Assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of methane regulations in British Columbia, Canada
Creators: name: Johnson, Marie France
name: Lavoie, Martin
name: MacKay, Katlyn
name: Long, Mallory
name: Risk, David
Publisher: name: Taylor & Francis
Year: 2023
Subjects: subject: Medicine
subject: Pharmacology
subject: Biotechnology
subject: Sociology
subject: FOS: Sociology
subject: Science Policy
subject: Infectious Diseases
subject: FOS: Health sciences

description: Many jurisdictions are introducing methane reduction policy as part of climate commitments, with a focus on the oil and gas supply chain. Periodic comprehensive leak detection and repair (LDAR) surveys or screening leak detection and repair surveys are required in the British Columbia, Canada oil and gas sector to reduce unintentional methane emissions caused by leaking infrastructure. By finding and fixing leaks quickly, emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, are reduced. In this study, we explored how effectively British Columbia’s regulation, deposited in December 2018, made progress towards meeting the policy objective of a 45% decrease in methane emissions by 2025 from a 2014 baseline. We evaluated the performance and cost effectiveness of regulatory-prescribed LDAR programmes using data collected by the BC Energy Regulator (formerly BC Oil and Gas Commission) for the 2020 year, and survey cost data submitted by service providers. We found that the new regulation was only partially effective due to low compliance rates. We also observed heavy tail leak distributions in LDAR data collected by service companies, but comparatively narrow leak distributions in data from permit holders who internalized LDAR operations, suggesting a difference in work practice or the use of equipment. Comprehensive leak detection surveys were found to be more cost efficient ($23 CAD/tCO<sub>2</sub>e reduced) compared to screening surveys ($1,787 CAD/tCO<sub>2</sub>e reduced) because more methane leaks are detected in comprehensive assessments. To meet methane reduction targets, we recommend that: 1) jurisdictions work to improve compliance rates by introducing minimum administrative penalties specific to noncompliance; 2) that all future LDAR surveys are instrument-based; 3) limiting turnaround time limits so that repairs are not delayed indefinitely; and 4) that LDAR completed internally by permit holders undergo independent third-party verification. Compliance is a key determinant of regulatory effectiveness.Data availability, transparency, and quality is critical to assessing regulatory effectiveness.Workers conducting LDAR surveys and measuring leaks must be trained to minimize errors.Instrument-based LDAR surveys are more effective and efficient at reducing leaked methane emissions than non-instrument-based methods.Instrument-based LDAR surveys can cost effectively reduce leaked methane emissions. Compliance is a key determinant of regulatory effectiveness. Data availability, transparency, and quality is critical to assessing regulatory effectiveness. Workers conducting LDAR surveys and measuring leaks must be trained to minimize errors. Instrument-based LDAR surveys are more effective and efficient at reducing leaked methane emissions than non-instrument-based methods. Instrument-based LDAR surveys can cost effectively reduce leaked methane emissions.