就在唐纳德·特朗普总统称自己为“环保主义者”的两天后，他的政府宣布撤销甲烷气体排放法规如此之大以至于连石油公司都反对这一改变。
在周四上午由环境保护局发布的拟议规则变更中，该局将终止一项联邦法规，该法规要求天然气和石油公司使用技术检查和修复其基础设施中的甲烷泄漏。这将使石油和天然气行业的很大一部分完全不受控制，没有污染限制。众所周知，甲烷排放会导致气候变化。
美国政府估计，这些回落每年将为石油和天然气行业节省1700万至1900万美元。
但是石油和天然气巨头不支持这一改变。英国石油美国公司董事长兼总裁苏珊·迪奥为英国石油公司撰写了一篇评论文章休斯顿纪事报在三月份，她声称环境保护局监管甲烷气体是至关重要的。
“这是为地球做的正确的事情，”她写道。“帮助进一步减少并最终消除全行业甲烷排放的最佳方式是通过联邦政府对新的和现有的来源进行直接监管。”
埃克森美孚公司去年给环保局写了一封信，要求他们保持甲烷法规不变，壳牌公司的美国董事长格雷琴·沃特金斯(Gretchen Watkins)在3月份表示，环保局应该制定法规来监管甲烷生产。
2019年7月8日，美国总统唐纳德·特朗普在DC华盛顿白宫聆听环境保护署行政官员安德鲁·惠勒谈论政府的环境政策。
这些高管中的许多人都专注于监管未来甲烷的排放。这是因为繁文缛节，或监管规则，通常会让那些有资金和基础设施来遵守这些规则的大型长期公司受益。他们作为一个天然的屏障来阻止新的暴发户进入这个行业。这些公司已经投入了大量资金来实施降低排放的技术，甚至投入了更多资金来说服美国公司天然气是一种良好的清洁能源替代品。
政府的新规则改变可能会伤害整个行业。“美国天然气的声誉岌岌可危，甲烷的回流是关键，”环境保护基金的高级主管本·拉特纳说纽约时报。
但是，较小的公司很可能会从这种特殊的回滚中受益，至少暂时受益。美国独立石油协会执行副主席李·富勒告诉记者倍虽然大公司更容易处理联邦法规，仅仅因为他们有钱这样做，通常“对这些小企业来说，这是一个非常不同的经济影响。”但是，对于那些负担不起大型基础设施或技术变革的公司来说，现在的水平领域和进入壁垒会更大一些。
塞拉俱乐部执行董事迈克尔·布鲁恩在一份电子邮件声明中表示:“这一提议是公然试图让石油和天然气公司获得另一张免费通行证，让它们在公众付出代价的同时释放尽可能多的有害空气污染。”。根据特朗普自己的环保局的数据，到2090年，气候变化的成本预计将使美国每年增加约2240亿美元。
甲烷是美国温室气体排放的第二大来源，仅次于二氧化碳。甲烷约占该国所有温室气体排放量的10 %,但最初捕获大气热量的能力是CO₂.的86倍
环境保护局规则的修改将在最终确定前的60天内接受公众和相关方的评论。
唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)周一在法国举行的G7峰会新闻发布会上表示，他是“一名环保主义者”。很多人不明白这一点。”总统还说他“比大多数人更了解环境”过去，总统称气候变化是中国人制造的骗局。这是特朗普政府第七次试图撤销针对石油和天然气污染的法规。
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ROLLS BACK GREENHOUSE GAS REGULATIONS SO FAR EVEN OIL COMPANIES OBJECT
Just two days after President Donald Trump called himself an "environmentalist," his administration announced a rollback of methane gas emissions regulations so large that even oil companies are objecting to the change.
In the proposed rule change, released by the Environmental Protection Agency Thursday morning, the agency would end a federal regulation that requires gas and oil companies to use technology to inspect for and repair methane leaks in their infrastructure. This would leave large segments of the oil and gas industry entirely uncontrolled with no pollution limits. Methane emissions are known to cause climate change.
The administration estimates that the rollbacks will save the oil and gas industry $17 to 19 million a year.
But oil and gas bigwigs don't support the change. Susan Dio, the chairwoman and president of BP America, wrote an opinion piece for the Houston Chronicle in March where she claimed it was essential that the EPA regulate methane gasses.
"It's the right thing to do for the planet," she wrote. "The best way to help further reduce and ultimately eliminate methane emissions industry wide is through direct federal regulation of new and existing sources."
ExxonMobil wrote a letter to the EPA last year, asking them to keep methane regulations intact, and Gretchen Watkins, the U.S. chairwoman for Shell, said in March that the EPA should keep rules in place to regulate methane production.
US President Donald Trump listens as Environmetal Protection Agency admistrator Andrew Wheeler speaks about the administration's environmental policies at the White House in Washington, DC on July 8, 2019.
A lot of these executives are focused on regulating future emissions of methane. That's because red tape, or regulatory rules, often work to benefit larger, long standing companies who have the money and infrastructure to abide by them. They work as a natural barrier to keep new upstarts out of the industry. These companies have already spent significant funds putting technology in place to lower their emissions and even more money convincing the American company that natural gas is a good, clean energy alternative.
The administration's new rule change could hurt the entire industry. "The reputation of American natural gas is at the precipice, and methane rollbacks are the shove," Ben Ratner, a senior director with the Environmental Defense Fund, told The New York Times.
But it's likely that smaller companies, however, will benefit, at least temporarily, from this particular rollback. Lee Fuller, executive vice president of the Independent Petroleum Association of America, told the Times that while it's easier for large companies to deal with federal regulations simply because they have the money to do so, ordinarily "for these small businesses, it's a very different economic impact." But the level-field and barriers to entry will now be a bit more even for companies who can't afford large infrastructure or technological changes.
"This proposal is a blatant attempt to give oil and gas companies yet another free pass to release as much harmful air pollution as they want while the public pays the price," Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said in an emailed statement. The cost of climate change is expected to cost the U.S. about $224 billion more per year by 2090, according to Trump's own EPA.
Methane is the second largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S., after carbon dioxide. Methane makes up about 10 percent of all greenhouse emissions coming out of the country, but initially has about 86 times more power to trap heat in the atmosphere than CO₂.
The EPA rule change will be open to comment by the public and interested parties for 60 days before it's finalized.
Donald Trump said during a Monday press conference at the G7 summit in France that he was, "an environmentalist. A lot of people don't understand that." The president also said he knows "more about the environment than most people." In the past, the president has called climate change a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese. This is the seventh time the Trump administration has attempted to rollback regulations against oil and gas pollution.
