- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

PRX Energy

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Featured in Physics
  • Open Access

Monitoring Methane Emissions from Oil and Gas Operations‡

William Collins1,2,*,†, Raymond Orbach3,†, Michelle Bailey4, Sebastien Biraud1, Ian Coddington5, David DiCarlo6, Jeff Peischl7,8, Anuradha Radhakrishnan9, and David Schimel10

  • 1Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, USA
  • 2University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California 94720, USA
  • 3Walker Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712, USA
  • 4Material Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, USA
  • 5Applied Physics Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Boulder, Colorado 80305, USA
  • 6Hildebrand Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712, USA
  • 7Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA
  • 8Chemical Sciences Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Colorado 80305, USA
  • 9The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78705, USA
  • 10Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91109, USA

  • *wdcollins@lbl.gov
  • †Co-Chair.
PDF

PRX Energy 1, 017001 – Published 22 June, 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXEnergy.1.017001

Abstract

The atmospheric concentration of methane has more than doubled since the start of the Industrial Revolution. Methane is the second-most-abundant greenhouse gas created by human activities and a major driver of climate change. This APS-Optica report provides a technical assessment of the current state of monitoring U.S. methane emissions from oil and gas operations, which accounts for roughly 30% of U.S. anthropogenic methane emissions. The report identifies current technological and policy gaps and makes recommendations for the federal government in three key areas: methane emissions detection, reliable and systematized data and models to support mitigation measures, and effective regulation.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

  • ‡This science and policy report was issued by the American Physical Society (APS) and Optica in MAY 2022 and is being published simultaneously by Optics Express.

Research News

Physicists Set their Sights on Curbing US Methane Emissions

Published 22 June, 2022

In a report published today, physicists make recommendations for ways to improve the monitoring of industrial methane emissions, something they say could have a significant impact on climate change.

See more in Physics

Popular Summary

Methane is both a fossil fuel and a potent greenhouse gas, with a much stronger impact on global warming than an equivalent mass of carbon dioxide. It is released into our atmosphere through agriculture, waste decomposition, and the extraction and processing of fossil fuels. This policy report details the accidental release of methane during fossil fuel production, a first step in much of the energy generation in the world today. Finding and addressing large methane leaks from super-emitters in the fossil-fuel sector could significantly reduce the atmospheric concentration of this greenhouse gas. The authors of the report outline specific, actionable goals for both physics and optics researchers and policymakers in federal agencies to address this problem. Scientific research into methane detection modeling and technology can drive the development of scalable, user-friendly leak monitoring systems. These advances in detection should, according to the authors, be supported by government initiatives to create robust policies for identifying and combating leaks from super-emitters.

Article Text

References (80)

  1. G. Myhre, D. Shindell, F. Bréon, W. Collins, J. Fuglestvedt, J. Huang, D. Koch, J.-F. Lamarque, D. Lee, B. Mendoza, T. Nakajima, A. Robock, G. Stephens, T. Takemura, and H. Zhang, in Climate Change 2013—The Physical Science Basis, edited by T. F. Stocker, D. Qin, G. K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex, and P. M. Midgley (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2014), p. 659.
  2. D. Shindell, et al., Global methane assessment: Benefits and costs of mitigating methane emissions. Technical report, United Nations Environment Programme and Climate and Clean Air Coalition, Nairobi, 2021. https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-methane-assessment-benefits-and-costs-mitigating-methane-emissions.
  3. J. G. Canadell, P. M. S. Monteiro, M. H. Costa, L. Cotrim da Cunha, P. M. Cox, A. V. Eliseev, S. Henson, M. Ishii, S. Jaccard, C. Koven, A. Lohila, P. K. Patra, S. Piao, J. Rogelj, S. Syampungani, S. Zaehle, and K. Zickfeld, in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J. B. R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2021), p. 673.
  4. M. Saunois, et al., The global methane budget 2000–2017, Earth Syst. Sci. Data 12, 1561 (2020).
  5. S. Szopa, V. Naik, B. Adhikary, P. Artaxo, T. Berntsen, W. D. Collins, S. Fuzzi, L. Gallardo, A. Kiendler-Scharr, Z. Klimont, H. Liao, N. Unger, and P. Zanis, in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J. B. R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2021), p. 817.
  6. E. G. Nisbet, et al., Methane mitigation: Methods to reduce emissions, on the path to the Paris agreement, Rev. Geophys. 58, e2019RG000675 (2020).
  7. R. M. Duren, A. K. Thorpe, K. T. Foster, T. Rafiq, F. M. Hopkins, V. Yadav, B. D. Bue, D. R. Thompson, S. Conley, N. K. Colombi, C. Frankenberg, I. B. McCubbin, M. L. Eastwood, M. Falk, J. D. Herner, B. E. Croes, R. O. Green, and C. E. Miller, California’s methane super-emitters, Nature 575, 180 (2019).
  8. R. B. Jackson, M. Saunois, P. Bousquet, J. G. Canadell, B. Poulter, A. R. Stavert, P. Bergamaschi, Y. Niwa, A. Segers, and A. Tsuruta, Increasing anthropogenic methane emissions arise equally from agricultural and fossil fuel sources, Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 71002 (2020).
  9. D. Zavala-Araiza, et al., Reconciling divergent estimates of oil and gas methane emissions, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112, 15597 (2015).
  10. A. R. Brandt, G. A. Heath, E. A. Kort, F. O’Sullivan, G. Petron, S. M. Jordaan, P. Tans, J. Wilcox, A. M. Gopstein, D. Arent, S. Wofsy, N. J. Brown, R. Bradley, G. D. Stucky, D. Eardley, and R. Harriss, Methane leaks from North American natural gas systems, Science 343, 733 (2014).
  11. D. J. Zimmerle, L. L. Williams, T. L. Vaughn, C. Quinn, R. Subramanian, G. P. Duggan, B. Willson, J. D. Opsomer, A. J. Marchese, D. M. Martinez, and A. L. Robinson, Methane emissions from the natural gas transmission and storage system in the United States, Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 9374 (2015).
  12. T. Lauvaux, C. Giron, M. Mazzolini, A. d’Aspremont, R. Duren, D. Cusworth, D. Shindell, and P. Ciais, Global assessment of oil and gas methane ultra-emitters, Science 375, 557 (2022).
  13. R. Duren, A. Thorpe, and S. Sander, California baseline methane survey Interim Phase 1 report. Technical report, California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2017. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/ca_ch4_survey_phase1_report_2017.pdf.
  14. A. Gvakharia, E. A. Kort, A. Brandt, J. Peischl, T. B. Ryerson, J. P. Schwarz, M. L. Smith, and C. Sweeney, Methane, black carbon, and ethane emissions from natural gas flares in the Bakken Shale, North Dakota, Environ. Sci. Technol. 51, 5317 (2017).
  15. D. H. Cusworth, R. M. Duren, A. K. Thorpe, S. Pandey, J. D. Maasakkers, I. Aben, D. Jervis, D. J. Varon, D. J. Jacob, C. A. Randles, R. Gautam, M. Omara, G. W. Schade, P. E. Dennison, C. Frankenberg, D. Gordon, E. Lopinto, and C. E. Miller, Multisatellite imaging of a gas well blowout enables quantification of total methane emissions, Geophys. Res. Lett. 48, e2020GL090864 (2021).
  16. SkyTruth, https://skytruth.org/flaring/ (accessed August 4, 2021).
  17. C. Elvidge, M. Zhizhin, F.-C. Hsu, and K. Baugh, VIIRS nightfire: Satellite pyrometry at night, Remote Sens. 5, 4423 (2013).
  18. Earth Observation Group, Payne Institute for Public Policy, https://payneinstitute.mines.edu/eog/viirs-nightfire-vnf/ (accessed March 22, 2022).
  19. Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership, https://www.ggfrdata.org/ (accessed May 6, 2021).
  20. K. J. Wecht, D. J. Jacob, M. P. Sulprizio, G. W. Santoni, S. C. Wofsy, R. Parker, H. Bösch, and J. Worden, Spatially resolving methane emissions in California: constraints from the CalNex aircraft campaign and from present (GOSAT, TES) and future (TROPOMI, geostationary) satellite observations, Atmos. Chem. Phys. 14, 8173 (2014).
  21. J. Peischl, et al., Quantifying sources of methane using light alkanes in the Los Angeles basin, California, J. Geophys. Res.: Atmos. 118, 4974 (2013).
  22. K. McKain, A. Down, S. M. Raciti, J. Budney, L. R. Hutyra, C. Floerchinger, S. C. Herndon, T. Nehrkorn, M. S. Zahniser, R. B. Jackson, N. Phillips, and S. C. Wofsy, Methane emissions from natural gas infrastructure and use in the urban region of Boston, Massachusetts, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112, 1941 (2015).
  23. S. Jeong, et al., Estimating methane emissions in California’s urban and rural regions using multitower observations, J. Geophys. Res.: Atmos. 121, 13013 (2016).
  24. S. Jeong, X. Cui, D. R. Blake, B. Miller, S. A. Montzka, A. Andrews, A. Guha, P. Martien, R. P. Bambha, B. LaFranchi, H. A. Michelsen, C. B. Clements, P. Glaize, and M. L. Fischer, Estimating methane emissions from biological and fossil-fuel sources in the San Francisco Bay Area, Geophys. Res. Lett. 44, 486 (2017).
  25. M. Etminan, G. Myhre, E. J. Highwood, and K. P. Shine, Radiative forcing of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide: A significant revision of the methane radiative forcing, Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 12 (2016).
  26. W. D. Collins, D. R. Feldman, C. Kuo, and N. H. Nguyen, Large regional shortwave forcing by anthropogenic methane informed by Jovian observations, Sci. Adv. 4, eaas9593 (2018).
  27. F. M. O’Connor, et al., Assessment of pre-industrial to present-day anthropogenic climate forcing in UKESM1, Atmos. Chem. Phys. 21, 1211 (2021).
  28. P. Balcombe, J. F. Speirs, N. P. Brandon, and A. D. Hawkes, Methane emissions: Choosing the right climate metric and time horizon, Environ. Sci.: Processes Impacts 20, 1323 (2018).
  29. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Valuing Climate Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide (The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2017).
  30. F. C. Errickson, K. Keller, W. D. Collins, V. Srikrishnan, and D. Anthoff, Equity is more important for the social cost of methane than climate uncertainty, Nature 592, 564 (2021).
  31. EPA, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2015. Technical Report EPA 430-P-17-001, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2017, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2017-02/documents/2017_complete_report.pdf.
  32. P. Werle, F. Slemr, K. Maurer, R. Kormann, R. Mücke, and B. Jänker, Near- and mid-infrared laser-optical sensors for gas analysis, Opt. Lasers Eng. 37, 101 (2002).
  33. A. O’Keefe, Integrated cavity output analysis of ultra-weak absorption, Chem. Phys. Lett. 293, 331 (1998).
  34. D. S. Baer, J. B. Paul, M. Gupta, and A. O’Keefe, Sensitive absorption measurements in the near-infrared region using off-axis integrated-cavity-output spectroscopy, Appl. Phys. B: Lasers Opt. 75, 261 (2002).
  35. A. O’Keefe and D. A. G. Deacon, Cavity ring-down optical spectrometer for absorption measurements using pulsed laser sources, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 59, 2544 (1988).
  36. E. R. Crosson, A cavity ring-down analyzer for measuring atmospheric levels of methane, carbon dioxide, and water vapor, Appl. Phys. B 92, 403 (2008).
  37. M. S. Zahniser, D. D. Nelson, B. McManus, P. L. Kebabian, and D. Lloyd, Measurement of trace gas fluxes using tunable diode laser spectroscopy, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, A 351, 371 (1995).
  38. W. White, J. Anderson, D. Blumenthal, R. Husar, N. Gillani, J. Husar, and W. Wilson, Formation and transport of secondary air pollutants: Ozone and aerosols in the St. Louis urban plume, Science 194, 187 (1976).
  39. A. Karion, C. Sweeney, G. Pétron, G. Frost, R. M. Hardesty, J. Kofler, B. R. Miller, T. Newberger, S. Wolter, R. Banta, A. Brewer, E. Dlugokencky, P. Lang, S. A. Montzka, R. Schnell, P. Tans, M. Trainer, R. Zamora, and S. Conley, Methane emissions estimate from airborne measurements over a western United States natural gas field, Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 4393 (2013).
  40. G. Pétron, et al., A new look at methane and non-methane hydrocarbon emissions from oil and natural gas operations in the Colorado Denver-Julesburg Basin, J. Geophys. Res.: Atmos. 119, 6836 (2014).
  41. D. Zavala-Araiza, R. A. Alvarez, D. R. Lyon, D. T. Allen, A. J. Marchese, D. J. Zimmerle, and S. P. Hamburg, Super-emitters in natural gas infrastructure are caused by abnormal process conditions, Nat. Commun. 8, 14012 (2017).
  42. A. R. Brandt, G. A. Heath, and D. Cooley, Methane leaks from natural gas systems follow extreme distributions, Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 12512 (2016).
  43. M. R. Johnson, D. R. Tyner, and A. J. Szekeres, Blinded evaluation of airborne methane source detection using Bridger Photonics LiDAR, Remote Sens. Environ. 259, 112418 (2021).
  44. I. Irakulis-Loitxate, et al., Satellite-based survey of extreme methane emissions in the Permian basin, Sci. Adv. 7, eabf4507 (2021).
  45. D. Jervis, J. McKeever, B. O. A. Durak, J. J. Sloan, D. Gains, D. J. Varon, A. Ramier, M. Strupler, and E. Tarrant, The GHGSat-D imaging spectrometer, Atmos. Meas. Tech. 14, 2127 (2021).
  46. T. B. Coplen and Y. Shrestha, Erratum to: Isotope-abundance variations and atomic weights of selected elements: 2016 (IUPAC Technical Report), Pure Appl. Chem. 91, 173 (2018).
  47. N. Kille, R. Chiu, M. Frey, F. Hase, M. K. Sha, T. Blumenstock, J. W. Hannigan, J. Orphal, D. Bon, and R. Volkamer, Separation of methane emissions from agricultural and natural gas sources in the Colorado Front Range, Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 3990 (2019).
  48. L. R. Brown, et al., Methane line parameters in the HITRAN2012 database, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer 130, 201 (2013).
  49. R. Checa-Garcia, J. Landgraf, A. Galli, F. Hase, V. A. Velazco, H. Tran, V. Boudon, F. Alkemade, and A. Butz, Mapping spectroscopic uncertainties into prospective methane retrieval errors from Sentinel-5 and its precursor, Atmos. Meas. Tech. 8, 3617 (2015).
  50. T. Delahaye, S. E. Maxwell, Z. D. Reed, H. Lin, J. T. Hodges, K. Sung, V. M. Devi, T. Warneke, P. Spietz, and H. Tran, Precise methane absorption measurements in the 1.64μm spectral region for the MERLIN mission, J. Geophys. Res.: Atmos. 121, 7360 (2016).
  51. C. B. Alden, S. C. Coburn, R. J. Wright, E. Baumann, K. Cossel, E. Perez, E. Hoenig, K. Prasad, I. Coddington, and G. B. Rieker, Single-blind quantification of natural gas leaks from 1 km distance using frequency combs, Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 2908 (2019).
  52. A. K. Ayasse, P. E. Dennison, M. Foote, A. K. Thorpe, S. Joshi, R. O. Green, R. M. Duren, D. R. Thompson, and D. A. Roberts, Methane mapping with future satellite imaging spectrometers, Remote Sens. 11, 3054 (2019).
  53. E. D. Sherwin, Y. Chen, A. P. Ravikumar, and A. R. Brandt, Single-blind test of airplane-based hyperspectral methane detection via controlled releases, Elem.: Sci. Anth. 9, 00063 (2021).
  54. Project Astra, https://www.projectastra.energy/ (accessed August 4, 2021).
  55. T. G. van Kessel, M. Ramachandran, L. J. Klein, D. Nair, N. Hinds, H. Hamann, and N. E. Sosa, in 2018 IEEE SENSORS (IEEE, New Delhi, India, 2018), p. 1.
  56. Y. Zhang, R. Gautam, S. Pandey, M. Omara, J. D. Maasakkers, P. Sadavarte, D. Lyon, H. Nesser, M. P. Sulprizio, D. J. Varon, R. Zhang, S. Houweling, D. Zavala-Araiza, R. A. Alvarez, A. Lorente, S. P. Hamburg, I. Aben, and D. J. Jacob, Quantifying methane emissions from the largest oil-producing basin in the United States from space, Sci. Adv. 6, eaaz5120 (2020).
  57. S. Schwietzke, M. Harrison, T. Lauderdale, K. Branson, S. Conley, F. C. George, D. Jordan, G. R. Jersey, C. Zhang, H. L. Mairs, G. Pétron, and R. C. Schnell, Aerially guided leak detection and repair: A pilot field study for evaluating the potential of methane emission detection and cost-effectiveness, J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 69, 71 (2018).
  58. A. K. Thorpe, et al., Mapping methane concentrations from a controlled release experiment using the next generation airborne visible/infrared imaging spectrometer (AVIRIS-NG), Remote Sens. Environ. 179, 104 (2016).
  59. D. H. Cusworth, R. M. Duren, A. K. Thorpe, W. Olson-Duvall, J. Heckler, J. W. Chapman, M. L. Eastwood, M. C. Helmlinger, R. O. Green, G. P. Asner, P. E. Dennison, and C. E. Miller, Intermittency of large methane emitters in the Permian basin, Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 8, 567 (2021).
  60. California Air Resources Board, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/california-satellite-partnership/california-me (accessed March 22, 2022).
  61. A. P. Ravikumar, S. Sreedhara, J. Wang, J. Englander, D. Roda-Stuart, C. Bell, D. Zimmerle, D. Lyon, I. Mogstad, B. Ratner, and A. R. Brandt, Single-blind inter-comparison of methane detection technologies—results from the Stanford/EDF mobile monitoring challenge, Elem.: Sci. Anth. 7, 37 (2019).
  62. H. Suto, F. Kataoka, N. Kikuchi, R. O. Knuteson, A. Butz, M. Haun, H. Buijs, K. Shiomi, H. Imai, and A. Kuze, Thermal and near-infrared sensor for carbon observation Fourier transform spectrometer-2 (TANSO-FTS-2) on the greenhouse gases observing Satellite-2 (GOSAT-2) during its first year in orbit, Atmos. Meas. Tech. 14, 2013 (2021).
  63. M. Buchwitz, R. de Beek, J. P. Burrows, H. Bovensmann, T. Warneke, J. Notholt, J. F. Meirink, A. P. H. Goede, P. Bergamaschi, S. Körner, M. Heimann, and A. Schulz, Atmospheric methane and carbon dioxide from SCIAMACHY satellite data: Initial comparison with chemistry and transport models, Atmos. Chem. Phys. 5, 941 (2005).
  64. E. Sánchez-García, J. Gorroño, I. Irakulis-Loitxate, D. J. Varon, and L. Guanter, Mapping methane plumes at very high spatial resolution with the WorldView-3 satellite, Atmos. Meas. Tech. 15, 1657 (2021).
  65. T. Ehret, A. D. Truchis, M. Mazzolini, J.-M. Morel, A. d’Aspremont, T. Lauvaux, R. Duren, D. Cusworth, and G. Facciolo, Global tracking and quantification of oil and gas methane emissions from recurrent sentinel-2 imagery, arXiv:2110.11832 [physics.ao-ph] (2021).
  66. A. Liang, W. Gong, G. Han, and C. Xiang, Comparison of satellite-observed XCO2 from GOSAT, OCO-2, and ground-based TCCON, Remote Sens. 9, 1033 (2017).
  67. D. Wunch, G. C. Toon, J. L. Blavier, R. A. Washenfelder, J. Notholt, B. J. Connor, D. W. T. Griffith, V. Sherlock, and P. O. Wennberg, The total carbon column observing network, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 369, 2087 (2011).
  68. B. J. Connor, H. Boesch, G. Toon, B. Sen, C. Miller, and D. Crisp, Orbiting carbon observatory: Inverse method and prospective error analysis, J. Geophys. Res.: Atmos. 113, D05305 (2008).
  69. B. Connor, H. Bösch, J. McDuffie, T. Taylor, D. Fu, C. Frankenberg, C. O’Dell, V. H. Payne, M. Gunson, R. Pollock, J. Hobbs, F. Oyafuso, and Y. Jiang, Quantification of uncertainties in OCO-2 measurements of XCO2: Simulations and linear error analysis, Atmos. Meas. Tech. 9, 5227 (2016).
  70. J. M. Hobbs, B. J. Drouin, F. Oyafuso, V. H. Payne, M. R. Gunson, J. McDuffie, and E. J. Mlawer, Spectroscopic uncertainty impacts on OCO-2/3 retrievals of XCO2, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer 257, 107360 (2020).
  71. V. H. Payne, B. J. Drouin, F. Oyafuso, L. Kuai, B. M. Fisher, K. Sung, D. Nemchick, T. J. Crawford, M. Smyth, D. Crisp, E. Adkins, J. T. Hodges, D. A. Long, E. J. Mlawer, A. Merrelli, E. Lunny, and C. W. O’Dell, Absorption coefficient (ABSCO) tables for the orbiting carbon observatories: Version 5.1, J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer 255, 107217 (2020).
  72. A. Lorente, T. Borsdorff, A. Butz, O. Hasekamp, J. aan de Brugh, A. Schneider, L. Wu, F. Hase, R. Kivi, D. Wunch, D. F. Pollard, K. Shiomi, N. M. Deutscher, V. A. Velazco, C. M. Roehl, P. O. Wennberg, T. Warneke, and J. Landgraf, Methane retrieved from TROPOMI: Improvement of the data product and validation of the first 2 years of measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech. 14, 665 (2021).
  73. A. Townsend-Small, E. C. Botner, K. L. Jimenez, J. R. Schroeder, N. J. Blake, S. Meinardi, D. R. Blake, B. C. Sive, D. Bon, J. H. Crawford, G. Pfister, and F. M. Flocke, Using stable isotopes of hydrogen to quantify biogenic and thermogenic atmospheric methane sources: A case study from the Colorado Front Range, Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 11 (2016).
  74. O. A. Sherwood, S. Schwietzke, V. A. Arling, and G. Etiope, Global inventory of gas geochemistry data from fossil fuel, microbial and burning sources, version 2017, Earth Syst. Sci. Data 9, 639 (2017).
  75. E. Malina, H. Hu, J. Landgraf, and B. Veihelmann, A study of synthetic 13CH4 retrievals from TROPOMI and Sentinel-5/UVNS, Atmos. Meas. Tech. 12, 6273 (2019).
  76. H. Graven, T. Hocking, and G. Zazzeri, Detection of fossil and biogenic methane at regional scales using atmospheric radiocarbon, Earth’s Future 7, 283 (2019).
  77. NASA, CLARREO (Climate Absolute Radiance and Refractivity Observatory) Pathfinder mission, 2022, https://clarreo-pathfinder.larc.nasa.gov/ (accessed March 26, 2022).
  78. White House Office of Domestic Climate Policy, U.S. Methane Emissions Reduction Action Plan, November 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/US-Methane-Emissions-Reduction-Action-Plan-pdf (accessed January 30, 2022).
  79. United National Framework Convention on Climate Change, Glasgow Climate Pact, November 2021, https://unfccc.int/documents/310475 (accessed January 30, 2022).
  80. United National Environmental Programme, International Methane Emissions Observatory 2021, https://www.unep.org/explore-topics/energy/what-we-do/international-methane-emissions-observatory (accessed January 30, 2022).

Outline

Information

PRX Energy 1, 017001– Published 22 June, 2022
    Crossmark - Check for updates button
    Creative Commons Logo

    Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

    Published by the American Physical Society

    Sign In to Your Journals Account

    Filter

    Filter

    Article Lookup

    Enter a citation