US emissions fell 2.1% in 2019

[acidburnNSA]

This is largely because we are replacing coal plants with fracked natural gas plants, which we are doing because fracked gas is cheap and plentiful.

Fracked gas is way better from an air pollution point of view and a little better from a direct carbon emission point of view. But when you consider the methane leaks from wellheads and pipelines and facilities it is roughly as bad as coal for climate. This is overall not a good story for climate as we lock in gas plants for decades.

Renewables and nuclear deployments did not factor in much to this decrease.

[lacker]

Natural gas is not at all "roughly as bad as coal for climate". There is a lot of research indicating this, so I will just point to one article:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/natural-gas-re...

Natural gas isn't the ultimate solution, of course, but it's a mistake to treat it the same as coal.

[Retric]

Unlike CO2 Methane has a half life of ~7 years in the atmosphere, thus front loading warming before breaking down into CO2 and water. So, in terms of climate impact in 2040+, natural gas burned today is significantly better than coal.

[misiti3780]

Yep, in 2017 the US became the largest exporter of crude oil, surpassing Saudi Arabia because of fracking.

American natural gas production, which had been essentially flat since the mid-1970s, jumped by nearly 43 percent between 2007 and 2017.

[imtringued]

You can't lock in gas plants because they are less capital intensive, require less staff, they can throttle based on demand and finally the fuel costs are higher than renewables so it always makes sense to throttle them down when renewables are available instead of clogging the grid like coal plants. They are one key part of the needed energy storage mix.

[dcolkitt]

> But when you consider the methane leaks from wellheads and pipelines and facilities it is roughly as bad as coal for climate.

This makes intuitive sense. But do you have a source for how that calculation was determined. My understanding is that the impact of methane viz-a-viz carbon is highly sensitive to the time frame that you're considering. Methane is highly potent in terms of warning but quickly breaks down in the atmosphere.

[godelski]

> a little better from a direct carbon emission point of view.

Usually I'm on your side about these things, but I was surprised by your comment. Here's the IPCC numbers [0]. Natural gas has about half the emissions that coal does. With CCS it almost gets to the levels of renewables and nuclear. I'm not saying this should be a long term solution or even endorsing this solution. But natural gas is definitely more than a little better than coal in terms of climate.

> This is overall not a good story for climate as we lock in gas plants for decades.

I do agree with this point, mostly. We can still push for CCS additions to already operating plants. I know you know better than most that renewables don't work as effectively everywhere and batteries are there for long term solutions (though clearly we're building gas where we don't have to and that IS a big problem). I also know you're an expert when it comes to understanding nuclear.

As for energy, we need more of it. If we can't build new renewables or nuclear, I'll take a new gas plant over a new coal plant any day. I do think everyone here is in agreement that we'd rather have renewables though (and several also want nuclear).

[0] https://i.imgur.com/wkvjleP.png

[merpnderp]

I’m not sure I believe this. My state over the last 20 years went from 70% coal 30% natgas to 25% coal, 25% wind, 50% natgas. We’re fricking killing it when it comes to fighting air pollution.

Only reason other states don’t follow suit is they politically can’t embrace natgas like we can, and without gas turbines, you can’t expand wind as easily.

[beat]

Renewables are definitely a factor at this point, and a growing one. Nuclear is not... new nuclear production is basically at a standstill, because it's far too expensive. Cost is what's killing coal, and it's killing traditional nuclear as well.

[DenisM]

Methane decomposes in the atmosphere [1]. CO2 is forever.

  Mechanism                 Methane removal (Mt)
  Tropospheric oxidation    506
  Stratospheric oxidation    40
  Soil uptake                30
  Total                     576
  Emissions                 598

[1] https://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/research/energy/downloads/methaneuk...

[arbuge]

> But when you consider the methane leaks from wellheads and pipelines and facilities it is roughly as bad as coal for climate.

This is a solvable problem which can and should be addressed by appropriate regulation.

The real problem is that the current administration seems intent on not doing so: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/29/climate/epa-methane-green...

[dclusin]

A few years ago NASA launched the Aqua satellite which has the capability to measure and visualize methane hotspots[1]. Hopefully this will allow us to mitigate the well head methane leaks. But I agree that this is a bridge technology at best and we need to transition to renewables ASAP.

1 - https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/87681/a-global-view...

[api]

Methane has a much shorter half-life in the atmosphere than CO2. Also unlike CO2 emissions there is an economic incentive to fix methane leaks: you're leaking product!

[stjohnswarts]

It's not just a "little better" on CO2 emissions, it emits half the amount of CO2 that coal does per unit energy. That's pretty significant.

[uncoder0]

The upside of methane is that it's short lived in the atmosphere with a half life in the atmosphere of ~7 years. At the end of the day we do need more nuclear it's the best solution and the newest generation of reactors can consume the 'waste' from our older generation plants, it's a win/win.

[ryanmarsh]

How does one quantify the methane leaks from well heads, pipelines, and facilities? Are we speaking of known loss of primary containment? LOPC is EPA reportable. Or are we saying there are other leaks which are not being reported but we somehow know those figures?

[elhudy]

Would you say that it's also important to have infrastructure in place for renewable natural gas? Most natural gas companies have set goals for moving to percentages of renewable natural gas in the near future. The same cannot be said of coal plants.

[tectonic]

A really good review of methane and climate change: https://www.darrinqualman.com/methane/

[adrianN]

Building lots of gas plants is not as bad as it sounds. Power-to-gas is a decent way of storing renewable energy and you need those gas plants to turn that back into power.

[Zenst]

Be interesting to see water quality (or water emissions if you like) for the same period. Mindful that fracking has been associated with water quality in some areas.

[mac01021]

Are those methane leaks factored into the determination that US Emissions have fallen 2.1%?

[mrfusion]

What if we fixed the leaks though? The leaks aren’t a problem inherent to natural gas.

[hanniabu]

> Fracked gas is way better from an air pollution point of view

And worse for water quality

[mirimir]

I suspect that these estimates don't include methane leaks.

[tomatotomato37]

How did I know the first comment was going to be some variation of "Ignore the data because the US is doing bad things and making the problem worse." Not everything is bad data or a conspiracy, sometimes it actually is progress, so stop whinging and take the fucking win for once.

[dennisgorelik]

> as bad as coal for climate

This statement incorrectly implies that increasing Earth temperature is bad for climate.

A warmer climate has both advantages and disadvantages for humans. The advantages of a warmer climate are more significant: 1) Easier to grow crops. 2) More comfortable to live closer to the poles (Canada, Siberia, Iceland, Greenland).

[Panino]

This article is very short but (some) early commenters appear not to have read it, and most subthreads at this moment started from them. Here are some of the important points from the article:

> This was due to a decrease in coal plants

> Further, renewables were up 6% in 2019

> Emissions rose from buildings [2.2%], industry [0.6%], and other parts of the economy

I'm supposed to take delivery of solar panels at my house today. It shouldn't be long before they're operational. I'm so excited!

To people in general, what improvements are you making (not your country, but you personally)? Not something you've always done - what's your latest new eco-project, big or small?

[jdgiese]

- I work remotely and live in a city where I can walk.

- I try to avoid buying new things for as long as possible. When I can, I repair what I own or buy used. Living in a small apartment provides some natural incentives to avoid buying too much stuff.

- I avoid eating meat, and when I do, try to eat Chicken or fish.

- I try to take short showers and don't flush the toilet if I only urinate (it took my wife a while to get used to this, but she came around after a bit).

- I avoid using paper towels and reuse aluminum foil and bags as often as possible (often, you can wipe off the aluminum foil and use it a second or third time).

Some of these may not make much of a difference.

I have not spent too much time thinking about this, so my reasoning may be faulty, but I will share it anyway:

I am more worried about deforestation and the rainforests and poaching than climate change.

I want to keep a healthy planet so that conscious beings, and especially humans, can continue enjoying it. Thus, there is a balance between enjoying life (e.g., traveling) and reducing emissions. It seems, as is often the case with difficult ethical questions, that finding balance is key.

[geddy]

> To people in general, what improvements are you making (not your country, but you personally)?

2019 was a great year for limiting my spent resources:

- I went fully plant-based in January, quit meat, eggs, dairy etc

- I joined a local gym that I can ride my bicycle to (or run in the warmer weather)

- I started working from home 4/5 days of the week

- I walk up the block and take a bus to work on that extra day

I also turn off my heat during the day when I'm home, and use a little space heater rather than burn natural gas keeping the whole house warm, since I'm in my office 99% of the time anyway.

Things I'd like to change in 2020 or beyond:

- My "daily driver" is still a large Dodge Ram - though I rarely ever drive it and certainly not daily, but occasionally I need it. It's an '09 so I've had it for quite a while. I want to replace it with something less ridiculous, but our lease on the Honda HRV is up so that'll take priority. Something electric if possible though our house is old and there's nowhere to install a charger.

[melling]

“ This was due to a decrease in coal plants, which resulted in an emissions drop of 190 million metric tons”

Yep, coal is one of the biggest problems.

https://h4labs.org/ive-got-another-stupid-idea-to-deal-with-...

[pcarolan]

How much of this is due to the fact that we're exporting pollution in the form of plant outsourcing to countries willing to absorb those externalities (China)?

[exabrial]

This is a nice win, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to China's increase and they already own 1/3 of total emissions.

Source: https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/china/

[jes5199]

I wonder if 2020 is the year that global emissions start to fall. In some sense, that's too little too late, but I still think it would be a victory. It's really up to China, who was mostly recently estimated to peak in 2022, but who knows really

[darksaints]

I agree with the view that we'll see a rapid change when new renewables are cheaper than continued operation of existing fossil fuel plants. However, where is that threshold? We're seeing solar and wind with LCoE as low as $0.03/kWh. How much further do we have to go?

[CivBase]

It surprises me that emissions from the transportation industry seem to be increasing despite mainstreaming of EVs.

I understand EVs are not a prefect solution because they just pass the emissions to the power plants, but considering the documented improvements in our power infrastructure, I thought that would have at least a slight knock-on effect for transportation. I figure the rate should at least be decreasing, even if it's very slow.

Is it just too soon to see the impact of EVs? Is it related the rise in delivered goods? Is there just more travel within the US in general?

[chiefalchemist]

If net importing was up then it means we've "outsourced" our polluting.

Also, the type of emissions matters, with some pollutants being more greenhouse-y than others.

[bamboozled]

It’s a a start, it’s excellent news. I wonder if the people of America can significantly beat this figure in 2020?

[perfunctory]

I guess this can be considered excellent news by current standards. In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is king after all.

According to the latest UN emissions gap report we need to reduce global emissions by 7.6% every year starting now to meet Paris agreement. And given US position in the world, it should probably do more than global average.

[ryanmercer]

I wonder how much of that is a result of the fairly mild fall/winter we've had so far.

[option]

we need more Nuclear power to drop emissions faster and by bigger % while allowing energy production and consumption to increase at the same time

[newguy1234]

Emissions are dropping but what about carbon sinks? Are we doing anything to plant more trees?

[newguy1234]

What about carbon sinks, are we planting more trees?

[sebastianconcpt]

How is China doing?

[asdf333]

great!!! lets keep it up!!!

[dang]

Url changed from https://electrek.co/2020/01/08/us-emissions-drop-2019/, which points to this.

[rwem]

Because we’re all idiots and waited too long, we need to cut emissions by 15% annually, not 2%. 2% does not even offset the increase in US emissions in 2018. 2% is a disaster.

[brink]

I don't think Trump is pro-coal or anti-coal more than he is just pro-economy and pro-capitalism and judged the economy as pro-coal. The economy is a voice of the people and thankfully happened to move towards a more eco-friendly solution to energy.