Joseph R. Roscioli

Measurements of Methane Emissions from Natural Gas Gathering Facilities and Processing Plants: Measurement Results

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.

Methane Emissions from Natural Gas Compressor Stations in the Transmission and Storage Sector: Measurements and Comparisons with the EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program Protocol

Equipment- and site-level methane emissions from 45 compressor stations in the transmission and storage (T&S) sector of the US natural gas system were measured, including 25 sites required to report under the EPA greenhouse gas reporting program (GHGRP). Direct measurements of fugitive and vented sources were combined with AP-42-based exhaust emission factors (for operating reciprocating engines and turbines) to produce a study onsite estimate. Site-level methane emissions were also concurrently measured with downwind-tracer-flux techniques. At most sites, these two independent estimates agreed within experimental uncertainty. Site-level methane emissions varied from 2-880 SCFM. Compressor vents, leaky isolation valves, reciprocating engine exhaust, and equipment leaks were major sources, and substantial emissions were observed at both operating and standby compressor stations. The site-level methane emission rates were highly skewed; the highest emitting 10% of sites (including two superemitters) contributed 50% of the aggregate methane emissions, while the lowest emitting 50% of sites contributed less than 10% of the aggregate emissions. Excluding the two superemitters, study-average methane emissions from compressor housings and noncompressor sources are comparable to or lower than the corresponding effective emission factors used in the EPA greenhouse gas inventory. If the two superemitters are included in the analysis, then the average emission factors based on this study could exceed the EPA greenhouse gas inventory emission factors, which highlights the potentially important contribution of superemitters to national emissions. However, quantification of their influence requires knowledge of the magnitude and frequency of superemitters across the entire T&S sector. Only 38% of the methane emissions measured by the comprehensive onsite measurements were reportable under the new EPA GHGRP because of a combination of inaccurate emission factors for leakers and exhaust methane, and various exclusions. The bias is even larger if one accounts for the superemitters, which were not captured by the onsite measurements. The magnitude of the bias varied from site to site by site type and operating state. Therefore, while the GHGRP is a valuable new source of emissions information, care must be taken when incorporating these data into emission inventories. The value of the GHGRP can be increased by requiring more direct measurements of emissions (as opposed to using counts and emission factors), eliminating exclusions such as rod-packing vents on pressurized reciprocating compressors in standby mode under Subpart-W, and using more appropriate emission factors for exhaust methane from reciprocating engines under Subpart-C.

Demonstration of an Ethane Spectrometer for Methane Source Identification

Methane is an important greenhouse gas and tropospheric ozone precursor. Simultaneous observation of ethane with methane can help identify specific methane source types. Aerodyne Ethane-Mini spectrometers, employing recently available mid-infrared distributed feedback tunable diode lasers (DFB-TDL), provide 1 s ethane measurements with sub-ppb precision. In this work, an Ethane-Mini spectrometer has been integrated into two mobile sampling platforms, a ground vehicle and a small airplane, and used to measure ethane/methane enhancement ratios downwind of methane sources. Methane emissions with precisely known sources are shown to have ethane/methane enhancement ratios that differ greatly depending on the source type. Large differences between biogenic and thermogenic sources are observed. Variation within thermogenic sources are detected and tabulated. Methane emitters are classified by their expected ethane content. Categories include the following: biogenic (<0.2%), dry gas (1-6%), wet gas (>6%), pipeline grade natural gas (<15%), and processed natural gas liquids (>30%). Regional scale observations in the Dallas/Fort Worth area of Texas show two distinct ethane/methane enhancement ratios bridged by a transitional region. These results demonstrate the usefulness of continuous and fast ethane measurements in experimental studies of methane emissions, particularly in the oil and natural gas sector.

Methane Emissions from United States Natural Gas Gathering and Processing

New facility-level methane (CH4) emissions measurements obtained from 114 natural gas gathering facilities and 16 processing plants in 13 U.S. states were combined with facility counts obtained from state and national databases in a Monte Carlo simulation to estimate CH4 emissions from U.S. natural gas gathering and processing operations. Total annual CH4 emissions of 2421 (+245/-237) Gg were estimated for all U.S. gathering and processing operations, which represents a CH4 loss rate of 0.47% (±0.05%) when normalized by 2012 CH4 production. Over 90% of those emissions were attributed to normal operation of gathering facilities (1697 +189/-185 Gg) and processing plants (506 +55/-52 Gg), with the balance attributed to gathering pipelines and processing plant routine maintenance and upsets. The median CH4 emissions estimate for processing plants is a factor of 1.7 lower than the 2012 EPA Greenhouse Gas Inventory (GHGI) estimate, with the difference due largely to fewer reciprocating compressors, and a factor of 3.0 higher than that reported under the EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. Since gathering operations are currently embedded within the production segment of the EPA GHGI, direct comparison to our results is complicated. However, the study results suggest that CH4 emissions from gathering are substantially higher than the current EPA GHGI estimate and are equivalent to 30% of the total net CH4 emissions in the natural gas systems GHGI. Because CH4 emissions from most gathering facilities are not reported under the current rule and not all source categories are reported for processing plants, the total CH4 emissions from gathering and processing reported under the EPA GHGRP (180 Gg) represents only 14% of that tabulated in the EPA GHGI and 7% of that predicted from this study.

Direct and Indirect Measurements and Modeling of Methane Emissions in Indianapolis, Indiana

This paper describes process-based estimation of CH4 emissions from sources in Indianapolis, IN and compares these with atmospheric inferences of whole city emissions. Emissions from the natural gas distribution system were estimated from measurements at metering and regulating stations and from pipeline leaks. Tracer methods and inverse plume modeling were used to estimate emissions from the major landfill and wastewater treatment plant. These direct source measurements informed the compilation of a methane emission inventory for the city equal to 29 Gg/yr (5% to 95% confidence limits, 15 to 54 Gg/yr). Emission estimates for the whole city based on an aircraft mass balance method and from inverse modeling of CH4 tower observations were 41 ± 12 Gg/yr and 81 ± 11 Gg/yr, respectively. Footprint modeling using 11 days of ethane/methane tower data indicated that landfills, wastewater treatment, wetlands, and other biological sources contribute 48% while natural gas usage and other fossil fuel sources contribute 52% of the city total. With the biogenic CH4 emissions omitted, the top-down estimates are 3.5-6.9 times the nonbiogenic city inventory. Mobile mapping of CH4 concentrations showed low level enhancement of CH4 throughout the city reflecting diffuse natural gas leakage and downstream usage as possible sources for the missing residual in the inventory.

Air Pollutant Mapping with a Mobile Laboratory During the BEE-TEX Field Study

The Aerodyne Mobile Laboratory was deployed to the Houston Ship Channel and surrounding areas during the Benzene and Other Toxics Exposure field study in February 2015. We evaluated atmospheric concentrations of volatile organic hydrocarbons and other hazardous air pollutants of importance to human health, including benzene, 1,3-butadiene, toluene, xylenes, ethylbenzenes, styrene, and NO2. Ambient concentration measurements were focused on the neighborhoods of Manchester, Harrisburg, and Galena Park. The most likely measured concentration of 1,3-butadiene in the Manchester neighborhood (0.17 ppb) exceeds the Environmental Protection Agencys E-5 lifetime cancer risk level of 0.14 ppb. In all the three neighborhoods, the measured benzene concentration falls below or within the E-5 lifetime cancer risk levels of 0.4–1.4 ppb for benzene. Pollution maps as a function of wind direction show the impact of nearby sources.

Characterization of methane emissions from five cold heavy oil production with sands (CHOPS) facilities

ABSTRACT Cold heavy oil production with sands (CHOPS) is a common oil extraction method in the Canadian provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan that can result in significant methane emissions due to annular venting. Little is known about the magnitude of these emissions, nor their contributions to the regional methane budget. Here the authors present the results of field measurements of methane emissions from CHOPS wells and compare them with self-reported venting rates. The tracer ratio method was used not only to analyze total site emissions but at one site it was also used to locate primary emission sources and quantify their contributions to the facility-wide emission rate, revealing the annular vent to be a dominant source. Emissions measured from five different CHOPS sites in Alberta showed large discrepancies between the measured and reported rates, with emissions being mainly underreported. These methane emission rates are placed in the context of current reporting procedures and the role that gas-oil ratio (GOR) measurements play in vented volume estimates. In addition to methane, emissions of higher hydrocarbons were also measured; a chemical “fingerprint” associated with CHOPS wells in this region reveals very low emission ratios of ethane, propane, and aromatics versus methane. The results of this study may inform future studies of CHOPS sites and aid in developing policy to mitigate regional methane emissions. Implications: Methane measurements from cold heavy oil production with sand (CHOPS) sites identify annular venting to be a potentially major source of emissions at these facilities. The measured emission rates are generally larger than reported by operators, with uncertainty in the gas-oil ratio (GOR) possibly playing a large role in this discrepancy. These results have potential policy implications for reducing methane emissions in Alberta in order to achieve the Canadian government’s goal of reducing methane emissions by 40–45% below 2012 levels within 8 yr.

Black Carbon, Organic Carbon, and Co-Pollutants Emissions and Energy Efficiency from Artisanal Brick Production in Mexico

In many parts of the developing world and economies in transition, small-scale traditional brick kilns are a notorious source of urban air pollution. Many are both energy inefficient and burn highly polluting fuels that emit significant levels of black carbon (BC), organic carbon (OC) and other atmospheric pollutants into local communities, resulting in severe health and environmental impacts. However, only a very limited number of studies are available on the emission characteristics of brick kilns; thus, there is a need to characterize their gaseous and particulate matter (PM) emission factors to better assess their overall contribution to emissions inventories and to quantify their ecological, human health, and climate impacts. In this study, the fuel-, energy, and brick-based emissions factors and time-based emission ratios of BC, OC, inorganic PM components, CO, SO2, CH4, NOx , and selected volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from three artisanal brick kilns with different designs in Mexico were quantified using the tracer ratio sampling technique. Simultaneous measurements of PM components, CO, and CO2 were also obtained using a sampling probe technique. Additional measurements included the internal temperature of the brick kilns, mechanical resistance of bricks produced, and characteristics of fuels employed. Average fuel-based BC emission factors ranged from 0.15 to 0.58 g (kg fuel)−1, whereas BC/OC mass ratios ranged from 0.9 to 5.2, depending on the kiln type. The results show that both techniques capture similar temporal profiles of the brick kiln emissions and produce comparable emission factors. A more integrated inter-comparison of the brick kilns’ performances was obtained by simultaneously assessing emissions factors, energy efficiency, fuel consumption, and the quality of the bricks produced.

Correction to Measurements of Methane Emissions from Natural Gas Gathering Facilities and Processing Plants: Measurement Results.

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. ■ INTRODUCTION Methane is the primary component of natural gas; it is also a potent greenhouse gas (GHG). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that the natural gas system contributes 23% of U.S. anthropogenic methane emissions. However, there are discrepancies between recent studies and EPA GHG inventories in some natural gas producing areas. The EPA GHG inventories largely rely on data collected in the early 1990s and may not reflect recent changes in technology, operations, and regulation. New measurements are needed to characterize methane emissions from the natural gas system. This study investigates the methane emissions from natural gas gathering and processing (G&P) facilities, which, collectively, gather natural gas from production wells, remove impurities, and deliver it to interand intrastate pipeline networks. We define gathering and processing as the equipment and pipeline network between the sales points at well pads and downstream delivery points. This includes gathering pipelines, and the equipment at gathering facilities: compressors (driven by electric motors (“motors”) and/or natural gas-fired internal combustion engines (“engines”) or turbines), dehydration systems to remove water, and treatment systems to remove hydrogen sulfide and/or carbon dioxide. Processing plants often house this equipment on a larger scale, acting as central nodes in a system of smaller gathering facilities. Processing plants also separate natural gas liquids (NGLs) (such as ethane, propane, butane, and heavier hydrocarbons) from methane. For this study, processing plants are defined as the facilities that meet the 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart KKK definition of “natural gas processing plant” based on the presence of NGL extraction. Facilities that only fractionate NGLs were not included in this study. This paper presents facility-level measurements of methane emission rates at 130 G&P facilities (114 gathering and 16 processing). A mobile laboratory was used to perform downwind tracer flux measurements, which is an established technique to estimate the total emissions of methane (or other Received: October 28, 2014 Revised: January 23, 2015 Accepted: January 28, 2015 Published: February 10, 2015 Article