
The Invisible Catastrophe: Record Methane Leak in CA - hackuser
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/03/magazine/the-invisible-catastrophe.html
======
clumsysmurf
While this was going on, there was another smaller methane gas leak just north
of Porter Ranch.

Whats interesting about this one, is the intentional effort to conceal it.

An airplane pilot using an infrared camera to record methane levels of the
main leak noticed the second leak. Employees of The Termo Company snaked a
2.5-inch pipe away from oil pumping equipment to hide its opening under a
tree.

[http://www.scpr.org/news/2016/03/18/58697/during-porter-
ranc...](http://www.scpr.org/news/2016/03/18/58697/during-porter-ranc-
stealthy-oil-workers-hid-anothe/)

~~~
hanniabu
That's fucked up, this stuff is so frustrating and pisses me off.....this
stuff will keep happening until stronger fines are in place. Rather than
setting petty fines, the fines should instead be something like 0.5% of the
company's revenue. That'll get them listening because it's a substantial
enough amount that the risk of getting caught isn't worth it.

~~~
jacobolus
If there were some kind of general carbon tax, I assume the fee for
"greenhouse equivalent of 1.7 million cars for a year" would be pretty big.

~~~
Retric
Methane breaks down in around 10 years into CO2. So, it's not quite that bad.

~~~
InclinedPlane
And then CO2 is removed from the atmosphere by plants and algae, so it's
really not bad at all!

/s

~~~
adrianN
CO2 stays in the atmosphere for a very long time. A large part of the released
CO2 will stay basically forever.

[http://www.nature.com/climate/2008/0812/full/climate.2008.12...](http://www.nature.com/climate/2008/0812/full/climate.2008.122.html)

While Methane is bad, releasing the equivalent amount of CO2 would be way
worse.

~~~
InclinedPlane
[http://www.internetslang.com/_2FS-meaning-
definition.asp](http://www.internetslang.com/_2FS-meaning-definition.asp)

------
npunt
This piece was a perfect opportunity for the New York Times to use data and
charts to visualize the magnitude of the problem and the timeline of the
discoveries and activities.

Instead we got a wall of text, and numbers without context like '97,100 metric
tons'. I'm sure somewhere deep in there the context was provided, but it
wasn't readily available for me as a reader to make a quick assessment of the
issues importance, and whether to dedicate 15 minutes to reading it.

Specifically, the lack of subheads and figures made the article really hard to
skim, which is rather inexcusable in the age of internet publishing. The only
images are a guy with a rolls royce, an overhead shot of the area, a pool, and
a gate. Not exactly compelling stuff, nor highly descriptive or additive. The
article is very well researched and real journalism went into it, and its a
shame it wasn't put together well.

 _EDIT: dove into this problem more on my blog_ \--
[http://www.nickpunt.com/2016/03/31/journalism-and-user-
exper...](http://www.nickpunt.com/2016/03/31/journalism-and-user-experience/)

~~~
gaur
This is another example of "long-form journalism". Some people apparently
consider the buried information and irrelevant fluff to be a feature, not a
bug.

~~~
Mvandenbergh
There's really very little point in putting the information in a very concise,
actionable form because the vast majority of readers are not in a position to
do anything about it.

------
guelo
Unstoppable Gas Leaks in Texas Even Worse than California’s, Media Silent:
[http://theantimedia.org/unstoppable-gas-leaks-texas-even-
wor...](http://theantimedia.org/unstoppable-gas-leaks-texas-even-worse-
californias-media-silent/)

~~~
thrownaway2424
This one makes a better story because of the concentration of the problem. The
Barnett Shale is 5000 square miles. A huge distributed gas leak on an area
that big is harder to impress people with.

------
jdmichal
So I loaded up Google Maps to get a visual of the neighborhood, and found that
someone has conveniently tagged the leak location as a "tourist attraction".

[https://www.google.com/maps/place/2015+Methane+gas+leak,+Cal...](https://www.google.com/maps/place/2015+Methane+gas+leak,+California+91326)

The Walmart shopping center is here:

[https://www.google.com/maps/place/Walmart+Supercenter,+19821...](https://www.google.com/maps/place/Walmart+Supercenter,+19821+Rinaldi+St,+Porter+Ranch,+CA+91326)

------
Eupolemos
That is roughly equivalent of the farts of 6 mill cows, just standing there.

Just saying for comparison, not for some "don't eat cows" agenda.

Cow fart source: [http://www.fastcoexist.com/3054212/collecting-cow-farts-
the-...](http://www.fastcoexist.com/3054212/collecting-cow-farts-the-stupid-
brilliant-solution-to-global-warming)

(208l of methane farts = 135g/day. 120 days = 16.2kg. 97 x 10^6/16.2 = roughly
6 x 10^6.)

Just smell that dairy air...

~~~
strommen
To get technical on you, 95% of methane from cattle is from burps, not farts.

~~~
lvs
Thanks for this clarification.

------
AnthonyMouse
The last time I made this argument it got like eight upvotes and ten downvotes
without any of the naysayers explaining themselves, so I'm going to make it
again.

A carbon tax imposed by a majority of industrialized countries would be net
profitable for countries that aren't large net petroleum exporters at the
expense of countries that are.

The carbon tax reduces consumption (i.e. demand) for petroleum, which reduces
its pre-tax market price according to supply and demand. In other words the
higher after-tax price of oil causes more people to buy electric cars and
build out non-fossil power generation, which means less burning of oil and
coal, which means less buying of it.

So you have a $2/gallon tax but the resulting drop in demand reduces the pre-
tax price of petroleum by $1/gallon (or whatever), which means you're only
actually paying $1/gallon more for gas. Meanwhile you have $2/gallon worth of
tax revenue which you can give back to the people paying the gas tax via a
negative income tax or whatever you like. The extra $1/gallon is money not
paid to Russia and Saudi Arabia, which we get instead.

It's free money at the expense of antagonistic countries. The fact that it
also happens to save the world is just a nice side benefit.

~~~
kbenson
If you subsidize people buying gas with taxes from buying gas, isn't that a
net equilibrium, and people (if perfectly rational) should buy the same amount
of gas (since it costs the same in the end)? I understand that some people
would buy less because there's an aversion to spending more, or people that
just can't afford it in the moment, but I'm not sure it makes sense,
economically, as you've explained it.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
The tax credit is fixed, not based on how much gas you buy. The average person
pays $2000 in tax (but the oil now costs $1000 less pre-tax) and then gets a
$2000 tax credit. If you burn less oil than average you still get the $2000
credit but pay only $800 in tax, so switching to oil alternatives puts that
much more money in your pocket.

------
anigbrowl
It's a sad comment on the state of our media and body politic that this has
not been headline news. But no signifying image of the enormous damage means
that it's hard to get and hold people's attention.

~~~
jonah
I've been hearing about it since the beginning but maybe it's just "local"
news? I live an hour-and-a-half away.

------
barbs
Man... it's so disheartening to read about these things. I feel like even if I
reduce all my emissions to the best of my ability - use only renewable energy,
don't eat meat, don't drive etc - my net effect is only a drop in the ocean
compared to catastrophes like this. And this is a total accident: it's not
something that could be blamed on apathy, or laziness. Maybe negligence? But
it feels like the expulsion of carbon gases is so hard to stop even with good
intentions. I can't help but feel so powerless against this.

~~~
beatpanda
You're right, your personal contributions don't mean a lot because you're
making choices in an economic system engineered, physically and politically,
to favor fossil fuels. Something like a decade ago, activists switched gears
from "consumer choice" campaigns to regulatory and physical sabotage of fossil
fuel extraction and infrastructure.

Don't worry about your car, but do help those committed nerds showing up to
regulatory hearings in your area. The Bay Area has several of these
infrastructure fights going on as we speak.

------
simplemath
We need another Teddy Roosevelt.

Or for the general population to start giving a shit.

About anything, really.

~~~
gscott
Teddy Roosevelt was the last President to not be bought by the 1%. I am
looking forward to President Trump being the 2nd. The 1% spending tens of
millions trying to stop him tells you how afraid they are of him.

~~~
simplemath
Trump is not going to be president.

It's nearly statistically impossible.

~~~
gscott
Great leaders can do nearly impossible things we can only hope he comes
through.

------
kohito
From the article: “Climate change is not a real thing for most of these
people,” Stern said. “But you change your mind quick when your kids are
puking.”

~~~
kevinskii
Air pollution != climate change.

~~~
rahilsondhi
Methane == climate change.

> Pound for pound, the comparative impact of CH4 on climate change is more
> than 25 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period.

[https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.ht...](https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html)

This is heavily discussed in a documentary I watched recently, "Cowspiracy."

~~~
hueving
Right, but it's not climate change that is causing the puking. Put it this
way, if we didn't have a greenhouse gas problem, the parents would still be
pissed if their kids are puking.

------
mirimir
The ConocoPhillips leak in the San Juan Basin is larger. And not so easily
sealed.

[https://www.hcn.org/issues/47.15/in-the-southwests-four-
corn...](https://www.hcn.org/issues/47.15/in-the-southwests-four-corners-
methane-has-a-dark-side/methane-emittersinfographic-jpg/image_view_fullscreen)

------
rabbidruster
Not directly related, but another interesting potential catastrophe in St.
Louis.

[http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/midwest/ct-
st...](http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/midwest/ct-st-louis-
underground-fire-20151010-story.html)

------
emgoldstein
There's one fact that is never mentioned in this story.

Methane is lighter than air (about 0.7th the density of air). The methane leak
is above Porter Ranch (about 1200 feet, a fact that is mentioned).

You know that and I know that. But do most NYT readers know that? If not, why
doesn't the writer mention it? He does mention elliptically that the town
residents are smelling mercaptans, not methane. He doesn't mention that the
methane can't possibly be reaching them. It seems like this simple science
fact would bring a lot of clarity to the picture.

(In related news, the greenhouse effect is O(log n), as a function from
greenhouse gas concentration to thermal forcing. I'm sure everyone here knew
this as well.)

------
fapjacks
Jailtime. Jailtime. Jailtime. Long sentences.

~~~
Zigurd
I wonder why this is downvoted. Industrial and white collar crimes are
generally orders of magnitude worse, in terms of physical destruction and
financial loss, than street-level property crime. Why aren't the sentences
(and enforcement, and prosecution) proportionate to the impact?

~~~
VeejayRampay
Let's be honest, it's the power of money.

------
reitanqild
How many times more powerful than CO2 is methane as greenhouse gas?

~~~
oppositelock
Ok, so set the gas plumes on fire, should be better for greenhouse effect.

~~~
trhway
and whole world is doing it, like they really care :)

[http://skytruth.org/viirs/](http://skytruth.org/viirs/)

btw, notice how activity decreased in 2015 vs. 2014 with oil prices falling

~~~
JumpCrisscross
It's actually done to prevent clouds of flammable gas, mixed with air, from
forming around the vents. The environmental benefit is a plus on the side.

~~~
trhway
reminded -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ufa_train_disaster](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ufa_train_disaster)

"The explosion occurred after a pipeline began leaking liquid natural gas[1]
(mainly propane and butane), creating a highly flammable cloud that was soon
ignited by wheel sparks from two passenger trains heading in opposite
directions near the site of the leak. "

~~~
jakub_h
"liquid natural gas[1] (mainly propane and butane)

That doesn't make sense to me. Either it's natural gas, or propane-butane.
Where I live at least, there are requirements for what natural gas is supposed
to be. There can be some amout of impurities in it but it's still supposed to
be mostly methane.

Maybe they meant that the propane and butane impurities stayed low while
methane escaped?

------
hueving
On mobile chrome the page randomly reloads and the article disappears after
about 5 minutes of reading. The mobile web is a sad state of affairs if
nytimes can't even get a page reliable enough to read a whole article!

~~~
a_imho
>The mobile web is a sad state of affairs

after almost 10 years of the release of the iphone, still can't get my head
around that people willingly choose that inconvenience in the name of the
dictated cool.

------
peter303
Methane creares half as much CO2 per BTU of energy as gasoline. However
methane its self is a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than CO2. So if more
than 2.5% of methane leaks into the atmosphere, it cancels its relative
cleanness.

I dont think anyone knows how natural or idustrial leakage there is. But some
groups are attempting measure.

------
hackuser
Is there any liability for this?

If I spilled toxic waste on your land, I'd have to pay to clean it up and
possibly more for mishandling it. If I spill invisible toxic waste in the
whole world's atmosephere, do I get to impose the costs on everyone else?

~~~
madaxe_again
The latter. The atmosphere is generally viewed as a convenient place to dump
whatever with no consequences. Like the ocean!

No consequences at all, nosiree.

~~~
yeukhon
There are laws to penalize leaks if the leak is caused by misconduct like not
following safety protocol or not built with safety measure. But the penalty is
so lightweight corps just ignore. There are too many drilling leaks every day,
so what? $250,000 fine? Fuck that. Easy money and it is the practice of energy
company to sub-contract the drilling so fault will never end up on them. Sub-
contractors sub-contract and more sub-contract. Yeah, a merge sort, but
penalty never bubble up. Also, there aren't enough human resource available to
do inspection.

------
omegaworks
What will it take for us to recognize there is only one Earth. We all share
the same air.

"Daddy, did it use to be hard to breathe when you were little too?"

~~~
rtkwe
The timeline for the damage is longer than the timelines that pretty much any
of the large institutions that could affect change is setup to handle. Add the
need for collective action across the world and it's a really hard problem.

Any problem that takes more than a lifetime to take effect is going to be
difficult to make people take action on.

------
xer0x
April fools!?

------
thrownaway2424
Can we talk about the visible catastrophe of the exurban development? I'm a
lot more upset about the total lifetime cost of the depicted subdivision than
I am about the one-time industrial calamity.

~~~
zbyte64
We can, maybe you should submit an article instead of trying to redirect the
conversation?

~~~
thrownaway2424
I'm discussing the photographs that are in the linked article. Am I supposed
to not see the juxtaposition between a complaint about the global warming
effects of a methane release, and the guy who is depicted in front of his
Rolls Royce, in front of his 3-car garage, on one of the many culs-de-sac in
the space filling graph of an unwalkable carscape? Am I supposed to feel like
Charles Chow gives one flying handshake about global warming?

Part of me feels like the Times is doing a subtle, sly job here, and part of
me feels like they missed the whole story.

