The EPA’s cost-benefit analysis for its new rules to reduce methane emissions from the oil and gas industry overstate (if not fabricate) the benefits. EPA has overstated or invented these benefits in order to cover-up the huge costs associated with the rule.
EPA claims that the benefits of the rule to the climate will be $690 million in 2025 while the costs are $520 million (including revenues from methane savings). But:
- The life cycle of atmospheric methane is not at all well understood.
- Methane may have zero impact on the climate and be irrelevant. Methane: The Irrelevant Greenhouse Gas
- Even assuming for the sake of argument that methane acts like EPA claims, the climate “benefit” amounts to a mere and insignificant 0.002 degrees Celsius lower global temperature by the year 2100.
So the climate benefits are more likely to be zero than any other number.
EPA claims that its methane rules will reduce ozone formation and, therefore, the alleged health effects of ozone, like asthma and even death.
- But EPA knows from its own human experiments that ozone does not trigger or cause asthma. Ozone triggers lying not asthma
- The notion that ozone (or really anything in outdoor air) causes heart problems or death is even more far-fetched. This article was written for particulate matter in outdoor air but a similar analysis holds for ozone as well. Also this new large study accepted for publication shows that ozone is not associated with death.
So these alleged health benefits are imaginary and, therefore, are zero as well.
What we’re left with is a rule that will impose huge costs ($520 million in 2025) for zero benefit.