Aerially guided leak detection and repair: A pilot field study for evaluating the potential of methane emission detection and cost-effectiveness. (2nd January 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Schwietzke, Stefan; Harrison, Matthew; Lauderdale, Terri; Branson, Ken; Conley, Stephen; George, Fiji C.; Jordan, Doug; Jersey, Gilbert R.; Zhang, Changyong; Mairs, Heide L.; Pétron, Gabrielle; Schnell, Russell C.
• Is Part Of: Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association. Volume 69:Number 1(2019)
• Page Start: 71
• Page End: 88
• Publication Date: 2019-01-02
• Subjects: Air -- Pollution -- Periodicals; Air quality management -- Periodicals; Hazardous wastes -- Management -- Periodicals; Air Pollution -- prevention & control -- Periodicals; Hazardous Waste -- prevention & control -- Periodicals; Waste Management -- Periodicals; 628.5305
• DOI: 10.1080/10962247.2018.1515123
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1047-3289

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Novel aerial methane (CH4 ) detection technologies were used in this study to identify anomalously high-emitting oil and gas (O&G) facilities and to guide ground-based "leak detection and repair" (LDAR) teams. This approach has the potential to enable a rapid and effective inspection of O&G facilities under voluntary or regulatory LDAR programs to identify and mitigate anomalously large CH4 emissions from a disproportionately small number of facilities. This is the first study of which the authors are aware to deploy, evaluate, and compare the CH4 detection volumes and cost-effectiveness of aerially guided and purely ground-based LDAR techniques. Two aerial methods, the Kairos Aerospace infrared CH4 column imaging and the Scientific Aviation in situ aircraft CH4 mole fraction measurements, were tested during a 2-week period in the Fayetteville Shale region contemporaneously with conventional ground-based LDAR. We show that aerially guided LDAR can be at least as cost-effective as ground-based LDAR, but several variable parameters were identified that strongly affect cost-effectiveness and which require field research and improvements beyond this pilot study. These parameters include (i) CH4 minimum dectectable limit of aerial technologies, (ii) emission rate size distributions of sources, (iii) remote distinction of fixable versus nonfixable CH4 sources ("leaks" vs. CH4 emissions occurring by design), and (iv) the fraction of fixable sources to total CH4 emissions. Suggestions for future study design are provided. Implications : Mitigation of methane leaks from existing oil and gas operations currently relies on on-site inspections of all applicable facilities at a prescribed frequency. This approach is labor- and cost-intensive, especially because a majority of oil and gas–related methane emissions originate from a disproportionately small number of facilities and components. We show for the first time in real-world conditions how aerial methane measurements can identify anomalously high-emitting facilities to enable a rapid, focused, and directed ground inspection of these facilities. The aerially guided approach can be more cost-effective than current practices, especially when implementing the aircraft deployment improvements discussed here.