共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
Dana R. Caulton Paul B. Shepson Renee L. Santoro Jed P. Sparks Robert W. Howarth Anthony R. Ingraffea Maria O. L. Cambaliza Colm Sweeney Anna Karion Kenneth J. Davis Brian H. Stirm Stephen A. Montzka Ben R. Miller 《Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America》2014,111(17):6237-6242
The identification and quantification of methane emissions from natural gas production has become increasingly important owing to the increase in the natural gas component of the energy sector. An instrumented aircraft platform was used to identify large sources of methane and quantify emission rates in southwestern PA in June 2012. A large regional flux, 2.0–14 g CH4 s−1 km−2, was quantified for a ∼2,800-km2 area, which did not differ statistically from a bottom-up inventory, 2.3–4.6 g CH4 s−1 km−2. Large emissions averaging 34 g CH4/s per well were observed from seven well pads determined to be in the drilling phase, 2 to 3 orders of magnitude greater than US Environmental Protection Agency estimates for this operational phase. The emissions from these well pads, representing ∼1% of the total number of wells, account for 4–30% of the observed regional flux. More work is needed to determine all of the sources of methane emissions from natural gas production, to ascertain why these emissions occur and to evaluate their climate and atmospheric chemistry impacts.Methane is a very important component of the Earth’s atmosphere: it represents a significant component of the natural and anthropogenically forced greenhouse effect, with a global warming potential 28–34 times greater than CO2 using a 100-y horizon and even greater on shorter time scales (1, 2). It also is an important sink for the hydroxyl radical, the dominant agent that defines the atmosphere’s cleansing capacity (3), has a significant impact on tropospheric ozone, and is one of the important sources of water vapor in the stratosphere, which in turn impacts stratospheric ozone and climate (4). The recent observation that global methane concentrations have begun increasing (5), after a decade of static or decreasing emissions in the late 1990s to ∼2007, has renewed interest in pinpointing the causes of global methane trends. Recently natural gas has been explored as a potential bridge to renewable energy, owing in part to the reduction in carbon emissions produced from electricity generation by natural gas compared with coal (6–9). Advances in drilling and well stimulation techniques have allowed access to previously locked reservoirs of natural gas, such as the Marcellus shale formation in Pennsylvania, which has led to a boom in natural gas production in the last decade (10). This has led to estimations of the carbon footprint of natural gas to examine the impact of increasing our reliance on natural gas for various energy needs (11–16). An important unresolved issue is the contribution of well-to-burner tip CH4 emission to the greenhouse gas footprint of natural gas use. Given that CH4 is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, quantifying CH4 emissions has become critical in estimating the long- and short-term environmental and economic impacts of increased natural gas use. According to a recent study, if total CH4 emissions are greater than approximately 3.2% of production, the immediate net radiative forcing for natural gas use is worse than for coal when used to generate electricity (8).The first estimates for CH4 emissions from shale gas development were reported in late 2010 and are based on uncertain emission factors for various steps in obtaining the gas and getting it to market (17, 18). In the short time since these first estimates, many others have published CH4 emission estimates for unconventional gas (including tight-sand formations in addition to shales), giving a range of 0.6–7.7% of the lifetime production of a well emitted “upstream” at the well site and “midstream” during processing and 0.07–10% emitted during “downstream” transmission, storage, and distribution to consumers (reviewed in refs. 18 and 19). The highest published estimates for combined upstream and midstream methane emissions (2.3–11.7%) are based on actual top-down field-scale measurements at specific regions (20, 21). Whereas a recent shale gas study (22) based on field sites across the United States to which the authors were given access scaled actual measurements up to the national level and found lower emissions than US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates, an equally recent study (23) used atmospheric measurements of greenhouse gases across the United States to inform a model and found CH4 emissions, cumulatively and specifically from fossil fuel production activities, to be underestimated by the EPA.The current range of observed CH4 emissions from US natural gas systems (2.3–11.7%), if it were representative of the national scale, applied to the reported 2011 unassociated gas production number yields a range of CH4 emissions between 5.6 and 28.4 Tg CH4, whereas the EPA reports 6.7 Tg CH4 from natural gas systems in 2011 and only 28 Tg CH4 total anthropogenic emissions (24). Natural gas systems are currently estimated to be the top source of anthropogenic CH4 emission in the United States, followed closely by enteric fermentation, but the top-down observations suggest that natural gas may play a more substantial role than previously thought (24). Inadequate accounting of greenhouse gas emissions hampers efforts to identify and pursue effective greenhouse gas reduction policies.Although it is clear that analysis of the effect of natural gas use would benefit from better measurements of emissions from unconventional gas wells, the inaccessible and transient nature of these leaks makes them difficult to identify and quantify, particularly at a scale at which they are useful for bottom-up inventories or mitigation strategies (i.e., leak rates of individual components or activities). Previous techniques have used either bottom-up inventories of the smallest scale of contributions or top-down apportionment of observed large-scale regional enhancements over a complex area to identify the source of the enhancements (11, 17, 20–23, 25). Although the latter suggest that the leak rate may be higher than what bottom-up inventories have allocated, they give little to no information about where in the upstream production process these leaks occur, thus hampering the interpretation of these data for bottom-up inventories or mitigation purposes.Here we use an aircraft-based approach that enables sampling of methane emissions between the regional and component level scales and can identify plumes from single well pads, groups of well pads, and larger regional scales, giving more information as to the specific CH4 emission sources. We implemented three types of flights over 2 d in June 2012: investigative (I), mass-balance flux (MB), and regional flux (RF). Details of each flight are presented in Flight type Flight no. Date Start time (EDT) Duration, min Wind speed, m/s Wind direction RF 1 6/20/2012 10:00 96 3.0 276 RF 2 6/21/2012 8:55 89 3.7 270 MB 1 6/20/2012 11:55 30 3.1 236 MB 2 6/20/2012 15:15 56 3.3 239 MB 3 6/21/2012 16:00 60 5.5 252 MB 4 6/21/2012 14:05 73 4.7 226 I 1 6/20/2012 12:25 5 3.0 258 I 2 6/21/2012 15:22 6 4.7 227 I 3 6/21/2012 9:14 15 4.2 257