Abstract
Satellites are a powerful tool in monitoring methane emissions around the world. In the last 5 years, many new systems have been both announced and deployed, each with different capabilities, and designed for a specific purpose. With an increase in options also comes confusion as to how these systems can and should be used. This paper will examine how these systems complement each other’s strengths and weaknesses to provide actionable insight to the oil and gas industry. The performance parameters of several current and future satellite systems will be presented and compared, supported with recent examples when available. The importance of factors like frequency of revisit, detection threshold, precision, and spatial resolution will be discussed and contrasted with the needs of the oil and gas industry in gaining a more complete understanding of its methane emissions, in providing key information to stakeholders, and in enabling action to mitigate emissions. Results from GHGSat’s second generation of high-resolution satellites displaying measurements of methane plumes at oil and gas facilities around the world will be presented to demonstrate some of the advantages of the technology. These two satellites, GHGSat-C1 and C2 (Iris and Hugo), were launched in September 2020 and January 2021, respectively. Another eight satellites are planned to be launched by mid-2023. Finally, the ability of these systems to work together and complement each other’s capabilities, and some of the analytics tools used to augment the data, will be presented.
Reference8 articles.
1. Hamburg S (2020) How Can aerial measurements aid methane emissions reductions – methane emissions from global oil and gas infrastructure – what we know, MethaneSAT. EUI – Florence School of Regulations. June 24. Available at [Accessed 15 July 2021]
2. Four Corners: the largest US methane anomaly viewed from space.;Geophysical Research Letters,2014
3. Myhre G, Shindell D, Bréon F-M, Collins W, Fuglestvedt J, Huang J, Koch D, Lamarque J-F, Lee D, Mendoza B (2013) Anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing. In ‘Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment’. (Eds TF Stocker, D Qin, GK Plattner, M Tignor, SK Allen, J Boschung, A Nauels, Y Xia, V Bex, PM Midgley) pp. 659–740. (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USA)
4. Comparative analysis of low-Earth orbit (TROPOMI) and geostationary (GeoCARB, GEO-CAPE) satellite instruments for constraining methane emissions on fine regional scales: application to the Southeast US.;Atmospheric Measurement Technique,2018
5. Spinant D, McPhie T (2021) Launch by United States, the European Union, and Partners of the Global Methane Pledge to Keep 1.5C Within Reach. 2 November 2021. Available at [Accessed 18 March 2022]