California’s methane super-emitters

Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas and is targeted for emissions mitigation by the US state of California and other jurisdictions worldwide1,2. Unique opportunities for mitigation are presented by point-source emitters—surface features or infrastructure components that are typically less than 10 metres in diameter and emit plumes of highly concentrated methane3. However, data on point-source emissions are sparse and typically lack sufficient spatial and temporal resolution to guide their mitigation and to accurately assess their magnitude4. Here we survey more than 272,000 infrastructure elements in California using an airborne imaging spectrometer that can rapidly map methane plumes5–7. We conduct five campaigns over several months from 2016 to 2018, spanning the oil and gas, manure-management and waste-management sectors, resulting in the detection, geolocation and quantification of emissions from 564 strong methane point sources. Our remote sensing approach enables the rapid and repeated assessment of large areas at high spatial resolution for a poorly characterized population of methane emitters that often appear intermittently and stochastically. We estimate net methane point-source emissions in California to be 0.618 teragrams per year (95 per cent confidence interval 0.523–0.725), equivalent to 34–46 per cent of the state’s methane inventory8 for 2016. Methane ‘super-emitter’ activity occurs in every sector surveyed, with 10 per cent of point sources contributing roughly 60 per cent of point-source emissions—consistent with a study of the US Four Corners region that had a different sectoral mix9. The largest methane emitters in California are a subset of landfills, which exhibit persistent anomalous activity. Methane point-source emissions in California are dominated by landfills (41 per cent), followed by dairies (26 per cent) and the oil and gas sector (26 per cent). Our data have enabled the identification of the 0.2 per cent of California’s infrastructure that is responsible for these emissions. Sharing these data with collaborating infrastructure operators has led to the mitigation of anomalous methane-emission activity10. Emission of methane from ‘point sources’—small surface features or infrastructure components—is monitored with an airborne spectrometer, identifying possible targets for mitigation efforts.

[1]  Yuk L. Yung,et al.  Monthly trends of methane emissions in Los Angeles from 2011 to 2015 inferred by CLARS-FTS observations , 2016, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.

[2]  Hartmut Boesch,et al.  Estimating global and North American methane emissions with high spatial resolution using GOSAT satellite data , 2015 .

[3]  G. Myhre,et al.  Radiative forcing of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide: A significant revision of the methane radiative forcing , 2016 .

[4]  R. Romo,et al.  Decoding stimulus features in primate somatosensory cortex during perceptual categorization , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[5]  J. Sheng,et al.  Satellite observations of atmospheric methane and their value for quantifying methane emissions , 2016 .

[6]  Anthony J. Marchese,et al.  Reconciling divergent estimates of oil and gas methane emissions , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  John R. Worden,et al.  Spatially resolving methane emissions in California: constraints from the CalNex aircraft campaign and from present (GOSAT, TES) and future (TROPOMI, geostationary) satellite observations , 2014 .

[8]  R. Weiss,et al.  Carbon dioxide and methane measurements from the Los Angeles Megacity Carbon Project – Part 1: calibration, urban enhancements, and uncertainty estimates , 2016, Atmospheric chemistry and physics.

[9]  S. Montzka,et al.  Estimating methane emissions from biological and fossil‐fuel sources in the San Francisco Bay Area , 2017 .

[10]  R. Weiss,et al.  Spatio‐temporally Resolved Methane Fluxes From the Los Angeles Megacity , 2019, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres.

[11]  S. Hamburg,et al.  Super-emitters in natural gas infrastructure are caused by abnormal process conditions , 2017, Nature Communications.

[12]  Division on Earth,et al.  Improving Characterization of Anthropogenic Methane Emissions in the United States , 2018 .

[13]  R. Green,et al.  Imaging spectrometer science measurements for Terrestrial Ecology: AVIRIS and new developments , 2011, 2011 Aerospace Conference.

[14]  E. Kort,et al.  Methane Leaks from North American Natural Gas Systems , 2014, Science.

[15]  D. Thompson,et al.  Airborne methane remote measurements reveal heavy-tail flux distribution in Four Corners region , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[16]  J. Peischl,et al.  Methane emissions from the 2015 Aliso Canyon blowout in Los Angeles, CA , 2016, Science.

[17]  Robert O. Green,et al.  Review of high fidelity imaging spectrometer design for remote sensing , 2018 .

[18]  M. Fischer,et al.  A multitower measurement network estimate of California's methane emissions , 2013 .

[19]  David R. Thompson,et al.  Space‐based remote imaging spectroscopy of the Aliso Canyon CH4 superemitter , 2016 .

[20]  R. Jackson,et al.  Aerial Interyear Comparison and Quantification of Methane Emissions Persistence in the Bakken Formation of North Dakota, USA. , 2018, Environmental science & technology.

[21]  Brian D. Bue,et al.  Airborne DOAS retrievals of methane, carbon dioxide, and water vapor concentrations at high spatial resolution: Application to AVIRIS-NG , 2017 .

[22]  V. Brovkin,et al.  The Global Methane Budget 2000–2017 , 2016, Earth System Science Data.

[23]  A. Thorpe Mapping methane concentrations from a controlled release experiment using the next generation Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRISng) , 2014 .

[24]  Ira Leifer,et al.  Methane emissions from a Californian landfill, determined from airborne remote sensing and in situ measurements , 2016 .

[25]  Dev Millstein,et al.  Spatially explicit methane emissions from petroleum production and the natural gas system in California. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[26]  J. Froines,et al.  UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY , 1995 .

[27]  H. Bovensmann,et al.  Real-time remote detection and measurement for airborne imaging spectroscopy: a case study with methane , 2015 .