Literature DB >> 32786569

Detection Limits of Optical Gas Imaging for Natural Gas Leak Detection in Realistic Controlled Conditions.

Daniel Zimmerle1, Timothy Vaughn1, Clay Bell1, Kristine Bennett1, Parik Deshmukh2, Eben Thoma3.   

Abstract

Optical gas imaging (OGI) is a commonly utilized leak detection method in the upstream and midstream sectors of the U.S. natural gas industry. This study characterized the detection efficacy of OGI surveyors, using their own cameras and protocols, with controlled releases in an 8-acre outdoor facility that closely resembles upstream natural gas field operations. Professional surveyors from 16 oil and gas companies and 8 regulatory agencies participated, completing 488 tests over a 10 month period. Detection rates were significantly lower than prior studies focused on camera performance. The leak size required to achieve a 90% probability-of-detection in this study is an order-of-magnitude larger than prior studies. Study results indicate that OGI survey experience significantly impacts leak detection rate: Surveyors from operators/contractors who had surveyed more than 551 sites prior to testing detected 1.7 (1.5-1.8) times more leaks than surveyors who had completed fewer surveys. Highly experienced surveyors adjust their survey speed, examine components from multiple viewpoints, and make other adjustments that improve their leak detection rate, indicating that modifications of survey protocols and targeted training could improve leak detection rates overall.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32786569      PMCID: PMC8193645          DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.0c01285

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


  12 in total

1.  Methane emissions from natural gas compressor stations in the transmission and storage sector: measurements and comparisons with the EPA greenhouse gas reporting program protocol.

Authors:  R Subramanian; Laurie L Williams; Timothy L Vaughn; Daniel Zimmerle; Joseph R Roscioli; Scott C Herndon; Tara I Yacovitch; Cody Floerchinger; Daniel S Tkacik; Austin L Mitchell; Melissa R Sullivan; Timothy R Dallmann; Allen L Robinson
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 9.028

2.  Measurements of methane emissions at natural gas production sites in the United States.

Authors:  David T Allen; Vincent M Torres; James Thomas; David W Sullivan; Matthew Harrison; Al Hendler; Scott C Herndon; Charles E Kolb; Matthew P Fraser; A Daniel Hill; Brian K Lamb; Jennifer Miskimins; Robert F Sawyer; John H Seinfeld
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Direct measurements show decreasing methane emissions from natural gas local distribution systems in the United States.

Authors:  Brian K Lamb; Steven L Edburg; Thomas W Ferrara; Touché Howard; Matthew R Harrison; Charles E Kolb; Amy Townsend-Small; Wesley Dyck; Antonio Possolo; James R Whetstone
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 9.028

4.  Are Optical Gas Imaging Technologies Effective For Methane Leak Detection?

Authors:  Arvind P Ravikumar; Jingfan Wang; Adam R Brandt
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2016-12-12       Impact factor: 9.028

5.  Detection limits of optical gas imagers as a function of temperature differential and distance.

Authors:  Yousheng Zeng; Jon Morris
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 2.235

6.  Methane Emissions from Gathering Compressor Stations in the U.S.

Authors:  Daniel Zimmerle; Timothy Vaughn; Ben Luck; Terri Lauderdale; Kindal Keen; Matthew Harrison; Anthony Marchese; Laurie Williams; David Allen
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 9.028

7.  Understanding oil and gas pneumatic controllers in the Denver-Julesburg basin using optical gas imaging.

Authors:  Michael Stovern; Jeramy Murray; Colin Schwartz; Cindy Beeler; Eben D Thoma
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2020-03-13       Impact factor: 2.235

8.  "Good versus Good Enough?" Empirical Tests of Methane Leak Detection Sensitivity of a Commercial Infrared Camera.

Authors:  Arvind P Ravikumar; Jingfan Wang; Mike McGuire; Clay S Bell; Daniel Zimmerle; Adam R Brandt
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2018-01-31       Impact factor: 9.028

9.  Methane emissions from process equipment at natural gas production sites in the United States: pneumatic controllers.

Authors:  David T Allen; Adam P Pacsi; David W Sullivan; Daniel Zavala-Araiza; Matthew Harrison; Kindal Keen; Matthew P Fraser; A Daniel Hill; Robert F Sawyer; John H Seinfeld
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 9.028

10.  Assessment of Uinta Basin Oil and Natural Gas Well Pad Pneumatic Controller Emissions.

Authors:  Eben D Thoma; Parikshit Deshmukh; Russell Logan; Michael Stovern; Chris Dresser; Halley L Brantley
Journal:  J Environ Prot (Irvine, Calif)       Date:  2017-04
View more
  1 in total

1.  Multiscale Methane Measurements at Oil and Gas Facilities Reveal Necessary Frameworks for Improved Emissions Accounting.

Authors:  Jiayang Lyra Wang; William S Daniels; Dorit M Hammerling; Matthew Harrison; Kaylyn Burmaster; Fiji C George; Arvind P Ravikumar
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2022-10-06       Impact factor: 11.357

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.