IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v627y2024i8003d10.1038_s41586-024-07117-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

US oil and gas system emissions from nearly one million aerial site measurements

Author

Listed:
  • Evan D. Sherwin

    (Stanford University
    Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory)

  • Jeffrey S. Rutherford

    (Stanford University
    Highwood Emissions Management)

  • Zhan Zhang

    (Stanford University)

  • Yuanlei Chen

    (Stanford University)

  • Erin B. Wetherley

    (Kairos Aerospace)

  • Petr V. Yakovlev

    (Kairos Aerospace)

  • Elena S. F. Berman

    (Kairos Aerospace)

  • Brian B. Jones

    (Kairos Aerospace)

  • Daniel H. Cusworth

    (Carbon Mapper)

  • Andrew K. Thorpe

    (California Institute of Technology)

  • Alana K. Ayasse

    (Carbon Mapper)

  • Riley M. Duren

    (Carbon Mapper
    California Institute of Technology
    University of Arizona)

  • Adam R. Brandt

    (Stanford University)

Abstract

As airborne methane surveys of oil and gas systems continue to discover large emissions that are missing from official estimates1–4, the true scope of methane emissions from energy production has yet to be quantified. We integrate approximately one million aerial site measurements into regional emissions inventories for six regions in the USA, comprising 52% of onshore oil and 29% of gas production over 15 aerial campaigns. We construct complete emissions distributions for each, employing empirically grounded simulations to estimate small emissions. Total estimated emissions range from 0.75% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65%, 0.84%) of covered natural gas production in a high-productivity, gas-rich region to 9.63% (95% CI 9.04%, 10.39%) in a rapidly expanding, oil-focused region. The six-region weighted average is 2.95% (95% CI 2.79%, 3.14%), or roughly three times the national government inventory estimate5. Only 0.05–1.66% of well sites contribute the majority (50–79%) of well site emissions in 11 out of 15 surveys. Ancillary midstream facilities, including pipelines, contribute 18–57% of estimated regional emissions, similarly concentrated in a small number of point sources. Together, the emissions quantified here represent an annual loss of roughly US$1 billion in commercial gas value and a US$9.3 billion annual social cost6. Repeated, comprehensive, regional remote-sensing surveys offer a path to detect these low-frequency, high-consequence emissions for rapid mitigation, incorporation into official emissions inventories and a clear-eyed assessment of the most effective emission-finding technologies for a given region.

Suggested Citation

  • Evan D. Sherwin & Jeffrey S. Rutherford & Zhan Zhang & Yuanlei Chen & Erin B. Wetherley & Petr V. Yakovlev & Elena S. F. Berman & Brian B. Jones & Daniel H. Cusworth & Andrew K. Thorpe & Alana K. Ayas, 2024. "US oil and gas system emissions from nearly one million aerial site measurements," Nature, Nature, vol. 627(8003), pages 328-334, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:627:y:2024:i:8003:d:10.1038_s41586-024-07117-5
    DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-07117-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07117-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41586-024-07117-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Robin Taylor & William Bodel & Anthony Banford & Gregg Butler & Francis Livens, 2024. "Sustainability of Nuclear Energy—A Critical Review from a UK Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-50, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:627:y:2024:i:8003:d:10.1038_s41586-024-07117-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.