Emerging methane technologies promise rapid and cost-effective methods to measure and monitor methane emissions. Here, we present results from the Alberta Methane Field Challengethe first large-scale, concurrent field trial of eleven alternative methane emissions detection and quantification technologies at operating oil and gas sites. We evaluate new technologies by comparing their performance with conventional optical gas imaging survey. Overall, technologies are effective at detecting methane emissions, with 8 out of 11 technologies achieving an effectiveness of approximately 80%. Importantly, results highlight the key differences in technology performance between those observed at controlled release tests versus those in field conditions. Intermittent emissions from tanks substantially affects detection and site-level quantification estimates and should be independently monitored while assessing technology performance. In this study, all technologies improved their effectiveness in detecting tank emissions when intermittency was considered. Truck-and plane-based systems have clear advantages in survey speed over other technologies, but their use as effective screening technologies to identify high-emitting sites rests on their quantification effectiveness. Drone-based technologies demonstrated higher effectiveness than other technologies in identifying quantification rank compared to baseline OGI-based survey. Overall, quantification under in-field conditions is affected by several exogenous factors such as temporal variation in emissions and changing environmental conditions. We recommend that assessment studies of new methane detection technologies at oil and gas facilities include comprehensive, continuous, and redundant emissions measurement.Recently, several new methane emissions detection technologies that promise faster and more cost-effective leak detection than existing approaches have been developed [19]. These technologies include continuous monitoring systems, mobile sensors mounted on drones, trucks, and planes, handheld sensors, and satellite systems [20]. Most of these technologies are not currently approved for use in regulatory LDAR programs. To enable widespread deployment, the efficacy of new technologies must be validated through rigorous testing, modeling, and field trials. Recent studies in the US have evaluated a variety of mobile methane detection technologies under controlled conditions [21]-[23]. The Stanford/EDF Mobile Monitoring Challenge, for example, evaluated ten truck-, drone-, and plane-based systems for their effectiveness in detecting and quantifying methane emissions at controlled release test facilities [21]. The US Department of Energy's MONITOR program funded the development of several new methane sensors that were tested under controlled conditions [24]. While these studies provided data on technology parameters such as probability of detection and false positive rates, they are not representative of typical O&G operations. Thus, systematic field trials at producing O&G...

The importance of reducing methane emissions from oil and gas operations as a near-term climate action is widely recognized. Most jurisdictions around the globe using leak detection and repair (LDAR) programs to find and fix methane leaks. In this work, we empirically evaluate the efficacy of LDAR programs using a large-scale, bottom-up, randomized controlled field experiment across ~200 oil and gas sites in Canada. We find that tanks are the single largest source of emissions, contributing to nearly 60% of total emissions. The average number of leaks at treatment sites that underwent repair reduced by ~50% compared to control sites. Although control sites did not see a reduction in the number of leaks, emissions reduced by approximately 36% suggesting potential impact of routine maintenance activities to find and fix large leaks. By tracking tags on leaking equipment over time, we find a high degree of persistence – leaks that are repaired remain fixed in follow-up surveys, while non-repaired leaks remain emitting. We did not observe any significant growth in emission rate for non-repaired leaks, suggesting that any increase in observed leak emissions following LDAR surveys are likely from new leaks. Vent emissions reduced by 38% without a significant reduction in the average number of vents across control and treatment sites, showing the importance of both anomalous vents and temporal variations in vent emissions. Our results show that a focus on equipment and sites that are prone to high emissions such as tanks and oil sites are key to cost-effective mitigation.

The Strategic Advisory Panel on Selenium Management is a broadly-based group of experts who have achieved success via independent, transparent stakeholder engagement with full collaboration across diverse disciplines. The Panel was formed in January 2010 to assist Teck Coal and its stakeholders in finding a sustainable approach to the management of selenium released from Teck"s metallurgical coal mines in southeastern BC and northwestern Alberta. The Panel"s Charter stipulated that the Panel would operate independently and would release a strategic plan for the management of selenium within six months. While part of the Panel"s work was highly technical, an equally important activity was active engagement with stakeholders. Selenium is a controversial topic with significant technical uncertainties, and often with strongly held views by potentially affected people (concerning their health or effects on ecosystem services). Past attempts to deal with these uncertainties had not succeeded in producing an acceptable plan for managing selenium loadings to the watershed, which were steadily increasing. Trust among stakeholders was low. The Panel used one-on-one meetings, workshops, site visits, and community meetings to reach out to Teck personnel, regulators, First Nations, NGOs, elected officials, and representatives of key stakeholder groups such as fly fishers. The Panel"s engagement activities, combined with the release of the strategic plan report without prior review by stakeholders (including Teck) produced a substantial increase in trust and engagement. The rapid acceptance of the report by the CEO of Teck Coal added to that trust. The involvement of stakeholders has continued into the implementation phase, which includes management of selenium at legacy waste dumps, incorporation of new operating procedures at active mines, inclusion of alternative mine and waste management practices for proposed expansions and new mines, and Teck"s continued engagement with a community-based watershed-health advocacy group. The continued engagement of stakeholders is an integral part of Teck"s commitment to sustainable mining. The Panel"s experience shows that independent advisory panels can be an effective catalyst for trust-building, especially if their activities truly are governed by sustainability principles.

Strategies for remediation of drilling mud wastes at a typical deep sour gas well site in the foothills of Alberta were assessed in terms of financial and social costs and benefits, in alignment with established sustainable remediation and decision analysis principles. Managers of contaminated sites containing historical drilling wastes are challenged with managing liability through several regulatory changes over time. Excavation and disposal of the contaminated soil from the site was the only means of securing regulatory release, with the nearest landfill located 150 km away. A perception exists that in many cases excavation and disposal inflicts unnecessary levels of site intrusiveness and public disturbance when other options achieving a similar risk end point may do so for lower social cost. The study tested this hypothesis to ascertain whether the currently accepted solution is the best option when the wider costs and benefits to society and the environment are included. Eight remedial strategies were assessed using cost–benefit analysis, including using environmental economics techniques to quantify social and environmental impacts. The economic model showed that methods such as capping in‐place or engineered encapsulation were superior to full excavation and disposal from financial and sustainability perspectives. Quantified external costs and benefits such as road damage, greenhouse gas emissions, public nuisance and safety, and community amenity value were influential in identifying superior options. It was demonstrated that $0.2 million of societal costs could be avoided by choosing capping over landfill disposal. This represents substantial implications when viewed in the context of this and other operators’ portfolios of hundreds of abandoned wells in the area. ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

No abstract