Literature DB >> 25668106

Measurements of methane emissions from natural gas gathering facilities and processing plants: measurement results.

Austin L Mitchell1, Daniel S Tkacik, Joseph R Roscioli, Scott C Herndon, Tara I Yacovitch, David M Martinez, Timothy L Vaughn, Laurie L Williams, Melissa R Sullivan, Cody Floerchinger, Mark Omara, R Subramanian, Daniel Zimmerle, Anthony J Marchese, Allen L Robinson.   

Abstract

Facility-level methane emissions were measured at 114 gathering facilities and 16 processing plants in the United States natural gas system. At gathering facilities, the measured methane emission rates ranged from 0.7 to 700 kg per hour (kg/h) (0.6 to 600 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm)). Normalized emissions (as a % of total methane throughput) were less than 1% for 85 gathering facilities and 19 had normalized emissions less than 0.1%. The range of methane emissions rates for processing plants was 3 to 600 kg/h (3 to 524 scfm), corresponding to normalized methane emissions rates <1% in all cases. The distributions of methane emissions, particularly for gathering facilities, are skewed. For example, 30% of gathering facilities contribute 80% of the total emissions. Normalized emissions rates are negatively correlated with facility throughput. The variation in methane emissions also appears driven by differences between inlet and outlet pressure, as well as venting and leaking equipment. Substantial venting from liquids storage tanks was observed at 20% of gathering facilities. Emissions rates at these facilities were, on average, around four times the rates observed at similar facilities without substantial venting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25668106     DOI: 10.1021/es5052809

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Technol        ISSN: 0013-936X            Impact factor:   9.028


  7 in total

1.  Reconciling divergent estimates of oil and gas methane emissions.

Authors:  Daniel Zavala-Araiza; David R Lyon; Ramón A Alvarez; Kenneth J Davis; Robert Harriss; Scott C Herndon; Anna Karion; Eric Adam Kort; Brian K Lamb; Xin Lan; Anthony J Marchese; Stephen W Pacala; Allen L Robinson; Paul B Shepson; Colm Sweeney; Robert Talbot; Amy Townsend-Small; Tara I Yacovitch; Daniel J Zimmerle; Steven P Hamburg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Atmospheric implications of large C2-C5 alkane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas industry.

Authors:  Z A Tzompa-Sosa; B H Henderson; C A Keller; K Travis; E Mahieu; B Franco; M Estes; D Helmig; A Fried; D Richter; P Weibring; J Walega; D R Blake; J W Hannigan; I Ortega; S Conway; K Strong; E V Fischer
Journal:  J Geophys Res Atmos       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 4.261

3.  Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain.

Authors:  Ramón A Alvarez; Daniel Zavala-Araiza; David R Lyon; David T Allen; Zachary R Barkley; Adam R Brandt; Kenneth J Davis; Scott C Herndon; Daniel J Jacob; Anna Karion; Eric A Kort; Brian K Lamb; Thomas Lauvaux; Joannes D Maasakkers; Anthony J Marchese; Mark Omara; Stephen W Pacala; Jeff Peischl; Allen L Robinson; Paul B Shepson; Colm Sweeney; Amy Townsend-Small; Steven C Wofsy; Steven P Hamburg
Journal:  Science       Date:  2018-06-21       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Super-emitters in natural gas infrastructure are caused by abnormal process conditions.

Authors:  Daniel Zavala-Araiza; Ramón A Alvarez; David R Lyon; David T Allen; Anthony J Marchese; Daniel J Zimmerle; Steven P Hamburg
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2017-01-16       Impact factor: 14.919

5.  Estimating Regional Methane Emission Factors from Energy and Agricultural Sector Sources Using a Portable Measurement System: Case Study of the Denver-Julesburg Basin.

Authors:  Stuart N Riddick; Fancy Cheptonui; Kexin Yuan; Mercy Mbua; Rachel Day; Timothy L Vaughn; Aidan Duggan; Kristine E Bennett; Daniel J Zimmerle
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 3.847

6.  Temporal variability largely explains top-down/bottom-up difference in methane emission estimates from a natural gas production region.

Authors:  Timothy L Vaughn; Clay S Bell; Cody K Pickering; Stefan Schwietzke; Garvin A Heath; Gabrielle Pétron; Daniel J Zimmerle; Russell C Schnell; Dag Nummedal
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Coal seam gas industry methane emissions in the Surat Basin, Australia: comparing airborne measurements with inventories.

Authors:  Bruno G Neininger; Bryce F J Kelly; Jorg M Hacker; Xinyi Lu; Stefan Schwietzke
Journal:  Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci       Date:  2021-09-27       Impact factor: 4.226

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.