2014
Assessment of Methane Emissions from Oil and Gas Production Pads using Mobile Measurements
Abstract: A new mobile methane emissions inspection approach, Other Test Method (OTM) 33A, was used to quantify short-term emission rates from 210 oil and gas production pads during eight two-week field studies in Texas, Colorado, and Wyoming from 2010 to 2013. Emission rates were log-normally distributed with geometric means and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 0.33 (0.23, 0.48), 0.14 (0.11, 0.19), and 0.59 (0.47, 0.74) g/s in the Barnett, Denver-Julesburg, and Pinedale basins, respectively. This study focused on site…
Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Select...
194
51
13
8
Citation Types
14
232
0
0
Year Published
2015
2026
Publication Types
Select...
174
32
26
4
Relationship
11
225
Authors
Journals
Cited by 234 publications
(246 citation statements)
References 10 publications
14
232
0
0
“…Other important emissions were from pneumatic controllers (Table S6) and leaks from onsite NG production and emissions capture/control equipment (e.g., gas production units, enclosed burner, and vapor recovery units). These results are consistent with CH 4 emission sources observed in recent studies of the NG production and gathering and processing sectors. ,,, …”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Other important emissions were from pneumatic controllers (Table S6) and leaks from onsite NG production and emissions capture/control equipment (e.g., gas production units, enclosed burner, and vapor recovery units). These results are consistent with CH 4 emission sources observed in recent studies of the NG production and gathering and processing sectors. ,,, …”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Additionally, an inverse relationship between production-normalized CH 4 emissions and total NG production was observed ( r 2 adj = 0.77), but with large scatter within each production category (Figure B). These relationships between CH 4 emissions and production (or NG throughput) have also been reported in recent studies. , …”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 82%
“…The higher GHGRP emission factor could be due to either reporting facility wells having higher emissions than the regional average or an overestimation of reported emissions caused by GHGRP methods. Our well pad emission factor (0.87 kg h –1 ) is between the geometric means of Midcontinent region (0.54 kg h –1 ) and Barnett well pads (1.19 kg h –1 ) from two recent studies, , supporting the consistency of our estimates.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…We found weak linear-correlations between well pad emission rates based on dispersion model inversions and gas production (Figure ). This relationship is statistically significant ( p = 0.05) with a correlation coefficient R equal to 0.57, suggesting that the more gas a well produces, the more CH 4 it releases, which is consistent with a previous study . The total gas production in the Barnett Shale area was reported to be 5,343 million cubic feet per day (mmcf/day) in 2013 ().…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 86%
