Continuous Lidar Measurements of Methane Emissions from Flowback: Differences Between Actual and Reported Emissions

Abstract Greenhouse gas emissions from oil and natural gas production activities in the United States are reported to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other regulatory bodies to understand their environmental impact and to maintain a national inventory of emissions. In this study, continuous monitoring using a Methane Lidar Camera was utilized to measure vented methane emissions from completions flowback operations at a natural gas production facility in the Marcellus basin in northern Pennsylvania. Measurements showed significant temporal variations in the emission rate. Total emissions were also estimated using conventional engineering calculations established by the EPA for reporting under the Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rule program in the US. The measured methane emissions were found to be 88% less than the estimated emissions. The overestimation from engineering calculations has direct impact on the greenhouse gas inventory and could increase the waste emissions charges incurred by the facility. This study examines assumptions made in the engineering calculations and illustrates the value of continuous monitoring to accurately report and quantify highly variable methane emissions from oil and natural gas operations.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition
Published
2025-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2118/227951-ms
Primary Topic
Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Continuous Lidar Measurements of Methane Emissions from Flowback: Differences Between Actual and Reported Emissions

Manasi Doshi, Andrew E. Pomerantz, L. M. Kotlyar, Stephen A. Dyer et al.
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition
Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
article

Continuous Lidar Measurements of Methane Emissions from Flowback: Differences Between Actual and Reported Emissions

Manasi Doshi, Andrew E. Pomerantz, L. M. Kotlyar, Stephen A. Dyer, E. G. Shelley, Florian Hollaender
article en

Abstract

Abstract Greenhouse gas emissions from oil and natural gas production activities in the United States are reported to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other regulatory bodies to understand their environmental impact and to maintain a national inventory of emissions. In this study, continuous monitoring using a Methane Lidar Camera was utilized to measure vented methane emissions from completions flowback operations at a natural gas production facility in the Marcellus basin in northern Pennsylvania. Measurements showed significant temporal variations in the emission rate. Total emissions were also estimated using conventional engineering calculations established by the EPA for reporting under the Greenhouse Gas Mandatory Reporting Rule program in the US. The measured methane emissions were found to be 88% less than the estimated emissions. The overestimation from engineering calculations has direct impact on the greenhouse gas inventory and could increase the waste emissions charges incurred by the facility. This study examines assumptions made in the engineering calculations and illustrates the value of continuous monitoring to accurately report and quantify highly variable methane emissions from oil and natural gas operations.

SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition
Openalex Percentile: Top 44%
Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.