this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2025
191 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

9854 readers
797 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 14 points 11 hours ago

If only those companies were wealthy enough to do something about it. I guess our only choice is let the tazpayer handle it.

[–] sexy_peach@feddit.org 10 points 18 hours ago

Who is going to prison over that?

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

“Than thought”

Man, I wonder where that “thought” came from

[–] tehWrapper@lemmy.world 20 points 23 hours ago

A more correct title would be "7 to 8 times more than originally reported"

[–] Sektor@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

Pfew, i was afraid they were eight times worse.

[–] TribblesBestFriend@startrek.website 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The page seems down. Could someone forward the study to me

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Seems to work for me, but here's the direct link for the study https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.4c05602

Turns out that all the site for McGill don’t want me to enter

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago

Shocking. /s

I think there was an estimate of the warming effects of natural gas including methane leaks which showed it being worse than coal.

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago

Methane emissions from Canada’s non-producing oil and gas wells appear to be seven times higher than government estimates, according to a new study led by researchers at McGill University. The findings spotlight a major gap in the country’s official greenhouse gas inventory and raise urgent questions about how methane leaks are monitored, reported and managed.

“Non-producing wells are one of the most uncertain sources of methane emissions in Canada,” said Mary Kang, Associate Professor of Civil Engineering at McGill and senior author on the paper. “We measured the highest methane emission rate from a non-producing oil and gas well ever reported in Canada.”

Methane is a potent greenhouse gas. Over a 20-year period, it traps about 80 times more heat in the atmosphere than the same amount of carbon dioxide. It’s also associated with air pollution and health risks.Kang’s team directly measured methane emissions from 494 wells across five provinces using a chamber-based method and analyzed well-level data such as age, depth and plugging status. The national emissions estimate they arrived at – 230 kilotonnes per year – is sevenfold higher than the 34 kilotonnes reported in Canada’s National Inventory Report. The study was published in Environmental Science & Technology.

[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

Looks like the cover to Supermassive Black Hole

[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm not an oil guy, but since methane has its uses, would there not be a way to capture this gas and sell it?

[–] ActuallyGoingCrazy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's a good bit of infrastructure to capture, compress, transport, and sell methane on the market. Since these are "non-producing" wells, I would assume that the leakage is (relatively) low and maybe not be worth the cost of all the setup and maintenance.

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 4 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Just put a methane generator on them and sell the power onto the grid. Its what many landdfills do with their methane.

Garbage dumps are close to the grid and the users.

Many of the worst offenders are very old wells, as much as a century old. Their original owners are long gone which is how governments ended up being burdened with capping them.

Like many old toxic mines, the creators of the problems have evaded legal liability by going out of business. Legal frameworks may be more rigorous now but the old wells and mines remain.

Some of the oldest wells, like the ones near Petrolia in SW Ontario, might be economically viable for methane power generation. Others in Saskatchewan and Alberta are likely not.

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Lots of industries just flare it when the winds are blowing the right way, ie: downwind of any Environment Canada sensors.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago

Flaring is much better than just letting the methane escape so it would be a better solution than doing nothing and would be a great stepping stone to a more permanent option. Flaring would be much cheaper than a methane generator or capture device.