> The difference between the assumed efficiency of flaring and the efficiency found in Kort and his colleagues’ results is a matter of a few percentage points. However, the researcher said that this seemingly small difference could be a big deal when extrapolated over the whole fossil fuel industry. Further, methane has more than 80 times the impact of carbon dioxide when it comes to warming the planet—at least during the first 20 years it spends in the air.
Isn't this enough? Yes, the article could make the point more explicit at the expense of brevity, but most readers can infer the implications of marginal changes.
I'll do you one better. The article doesn't state the loss to taxpayers given the billions+ of permanently lost tax revenue!
/OT
I don't understand why this "point in time" article is meaningful years later, given it's been a known issue (far prior to the article) and the regulatory story has evolved.