## 4 Results
### Identification of Typical Methane Emission Hotspots in China and the United States
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline
**Figure** & **Mission** & **Date** & **Sector** & **Lat, Long** & **Q (t/h)** \\ \hline Figure 4a & EnMAP & 20221205 & Coal mining & 36.133, 112.565 & 12.7 \\ Figure 4b & GF5-02-AHSI & 20221018 & Coal mining & 36.145, 112.591 & 73.1 \\ Figure 4c & GF5-02-AHSI & 20220504 & Coal mining & 36.123, 113.041 & 75.1 \\ Figure 4d & EnMAP & 20230330 & Coal mining & 36.084, 113.003 & 9.4 \\ Figure 4e & GF5-02-AHSI & 20221018 & Coal mining & 36.105, 113.024 & 4.7 \\ Figure 4f & GF5-02-AHSI & 20221208 & Coal mining & 36.107, 113.072 & 18.1 \\ Figure 4g & EnMAP & 20221205 & Coal mining & 36.203, 112.522 & 22.7 \\ Figure 4h & GF5-02-AHSI & 20221208 & Unknown & 36.103, 113.032 & 2.1 \\ Figure 5a & EnMAP & 20230112 & Gas well & 32.149, \(-\)103.995 & 9.7 \\ Figure 5b & GF5-02-AHSI & 20220208 & Oil and gas & 32.604, \(-\)104.249 & 2.9 \\ Figure 5c & EnMAP & 20220902 & Oil and gas & 32.301, \(-\)104.120 & 1.7 \\ Figure 5d & EnMAP & 20230112 & Unknown & 31.659, \(-\)103.543 & 8.7 \\ Figure 5e & EnMAP & 20220902 & Oil and gas & 31.640, \(-\)104.038 & 3.2 \\ Figure 5f & GF5-02-AHSI & 20220208 & Gas well & 31.999, \(-\)104.125 & 2.6 \\ Figure 5g & EnMAP & 20230112 & Oil and gas & 31.710, \(-\)103.766 & 3.1 \\ Figure 5h & GF5-02-AHSI & 20220208 & Gas well & 32.069, \(-\)104.026 & 3.4 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Summary of the detected methane plumes in the Changzhi and Permian Basin using satellite imaging spectroscopy data. The figure code refers to the figure panel where the plume is shown; Q is the estimated emission flux rate. EPA greenhouse gas inventory updated to account for 2018 infrastructure using well-level information from Enverus DrillingInfo. Enverus DrillingInfo is a leading global platform for energy industry data and analytics [52]. Surrounding the main panel of Figure 5 are subplots illustrating individual examples of methane plumes (for detailed information on plume locations, intensities, and types of emitting facilities, please refer to Table 1). The methane point sources detected in this study represented snapshots of methane plumes with emission intensities exceeding 500 kg/h at the time of satellite overpass, exhibiting a degree of transience due to the intermittent nature of point source emissions from fossil fuel extraction activities. There was considerable variability in both emission rates and source types. For instance, plume b originated from an oil and gas facility with an emission rate of 2.9 \(\pm\) 1.8 t/h; plume c was from a facility with a lower emission rate; plume e from an oil and gas facility with an emission rate of Q = 3.2 \(\pm\) 1.7 t/h; while plume f, from a shale gas well, had an emission rate of Q = 2.6 \(\pm\) 1.5 t/h. [PERSON] et al. [36] quantified the methane point source emission rate here as 2.7 t/h using the German EnMAP hyperspectral imager. Plume d corresponded to a significant emission from an area lacking visible infrastructure elements (such as well pads and storage tanks) with Q = 8.7 \(\pm\) 2.1 t/h, which is one of the larger methane leaks identified in this region to date. Plume h was a strong emission (Q = 3.4 \(\pm\) 1.7 t/h), likely due to venting from a gas well, and plume g had an emission rate of 3.1 \(\pm\) 1.4 t/h, and was from an oil and gas facility. Lastly, plume a was an exceptional case, corresponding to an unusually high emission from a compressor station (Q = 9.7 \(\pm\) 4.6 t/h). We attributed this to a large transient release, possibly from one of the major natural gas gathering pipelines in the area. Within a few days of this event, at the same location as plume A, TROPOMI also observed a strong methane enhancement (as shown in Figure 6), but we could not ascertain what fraction of the enhancement was actually due to this particular emission. Figure 4: Methane plumes and emission rates detected in Changzhi, with the central panel showing a map of the identified methane plumes.