Aerially guided leak detection and repair: A pilot field study for evaluating the potential of methane emission detection and cost-effectiveness
Creators: name: Schwietzke, Stefan
name: Harrison, Matthew
name: Lauderdale, Terri
name: Branson, Ken
name: Conley, Stephen
name: Fiji C. George
name: Jordan, Doug
name: Jersey, Gilbert R.
name: Changyong Zhang
name: Mairs, Heide L.
name: Pétron, Gabrielle
name: Schnell, Russell C.
Publisher: name: Taylor & Francis
Year: 2018
Subjects: subject: Biophysics
subject: Pharmacology
subject: 59999 Environmental Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Earth and related environmental sciences
subject: FOS: Earth and related environmental sciences
subject: 39999 Chemical Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: FOS: Chemical sciences
subject: FOS: Chemical sciences

description: Novel aerial methane (CH<sub>4</sub>) detection technologies were used in this study to identify anomalously high-emitting oil and gas (O&amp;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&amp;G facilities under voluntary or regulatory LDAR programs to identify and mitigate anomalously large CH<sub>4</sub> 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 CH<sub>4</sub> detection volumes and cost-effectiveness of aerially guided and purely ground-based LDAR techniques. Two aerial methods, the Kairos Aerospace infrared CH<sub>4</sub> column imaging and the Scientific Aviation in situ aircraft CH<sub>4</sub> 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) CH<sub>4</sub> minimum dectectable limit of aerial technologies, (ii) emission rate size distributions of sources, (iii) remote distinction of fixable versus nonfixable CH<sub>4</sub> sources (“leaks” vs. CH<sub>4</sub> emissions occurring by design), and (iv) the fraction of fixable sources to total CH<sub>4</sub> emissions. Suggestions for future study design are provided. <i>Implications</i>: 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.