scholarly journals Fugitive methane emissions from leak-prone natural gas distribution infrastructure in urban environments

2016 ◽  
Vol 213 ◽  
pp. 710-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret F. Hendrick ◽  
Robert Ackley ◽  
Bahare Sanaie-Movahed ◽  
Xiaojing Tang ◽  
Nathan G. Phillips
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hossein Maazallahi ◽  
Antonio Delre ◽  
Lena Buth ◽  
Anders Michael Fredenslund ◽  
Ina Nagler ◽  
...  

<p>On October 14, 2020 the European Commission adopted the EU methane strategy[1]. Measurement-based reporting of methane emissions will be crucial and may become legally binding. A variety of different methods are in use to quantify methane emissions from natural gas distribution networks, some attempting to quantify the pipeline leak under the ground, others attempting to quantify the emissions to the atmosphere. Comparisons between these methods are essential, as each method has its own advantages and limitations. In August and September 2020, we conducted an extensive campaign to compare three different methods, the mobile survey method, the tracer release method, and the suction techniques, to quantify emission rates of leaks from the natural gas distribution network in Hamburg, Germany. The mobile measurement technique employed two different cavity ringdown analyzers to identify and quantify methane, ethane and carbon dioxide using a moving vehicle. The tracer release technique measured methane and the tracer gas acetylene also with fast laser methods during driving or stationary deployment in a vehicle at an identified leak location. The suction method deployed soil sondes around an identified leak and measured methane in a stream of air pumped out of the soil until an equilibrium was reached.  In total, we targeted 20 locations that had been identified by mobile measurements or by the routine leak detection of the local gas utility, GasNetz Hamburg. For numerous locations we detected several emission outlets from e.g., cavities, cracks or drains and we used measurements of the ethane to methane ratio to identify possible mixture of fossil and microbial sources. We will compare the different quantification methods, including their suitability for routine application and precision and accuracy in emission quantification.</p><div><br><div> <p>[1] https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/eu_methane_strategy.pdf</p> </div> </div>


Elem Sci Anth ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cody Floerchinger ◽  
Paul B. Shepson ◽  
Kristian Hajny ◽  
Bruce C. Daube ◽  
Brian H. Stirm ◽  
...  

Using the Purdue University Airborne Laboratory for Atmospheric Research, we measured concentrations of methane and ethane emanating from seven U.S. cities (New York, NY, Philadelphia, PA, Washington, D.C./Baltimore, MD, Boston, MA, Chicago, IL, Richmond, VA, and Indianapolis, IN), in order to determine (with a median 95% CI of roughly 7%) the fraction of methane emissions attributable to natural gas (Thermogenic Methane Emission Ratio [TMER]), for both summer and winter months. New methodology is introduced to compute inflow concentrations and to accurately define the spatial domain of the sampling region, using upwind measurements coupled with Lagrangian trajectory modeling. We show discrepancies in inventory-estimated TMER from cities when the sample domain is defined using political boundaries versus urban centers encircled by the flight track and highlight this as a potential source of error common to top-down studies. We found that methane emissions of natural gas were greater than winter biogenic emissions for all cities except Richmond, where multiple landfills dominate. Biogenic emissions increased in summer, but natural gas remained important or dominant (20%–80%). National inventories should be updated to reflect the dominance of natural gas emissions for urban environments and to account for seasonal increases in biogenic methane in summer.


Energies ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xianzheng Zhou ◽  
Chuangxin Guo ◽  
Yifei Wang ◽  
Wanqi Li

Author(s):  
Morgan R. Edwards ◽  
Amanda Giang ◽  
Gregg P. Macey ◽  
Zeyneb Magavi ◽  
Dominic Nicholas ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document