4.8 Article

Closing the methane gap in US oil and natural gas production emissions inventories

Journal

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-25017-4

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. California Air Resources Board [18ISD011]
  2. Novim under a Limited Sponsorship Agreement
  3. Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis of NREL
  4. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-AC36-08GO28308]
  5. Novim
  6. Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent studies have shown that methane emissions from oil and gas production in the United States are typically 1.5-2 times higher than official estimates, with equipment leaks being the main cause of the discrepancy. By developing a new inventory-based model, more accurate estimates of methane emissions can be made to guide mitigation policies effectively.
Methane (CH4) emissions from oil and natural gas (O&NG) systems are an important contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. In the United States, recent synthesis studies of field measurements of CH4 emissions at different spatial scales are similar to 1.5-2x greater compared to official greenhouse gas inventory (GHGI) estimates, with the production-segment as the dominant contributor to this divergence. Based on an updated synthesis of measurements from component-level field studies, we develop a new inventory-based model for CH4 emissions, for the production-segment only, that agrees within error with recent syntheses of site-level field studies and allows for isolation of equipment-level contributions. We find that unintentional emissions from liquid storage tanks and other equipment leaks are the largest contributors to divergence with the GHGI. If our proposed method were adopted in the United States and other jurisdictions, inventory estimates could better guide CH4 mitigation policy priorities.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available