Oil and gas production in Texas produces twice as much methane as in New Mexico

Clarifying the Result

• Several comments note the headline is misleading: “produces” here means methane leakage to the atmosphere, not intentional production.
• The article’s key detail (easy to miss) is that Texas emits about twice the methane per unit of oil/gas produced compared with New Mexico, not just in absolute terms.
• Posters distinguish methane from livestock vs fossil fuels: cow methane is from recent carbon and is roughly carbon-neutral over decades, whereas methane from oil/gas adds new fossil carbon.
• Methane’s warming impact per molecule is emphasized as much higher than CO₂.

Operational Practices and Economics

• An industry engineer describes Permian operations: gas is a low-value byproduct of oil; preferred order is sell gas → use onsite (compression/generation) → flare → vent.
• Pipelines are constrained; wells often start producing oil before gas takeaway exists, leading to prolonged flaring up to legal limits.
• Self-generation from waste gas can sometimes beat grid power on cost, but comments debate whether market gas price spikes and future low electricity prices make such investments risky.

Flaring vs Venting and Technology

• Flaring is differentiated from venting; venting releases methane directly, flaring converts most of it to CO₂.
• But flaring efficiency is questioned; studies suggest substantial unburned methane, so generators plus bitcoin mining or other uses may be preferable if economically viable.
• Direct methane fuel cells are mentioned as promising but likely require very pure gas, hard to achieve at well sites.

Abandoned and Orphan Wells

• Some suspect old, abandoned, or poorly plugged wells are major methane sources, especially in historically drilled Texas.
• Plugging wells is costly (tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars) and requires permits and rigs.
• Bonds/escrow for plugging already exist but often don’t cover full costs; many legacy wells predate modern rules.
• Nonprofits and federal programs are working on orphan wells, but the scale remains large.

Regulation, Policy, and Externalities

• New Mexico’s stricter rules are cited as reducing emissions without obvious production harm, though enforcement capacity is questioned.
• Some argue that weak economics for gas capture illustrate classic externalities, justifying carbon fees or Pigouvian taxes.
• Others warn that new regulations can entrench large firms, reduce competition, and may have net negative social effects; they call for more rigorous impact analysis.
• EPA authority and the Commerce Clause are debated, with concern about judicial limits on environmental regulation and the need for persistent democratic pressure.

Data Quality, Comparisons, and Uncertainty

• Skeptics note the article’s reliance on averages without distribution details (e.g., p90/p99), leaving uncertainty about whether a few “super-emitters” dominate Texas’s numbers.
• Questions arise about distinguishing emissions from active vs abandoned sites and about the lack of raw Kayrros data.
• Some point to NASA satellite work identifying New Mexico super-emitters and suggest the article’s framing may conflict with or oversimplify those findings.
• Confounders like Texas’s larger scale, hotter climate, and more complex infrastructure are mentioned but not resolved.

Anecdotes and Broader Perspective

• Multiple commenters describe night flights or drives over West Texas and the Persian Gulf regions showing extensive flaring, reinforcing the sense of large, visible emissions.
• Several see methane mitigation as “low-hanging fruit” for slowing warming; others worry such framing could distract from deeper systemic changes.