Hacker News Reader

Comment by westurner | Hacker News Reader

So, in 2022, it's cheaper to dump concrete than to capture it, but the new fines this year aren't enough incentive to solve for: capture to a tank and haul, build unprocessed natural gas pipelines, or process onsite and/or fill tankers onsite?

Data quality: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_quality

... Space -based imaging.

How long should they wait to up the methane fee if it's not enough to incentivize capping closed wells?

View on HN

It is totally cheaper to dump some cement (it is mostly gel with a topping of cement). To P&A older wells maybe runs $12-25K (assuming, like, a 5-8k ft. depth conventional well)...and I may be running a little high on that number. That gets a small truck out there with a small crew to pull tubing and dump alternating layers of cement and gel (cement goes on the top and across formations that would be ground water bearing). Fun fact, if you have to go back into an abandoned well and you come across red cement at the top, that is indicative of someone losing a nuclear based well tool in there and to call someone before going further. A typical 7.5-10k foot lateral unconventional well (horizontal wells) down that way will run about $7-8 million depending (and 6 wells on average on a well pad), but aren't really the issue, but just giving you some numbers to sort of show that fining someone $100K for something serious isn't that big an expense and not really a deterrent. Natural gas lines are always a big deal to oil and gas companies - if you build it they will come. Most space in pipelines for operators is spoken for before they even dig the first trench.

Options:

A. Privately and/or Publicly grant to P&A wells

    ($25k+  * n_wells)
  + ($7-8m+ * m_wells)

B. Build natural gas pipelines that run past those well sites (approval,)

C. increase the incentives/fines/fees

Shouldn't it be pretty easy to find such tools with IDK neutron detection and/or imaging at what distance?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com