own business interests to overlooking voter desires, the case is clear that the costs are stiff indeed. Climate action is good business, and the smart money says it’s time to stay the course.

Technology Breakthroughs: Creating Fertile Ground for Innovation in the Oil and Gas Sector

aileen_nowlan_31394David Hone, Chief Climate Change Advisor at Shell, recently stated that it takes 25 years for a new technology to reach one percent of the energy system. At the multinational companies I have worked with as clients and partners, I have seen how much time it can take to launch a new idea or product.  But, I believe we can and must accelerate the pace of technology development and adoption. This is especially crucial in the area of methane detection. Methane is the main component of natural gas and methane emissions are the cause of 25% of today’s global warming.

For the past three years, the Methane Detectors Challenge (MDC), a groundbreaking partnership between Environmental Defense Fund, oil and gas companies, technology developers, and other experts, has focused on designing and testing promising methane detection technologies. Two of the most promising technologies, both of which provide low-cost continuous methane emissions monitoring, will soon be pilot-tested by major oil and gas companies. Moving from concept to pilots in just a few years teaches us that it is possible to accelerate the adoption of new technology in the oil and gas sector.

Lesson One: Bring all stakeholders to the table around a realistic shared goal

During tMDC_teamhe initial phase of the Methane Detectors Challenge, we facilitated a series of meetings between environmentalists, scientists and oil and gas companies, including Shell, Noble Energy and Southwestern Energy.  This collaborative approach set MDC up for success.  We gained insights on how methane detectors would need to work in the field—simple, self-powered, able to send automated alarms—and this helped the technology entrepreneurs target key functionality.

Our environmental goal for MDC struck a balance of ambitious and pragmatic; detecting big emissions that account for the vast majority of total methane emissions.  By understanding which features would deliver the most impact, we focused on key—but not all—technology gaps.  This dramatically sped up the development and testing time.

Lesson Two: Cast the net widely

At the start of the Methane Detectors Challenge, we cast the net widely for initial applications. If existing providers aren’t already solving the problem, there is no reason to stick with the familiar.  MDC invited applications from all over the world and from different industries.  The result was technologies adapted from outer space, coal mine safety, and personal breathalyzers, to name a few: fresh ideas and new approaches brought together by entrepreneurs who are committed to slowing the tide of climate change.

Lesson Three: Small, flexible investments can pay off

Small investments in emerging technologies can yield great results, and while not all will pay off, those with promise will improve rapidly. This is a portfolio approach to innovation—much like successful Silicon Valley enterprises. This requires leadership commitment and clear communication of project goals to all stakeholders, then being flexible and creative.

Taking some early-stage risk is necessary to create opportunity for big payoffs. Oil and gas companies are familiar with this at the exploration stage; the same is true for technology innovation.  MDC focused on new hardware solutions. Many entrepreneurs (as with entrepreneurs in other sectors) were often advancing personal funds to contract manufacturers or suppliers. This is a dangerous stage that many startups do not survive.

Oil and gas companies should consider offering working capital, rapid payment terms, and in-kind support for early-stage ventures.  The payoff could be significant—a more efficient, more effective strategy that works with a company’s exact specifications. With the right assistance, hardware startups are still not going to turn a profit on the first units, but they might make it through their first year.

MDC headerCatalyzing innovation requires flexibility and compromise on all sides.  Just as entrepreneurs aim to learn about the culture, quality and safety standards and business priorities of oil and gas customers, oil and gas companies will learn and improve faster if they ask themselves what they do and do not need from an early-stage entrepreneur as compared to their expectations of an established provider.  Their requirements for fast iteration of a developing technology may be different from adoption of a tested and proven technology. A lower risk, rapid improvement orientation can be reflected in product or service agreements, warranties, and the feedback offered to innovators.  Similarly, for oil and gas companies, the business case for adopting a new technology may not initially outweigh their current approach.  But with a portfolio of small bets, and the patience to help new ideas progress down the cost curve, these companies increase the odds that a new technology dramatically improves on the status quo.

During the Methane Developers Challenge, I have witnessed first-hand how environmentalists and oil and gas companies can learn from the portfolio approach and rapid iteration lessons of Silicon Valley innovation. In the next few months, MDC entrepreneurs will learn from deploying their technologies at major oil and gas companies. This is a powerful example of ambitious and pragmatic collaboration. This corporate leadership, with oil and gas companies taking a risk and putting their unique resources and insights to work catalyzing innovation, will enable business and the planet to thrive.


Follow Aileen Nowlan on Twitter, @aileennow


Additional information on EDF Methane Detectors Challenge

 

As Investors Benchmark Methane Management, Where Will Companies Stand?

Ben Ratner headshotGlobal attention on oil and gas methane emissions is taking off. The International Energy Agency has recognized that  “the potential for natural gas to play a credible role in the transition to a decarbonized energy system fundamentally depends on minimizing these [methane] emissions.” North American heads of state recently committed to reduce oil and gas methane emissions 45% by 2025. And the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued standards for methane from new sources, while Canada and Mexico begin executing their commitment to develop regulations necessary to achieve waste-cutting emission reductions.

With a rising wave of public and policy maker scrutiny, it’s no surprise that methane has become a hot topic in investor circles. A group of 76 investors representing $3.6T assets under management publicly supported the North American methane announcement. And a much broader set of investors, from large institutional investors to private equity, and socially responsible investors to large banks, are turning their attention to reading up on the issue and engaging operator management in quiet but important conversations on managing this rising risk. As leading global asset management company Allianz Global noted to its clients, methane emissions are “the next frontier for the Oil & Gas industry” and there is an “urgent need to act."

EDF has long recognized the power of stakeholders with an economic incentive to drive progress that helps people and nature prosper. That’s why we are devoting a growing effort to educate oil and gas investors on why methane risk matters and what they can do to address it through constructive engagement with operators across the world.

In a post-Paris, carbon constrained world where investors constantly demand more and better information on all manner of corporate responses to climate risk, it’s only a matter of time until investors have the data at their fingertips to use the quality of methane management as one additional input in decision making processes, even including which companies to buy or sell.

If that seems like a stretch, just consider: an operator managing methane aggressively is better poised for smooth regulatory compliance, while also reaping operational efficiencies through waste reduction, providing evidence they can be part of the transition to a lower carbon energy economy, showing neighbors they are helping to reduce air pollution, and even appealing to top talent in an environmentally conscious workforce.

investorguide_cover

In the meantime, EDF has released a new resource in partnership with the Principles for Responsible Investment: “An Investor’s Guide to Methane: Engaging with Oil and Gas Companies to Manage a Rising Risk”, which builds on our landmark report “Rising Risk: Improving Methane Disclosure in the Oil and Gas Industry.” While the primary audience is investors who represent growing demand for improved methane management (and indeed gave us the idea for creating a guide in the first place), the Guide is public for a reason – operators who want to get ahead of the curve can review it for themselves.

Our Guide is based on three simple ideas. 1) Methane poses a material risk, in the form of financial, reputational, and regulatory risk. 2) Managing the risk well requires directly measuring emissions, transparently reporting the plan of action and its results, and actively reducing emissions. 3) Continuous improvement is key: each company can advance along the spectrum from beginner, to intermediate, to advanced, on each dimension of measure, report, reduce.

As operators review the Guide, they can use it to benchmark where they are today, prepare for dialogue with investors, and develop an action plan for continuous improvement. Whether motivated by investor relations, operational enhancements, regulatory positioning, or simply doing the right thing, we hope operators will find the guide to be a useful tool. Competitive advantage is at stake, and there’s no time to waste.


Follow Ben Ratner on Twitter, @RatnerBen


 

Managing the Rising Risk of Methane, What Investors Can Do

sean-headshotIn a recent blog post, I discussed three ways investors can have a positive impact on the environment.  One of those levers is engagement, or using your influence with the companies you invest in to help ensure those companies are being managed both profitably and sustainably.

Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) is a recognized global authority on how investors can engage with companies to manage environmental risks. Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is partnering with PRI to release a new how-to guide for engaging with oil and gas companies globally on methane emissions.

As investor scrutiny ramps up on all forms of climate risk, investors globally are becoming more aware of and concerned about the material risks that methane poses to portfolios, detailed in EDF’s Rising Risk report.  That report found methane poses a series of reputational, regulatory and financial risks to operators and their investors.  Methane, 84 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, is a potent form of carbon risk, and left unmanaged it can literally leak away shareholder value.

An Investor’s Guide to Methane responds to growing demand from investors globally for practical guidance on how to not only manage these risks through company engagement, but surface opportunities as well.  Investors want to understand how companies should measure their emissions, what they should be reporting, and what kinds of best management practices they should adopt to keep more product in the pipeline.  This guide provides details on what leading methane management looks like.

Just as investors use quarterly earnings to understand who the most profitable companies are, investors can use the performance benchmarking framework included in the guide to help differentiate relative methane performance.  Because methane management is such a powerful proxy for operational excellence, understanding relative performance on the issue can be a helpful insight for investment decision-making. As such, early-engagers will have a first-mover advantage. This framework is also designed to help identify concrete next steps companies can take to improve management, such as using additional emissions reductions technologies or adopting methane reporting metrics.

summary-performance-assessment-toolThe guide also provides detailed questions to help support constructive dialogue.  For example, EDF’s Rising Risk report found that as of early 2016, zero of the leading 65 companies in the US had disclosed a methane reduction target. The guide includes questions such as “What form of a quantitative methane reduction target would work best for your company?” that can help an operator think through how to best set an ambitious but achievable target.

As part of their engagement, investors should expect all operators to measure, report and reduce their emissions:

Measure – We’ve all heard the phrase “what gets measured, gets managed.” Getting accurate information on a company’s methane emissions is the first step in understanding the extent of the problem, uncovering hidden risks, and identifying opportunities to bring more product to the bottom line.  The more accurate the information, the better positioned companies will be to effectively reduce emissions. Expert level methane management requires companies to utilize robust direct measurement, or the process of getting out into the field to measure emissions, as this is more accurate than desk-top estimates.

Report – Investors require actionable methane information in order to understand the relative performance of operators, and leading companies will demonstrate how they are managing methane risk.  Operators should set and disclose a methane reduction target, and report how they plan to meet that target. For example, expert level operators will report the frequency, scope and methodology for their leak detection and repair (LDAR) programs as one best practice to limit emissions.

Reduce – Minimizing methane emissions is highly cost effective, and can be done using proven, off the shelf technologies.  Because methane is both pollutant and product, many of these technologies have a positive payback. Investors should feel confident in encouraging companies to reduce emissions knowing they can do so in a shareholder-friendly manner.  Leading operators will show a declining trend in emissions, frequently inspect assets for leaks, join global voluntary initiatives like the Oil and Gas Methane Partnership, and support regulations to reduce emissions.

The key points from these three buckets, as well as related engagement discussion questions, are summarized in a 2-page cheat sheet summary investors can take to meetings with them.

managing methane riskMethane is the next frontier for investor engagement on climate and carbon risk. Unmanaged emissions of methane can directly undermine the natural gas’ ability to play a role in a lower-carbon energy economy, impair social license to operate and be a proxy for operational inefficiency.   Conversely, active methane management can inspire investor and stakeholder confidence, keep product in the pipeline and prepare companies to operate in an increasingly carbon-constrained, regulated world.

Investors should utilize their influence, and this guide, to ensure companies are proactively managing methane risks and leveraging opportunities.

Download An Investor's Guide to Methane


Follow Sean Wright on Twitter, @SeanWright23


Additional reading: Why energy investors need to manage methane as a Rising Risk

 

Three Ways Investors Can Drive Environmental Gains

sean-headshotInvestors can be powerful change agents when it comes to the environment. Investors have capital which they can allocate in ways that either help or hurt the environment. They also have significant influence with the companies they invest in and with policymakers globally, both critical stakeholders when it comes to improving the environment.

While some investors are already working at the nexus of the environment and finance, given the earth’s pressing environmental challenges like climate change, overfishing and deforestation, there has never been a greater need for all investors to engage on sustainability issues. For example, private capital will be essential in order to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change – a recent UN study estimated that it will require roughly $90 trillion dollars, much more than philanthropic or public (i.e., government) investments can fund.

Of course, investors should consider environmental issues not just to do good, but also because the returns often meet if not exceed the performance of more traditional investments. And because investors are interested in risk-adjusted returns, managing environmental risks like carbon and water is critical to any comprehensive investment process.

Below are three levers investors can use to when considering environmental impacts:

  1. Capital allocation – The first decision any investor must make is where to invest their money. Considering sustainability issues can help drive capital towards investments that provide both an environmental and financial dividend.

One way to allocate capital toward more sustainable investments is to integrate environmental criteria into the investment process. Organizations like Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) and Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) improve disclosure on issues like carbon emissions and water, enabling investors to gain insight into how efficiently a company operates and manages environmental risk. In this respect, as Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) disclosure improves, investors can move from screening out whole sectors to proactively allocating capital toward companies that better manage material environmental issues, an investment trend which is becoming more mainstream in the U.S.  For example, while Environmental Defense Fund’s (EDF) Rising Risk report found methane disclosure in the oil and gas industry to be poor, as methane data improves, investors will be able to shift capital to those operators who are actively managing risk from this powerful pollutant and wasted product.

Investors can also place their money into investments with an explicit environmental component, like green bonds. These bonds are a debt instrument specifically tied to achieving a beneficial environmental outcome like energy efficiency, climate resiliency, or water infrastructure. The market for these double bottom line investments has grown from less than $3b just a few years ago to over $40b in 2015.

Investors are gaining new opportunities to invest in innovative products that help to reduce carbon emissions from deforestation and agriculture and improve sustainable fishing practices around the globe. Sustainable investing is also no longer just for sophisticated institutional investors. As financial tech startups are enabling individual retail investors to invest in an environmentally-friendly manner – giving all an opportunity to do well by doing good.

  1. Company engagement – Once their money is allocated, investors can then use their influence as equity or debt-holders to hold corporations accountable for environmental performance, risk management and disclosure. Organizations like Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) and Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) act to help investors be effective engagers by coordinating efforts on topics from deforestation and palm oil to water risks, and encourage collaboration where possible.

Engagement can include the ability of asset owners like private equity to work with portfolio companies to become more sustainable. EDF worked with leading private equity companies to design the Green Returns tool, which enables private equity to approach value creation through an environmental lens, and spot opportunities such as energy efficiency and waste reduction initiatives that generate cost-savings. Using this tool, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts (KKR) was able to add $1.2 billion to the value of their portfolio while avoiding significant greenhouse gases, water use, and excess waste.

Shareholders in public companies also have the ability to file shareholder resolutions to publically encourage better environmental management. In 2016, shareholders filed a record number of climate-related resolutions, which a recent Harvard Business School study has shown to be effective in improving both financial and environmental performance when focused on material ESG issues.

  1. Policy Support – Getting the rules right will be critical in both addressing environmental issues directly and in driving private capital towards environmentally-friendly assets. As Hank Paulson, the former Treasury Secretary and CEO of Goldman Sachs noted in a recent NY Times Op-Ed, we need policies that “include environmental regulations to stimulate clean, sustainable development; incentives and subsidies for clean energy investments; and the pricing of carbon emissions.”

Investors with expertise on business, markets, and finance have an important role to play in the policy process. The next generation of investor leadership on sustainability will require aligning external policy positions with internal sustainability practices and playing a proactive and public role to support legislation and regulations.

Organizations like CERES have been instrumental in activating investors on policy matters. Just this year, CERES played a leading role in getting 76 global investors with $3.6 trillion in assets under management (AUM) to support methane regulations in the U.S. and Canada while working with organizations like Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC) in Europe to recruit 130 investors with $13 trillion in AUM to support implementation of the Paris agreement. Such statements of support are meaningful in helping build the business case for environmental policy.  And direct engagement with law and policy makers is a next frontier for investors looking to maximize their impact on supporting sound policy development.

The need for investors to engage on environmental issues has never been greater, and the opportunities to do so profitably have never been more widespread. Investors of all kinds should incorporate the levers of allocation, engagement and policy in their investment process – a move with the potential to benefit both the planet and their portfolios.


Follow Sean Wright on Twitter, @SeanWright23


Why energy investors need to manage methane as a Rising Risk

 

Time to Tell the EPA What Works in Methane Mitigation

aileen_nowlan_31394The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has committed to regulate existing sources of methane from the oil and gas industry, and it is asking for information from the methane mitigation industry to make sure the rule’s approach and requirements account for recent innovation. The EPA’s announcement comprises the U.S. portion of the North American commitment to cut methane by up to 45% from the continent’s oil and gas industry by 2025. Existing sources in the oil and gas industry make up over 90% of the sector’s emissions, which contribute over 9 million tons of methane pollution annually.

The opportunity is open now to tell the EPA what works in methane mitigation.

methane_technician

Emission standards for existing sources of methane will not only reduce greenhouse gases but could also create new markets and customers for the growing mitigation industry. The regulation will likely start with one or more approved work practices to find and fix methane leaks, describing a technology or group of technologies that must be used in a certain manner. For example, EPA’s New Source Performance Standards for new and modified sources of methane required the use of optical gas imaging cameras or “Method 21” instruments. With far more existing sources of methane than new or modified sources, being part of an approved work practice for existing sources would open up a significant market opportunity.

In one of the first steps toward developing the existing source rule, the EPA has set up a voluntary Request for Information, asking anyone with “information about monitoring, detection of fugitive emissions, and alternative mitigation approaches” to submit details by commenting on the Request for Information docket online. The EPA states it is particularly interested in “advanced monitoring technologies” that could be “broadly applicable to existing sources.” The EPA cites as an example “monitoring systems that provide coverage across emission points or equipment in a way that was not previously possible, thus enabling a different approach to setting standards.” A good submission may include “published or unpublished papers, technical information, data, or any other information” that might be relevant.

The deadline to submit information via comment to the agency is November 15, 2016. But there is no need to wait–those who submit earlier will be part of the conversation sooner. And a number of important topics need to be discussed to shape the existing source regulation. The federal New Source Performance Standards and Colorado’s methane regulation contain a pathway for innovative technologies—a mechanism, supported by industry and  environmentalists alike, for the EPA to evaluate and approve better methane reduction approaches. A similar approach could help incentivize advanced technology deployment for existing sources.  This request for information is the first invitation of many to highlight innovation in the methane mitigation industry.


Follow Aileen Nowlan on Twitter, @Aileennow


Read more about the emerging Methane Mitigation industry

Why energy investors need to manage methane as a Rising Risk

 

3 Keys for the American Petroleum Institute’s New Climate Task Force

The climate change discussion is percolating even in surprising places. The latest sign: the American Petroleum Institute’s recent formation of an internal task force on climate change. Reportedly the new task force’s mandate is to revisit API’s approach to this crucial issue, going into an election year and with ever greater scrutiny on fossil fuels.

AdobeStock_56840116It is too soon to know whether the task force will rubber stamp a business-as-usual approach defined by glossing over climate concerns and attacking policy measures, or chart a new path instead.

But if the task force is serious about a fresh look at the issue, here are three keys for the task force to consider as it ponders the future of API on climate. Read more

Regulation as a Platform for Innovation

IMG_0187To get anything accomplished, you can’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. One unsung story buried in last week’s release of EPA’s new source methane rules may make good options even better – driving innovation and offering industry more options to meet the methane challenge.

The new rules target a pervasive problem: methane – the primary component of natural gas – leaking throughout the oil and gas value chain. Methane emissions represent a waste of saleable resources, a reputational risk, and a contributor to both poor local air quality and climate change.

Under the EPA’s framework, oil and gas operators must take steps to minimize emissions from new and modified sources – from finding and fixing leaks to swapping out equipment to reduce methane vented from pneumatic controllers and pumps. Companies in Colorado working to comply with the state’s similar rule have reported that putting similar measures in place is cost-effective, even generating positive returns from selling the captured gas.

But what should an agency do when the solutions available now are reasonable but not perfect? Existing strategies don’t monitor all the time – only a few days a year. So leaks and malfunctions can be missed, or leak for months before they are fixed.

MDC-devices-in-fieldNew technologies – emerging from research labs, startups and mature companies in adjacent sectors – can help spot leaks at lower cost, including through continuous monitoring. EDF’s Methane Detectors Challenge will launch pilots of sensitive, rugged, low-cost continuous methane monitors with oil and gas operators. Due to collaborative partnerships, these innovative technologies are advancing rapidly.

In a regulated industry like oil and gas, adaptability as technology progresses is key to ensuring operators can use more effective and lower-cost solutions as they become available. That insight led many innovators, forward-thinking oil and gas operators and EDF to call on EPA to include a pathway to innovation in the final rule. Read more

Three Ways Methane Standards Can Help the Oil and Gas Sector Rebuild

A massive wave of market and societal forces is changing the oil and gas industry. Low commodity prices are driving out weaker players with excessive debt, and forcing those that remain to become leaner and more efficient. As climate change effects worsen and countries move to fulfill their commitments from the Paris climate agreement, public scrutiny of oil and natural gas and their impacts only intensifies.

The question is not will industry change to meet these challenges — it’s how. It’s about what opportunities can propel industry to come back stronger out of the depths of the commodity slide, as a leaner, cleaner industry standing on firm ground that it can play a meaningful role as societies work to transition to lower-carbon economies.

Rising_Risk_banner

While natural gas remains a fact of life, and switching from coal to natural gas has helped reduce greenhouse gas emissions, scientific research has demonstrated that potent methane emissions from the oil and gas system are undermining that climate benefit. The latest U.S. inventory shows over 9 million metric tons of oil and gas methane emissions, packing the same climate impact over a 20 year timeframe as over 200 coal-fired power plants. That’s a lot of methane no matter how you slice it.

Methane standards like the rule announced today by EPA can aid industry, for three reasons: Read more