EPA moves closer to rolling back Obama-era rules on methane

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • silo Sandy, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 10:37 p.m.

    @conservative scientist
    "This is no more unfair than what Obama did"

    You might have a point if Obama had actually abused executive order usage as you claim. Except he didn't. The actual data shows clearly that Obama used executive orders on a less frequent basis than any other president going back to Grover Cleveland in the late 1800s.

    Even Trump has substantially exceeded Obama's rate of Executive Order usage, despite having a Republican controlled House and Senate.

  • jpc53 Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 8:41 p.m.

    @ Conservative Scientist
    That is one big difference, Obama had the overwhelming support of the scientific community even if you may have disagreed.
    Trumps efforts will be blocked by the courts, just like almost every other attempt he has made to denude the EPA.

  • Frozen Fractals Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 4:27 p.m.

    @Thid Barker
    "And here I thought C02, not CH4 was the culprit!"

    They are the second and third most important greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. (First is water vapor which is a large majority of the 30C greenhouse effect but doesn't really fluctuate overall in the atmosphere aside from correlating with temperature so it enhances changes in the others).

  • barfolomew Tooele, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 3:46 p.m.

    @ one old man

    I wholeheartedly agree with you! If it weren't about money, there wouldn't even be an issue.

    However, where we part ways is in who's money we're talking about. When you want to take away mine to give to someone else, that's where i draw the line. And that's what it's really all about, isn't it? Redistribution of wealth. From your pocket to Al Gore's. He's become a billionaire with global warming. It's also about relinquishing sovereignty to the UN; the AGW crowd and their one-world view. Well, I'm not willing to give it all up for something that "might" happen. I do believe that the Earth's climate is changing. Actually, it has never stopped changing. Our lives are just a minute blip in the geological timeline. You can't call the climate you grew up with "normal" and any change to that being abnormal.

    Also, your argument that because the theory of Plate Tectonics and Continental Drift was debated then and is accepted science now, only proves that AGW will be accepted science soon is beyond laughable. The Earth being flat and the sun revolving around the Earth was also "accepted science" at one time.

  • conservative scientist Lindon, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 3:23 p.m.

    Obama (and the agencies under his direct control) loved to rule by executive fiat. He thought that's the best way to change our country and the world rather than go through congress which is how our constitution really states things are to be done (that is, the executive branch enforces the laws, but doesn't make them). However, congress was too slow and inefficient in Obama's mind, not to mention that once Republicans became a majority in congress they were not going to rubber-stamp his ideological policies.

    Now a different political power takes over the executive branch, and they can push their own agenda by executive fiat - following Obama's precedent. This is no more unfair than what Obama did and the left should not whine about it. A current executive using a stroke of a pen to correct past executive excesses is actually a noble thing to do.

  • Harrison Bergeron Holladay , UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 3:13 p.m.

    Let's talk about methane. Atmospheric methane is primarily produced through the decomposition of organic material. Many animals (including humans) produce it as a natural part of digestion. When it is unaccompanied by sulfide compounds it is odorless. Wetlands account for about 22% of atmospheric methane. Forests may account for approximately 10 to 30%. Atmospheric methane is also produced in farming. Rice cultivation accounts for about 12% of atmospheric methane, farm animals about 16%. Fossil fuel mining accounts for about 19%.

    Methane is also a valuable commodity. We all buy it to heat our homes, run dryers, etc. Oil and gas companies are trying ever harder to capture more of it so they can sell it to us. It makes them no money when it escapes into the atmosphere. The next largest industry to produce methane is the livestock industry. So here is the question: How do you capture methane from cow flatulence? It's easy to make rules and regulations. But until someone comes up with a method or a device to catch methane from an animal, it's kind of ridiculous to try to regulate it.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 3:11 p.m.

    Who needs a clean environment, Not the GOP.

    If they can help the filthy hydrocarbon corporations make even a penny more, then science and life be damned, cause in the end it's all about the money with the GOP they care little for future generations, the Baby Boomers are turning out to be one of the most selfish generations in The United States.

    Don't care about others health or health care, think that all taxes are theft, believe in ignorance that each man is an island and needs nothing from their government.

    Sad selfish angry people don't make good decisions for our collective future.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 2:15 p.m.

    @one old man - Ogden, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 12:58 p.m.
    This is not a smart thing to do."

    Consider the source. The GOP is already cannibalizing itself. We should not stand for them taking the rest of us down withe them.

  • Thid Barker Victor, ID
    Sept. 11, 2018 2:01 p.m.

    And here I thought C02, not CH4 was the culprit! I remember when I heard a "climate scientist" who claimed dinosaur flatulence caused the ice age and that bovine flatulence was destroying our climate today! Settled science? Hardly!

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 1:26 p.m.

    " It's already "settled science."

    Perhaps not yet, but we're getting closer.

    Back when I was a young college student in the early '60's, the theory of Plate Tectonics and Continental Drift was a hotly debated among geologists as climate change is today. Now it is settle science and we can even tell you that every time to clip your fingernails, the piece you clip off equals the distance the North American continent has drifted since the last time you trimmed them.

    Good science requires time and a lot of questioning. It's coming.

    The only difference is that back in the old days, Plate Tectonics didn't affect the bottom lines of any big companies or wealthy people and so it never became a political football.

    But when MONEY is involved, everything changes. It's not science that's driving the climate debate. It's greed.

    And someday, our descendants will pay the price.

  • barfolomew Tooele, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 1:08 p.m.

    "....methane gas, one of the most potent agents of climate change."

    This is the very first line of the article.

    No bias here, huh? Oh, that's right! What was I thinking? It's already "settled science."

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Sept. 11, 2018 12:58 p.m.

    This is not a smart thing to do.