Abstract
As airborne methane surveys of oil and gas systems continue to discover large emissions that are missing from official estimates1,2,3,4, the true scope of methane emissions from energy production has yet to be quantified. We integrate approximately one million aerial site measurements into regional emissions inventories for six regions in the USA, comprising 52% of onshore oil and 29% of gas production over 15 aerial campaigns. We construct complete emissions distributions for each, employing empirically grounded simulations to estimate small emissions. Total estimated emissions range from 0.75% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65%, 0.84%) of covered natural gas production in a high-productivity, gas-rich region to 9.63% (95% CI 9.04%, 10.39%) in a rapidly expanding, oil-focused region. The six-region weighted average is 2.95% (95% CI 2.79%, 3.14%), or roughly three times the national government inventory estimate5. Only 0.05–1.66% of well sites contribute the majority (50–79%) of well site emissions in 11 out of 15 surveys. Ancillary midstream facilities, including pipelines, contribute 18–57% of estimated regional emissions, similarly concentrated in a small number of point sources. Together, the emissions quantified here represent an annual loss of roughly US$1 billion in commercial gas value and a US$9.3 billion annual social cost6. Repeated, comprehensive, regional remote-sensing surveys offer a path to detect these low-frequency, high-consequence emissions for rapid mitigation, incorporation into official emissions inventories and a clear-eyed assessment of the most effective emission-finding technologies for a given region.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Anonymized emission and source data from the Kairos Fort Worth campaign are available at Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8302419 (ref. 51), from the Kairos Permian at Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10067753 (ref. 52). The remaining Kairos Aerospace data from this study are not available for open release due to confidentiality concerns. Kairos Aerospace is committed to working with research groups studying methane emissions. Access may be granted, but must be done directly through Kairos Aerospace. Interested researchers should contact research-collaborations@kairosaerospace.com. For sensitive Kairos and Enverus microdata, the published code contains aggregated summaries sufficient to reproduce key results in the paper: regional estimates of the magnitude and breakdown of methane emissions from oil and gas activity. In addition, our code repositories include all code used to aggregate these commercially sensitive microdata. All methane data from airborne campaigns led by the Carbon Mapper/JPL team since 2016 are available at https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1727 and from refs. 1,2,42,43. Data required to reproduce maps of national and state boundaries within the USA are available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files/time-series/geo/carto-boundary-file.html and from Esri, with national boundaries for Canada and Mexico at http://www.naturalearthdata.com/downloads/, lakes and rivers from the United States Geological Survey at https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/4fb55df0e4b04cb937751e02 and ocean boundaries from the Flanders Marine Institute at https://doi.org/10.14284/542. Source data are provided with this paper.
Code availability
The data and code required to reproduce the key results of this article, as well as 100,000 random samples from each simulated emissions distribution in this study, are available at Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10064774 (ref. 53) and https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10073882 (ref. 54).
References
Duren, R. M. et al. California’s methane super-emitters. Nature 575, 180–184 (2019).
Cusworth, D. H. et al. Intermittency of large methane emitters in the Permian Basin. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 8, 567–573 (2021).
Cusworth, D. H. et al. Strong methane point sources contribute a disproportionate fraction of total emissions across multiple basins in the United States. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2202338119 (2022).
Frankenberg, C. et al. Airborne methane remote measurements reveal heavy-tail flux distribution in Four Corners region. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 9734–9739 (2016).
US Environmental Protection Agency. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2020; www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2020 (2022).
Yarmuth, J. A. Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, H.R.5376, Public Law No. 117–169, https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5376/text (2022).
Brandt, A. R. et al. Methane leaks from North American natural gas systems. Science 343, 733–735 (2014).
Conrad, B. M., Tyner, D. R., Li, H. Z., Xie, D. & Johnson, M. R. A measurement-based upstream oil and gas methane inventory for Alberta, Canada reveals higher emissions and different sources than official estimates. Commun. Earth Environ. 4, 416 (2023).
US Environmental Protection Agency. Methodology Report: Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks by State: 1990–2020; https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/methodology-report-inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-state-1990-2020 (2023).
Johnson, M. R., Conrad, B. M. & Tyner, D. R. Creating measurement-based oil and gas sector methane inventories using source-resolved aerial surveys. Commun. Earth Environ. 4, 139 (2023).
Alvarez, R. A. et al. Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain. Science 361, 186–188 (2018).
Carras, J. N. et al. in 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Ch. 4 (2006).
Irakulis-Loitxate, I. et al. Satellite-based survey of extreme methane emissions in the Permian basin. Sci. Adv. 7, eabf4507 (2021).
Chen, Y. et al. Quantifying regional methane emissions in the New Mexico Permian Basin with a comprehensive aerial survey. Environ. Sci. Technol. 56, 4317–4323 (2022).
Varon, D. J. et al. Satellite discovery of anomalously large methane point sources from oil/gas production. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 13507–13516 (2019).
Varon, D. J. et al. High-frequency monitoring of anomalous methane point sources with multispectral Sentinel-2 satellite observations. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 14, 2771–2785 (2021).
Lauvaux, T. et al. Global assessment of oil and gas methane ultra-emitters. Science 375, 557–561 (2022).
Rutherford, J. S. et al. Closing the methane gap in US oil and natural gas production emissions inventories. Nat. Commun. 12, 4715 (2021).
Kunkel, W. M. et al. Extension of methane emission rate distribution for Permian Basin oil and gas production infrastructure by aerial LiDAR. Environ. Sci. Technol. 57, 12234–12241 (2023).
Sherwin, E. D., Chen, Y., Ravikumar, A. P. & Brandt, A. R. Single-blind test of airplane-based hyperspectral methane detection via controlled releases. Elementa (Wash. D. C.) 9, 00063 (2021).
Jacob, D. J. et al. Quantifying methane emissions from the global scale down to point sources using satellite observations of atmospheric methane. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 22, 9617–9646 (2022).
Bell, C. et al. Single-blind determination of methane detection limits and quantification accuracy using aircraft-based LiDAR. Elementa (Wash. D. C.) 10, 00080 (2022).
Sherwin, E. D. et al. Single-blind validation of space-based point-source detection and quantification of onshore methane emissions. Sci. Rep. 13, 3836 (2023).
Sherwin, E. D. et al. Single-blind test of nine methane-sensing satellite systems from three continents. Atmospheric Meas. Tech. 70, 765–782 (2024).
US Environmental Protection Agency. State GHG Emissions and Removals; www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/state-ghg-emissions-and-removals (2022).
Omara, M. et al. Methane emissions from US low production oil and natural gas well sites. Nat. Commun. 13, 2085 (2022).
Brandt, A. R., Heath, G. A. & Cooley, D. Methane leaks from natural gas systems follow extreme distributions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 12512–12520 (2016).
Crippa, M. et al. Fossil CO2 and GHG emissions of all world countries: 2019 report (Publications Office of the European Union, 2019).
Masson-Delmotte, V. et al. (eds.) Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2021).
Omara, M. et al. Methane emissions from natural gas production sites in the United States: data synthesis and national estimate. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 12915–12925 (2018).
Peischl, J. et al. Quantifying atmospheric methane emissions from the Haynesville, Fayetteville, and northeastern Marcellus shale gas production regions. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 120, 2119–2139 (2015).
Pétron, G. et al. A new look at methane and nonmethane hydrocarbon emissions from oil and natural gas operations in the Colorado Denver-Julesburg Basin: hydrocarbon emissions in oil & gas basin. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 119, 6836–6852 (2014).
Barkley, Z. R. et al. Quantifying methane emissions from natural gas production in north-eastern Pennsylvania. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 17, 13941–13966 (2017).
Peischl, J. et al. Quantifying methane and ethane emissions to the atmosphere from central and western U.S. oil and natural gas production regions. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 123, 7725–7740 (2018).
Fried, A. & Dickerson, R. Interim Report on Proposal Activities and No-Cost Extension Request: Continuous Airborne Measurements and Analysis of Oil & Natural Gas Emissions During the 2021 Denver-Julesburg Basin Studies. Prepared for the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and the Colorado Air Pollution Control; https://apcd.state.co.us/aqidev/tech_doc_repository.aspx?action=open%26file=CU_UMD_2021_Final_Report.pdf (2022).
Lin, J. C. et al. Declining methane emissions and steady, high leakage rates observed over multiple years in a western US oil/gas production basin. Sci. Rep. 11, 22291 (2021).
Zhang, Y. et al. Quantifying methane emissions from the largest oil-producing basin in the United States from space. Sci. Adv. 6, eaaz5120 (2020).
Schneising, O. et al. Remote sensing of methane leakage from natural gas and petroleum systems revisited. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 20, 9169–9182 (2020).
Fox, T. A., Gao, M., Barchyn, T. E., Jamin, Y. L. & Hugenholtz, C. H. An agent-based model for estimating emissions reduction equivalence among leak detection and repair programs. J. Clean. Prod. 282, 125237 (2021).
Kemp, C. E. & Ravikumar, A. P. New technologies can cost effectively reduce oil and gas methane emissions, but policies will require careful design to establish mitigation equivalence. Environ. Sci. Technol. 55, 9140–9149 (2021).
US Environmental Protection Agency. Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review; https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/11/15/2021-24202/standards-of-performance-for-new-reconstructed-and-modified-sources-and-emissions-guidelines-for (2022).
Cusworth, D. H. Methane plumes for NASA/JPL/UArizona/ASU Sep–Nov 2019 Permian campaign. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5610307 (2021).
Cusworth, D. et al. Methane plumes from airborne surveys 2020–2021 (1.0). Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5606120 (2021).
Berman, E. S. F., Wetherley, E. B. & Jones, B. B. Kairos Aerospace Technical White Paper: Methane Detection (Version 1F); https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/HZG52 (2023).
Thorpe, A. K. et al. Mapping methane concentrations from a controlled release experiment using the next generation airborne visible/infrared imaging spectrometer (AVIRIS-NG). Remote Sens. Environ. 179, 104–115 (2016).
El Abbadi, S. et al. Comprehensive evaluation of aircraft-based methane sensing for greenhouse gas mitigation. Preprint at eartharxiv.org/repository/view/5569/ (2023).
Branson, K., Jones, B. B. & Berman, E. S. F. Kairos Aerospace Methane Emissions Quantification; https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/2UNWQ (2021).
Thorpe, A. K., Frankenberg, C. & Roberts, D. A. Retrieval techniques for airborne imaging of methane concentrations using high spatial and moderate spectral resolution: application to AVIRIS. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 7, 491–506 (2014).
Robertson, A. M. et al. New Mexico Permian Basin measured well pad methane emissions are a factor of 5–9 times higher than U.S. EPA estimates. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 13926–13934 (2020).
Wasserman, L. All of Statistics: A Concise Course in Statistical Inference (Springer Science+Business Media, 2004).
KairosAerospace/stanford_fort_worth_data_2021: v1.0. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8302419 (2023).
KairosAerospace/stanford_nm_data_2019: v1.0. Zenodo https://zenodo.org/records/10067753 (2023).
Sherwin, E. D. & Zhang, Z. Data and code for “US oil and gas system emissions from nearly one million aerial site measurements”. Zenodo https://zenodo.org/records/10064774 (2023).
JSRuthe/BU_methane_model: Release for distributions paper. Zenodo https://zenodo.org/records/10073882 (2023).
Acknowledgements
J. Kruguer of Kairos Aerospace provided data management support. T. Lauvaux, C. Giron and A. d’Aspremont provided satellite-derived data to support the analysis of power law behaviour. This work benefited from discussions with N. Boness, S. El Abbadi, B. Hmiel, E. Kort, G. Wayne, M. Omara, R. Gautam, D. Zavala-Araiza, S. Hamburg and R. Jackson. This study was funded by the Stanford Natural Gas Initiative, an industry consortium that supports independent research at Stanford University. Funding for AVIRIS–NG and GAO flight operations and/or data analysis referenced in this paper was provided by NASA’s Carbon Monitoring System and Advanced Information System Technology programmes, as well as by Carbon Mapper, RMI the Environmental Defense Fund, the California Air Resources Board, the University of Arizona and the US Climate Alliance. Funding for Colorado overflights was provided by the Mark Martinez and Joey Irwin Memorial Public Projects Fund with the support of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Portions of this research were carried out at JPL, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (no. 80NM0018D0004). GAO is managed by the Center for Global Discovery and Conservation Science at Arizona State University, and is made possible by support from private foundations, philanthropic individuals and Arizona State University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization was the responsibility of E.D.S., A.R.B., E.S.F.B. and B.B.J. Resources were handled by A.R.B., E.S.F.B. and R.M.D. E.D.S., E.S.F.B., E.B.W., P.V.Y., D.H.C., Z.Z., J.S.R. and Y.C. undertook data curation. E.D.S., J.S.R., Z.Z. and Y.C. were responsible for software. Formal analysis was carried out by E.D.S., J.S.R. and Z.Z. A.R.B. supervised the project. Funding was acquired by A.R.B., E.S.F.B. and R.M.D. Investigation was carried out by E.D.S., E.S.F.B., E.B.W., D.H.C., A.K.T. and A.K.A. E.D.S. and Z.Z. undertook visualization. E.D.S., J.S.R., E.B.W. and P.V.Y. performed methodology. E.D.S. wrote the original draft. The project was administered by E.D.S. and A.R.B. All authors wrote, reviewed and edited the article.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
E.S.F.B., P.V.Y., B.B.J. and E.B.W. are employees of Kairos Aerospace. R.M.D., D.H.C. and A.K.A. are employees of the University of Arizona and seconded to the non-profit organization Carbon Mapper. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature thanks Grant Allen and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Source data
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Sherwin, E.D., Rutherford, J.S., Zhang, Z. et al. US oil and gas system emissions from nearly one million aerial site measurements. Nature 627, 328–334 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07117-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07117-5
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
