Estimating Regional Methane Emission Factors from Energy and Agricultural Sector Sources Using a Portable Measurement System: Case Study of the Denver-Julesburg Basin.

Methane (CH4), a powerful greenhouse gas (GHG), has been identified as a key target for emission reduction in the Paris agreement, but it is not currently clear where efforts should be focused to make the greatest impact. Currently, activity data and standard emission factors (EF) are used to generate GHG emission inventories. Many of the EFs are globally uniform and do not account for regional variability in industrial or agricultural practices and/or regulation. Regional EFs can be derived from top-down emissions measurements and used to make bespoke regional GHG emission inventories that account for geopolitical and social variability. However, most large-scale top-down approaches campaigns require significant investment. To address this, lower-cost driving surveys (DS) have been identified as a viable alternative to more established methods. DSs can take top-down measurements of many emission sources in a relatively short period of time, albeit with a higher uncertainty. To investigate the use of a portable measurement system, a 2260 km DS was conducted throughout the Denver-Julesburg Basin (DJB). The DJB covers an area of 8000 km2 north of Denver, CO and is densely populated with CH4 emission sources, including oil and gas (O and G) operations, agricultural operations (AGOs), lakes and reservoirs. During the DS, 157 individual CH4 emission sources were detected; 51%, 43% and 4% of sources were AGOs, O and G operations, and natural sources, respectively. Methane emissions from each source were quantified using downwind concentration and meteorological data and AGOs and O and G operations represented nearly all the CH4 emissions in the DJB, accounting for 54% and 37% of the total emission, respectively. Operations with similar emission sources were grouped together and average facility emission estimates were generated. For agricultural sources, emissions from feedlot cattle, dairy cows and sheep were estimated at 5, 31 and 1 g CH4 head-1 h-1, all of which agreed with published values taken from focused measurement campaigns. Similarly, for O and G average emissions for well pads, compressor stations and gas processing plants (0.5, 14 and 110 kg CH4 facility-1 h-1) were in reasonable agreement with emission estimates from intensive measurement campaigns. A comparison of our basin wide O and G emissions to measurements taken a decade ago show a decrease of a factor of three, which can feasibly be explained by changes to O and G regulation over the past 10 years, while emissions from AGOs have remained constant over the same time period. Our data suggest that DSs could be a low-cost alternative to traditional measurement campaigns and used to screen many emission sources within a region to derive representative regionally specific and time-sensitive EFs. The key benefit of the DS is that many regions can be screened and emission reduction targets identified where regional EFs are noticeably larger than the regional, national or global averages.

Methane Exhaust Measurements at Gathering Compressor Stations in the United States.

Unburned methane entrained in exhaust from natural gas-fired compressor engines ("combustion slip") can account for a substantial portion of station-level methane emissions. A novel in-stack, tracer gas method was coupled with Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) species measurements to quantify combustion slip from natural gas compressor engines at 67 gathering and boosting stations owned or managed by nine "study partner" operators in 11 U.S. states. The mean methane emission rate from 63 four-stroke, lean-burn (4SLB) compressor engines was 5.62 kg/h (95% CI = 5.15-6.17 kg/h) and ranged from 0.3 to 12.6 kg/h. The mean methane emission rate from 39 four-stroke, rich-burn (4SRB) compressor engines was 0.40 kg/h (95% CI = 0.37-0.42 kg/h) and ranged from 0.01 to 4.5 kg/h. Study results for 4SLB engines were lower than both the U.S. EPA compilation of air pollutant emission factors (AP-42) and Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (GHGI) by 8 and 9%, respectively. Study results for 4SRB engines were 43% of the AP-42 emission factor and 8% of the GHGI emission factor, the latter of which does not distinguish between engine types. Total annual combustion slip from the U.S. natural gas gathering and boosting sector was modeled using measured emission rates and compressor unit counts from the U.S. EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. Modeled results [328 Gg/y (95% CI = 235-436 Gg/y) of unburned methane] would account for 24% (95% CI = 17-31%) of the 1391 Gg of methane emissions for "Gathering and Boosting Stations", or 6% of the net emissions for "Natural Gas Systems" (5598 Gg) as reported in the 2020 U.S. EPA GHGI. Gathering and boosting combustion slip emissions reported in the 2020 GHGI (374 Gg) fall within the uncertainty of this model.

Temporal variability largely explains top-down/bottom-up difference in methane emission estimates from a natural gas production region.

This study spatially and temporally aligns top-down and bottom-up methane emission estimates for a natural gas production basin, using multiscale emission measurements and detailed activity data reporting. We show that episodic venting from manual liquid unloadings, which occur at a small fraction of natural gas well pads, drives a factor-of-two temporal variation in the basin-scale emission rate of a US dry shale gas play. The midafternoon peak emission rate aligns with the sampling time of all regional aircraft emission studies, which target well-mixed boundary layer conditions present in the afternoon. A mechanistic understanding of emission estimates derived from various methods is critical for unbiased emission verification and effective greenhouse gas emission mitigation. Our results demonstrate that direct comparison of emission estimates from methods covering widely different timescales can be misleading.

Methane Emissions from United States Natural Gas Gathering and Processing.

New facility-level methane (CH4) emissions measurements obtained from 114 natural gas gathering facilities and 16 processing plants in 13 U.S. states were combined with facility counts obtained from state and national databases in a Monte Carlo simulation to estimate CH4 emissions from U.S. natural gas gathering and processing operations. Total annual CH4 emissions of 2421 (+245/-237) Gg were estimated for all U.S. gathering and processing operations, which represents a CH4 loss rate of 0.47% (±0.05%) when normalized by 2012 CH4 production. Over 90% of those emissions were attributed to normal operation of gathering facilities (1697 +189/-185 Gg) and processing plants (506 +55/-52 Gg), with the balance attributed to gathering pipelines and processing plant routine maintenance and upsets. The median CH4 emissions estimate for processing plants is a factor of 1.7 lower than the 2012 EPA Greenhouse Gas Inventory (GHGI) estimate, with the difference due largely to fewer reciprocating compressors, and a factor of 3.0 higher than that reported under the EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. Since gathering operations are currently embedded within the production segment of the EPA GHGI, direct comparison to our results is complicated. However, the study results suggest that CH4 emissions from gathering are substantially higher than the current EPA GHGI estimate and are equivalent to 30% of the total net CH4 emissions in the natural gas systems GHGI. Because CH4 emissions from most gathering facilities are not reported under the current rule and not all source categories are reported for processing plants, the total CH4 emissions from gathering and processing reported under the EPA GHGRP (180 Gg) represents only 14% of that tabulated in the EPA GHGI and 7% of that predicted from this study.

Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Transmission and Storage System in the United States.

The recent growth in production and utilization of natural gas offers potential climate benefits, but those benefits depend on lifecycle emissions of methane, the primary component of natural gas and a potent greenhouse gas. This study estimates methane emissions from the transmission and storage (T&S) sector of the United States natural gas industry using new data collected during 2012, including 2,292 onsite measurements, additional emissions data from 677 facilities and activity data from 922 facilities. The largest emission sources were fugitive emissions from certain compressor-related equipment and "super-emitter" facilities. We estimate total methane emissions from the T&S sector at 1,503 [1,220 to 1,950] Gg/yr (95% confidence interval) compared to the 2012 Environmental Protection Agency's Greenhouse Gas Inventory (GHGI) estimate of 2,071 [1,680 to 2,690] Gg/yr. While the overlap in confidence intervals indicates that the difference is not statistically significant, this is the result of several significant, but offsetting, factors. Factors which reduce the study estimate include a lower estimated facility count, a shift away from engines toward lower-emitting turbine and electric compressor drivers, and reductions in the usage of gas-driven pneumatic devices. Factors that increase the study estimate relative to the GHGI include updated emission rates in certain emission categories and explicit treatment of skewed emissions at both component and facility levels. For T&S stations that are required to report to the EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), this study estimates total emissions to be 260% [215% to 330%] of the reportable emissions for these stations, primarily due to the inclusion of emission sources that are not reported under the GHGRP rules, updated emission factors, and super-emitter emissions.

Methane emissions from natural gas compressor stations in the transmission and storage sector: measurements and comparisons with the EPA greenhouse gas reporting program protocol.

Equipment- and site-level methane emissions from 45 compressor stations in the transmission and storage (T&S) sector of the US natural gas system were measured, including 25 sites required to report under the EPA greenhouse gas reporting program (GHGRP). Direct measurements of fugitive and vented sources were combined with AP-42-based exhaust emission factors (for operating reciprocating engines and turbines) to produce a study onsite estimate. Site-level methane emissions were also concurrently measured with downwind-tracer-flux techniques. At most sites, these two independent estimates agreed within experimental uncertainty. Site-level methane emissions varied from 2-880 SCFM. Compressor vents, leaky isolation valves, reciprocating engine exhaust, and equipment leaks were major sources, and substantial emissions were observed at both operating and standby compressor stations. The site-level methane emission rates were highly skewed; the highest emitting 10% of sites (including two superemitters) contributed 50% of the aggregate methane emissions, while the lowest emitting 50% of sites contributed less than 10% of the aggregate emissions. Excluding the two superemitters, study-average methane emissions from compressor housings and noncompressor sources are comparable to or lower than the corresponding effective emission factors used in the EPA greenhouse gas inventory. If the two superemitters are included in the analysis, then the average emission factors based on this study could exceed the EPA greenhouse gas inventory emission factors, which highlights the potentially important contribution of superemitters to national emissions. However, quantification of their influence requires knowledge of the magnitude and frequency of superemitters across the entire T&S sector. Only 38% of the methane emissions measured by the comprehensive onsite measurements were reportable under the new EPA GHGRP because of a combination of inaccurate emission factors for leakers and exhaust methane, and various exclusions. The bias is even larger if one accounts for the superemitters, which were not captured by the onsite measurements. The magnitude of the bias varied from site to site by site type and operating state. Therefore, while the GHGRP is a valuable new source of emissions information, care must be taken when incorporating these data into emission inventories. The value of the GHGRP can be increased by requiring more direct measurements of emissions (as opposed to using counts and emission factors), eliminating exclusions such as rod-packing vents on pressurized reciprocating compressors in standby mode under Subpart-W, and using more appropriate emission factors for exhaust methane from reciprocating engines under Subpart-C.

Measurements of methane emissions from natural gas gathering facilities and processing plants: measurement results.

Facility-level methane emissions were measured at 114 gathering facilities and 16 processing plants in the United States natural gas system. At gathering facilities, the measured methane emission rates ranged from 0.7 to 700 kg per hour (kg/h) (0.6 to 600 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm)). Normalized emissions (as a % of total methane throughput) were less than 1% for 85 gathering facilities and 19 had normalized emissions less than 0.1%. The range of methane emissions rates for processing plants was 3 to 600 kg/h (3 to 524 scfm), corresponding to normalized methane emissions rates <1% in all cases. The distributions of methane emissions, particularly for gathering facilities, are skewed. For example, 30% of gathering facilities contribute 80% of the total emissions. Normalized emissions rates are negatively correlated with facility throughput. The variation in methane emissions also appears driven by differences between inlet and outlet pressure, as well as venting and leaking equipment. Substantial venting from liquids storage tanks was observed at 20% of gathering facilities. Emissions rates at these facilities were, on average, around four times the rates observed at similar facilities without substantial venting.