I was ready to be angry.
However using gas that would have been burned or vented anyway doesn't seem so bad.
Of course this makes it so there is no incentive to close these vents completely.
However using gas that would have been burned or vented anyway doesn't seem so bad.
Of course this makes it so there is no incentive to close these vents completely.
They're basically buying up wells that are too low pressure to continue using for mainstream production, and then instead of closing them off they're extracting all of the remaining gas and burning it.
Seems like a terrible idea to give them a tax break for burning more natural gas that would otherwise be left in the ground.
I'd be okay if it was just the flare-off from refineries, but that's not all they're doing.
Good thing that’s not what they’re doing.
Are you sure that follows from HB 189? To avoid tax the gas just needs to be certified that it would have been vented. I don't see anything that would encourage keeping small leaks.
>Natural gas that is consumed on the site and would have otherwise been vented or flared under the authority of the Wyoming oil and gas conservation commission has no value and is exempt from taxation as long as the natural gas is certified by the Wyoming oil and gas conservation commission as to have originated from a qualifying well.
Probably an incentive to declare more gas as “flare off”
Incentives to just burn baby burn for bitcoin power are growing. Already was there for power plants, more money to be made in bitcoin than powering hospitals and tv sets.