Reducing fugitive methane emissions from the North American oil and gas sector: a proposed science-policy framework

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 1133-1151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Konschnik ◽  
Sarah Marie Jordaan
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
VANDERSON A. DELAPEDRA-SILVA

ABSTRACT Purpose: This research aims to identify the probability of default of infrastructure companies considering the sector specificities of their activities. In addition, the work seeks to identify the application of structural variables of probability of default in a model in a reduced way in order to identify the significance of its use. For this purpose, we investigated 1,520 North American companies from six different sectors linked to infrastructure. Originality/value: The analyzes carried out to identify the probability of a company going bankrupt hardly consider its sectorial particularity. Although most models bring important inputs for risk assessment, most of them do not consider this sectoral view. Then, this work has as value and originality the contribution to fill this gap and identify the existence of sectorial differences in the analysis of default risk in infrastructure companies in the North American market in the period between 2006 and 2018. Design/methodology/approach: The study performed a logistic regression (logit model) using 11 model variables established in calculating the probability of default. It also used the variable distance to default as an explanatory variable in order to identify its ability to explain the researched phenomenon. Findings: The study identified that, in addition to the size of the companies, the distance to default variable is the only variable that can be applied with significance in all the analyzed sectors. In addition, it was identified that companies in the oil and gas sector have less sensitivity to this variable than companies in the other sectors.


2005 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 349 ◽  
Author(s):  
G.M. Carlsen ◽  
K. Ameed R. Ghori

There are more than 131 giant and super-giant oil and gas fields with Palaeozoic source and reservoir that are similar to the Canning Basin. These include Palaeozoic basins of North America, North Africa, and the North Caspian Basin of Kazakhstan and Russia.The productivity of these Palaeozoic petroleum systems depends on timing of generation and preservation of charge. Thick Ordovician, Permian, and Triassic evaporite deposits played a very important role in creating and preserving the North American, north Caspian, and north African giant oil and gas fields, respectively.The Mesozoic–Tertiary charged Palaeozoic systems are typically more productive than the Palaeozoic charged systems as exemplified by the north African basins.The Ordovician sourced and reservoired giant oil fields of the North American Mid-Continent are also highly productive. Within the Canning Basin, Ordovician sourced oil has been recovered on the Barbwire Terrace (in Dodonea–1, Percival–1 and Solanum–1) on the Dampier Terrace (in Edgar Range–1 and Pictor–1) and along the Admiral Bay Fault Zone (in Cudalgarra–1, Great Sandy–1, and Leo–1).The Canning Basin may be the least explored of the known Palaeozoic basins with proven petroleum systems. The Palaeozoic basins of North America are the most explored with 500-wells/10,000 km2 compared to the Canning Basin with only 4-wells/10,000 km2.The presence of five oil fields, numerous oil and gas shows and the well density in the Canning Basin (200 wells in 530,000 km2) suggests that further exploration is warranted. Critical analysis of the distribution of source rock, reservoir, seal, timing of generation versus trap formation and post accumulation modification for each tectonic unit of the Canning Basin is required.


2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (21) ◽  
pp. 13008-13017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew R. Johnson ◽  
David R. Tyner ◽  
Stephen Conley ◽  
Stefan Schwietzke ◽  
Daniel Zavala-Araiza

Elem Sci Anth ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Fox ◽  
Arvind P. Ravikumar ◽  
Chris H. Hugenholtz ◽  
Daniel Zimmerle ◽  
Thomas E. Barchyn ◽  
...  

Fugitive methane emissions from the oil and gas sector are typically addressed through periodic leak detection and repair surveys. These surveys, conducted manually using handheld leak detection technologies, are time-consuming. To improve the speed and cost-effectiveness of leak detection, technology developers are introducing innovative solutions using mobile platforms, close-range portable systems, and permanent installations. Many of these new approaches promise faster, cheaper, or more effective leak detection than conventional methods. However, ensuring mitigation targets are achieved requires demonstrating that alternative approaches are at least as effective in reducing emissions as current approaches – a concept known as emissions reduction equivalence. Here, we propose a five-stage framework for demonstrating equivalence that combines controlled testing, simulation modeling, and field trials. The framework was developed in consultation with operators, regulators, academics, solution providers, consultants, and non-profit groups from Canada and the U.S. We present the equivalence framework and discuss challenges to implementation.


Significance As a new round of talks over the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) looms, the region’s booming energy trade is in the spotlight. Trump’s hard-line rhetoric around the 1994 free trade deal has raised concerns that he will undermine trade between North American nations, which created huge opportunities for energy producers in Canada, Mexico and the United States. Impacts Political uncertainty will dissuade cross-border pipeline investment until greater clarity on US policy is forthcoming. US oil and gas producers and refiners’ reliance on external markets will grow, especially Canada and Mexico. A slowdown in US oil imports from Canada would aid other heavy oil suppliers such as Venezuela and Iraq. Canadian and Mexican exporters will benefit from Trump-driven fluctuations of the Canadian dollar and Mexican peso.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (10) ◽  
pp. 548-558 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver Schneising ◽  
John P. Burrows ◽  
Russell R. Dickerson ◽  
Michael Buchwitz ◽  
Maximilian Reuter ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document