Quantification of methane emissions from oil and natural gas - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
quantification of methane emissions from oil and natural
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Quantification of methane emissions from oil and natural gas - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Apr 27, 2023 354 likes •555 views

Quantification of methane emissions from oil and natural gas extraction regions in the Central/Western U.S. and comparison to previous studies Jeff Peischl, 1,2 Ken Aikin, 1,2 Scott Eilerman, 1,2 Jessica Gilman, 1,2 Joost de Gouw, 1,2 Scott

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Quantification of methane emissions from oil and natural gas extraction regions in the Central/Western U.S. and comparison to previous studies

Jeff Peischl,1,2 Ken Aikin,1,2 Scott Eilerman,1,2 Jessica Gilman,1,2 Joost de Gouw,1,2 Scott Herndon,3 Brian Lerner,1,2 Andy Neuman,1,2 Travis Tokarek,4 Michael Trainer,2 Carsten Warneke,1,2 and Tom Ryerson2

1CIRES, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 2NOAA ESRL Chemical Sciences Division, Boulder, CO, 3Aerodyne Research, Inc., Billerica, MA, 4University of Calgary, Calgary, AB

  • methane (CH4) is the second most important greenhouse gas after CO2
  • many studies report inventories of CH4 are lower than top-down emissions estimates
  • fast ethane (C2H6) data are key to apportioning CH4 emissions to specific sources

C2H6/CH4 atmospheric enhancement ratio

  • 1-Hz CH4 and C2H6 data from downwind

transects only

  • generally larger C2H6/CH4 atmospheric

enhancement ratios from fields with more oil production

  • C2H6 and NH3 measurements will be used to

apportion CH4 emissions to different source sectors (e.g., natural gas and livestock)

slide-2
SLIDE 2

emitted massi = v • ∫nzdz • ∫Xidy

= wind speed • PBL height • plume enhancement [White et al., Science, 1976]

CH4 emissions are determined using the mass balance technique

flux diagram:

  • assume 50% uncertainty for this

preliminary analysis – we have the measurements needed to refine uncertainties in final analysis

slide-3
SLIDE 3

wind

Dallas/

  • Ft. Worth

April 4, 2015

  • landfill CH4 emissions are apparent in

Dallas-Ft. Worth plume

  • most CH4 enhancement above natural

gas wells; but well locations alone do not always indicate likeliest CH4 sources

CH4 emissions from the Barnett shale region are not significantly different than found in a 2013 airborne study

slide-4
SLIDE 4

CH4 emissions from the Barnett shale region are not significantly different than found in a 2013 airborne study

wind

April 4, 2015

  • landfill CH4 emissions are apparent in

Dallas-Ft. Worth plume

  • most CH4 enhancement above natural

gas wells; but well locations alone do not always indicate likeliest CH4 sources

  • highest CH4 enhancement over and

downwind of highest natural gas production (normalized to black = 1)

slide-5
SLIDE 5

wind

April 4, 2015

  • landfill CH4 emissions are apparent in

Dallas-Ft. Worth plume

  • most CH4 enhancement above natural

gas wells; but well locations alone do not always indicate likeliest CH4 sources

  • highest CH4 enhancement over and

downwind of highest natural gas production (normalized to black = 1)

CH4 attribution among different sources: Karion et al. (2015) & Smith et al. (2015) attributed 71–85% of CH4 from oil & gas sources

8 flights, March & Oct. 2013 Karion et al. (2015)

CH4 emissions from the Barnett shale region are not significantly different than found in a 2013 airborne study

slide-6
SLIDE 6

April 14, 2015

  • remote location results in few sources of

CH4 immediately upwind

  • highest CH4 enhancement over and

downwind of highest natural gas production (normalized to black = 1)

3 flights, May 2014 Peischl et al. (2016)

CH4 emissions from the Bakken shale region are not significantly different than found in a 2014 airborne study

Attribution is simplified in this remote region CH4 sources dominated by oil & gas

slide-7
SLIDE 7

April 21, 2015

CH4 emissions from the Bakken shale region are not significantly different than found in a 2014 airborne study

  • remote location results in few sources of

CH4 immediately upwind

  • highest CH4 enhancement over and

downwind of highest natural gas production (normalized to black = 1)

Attribution is simplified in this remote region CH4 sources dominated by oil & gas

3 flights, May 2014 Peischl et al. (2016)

slide-8
SLIDE 8

March 29, 2015

  • in addition to oil & gas and urban CH4

sources, the Denver-Julesburg Basin has significant agricultural sources of CH4

2 flights, May 2012 Pétron et al., (2014)

CH4 attribution among different sources: Pétron et al. (2014): 66% of CH4 from oil & gas sources, 33% of CH4 from agricultural sources

FRAPPÉ/ DISCOVER-AQ field studies

  • Colo. regs. to reduce

CH4 & C2H6 emissions take effect

CH4 emissions from the Denver-Julesburg Basin region are not significantly different than found in a 2012 airborne study

slide-9
SLIDE 9

CH4 emissions from Denver-Julesburg Basin are yet to be apportioned using C2H6 and NH3 data

Collaborative effort among NOAA, NASA, NSF, Aerodyne, Princeton University, University of Colorado, Colorado State, and others to quantify and apportion CH4 in this region chemically-instrumented CSD mobile lab data chemically-instrumented P-3 aircraft data

slide-10
SLIDE 10

CH4 emissions from the Eagle Ford shale region determined for first time using aircraft in situ data

  • Eagle Ford shale is a source of both oil

and natural gas

slide-11
SLIDE 11

CH4 emissions from the Eagle Ford shale region determined for first time using aircraft in situ data

  • Eagle Ford shale is a source of both oil

and natural gas

slide-12
SLIDE 12

CH4 emissions from the Eagle Ford shale region determined for first time using aircraft in situ data

April 2, 2015

  • Eagle Ford shale is a source of both oil

and natural gas

  • total CH4 mass emission rate from Eagle Ford is

the largest of all basins studied to date

slide-13
SLIDE 13

CH4 emissions from the Eagle Ford shale region determined for first time using aircraft in situ data

April 7, 2015

  • total CH4 mass emission rate from Eagle Ford is

the largest of all basins studied to date

  • Second flight suggests lower CH4 emissions to the

east

  • Eagle Ford shale is a source of both oil

and natural gas

slide-14
SLIDE 14

CH4 emissions from the Eagle Ford shale region determined for first time using aircraft in situ data

April 7, 2015 We have now quantified emissions from approximately 60% of shale gas production in the U.S.

  • Eagle Ford shale is a source of both oil

and natural gas

slide-15
SLIDE 15

CH4 emissions from NG producing regions are on pace with latest EPA GHG inventory scaled by NG production

Uinta Haynesville Fayetteville NE Marcellus Barnett W Eagle Ford

natural gas

Uinta Haynesville Fayetteville NE Marcellus Barnett W Eagle Ford

EPA GHG inventory

(production, processing, and ½ transmission)

airborne studies 39%

Permian SW Marcellus Utica Green River Oklahoma etc.

regions that account for ~39% of U.S. natural gas production account for 44 ± 7% of 2014 EPA GHG inventory emissions

2014 2012–2015

slide-16
SLIDE 16

CH4 emissions from oil producing regions are on pace with latest EPA GHG inventory scaled by oil production

  • il

2014 2012–2015 EPA GHG inventory airborne studies 32%

DJB Bakken E Eagle Ford DJB Bakken E Eagle Ford

regions that account for ~32% of U.S. oil production account for 25 ± 7% of 2014 EPA GHG inventory emissions

Permian Gulf of Mexico Alaska California Oklahoma etc. Uinta Haynesville Fayetteville NE Marcellus Barnett W Eagle Ford

natural gas

Uinta Haynesville Fayetteville NE Marcellus Barnett W Eagle Ford

EPA GHG inventory

(production, processing, and ½ transmission)

airborne studies 39%

Permian SW Marcellus Utica Green River Oklahoma etc.

regions that account for ~39% of U.S. natural gas production account for 44 ± 7% of 2014 EPA GHG inventory emissions

2014 2012–2015

slide-17
SLIDE 17
  • il

2014 2012–2015 EPA GHG inventory airborne studies 32%

DJB Bakken E Eagle Ford DJB Bakken E Eagle Ford

regions that account for ~32% of U.S. oil production account for 25 ± 7% of 2014 EPA GHG inventory emissions natural gas

  • ther sources

(livestock, landfills, coal mining, natural gas distribution, etc.)

Permian Gulf of Mexico Alaska California Oklahoma etc.

emissions estimated from specific top-down studies still greater than latest 2014 EPA GHG inventory emissions

2008 2010 2012 2014

CH4 emissions from oil & gas producing regions don’t yet explain differences between specific top-down and EPA GHG inventory emissions estimates

Uinta Haynesville Fayetteville NE Marcellus Barnett W Eagle Ford

natural gas

Uinta Haynesville Fayetteville NE Marcellus Barnett W Eagle Ford

EPA GHG inventory

(production, processing, and ½ transmission)

airborne studies 39%

Permian SW Marcellus Utica Green River Oklahoma etc.

regions that account for ~39% of U.S. natural gas production account for 44 ± 7% of 2014 EPA GHG inventory emissions

2014 2012–2015

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Conclusions

  • analysis of SONGNEX data will

provide refined estimates of CH4 and C2H6 emissions from many different major oil and natural gas producing regions

  • final CH4 source apportionment

will use simultaneous measurements of C2H6 and NH3

  • il and natural gas producing

regions studied to date do not account for the apparent difference between specific top- down and 2014 EPA GHG inventory CH4 emissions estimates in the U.S.