ExxonMobil Stands Against The Rollback of Methane Regulation
Source: flickr.com; Pic by Richard Hurd (CC BY 2.0)
Dailycsr.com – 18 February 2019 – The gas and oil industry of the U.S. emit methane as they generate waste from “valuable resources”. This, in turn, adds to the acceleration of climate change, whereby severely clouding “the credibility of natural gas in the low carbon transition”. If reports are to be believed Andrew Wheeler, the acting “EPA Administrator”, has made a proposition of weakening standards by “limiting pollution from new and modified oil and gas facilities”.
The stakeholders across the value chain, connected to the “future of gas”, do share “an incentive” to usher in an enhancement towards countrywide “methane regulation”, as a continued effort, which will help the industry to improve. There are also reports of EPA considering on a “more extreme” proposal for abolishing “methane regulation” but some of the responses received from the industry highlights “just how out of step this administration’s attacks have been”, while other responses including “non-responses” shows discouraging sign about “regulatory rollbacks that will increase harmful emissions”.
The ExxonMobil is one such company that is for “continued EPA methane regulation”. In fact, it was also given its comments to EPA showing its support towards “federal regulatory standards to mitigate methane emissions for both new and existing source oil and gas facilities”, whereby it has urged the EPA to carry on the methane regulation. According to the EDF+Business:
“Although EDF strongly disagrees with the API comments, Exxon deserves recognition for becoming the first company to call for continued EPA methane regulation. This aspect of Exxon’s comments supports its prior public commitment to advocate for methane regulation (BP, Chevron, Equinor and Shell are among those who have made the identical commitment) and position Exxon as an important voice against rollbacks in 2019 and beyond”.
On the other hand, Shell has come out in support for continuation of bi-annual “leak inspections”. As EPA’s proposition is to “weaken leak detection and repair frequency”, Shell talks from its experience explaining “a continuation of semiannual survey frequency is reasonable for the reduction of fugitive emissions from…affected sources”. With this, Shell takes up the leadership as the “only operator” opposing the “proposed EPA changes” which would pose immediate increment in the emissions level.
Nevertheless, it did not manage to math up to ExxonMobil as it chose to remain quiet about the “need for continued federal regulation of methane” and noted that the company’s comments intends to “complement” the ones “submitted by API and other trade groups”. As it stands, some company’s opposed the rollback while others ether showed their support or chose to remain silent. Similarly, comments from BP dealt with “innovative alternatives for compliance with leak detection standards” and ignored the proposal of administration which would “weaken the core standards’.
References:
3blmedia.com
The stakeholders across the value chain, connected to the “future of gas”, do share “an incentive” to usher in an enhancement towards countrywide “methane regulation”, as a continued effort, which will help the industry to improve. There are also reports of EPA considering on a “more extreme” proposal for abolishing “methane regulation” but some of the responses received from the industry highlights “just how out of step this administration’s attacks have been”, while other responses including “non-responses” shows discouraging sign about “regulatory rollbacks that will increase harmful emissions”.
The ExxonMobil is one such company that is for “continued EPA methane regulation”. In fact, it was also given its comments to EPA showing its support towards “federal regulatory standards to mitigate methane emissions for both new and existing source oil and gas facilities”, whereby it has urged the EPA to carry on the methane regulation. According to the EDF+Business:
“Although EDF strongly disagrees with the API comments, Exxon deserves recognition for becoming the first company to call for continued EPA methane regulation. This aspect of Exxon’s comments supports its prior public commitment to advocate for methane regulation (BP, Chevron, Equinor and Shell are among those who have made the identical commitment) and position Exxon as an important voice against rollbacks in 2019 and beyond”.
On the other hand, Shell has come out in support for continuation of bi-annual “leak inspections”. As EPA’s proposition is to “weaken leak detection and repair frequency”, Shell talks from its experience explaining “a continuation of semiannual survey frequency is reasonable for the reduction of fugitive emissions from…affected sources”. With this, Shell takes up the leadership as the “only operator” opposing the “proposed EPA changes” which would pose immediate increment in the emissions level.
Nevertheless, it did not manage to math up to ExxonMobil as it chose to remain quiet about the “need for continued federal regulation of methane” and noted that the company’s comments intends to “complement” the ones “submitted by API and other trade groups”. As it stands, some company’s opposed the rollback while others ether showed their support or chose to remain silent. Similarly, comments from BP dealt with “innovative alternatives for compliance with leak detection standards” and ignored the proposal of administration which would “weaken the core standards’.
References:
3blmedia.com
Companies