I have not done tracking down exactly how they managed to reduce their recorded emissions by a factor of eight. It is suspicious. But the real answer is we need to be measuring in both countries and we talked about aircraft. We talked about continuous monitoring. Theres satellites. If the United States does it other countries will start to do it as well. The United States doesnt. I think thats what i wanted to get. Why would we think that . Why would increasing our own regulations encourage the russians who are clearly not our friends, why would that encourage them to care about the environment . Russia is a tough case. But theyre the biggest one when were talking about gas. Thats right. We have to basically show that we are doing it right and the European Union and the other buyers they determine whose data is more credible. Is it the measurements from the United States or is it the spreadsheet exercise in strange numbers fromrussia . I think the europeans are smart enough to figure that out. I would hope so. They recently canceled a large deal with a company for that reason. Making up things just in our International Labs that have done this already and im assuming you probably already agree with that work and that work is thoughtfully done. But with that im already out of time. Thank you maam chair. Next Ranking Member graves. Doctor kleinberg i appreciate you being here and i want to follow up on congressman crenshaws questions. Russia for weeks sat there at theborder and said they were going into ukraine. They said they will use Russian Military operation and later they said they were liberating ukrainians who wanted to be liberated. They denied any Human Rights Violations which i think were was clear evidence that was not the case and my point is here that im not sure russia has much credibility. We could sit here all day long and talk about the lives of Vladimir Putin or methane numbers. I do want to ask you though, you noted in your testimony i heard you tell mister crenshaw that sort of russian numbers are fishy. I did want to ask what do we do to put a better system in place . To get more accurate measurements and could you explain the benefits of the international methane emissions conservatory . Ill be happy to. Russia is using the same system that was first used in the United States pioneered by epa that in the 1990s which was the best method at the time which is the emissions factor method which is basically a spreadsheet. Russia copy that. Most countries do copy what we do. But i think by the same token we need to now that we have these wonderful new instruments such as long path , Aerial Surveys that were mentioned and so on we can do a lot better in other countries will copy us. I want to point out youre from louisiana. When ive been around the world talking with engineers they are trained at lsu. They are trained at texas a m. Believe me the american influence is very powerful. And once we do it right, other countries will and then the purchasing nations, europeans, japanese will say yes, we want this. It is verifiably clean. I want to thank you for listening. Doctor alden, when your colleague long path testified house science a few weeks ago they talked about the importance of epa regulations and encouraging innovation to provide a path to new technologies to determine methane leaks more effectively. Would you mind expanding on that and talk about some of the opportunities and some of the challenges those companies are facing . So a lot of companies are turning out these new technologies right now and there testing the waters. So is going to be important to be able to take that next step and have policies and regulations really incentivize and encourage operators to do technologies. Another piece of the puzzle is if policymakers and decisionmakers are interested in the data that comes with that theyre going to be encouraged incentivize on producing that data and certainly not do that with a stick but rather with a carrot. We see a lot of people trying stuff out. We want to see the policies encouraged as a widespread option and we find if we do put the time into integrate that data theres super immediate datain terms of improvement. Miss tomcik thank you for being here and please note my Opening Statement wasnt an effort to attack you. My Opening Statement is inherent to and i care about the environment and the planet that we leave our kids. I just think the data shows a different outcome than all of the folks believe the narrative to be. You know i was curious. In your testimony i think you said and i got this backwards earlier. Use it is estimated the oil and gas industry in its 16 Million Metric Tons annually and missed said the domestic oil and gas industry and its affect or 8 million tons. You understand what the difference is between your testimony . So the 16 Million Metric Tons annually is a stop of environmental information and what they do is they are looking at the measurements that are taken directly from oil and gas and using estimates to calculate those. I would be happy to provide that information to you. That would be great if you could and i want to ask if you could provide information. You made a comment that minorities are more impacted in your testimony and if you could reflect on that, someone said their data actually shows the opposite. I would ask that you submit two letters from the governments of energy another one from june 24 at xtc be included in the record of the hearing. Methane emissions and energy independence. Without objection so order and i want to thank the Witnesses Today for your very insightful testimony and i ask unanimous consent to submit a record from the evangelical environmental network. Fighting the committee for our hearing and lets see. The Environmental Defense fund also a letter from them on these scientific papers economic reports highlighting the need for strong federal rules that help us target methane waste and other letter from clark foul company is encouraging the committee to weigh in with the epa urged the agency to consider lowering to propose levels. Thanks again. This is a critical topic and we appreciate the insightful testimony. The committee is adjourned. [inaudible] the use of biometrics impacts privacy. Live coverage on cspan. They can insert degrading the quality of information or introducing statistical noise so thathe