Aerially guided leak detection and repair: A pilot field study for evaluating the potential of methane emission detection and cost-effectiveness
Aerially guided leak detection and repair: A pilot field study for evaluating the potential of methane emission detection and cost-effectiveness
复制标题
空中引导泄漏检测和修复：评估甲烷排放检测潜力和成本效益的试点现场研究
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
R. Schnell
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Schwietzke;Matthew Harrison;Terri Lauderdale;K. Branson;S. Conley;Fiji C George;D. Jordan;G. R. Jersey;Changyong Zhang;H. L. Mairs;G. Pétron;R. Schnell
摘要本研究采用新型空中甲烷（CH 4）检测技术来识别有害的高排放石油和天然气（O&G）设施，并指导地面“泄漏检测和修复”（LDAR）团队。这种方法有可能在自愿或监管LDAR计划下对O&G设施进行快速有效的检查，以识别和缓解不成比例的少数设施的大量CH 4排放。这是第一项研究，作者知道部署，评估和比较CH 4检测量和成本效益的空中制导和纯地面LDAR技术。两种空中方法，凯罗斯航空航天红外甲烷柱成像和科学航空原位飞机甲烷摩尔分数测量，在2周期间进行了测试，同时在费耶特维尔页岩地区与传统的地面LDAR。我们表明，空中引导LDAR可以至少是成本效益的地面LDAR，但确定了几个变量参数，强烈影响成本效益，需要现场研究和改进超出这个试点研究。这些参数包括：（一）航空技术可探测的甲烷最低限度;（二）源的排放率大小分布;（三）可固定甲烷源与不可固定甲烷源的遥远区别（“泄漏”与设计产生的甲烷排放量）;（四）可固定源占甲烷总排放量的比例。并对未来的研究设计提出建议。含义：目前，缓解现有石油和天然气作业的甲烷泄漏依赖于以规定的频率对所有适用设施进行现场检查。这种方法是劳动力和成本密集型的，特别是因为大多数与石油和天然气相关的甲烷排放来自不成比例的少数设施和组件。我们首次展示了在现实条件下，空中甲烷测量如何识别有害的高排放设施，以便对这些设施进行快速，集中和直接的地面检查。空中制导方法比目前的做法更具成本效益，特别是在实施这里讨论的飞机部署改进时。
ABSTRACT Novel aerial methane (CH4) detection technologies were used in this study to identify anomalously high-emitting oil and gas (O&G) facilities and to guide ground-based “leak detection and repair” (LDAR) teams. This approach has the potential to enable a rapid and effective inspection of O&G facilities under voluntary or regulatory LDAR programs to identify and mitigate anomalously large CH4 emissions from a disproportionately small number of facilities. This is the first study of which the authors are aware to deploy, evaluate, and compare the CH4 detection volumes and cost-effectiveness of aerially guided and purely ground-based LDAR techniques. Two aerial methods, the Kairos Aerospace infrared CH4 column imaging and the Scientific Aviation in situ aircraft CH4 mole fraction measurements, were tested during a 2-week period in the Fayetteville Shale region contemporaneously with conventional ground-based LDAR. We show that aerially guided LDAR can be at least as cost-effective as ground-based LDAR, but several variable parameters were identified that strongly affect cost-effectiveness and which require field research and improvements beyond this pilot study. These parameters include (i) CH4 minimum dectectable limit of aerial technologies, (ii) emission rate size distributions of sources, (iii) remote distinction of fixable versus nonfixable CH4 sources (“leaks” vs. CH4 emissions occurring by design), and (iv) the fraction of fixable sources to total CH4 emissions. Suggestions for future study design are provided. Implications: Mitigation of methane leaks from existing oil and gas operations currently relies on on-site inspections of all applicable facilities at a prescribed frequency. This approach is labor- and cost-intensive, especially because a majority of oil and gas–related methane emissions originate from a disproportionately small number of facilities and components. We show for the first time in real-world conditions how aerial methane measurements can identify anomalously high-emitting facilities to enable a rapid, focused, and directed ground inspection of these facilities. The aerially guided approach can be more cost-effective than current practices, especially when implementing the aircraft deployment improvements discussed here.