Mind you, identifying leaks isn’t enough; it takes actively fixing them and decommissioning the infrastructure which resulted in methane release in the first place.

  • Matt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Great! So then regulators can increase their finger wagging rate. If only there were some way to assign cost to pollution, based on output. But that would decrease profit, and we can’t have that….

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      In the US, the biggest oil and gas industry sources have a significant emissions tax ($900/tonne, rising to $1500 in 2026) attached to them. So they can do a bit more than wag for the worst cases.

      It’ll take shifting that down to include smaller sources though, and enforcing that kind of penalty worldwide.

      • thejevans@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Unfortunately these satellites don’t have a high-enough resolution for oil and gas source attribution in most cases. They’re great for CAFOs and landfills, though.

        • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          My understanding is that the plan is to use a mix of high-frequency-low-resolution imaging with less-frequent-higher-resolution images to pinpoint specific leak sources.