Oilfield Greenhouse Gas Emissions

T4ES wrote: As a 20 year professional in the oil and gas business, I deal first hand with the production equipment that release the greenhouse gasses.

T4ES wrote:
As a 20 year professional in the oil and gas business, I deal first hand with the production equipment that release the greenhouse gasses. Five years ago I started a company based on some ideas that I had to reduce the emissions in this sector. With regulations set in 2016, the oil and gas industry must lower gas emissions by 75-80% over the coming 4 years.

Through crowdfunding, T4 Environmental Solutions, LLC is raising money for expanded research & development and implementation costs associated with its patented technology that will reduce oil and gas emissions by roughly 17%. This will make a big impact on the number of greenhouse gasses (GHG's) that are emitted to the atmosphere consistently throughout the oilfield globally. Whether you believe in global warming or not, there is no doubt that these GHG's are bad for the environment. They contain cancer-causing carcinogens and other properties that are hazardous to people, wildlife, and much more. Your support would be greatly appreciated. Please share and help spread the word about this crowdfunding opportunity so we can make a difference and help make Earth a clean/safe place for generations to come.

[url] https://www.gofundme.com/f/patented-solution-to-help-battle-green-house-gases[/url]

T4ES wrote:Well, first of all, this is most definitely not spam. Secondly, I have definitely been in the oilfield since January '01. Everything I say is verifiable.

IBdaMann wrote:

T4ES wrote:Well, first of all, this is most definitely not spam. Secondly, I have definitely been in the oilfield since January '01. Everything I say is verifiable.

Do you believe in Greenhouse Effect?

.

T4ES wrote: If you're asking if I believe in global warming,

T4ES wrote: But if you are asking if I believe that greenhouse gases are toxic to the environment, absolutely.

IBdaMann wrote:

T4ES wrote: If you're asking if I believe in global warming,

I did not ask that. I am asking if you believe in Greenhouse Effect.

T4ES wrote: But if you are asking if I believe that greenhouse gases are toxic to the environment, absolutely.

Is CO2 a "greenhouse gas"?

.

T4ES wrote:I'm not a scientist.

T4ES wrote: I find solutions to problems

T4ES wrote: ...that are identified,

T4ES wrote: ... causing stringent regulations to be imposed upon the industry that I make a living from, while also trying to do my part in hopefully creating a better future for all of us.

IBdaMann wrote:

T4ES wrote:I'm not a scientist.

That much is obvious. You are a political activist who is adept at EVASION.

Let's try again and yes, let's focus on your personal beliefs just for a moment. After all, you aren't fooling me by pretending that you are somehow dispassionately seeking some sort of scientific "solution.". You are a scientifically illiterate worshiper of Climate Change and you are here to preach, not to learn.

Please notice how you have failed to define any sort of problem set. Please notice how you characterize a life-essential compound required for all life to continue existing on earth as " toxic" and "a problem.". Please notice how you have EVADED all of my questions deliberately.

I'll give you another shot.

1. For the record, state just how toxic YOU BELIEVE carbon dioxide to be.
2. Define the problem YOU BELIEVE you are trying to solve or address..

Please be clear. Please define your terms.

T4ES wrote: I find solutions to problems

To what kind of problems? You aren't an engineer. Do you organize rallies or something like that?

T4ES wrote: ...that are identified,

... by whom? I always become suspicious whenever the passive voice is employed.

T4ES wrote: ... causing stringent regulations to be imposed upon the industry that I make a living from, while also trying to do my part in hopefully creating a better future for all of us.

Basically you protect humanity and save the planet, right?

Clearly your target audience is any Marxist that orgasms over shutting down capitalism. Ask me how I know. Also, ask me how I know that you don't make your living in the petroleum business.

.

Also, ask me how I know that you don't make your living in the petroleum business.

.

T4ES wrote:Political Activist? Really?

T4ES wrote:You think you know me?

T4ES wrote:Adept at evasion huh?

T4ES wrote:

Also, ask me how I know that you don't make your living in the petroleum business.

.

T4ES wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

T4ES wrote:

Today's world is infested with Marxists who seek to destroy capitalism and to impose global tyranny on humanity. In that pursuit there is no lie that is off limits. One of the preferred angles of attack for today's Marxists is hyping fear of Global Warming, Climate Change and Greenhouse Effect as a terrifying existential threat that only governments can solve, and only then if all of humanity is sufficiently taxed until every penny of personal wealth has been confiscated and the bloated unified global oligarchy becomes drunk on absolute power.

The grand prize of Marxism's war on humanity and individual liberty is the energy sector in general and Big Oil in particular. If those can be destroyed, the rest of the war will be an easy stroll in the park.

T4ES, you have had many opportunities to distinguish yourself from the above described Marxists and yet you will only endeavor in their exact same pursuits.
You ask this board to believe that, despite you being scientifically illiterate and incapable of engineering anything, that you are simply targetting Big Oil to save the environment. You want the support of the members of this board ... which entails belief that CO2 and totally undefined "greenhouse gases" are some sort of problem that we need you to address.

Is it possible that you can start over by explaining to this board why you want us to believe as you believe? Don't tell us that you are a capitalistic entrepreneur ... explain how exactly you are looking to help the energy industry and not to kill it. Every time you are dishonest you are announcing to the board that yes, you are just another dishonest Marxist (I know, redundant). This is your opportunity to show us that you are not a dishonest Marxist ... because that is the current assumption. It is unlikely that you are simply going to be believed until you offer some solid rationale for why you should be believed. Too many liars have come to this site preaching exactly what you are preaching and all of them have tried to get their claims and assertions to simply be accepted as true without even extending to this board the courtesy of defining any problem and without defining any of their terms and buzzwords. Now you are here doing the exact same thing.

The choice is yours. Would you like to clarify a few points? I assure you, although I speak only for myself, I am by no means the only one who has interpreted what you have written in this way.

The floor is yours.

.

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

T4ES wrote:

Today's world is infested with Marxists who seek to destroy capitalism and to impose global tyranny on humanity. In that pursuit there is no lie that is off limits. One of the preferred angles of attack for today's Marxists is hyping fear of Global Warming, Climate Change and Greenhouse Effect as a terrifying existential threat that only governments can solve, and only then if all of humanity is sufficiently taxed until every penny of personal wealth has been confiscated and the bloated unified global oligarchy becomes drunk on absolute power.

The grand prize of Marxism's war on humanity and individual liberty is the energy sector in general and Big Oil in particular. If those can be destroyed, the rest of the war will be an easy stroll in the park.

T4ES, you have had many opportunities to distinguish yourself from the above described Marxists and yet you will only endeavor in their exact same pursuits.
You ask this board to believe that, despite you being scientifically illiterate and incapable of engineering anything, that you are simply targetting Big Oil to save the environment. You want the support of the members of this board ... which entails belief that CO2 and totally undefined "greenhouse gases" are some sort of problem that we need you to address.

Is it possible that you can start over by explaining to this board why you want us to believe as you believe? Don't tell us that you are a capitalistic entrepreneur ... explain how exactly you are looking to help the energy industry and not to kill it. Every time you are dishonest you are announcing to the board that yes, you are just another dishonest Marxist (I know, redundant). This is your opportunity to show us that you are not a dishonest Marxist ... because that is the current assumption. It is unlikely that you are simply going to be believed until you offer some solid rationale for why you should be believed. Too many liars have come to this site preaching exactly what you are preaching and all of them have tried to get their claims and assertions to simply be accepted as true without even extending to this board the courtesy of defining any problem and without defining any of their terms and buzzwords. Now you are here doing the exact same thing.

The choice is yours. Would you like to clarify a few points? I assure you, although I speak only for myself, I am by no means the only one who has interpreted what you have written in this way.

The floor is yours.

.

I too would like to hear an actual explanation of his 'solution'. I do not tolerate buzzwords.

Into the Night wrote:

T4ES wrote:

Also, ask me how I know that you don't make your living in the petroleum business.

.

No such server. As far as I can tell this is a hole in a strip mall wall that's been around since 2016. You are not in the petroleum business. You are in the scam business. Such is your 'resume'.

Unlike you, I actually have a business. We make instrumentation for industrial, aerospace, and medical uses, including the petroleum industry.

T4ES wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

T4ES wrote:

Today's world is infested with Marxists who seek to destroy capitalism and to impose global tyranny on humanity. In that pursuit there is no lie that is off limits. One of the preferred angles of attack for today's Marxists is hyping fear of Global Warming, Climate Change and Greenhouse Effect as a terrifying existential threat that only governments can solve, and only then if all of humanity is sufficiently taxed until every penny of personal wealth has been confiscated and the bloated unified global oligarchy becomes drunk on absolute power.

The grand prize of Marxism's war on humanity and individual liberty is the energy sector in general and Big Oil in particular. If those can be destroyed, the rest of the war will be an easy stroll in the park.

T4ES, you have had many opportunities to distinguish yourself from the above described Marxists and yet you will only endeavor in their exact same pursuits.
You ask this board to believe that, despite you being scientifically illiterate and incapable of engineering anything, that you are simply targetting Big Oil to save the environment. You want the support of the members of this board ... which entails belief that CO2 and totally undefined "greenhouse gases" are some sort of problem that we need you to address.

Is it possible that you can start over by explaining to this board why you want us to believe as you believe? Don't tell us that you are a capitalistic entrepreneur ... explain how exactly you are looking to help the energy industry and not to kill it. Every time you are dishonest you are announcing to the board that yes, you are just another dishonest Marxist (I know, redundant). This is your opportunity to show us that you are not a dishonest Marxist ... because that is the current assumption. It is unlikely that you are simply going to be believed until you offer some solid rationale for why you should be believed. Too many liars have come to this site preaching exactly what you are preaching and all of them have tried to get their claims and assertions to simply be accepted as true without even extending to this board the courtesy of defining any problem and without defining any of their terms and buzzwords. Now you are here doing the exact same thing.

The choice is yours. Would you like to clarify a few points? I assure you, although I speak only for myself, I am by no means the only one who has interpreted what you have written in this way.

The floor is yours.

.

I too would like to hear an actual explanation of his 'solution'. I do not tolerate buzzwords.

Let me see if I can explain it a little better. In 2016, the EPA issued strict guidelines as to how the oilfield is to create solutions for GHG's/VOC's. In this, it describes, in detail, the different areas of focus. It includes what are called "Liquid Level Controllers", which account for approximately 17% of the released gasses in the oilfield. In 2020, under the direction of President Trump, a few of the harshest regulations were eased up. This does not affect the solution I propose. Now that the Democrats have control of the House, Senate, and Presidency, these regulations are reinstated and more are set to hit in July of this year.

https://www.epa.gov/controlling-air-pollution-oil-and-natural-gas-industry/epa-issues-final-policy-and-technical

Greenhouse Gas Fees and Citations are the costs associated with emissions. In the O&G sector. Fees are based on a per annum base, from Sept. 1st to Aug. 31st every year. Each year, O&G producers submit their projected amount of GHG's to the associated authorities (EPA, Bureau Of Land Management, State Government, etc.) and pay the appropriate fees. Organizations, such as the Bureau Of Land Management, perform routine field tests throughout the year to make sure that companies are remaining in compliance and not emitting more than their projected output. These are done by various means, such as in-person site testing or, as in the case of New Mexico, taking pictures/videos using FLIR cameras on helicopters and planes. When companies are found to not be in compliance, citations (fines) are issued for each occurrence. A culmination of these citations are often in the 10's of millions of dollars range per company per year.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-05/documents/subpart-w_tsd.pdf

Here's a link to Exon/Mobile for an example
https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/Sustainability/Emissions-and-climate#

I hope this helps clear up any questions as to why I'm doing what I'm doing. I wish there was a better way for me to explain it so you could understand all the details and things we deal with out here in the oilfield. There is much more information that can be acquired, but there's no way I could possibly relay all of that on here.

I assure you that I am in no way trying to hurt the industry that I make a living from. I am trying to help keep it from being hindered. These costs directly impact the price of oil. Not as much as import/export rates, but they do affect it.

T4ES wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

T4ES wrote:

Also, ask me how I know that you don't make your living in the petroleum business.

.

No such server. As far as I can tell this is a hole in a strip mall wall that's been around since 2016. You are not in the petroleum business. You are in the scam business. Such is your 'resume'.

Unlike you, I actually have a business. We make instrumentation for industrial, aerospace, and medical uses, including the petroleum industry.

You were saying?

Into the Night wrote:

T4ES wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

T4ES wrote:

Today's world is infested with Marxists who seek to destroy capitalism and to impose global tyranny on humanity. In that pursuit there is no lie that is off limits. One of the preferred angles of attack for today's Marxists is hyping fear of Global Warming, Climate Change and Greenhouse Effect as a terrifying existential threat that only governments can solve, and only then if all of humanity is sufficiently taxed until every penny of personal wealth has been confiscated and the bloated unified global oligarchy becomes drunk on absolute power.

The grand prize of Marxism's war on humanity and individual liberty is the energy sector in general and Big Oil in particular. If those can be destroyed, the rest of the war will be an easy stroll in the park.

T4ES, you have had many opportunities to distinguish yourself from the above described Marxists and yet you will only endeavor in their exact same pursuits.
You ask this board to believe that, despite you being scientifically illiterate and incapable of engineering anything, that you are simply targetting Big Oil to save the environment. You want the support of the members of this board ... which entails belief that CO2 and totally undefined "greenhouse gases" are some sort of problem that we need you to address.

Is it possible that you can start over by explaining to this board why you want us to believe as you believe? Don't tell us that you are a capitalistic entrepreneur ... explain how exactly you are looking to help the energy industry and not to kill it. Every time you are dishonest you are announcing to the board that yes, you are just another dishonest Marxist (I know, redundant). This is your opportunity to show us that you are not a dishonest Marxist ... because that is the current assumption. It is unlikely that you are simply going to be believed until you offer some solid rationale for why you should be believed. Too many liars have come to this site preaching exactly what you are preaching and all of them have tried to get their claims and assertions to simply be accepted as true without even extending to this board the courtesy of defining any problem and without defining any of their terms and buzzwords. Now you are here doing the exact same thing.

The choice is yours. Would you like to clarify a few points? I assure you, although I speak only for myself, I am by no means the only one who has interpreted what you have written in this way.

The floor is yours.

.

I too would like to hear an actual explanation of his 'solution'. I do not tolerate buzzwords.

Let me see if I can explain it a little better. In 2016, the EPA issued strict guidelines as to how the oilfield is to create solutions for GHG's/VOC's. In this, it describes, in detail, the different areas of focus. It includes what are called "Liquid Level Controllers", which account for approximately 17% of the released gasses in the oilfield. In 2020, under the direction of President Trump, a few of the harshest regulations were eased up. This does not affect the solution I propose. Now that the Democrats have control of the House, Senate, and Presidency, these regulations are reinstated and more are set to hit in July of this year.

https://www.epa.gov/controlling-air-pollution-oil-and-natural-gas-industry/epa-issues-final-policy-and-technical

Greenhouse Gas Fees and Citations are the costs associated with emissions. In the O&G sector. Fees are based on a per annum base, from Sept. 1st to Aug. 31st every year. Each year, O&G producers submit their projected amount of GHG's to the associated authorities (EPA, Bureau Of Land Management, State Government, etc.) and pay the appropriate fees. Organizations, such as the Bureau Of Land Management, perform routine field tests throughout the year to make sure that companies are remaining in compliance and not emitting more than their projected output. These are done by various means, such as in-person site testing or, as in the case of New Mexico, taking pictures/videos using FLIR cameras on helicopters and planes. When companies are found to not be in compliance, citations (fines) are issued for each occurrence. A culmination of these citations are often in the 10's of millions of dollars range per company per year.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-05/documents/subpart-w_tsd.pdf

Here's a link to Exon/Mobile for an example
https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/Sustainability/Emissions-and-climate#

I hope this helps clear up any questions as to why I'm doing what I'm doing. I wish there was a better way for me to explain it so you could understand all the details and things we deal with out here in the oilfield. There is much more information that can be acquired, but there's no way I could possibly relay all of that on here.

I assure you that I am in no way trying to hurt the industry that I make a living from. I am trying to help keep it from being hindered. These costs directly impact the price of oil. Not as much as import/export rates, but they do affect it.

No solution or plan was described. Guess you don't have one. The EPA is unconstitutional. There is no need to 'conform' to anything with them. There is NO compromising with Democrats.

Your 'costs' that you describe aren't there, other than illegal taxes and regulations. It's time for the oil companies to stand up and fight this.

T4ES wrote: I'm not gonna spend all my time trying to explain something that is apparently beyond your scope of understanding. Have a good day.

IBdaMann wrote:

T4ES wrote: I'm not gonna spend all my time trying to explain something that is apparently beyond your scope of understanding. Have a good day.

Let's change gears for a moment.

Why is it so difficult, if not completely impossible, for you to define the physical problem set you are addressing and elaborating on your general solution idea?

I took the trouble to explain to you how your approach of hyping an undefined problem without offering any solution is exactly what all Marxists do, i.e. preach fear and panic to help the government more easily control the population. Despite the courtesy I extended to you, you still REFUSE to answer ANY of my questions and instead pretend to get angry at those who are asking questions. Your behavior is identical to that of a religious preacher who DEMANDS unquestioning OBEDIENCE and who is quick to direct rage at doubters and questioners.

So why is that?

Besides, what entrepreneur isn't absolutely eager to present and to demonstrate his specific goods and services? ... especially if that's how he makes a living?
You resent even being asked. It appears that you were lying when you claimed to be an entrepreneur that provides solutions, exactly as if you were in fact a lying Marxist (I know, redundant).

So we don't lose context, allow me to reiterate my question.

Why is it so difficult, if not completely impossible, for you to define the physical problem set you are addressing and elaborating on your general solution idea?


.

T4ES wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

T4ES wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

T4ES wrote:

Today's world is infested with Marxists who seek to destroy capitalism and to impose global tyranny on humanity. In that pursuit there is no lie that is off limits. One of the preferred angles of attack for today's Marxists is hyping fear of Global Warming, Climate Change and Greenhouse Effect as a terrifying existential threat that only governments can solve, and only then if all of humanity is sufficiently taxed until every penny of personal wealth has been confiscated and the bloated unified global oligarchy becomes drunk on absolute power.

The grand prize of Marxism's war on humanity and individual liberty is the energy sector in general and Big Oil in particular. If those can be destroyed, the rest of the war will be an easy stroll in the park.

T4ES, you have had many opportunities to distinguish yourself from the above described Marxists and yet you will only endeavor in their exact same pursuits.
You ask this board to believe that, despite you being scientifically illiterate and incapable of engineering anything, that you are simply targetting Big Oil to save the environment. You want the support of the members of this board ... which entails belief that CO2 and totally undefined "greenhouse gases" are some sort of problem that we need you to address.

Is it possible that you can start over by explaining to this board why you want us to believe as you believe? Don't tell us that you are a capitalistic entrepreneur ... explain how exactly you are looking to help the energy industry and not to kill it. Every time you are dishonest you are announcing to the board that yes, you are just another dishonest Marxist (I know, redundant). This is your opportunity to show us that you are not a dishonest Marxist ... because that is the current assumption. It is unlikely that you are simply going to be believed until you offer some solid rationale for why you should be believed. Too many liars have come to this site preaching exactly what you are preaching and all of them have tried to get their claims and assertions to simply be accepted as true without even extending to this board the courtesy of defining any problem and without defining any of their terms and buzzwords. Now you are here doing the exact same thing.

The choice is yours. Would you like to clarify a few points? I assure you, although I speak only for myself, I am by no means the only one who has interpreted what you have written in this way.

The floor is yours.

.

I too would like to hear an actual explanation of his 'solution'. I do not tolerate buzzwords.

Let me see if I can explain it a little better. In 2016, the EPA issued strict guidelines as to how the oilfield is to create solutions for GHG's/VOC's. In this, it describes, in detail, the different areas of focus. It includes what are called "Liquid Level Controllers", which account for approximately 17% of the released gasses in the oilfield. In 2020, under the direction of President Trump, a few of the harshest regulations were eased up. This does not affect the solution I propose. Now that the Democrats have control of the House, Senate, and Presidency, these regulations are reinstated and more are set to hit in July of this year.

https://www.epa.gov/controlling-air-pollution-oil-and-natural-gas-industry/epa-issues-final-policy-and-technical

Greenhouse Gas Fees and Citations are the costs associated with emissions. In the O&G sector. Fees are based on a per annum base, from Sept. 1st to Aug. 31st every year. Each year, O&G producers submit their projected amount of GHG's to the associated authorities (EPA, Bureau Of Land Management, State Government, etc.) and pay the appropriate fees. Organizations, such as the Bureau Of Land Management, perform routine field tests throughout the year to make sure that companies are remaining in compliance and not emitting more than their projected output. These are done by various means, such as in-person site testing or, as in the case of New Mexico, taking pictures/videos using FLIR cameras on helicopters and planes. When companies are found to not be in compliance, citations (fines) are issued for each occurrence. A culmination of these citations are often in the 10's of millions of dollars range per company per year.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-05/documents/subpart-w_tsd.pdf

Here's a link to Exon/Mobile for an example
https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/Sustainability/Emissions-and-climate#

I hope this helps clear up any questions as to why I'm doing what I'm doing. I wish there was a better way for me to explain it so you could understand all the details and things we deal with out here in the oilfield. There is much more information that can be acquired, but there's no way I could possibly relay all of that on here.

I assure you that I am in no way trying to hurt the industry that I make a living from. I am trying to help keep it from being hindered. These costs directly impact the price of oil. Not as much as import/export rates, but they do affect it.

No solution or plan was described. Guess you don't have one. The EPA is unconstitutional. There is no need to 'conform' to anything with them. There is NO compromising with Democrats.

Your 'costs' that you describe aren't there, other than illegal taxes and regulations. It's time for the oil companies to stand up and fight this.

Your political beliefs, even though I have the same beliefs, are inconsequential. You can say that all day long, but that isn't what's happening. I'm not gonna spend all my time trying to explain something that is apparently beyond your scope of understanding. Have a good day.

T4ES wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

T4ES wrote: I'm not gonna spend all my time trying to explain something that is apparently beyond your scope of understanding. Have a good day.

Let's change gears for a moment.

Why is it so difficult, if not completely impossible, for you to define the physical problem set you are addressing and elaborating on your general solution idea?

I took the trouble to explain to you how your approach of hyping an undefined problem without offering any solution is exactly what all Marxists do, i.e. preach fear and panic to help the government more easily control the population. Despite the courtesy I extended to you, you still REFUSE to answer ANY of my questions and instead pretend to get angry at those who are asking questions. Your behavior is identical to that of a religious preacher who DEMANDS unquestioning OBEDIENCE and who is quick to direct rage at doubters and questioners.

So why is that?

Besides, what entrepreneur isn't absolutely eager to present and to demonstrate his specific goods and services? ... especially if that's how he makes a living?
You resent even being asked. It appears that you were lying when you claimed to be an entrepreneur that provides solutions, exactly as if you were in fact a lying Marxist (I know, redundant).

So we don't lose context, allow me to reiterate my question.

Why is it so difficult, if not completely impossible, for you to define the physical problem set you are addressing and elaborating on your general solution idea?


.

I didn't put a long description in my original post because my gofundme page has a lengthy description.

T4ES wrote:
I assumed that if anyone was interested in learning about it then they would follow the link.

T4ES wrote:
But instead, I am bombarded by a series of attacks on my validity and even my career, which happens to be true by the way.

T4ES wrote:
I understand asking, but that's not how it happened. It was instantly "scam" or "ask me how I know your not in the oilfield". Not questions about what I offer.

T4ES wrote:
I'm on your side when it comes to the personal beliefs on the subject, but instantly attacking someone is not how a debate happens.

T4ES wrote:
When someone instantly goes on the attack, they instantly lose the battle.

T4ES wrote:
Pretty hard to get someone to see your point of view when that happens.

T4ES wrote:
So here's the description of it:

The most prolific single sources of GHG's within the Oil & Natural Gas sector are Liquid Level Controllers, which are used on most production equipment at almost all stages of oilfield operations following fracking, from well site production all the way to the refinery. These Liquid level controllers account for approximately 17% of all GHG's in this sector. To date, there has been no real solution to completely eliminate the gasses emitted from these level controllers. There have been devices, called "Low Bleed" that claim to lower the output of GHG's, but they come at a substantial cost increase to end-users and have shown to have a negative impact on the economy due to downtime and repairs and simply do not eliminate the GHG emissions.

T4ES wrote:
Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to present a green solution from one of our patented products, the GRB (Gas Recovery Box).

T4ES wrote:
We are not offering a new device that only serves to hinder production and create profit loss due to emitted gas and greenhouse fees & citations (fines).

T4ES wrote:
The GRB is a self-contained emissions recovery system that corrects and improves the current effective technology by simply capturing 100% of the expended gas emitting from these controllers, allowing that gas to be sold or burned off. This will make a big impact on the number of greenhouse gasses (GHG's) that are consistently emitted to the atmosphere throughout the oilfield globally.

T4ES wrote:

The oil well owners already collect this gas and sell it. It's money.

T4ES wrote:I didn't put a long description in my original post because my gofundme page has a lengthy description. I assumed that if anyone was interested in learning about it then they would follow the link.

T4ES wrote:But instead, I am bombarded by a series of attacks on my validity and even my career,

T4ES wrote: I understand asking, but that's not how it happened. It was instantly "scam" or "ask me how I know your not in the oilfield".

T4ES wrote: Not questions about what I offer.

T4ES opened his thread with this:T4 Environmental Solutions, LLC is raising money for expanded research & development and implementation costs associated with its patented technology that will reduce oil and gas emissions by roughly 17%. This will make a big impact on the number of greenhouse gasses (GHG's) that are emitted to the atmosphere consistently throughout the oilfield globally. Whether you believe in global warming or not, there is no doubt that these GHG's are bad for the environment. They contain cancer-causing carcinogens and other properties that are hazardous to people, wildlife, and much more. Your support would be greatly appreciated.

T4ES wrote:I'm on your side when it comes to the personal beliefs on the subject,

T4ES wrote: ... but instantly attacking someone is not how a debate happens.

T4ES wrote: So here's the description of it:

T4ES wrote: The most prolific single sources of GHG's within the Oil & Natural Gas sector are Liquid Level Controllers, which are used on most production equipment at almost all stages of oilfield operations following fracking, from well site production all the way to the refinery. These Liquid level controllers account for approximately 17% of all GHG's in this sector.

T4ES wrote: To date, there has been no real solution to completely eliminate the gasses emitted from these level controllers.

T4ES wrote: There have been devices, called "Low Bleed" that claim to lower the output of GHG's, but they come at a substantial cost increase to end-users and have shown to have a negative impact on the economy due to downtime and repairs and simply do not eliminate the GHG emissions.

T4ES wrote: Therefore, I would like to take this opportunity to present a green solution from one of our patented products, the GRB (Gas Recovery Box).

T4ES wrote:

The oil well owners already collect this gas and sell it. It's money.

Now you're just lost. Go away, you have no idea what you're talking about.

duncan61 wrote:
Why do LLC leak methane gas and what percentage of oil fields cover the planet for this to be a problem.If your device works why is the oil company not retro fitting it and why the F do you need a gofundme.I am suspecting you saw the title and thought there would be warmazombies willing to give you loot for your stirling work saving the planet