Re: AGW. LNG Worse Than Coal.

On 10/29/2024 8:50 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:

  On 10/29/24 17:41, Someone claiming to be Titus G wrote:

Recent headlines report on research confirming that LNG has a far
greater negative impact on climate change than coal. I have been waiting
for D or Dimwire to raise this topic but not holding my breath. Back in
2014 the US was offering IMF and World Bank funding to Ukraine to
develop its natural gas industry to gain independence from Russia
despite a required doubling in the Ukranian price of gas and the Biden
crime family was profiting from that was part of that   A side benefit
of the US proxy war with Russia has been a significant increase in gas
exports for the US so neither Trump nor Harris are likely to consider
this problem if they obtain the power to do so. Almost fracking
unbelievable!

      More Putin BS propaganda. LNG is about 50% better for the
environment than coal or 100% better than the way Russian Troops
have treated Nuclear Reactor power plants.

I'd like to see some numbers on this.
Yes, burning methane generates less CO2 per BTU than
methane.
But:
A significant amount of methane escapes the system in leaks
and gets into the atmosphere without being burnt. In the US,
about 1.4%. Other countries do much worse, and a recent satellite
has started mapping the problem:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/nasa-s-methane-satellite-just-mapped-its-first-plumes/ar-AA1spd3X?ocid=BingNewsSerp
Coal that 'leaks' out of the system just sits on the ground.
AND
Methane, molecule for molecule, is a far more potent greenhouse
gas than CO2. 120x as potent, in fact.
This is mitigated by the fact that methane only  lasts about 10
years in the atmosphere, while CO2 lasts far longer.
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials
So, I'd like to see some actual numbers to support of debunk this
claim, not a simple declaration.
pt