Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Reversal of global atmospheric ethane and propane trends largely due to US oil and natural gas production

Nature Geoscience volume 9, pages 490–495 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Non-methane hydrocarbons such as ethane are important precursors to tropospheric ozone and aerosols. Using data from a global surface network and atmospheric column observations we show that the steady decline in the ethane mole fraction that began in the 1970s1,2,3 halted between 2005 and 2010 in most of the Northern Hemisphere and has since reversed. We calculate a yearly increase in ethane emissions in the Northern Hemisphere of 0.42 (±0.19) Tg yr−1 between mid-2009 and mid-2014. The largest increases in ethane and the shorter-lived propane are seen over the central and eastern USA, with a spatial distribution that suggests North American oil and natural gas development as the primary source of increasing emissions. By including other co-emitted oil and natural gas non-methane hydrocarbons, we estimate a Northern Hemisphere total non-methane hydrocarbon yearly emission increase of 1.2 (±0.8) Tg yr−1. Atmospheric chemical transport modelling suggests that these emissions could augment summertime mean surface ozone by several nanomoles per mole near oil and natural gas production regions. Methane/ethane oil and natural gas emission ratios could suggest a significant increase in associated methane emissions; however, this increase is inconsistent with observed leak rates in production regions and changes in methane’s global isotopic ratio.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Histories of atmospheric ethane.
Figure 2: Latitudinal distribution of ethane, propane, iso-butane, and n-butane.
Figure 3: Ethane and propane trends at global monitoring sites.
Figure 4: Ozone sensitivity study.

References

  1. Aydin, M. et al. Recent decreases in fossil-fuel emissions of ethane and methane derived from firn air. Nature 476, 198–201 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Worton, D. R. et al. Evidence from firn air for recent decreases in non-methane hydrocarbons and a 20th century increase in nitrogen oxides in the northern hemisphere. Atmos. Environ. 54, 592–602 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Helmig, D. et al. Reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere 1950–2010 atmospheric non-methane hydrocarbons. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 14, 1463–1483 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Nicewonger, M. R., Verhulst, K. R., Aydin, M. & Saltzman, E. S. Preindustrial atmospheric ethane levels inferred from polar ice cores: a constraint on the geologic sources of atmospheric ethane and methane. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 214–221 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Von Schneidemesser, E., Monks, P. S. & Plass-Duelmer, C. Global comparison of VOC and CO observations in urban areas. Atmos. Environ. 44, 5053–5064 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Warneke, C. et al. Multiyear trends in volatile organic compounds in Los Angeles, California: five decades of decreasing emissions. J. Geophys. Res. 117, D00V17 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Simpson, I. J. et al. Long-term decline of global atmospheric ethane concentrations and implications for methane. Nature 488, 490–494 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kramer, L. J. et al. Seasonal variability of atmospheric nitrogen oxides and non-methane hydrocarbons at the GEOSummit station, Greenland. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 12, 6827–6849 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Plass-Duelmer, C., Michl, K., Ruf, R. & Berresheim, H. C2–C8 hydrocarbon measurement and quality control procedures at the Global Atmosphere Watch Observatory Hohenpeissenberg. J. Chrom. 953, 175–197 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Read, K. A. et al. Intra-annual cycles of NMVOC in the tropical marine boundary layer and their use for interpreting seasonal variability in CO. J. Geophys. Res. 114, D21303 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Leuchner, M. et al. Can positive matrix factorization help to understand patterns of organic trace gases at the continental Global Atmosphere Watch site Hohenpeissenberg? Atmos. Chem. Phys. 15, 1221–1236 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Franco, B. et al. Retrieval of ethane from ground-based FTIR solar spectra using improved spectroscopy: recent burden increase above Jungfraujoch. J. Quant. Spec. Radiat. Trans. 160, 36–49 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pétron, G. et al. Hydrocarbon emissions characterization in the Colorado Front Range: a pilot study. J. Geophys. Res. 117, 1–19 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Helmig, D. et al. Highly elevated atmospheric levels of volatile organic compounds in the Uintah Basin, Utah. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 4707–4715 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Thompson, C. R., Hueber, J. & Helmig, D. Influence of oil and gas emissions on ambient atmospheric non-methane hydrocarbons in residential areas of Northeastern Colorado. Elementa 2, 1–16 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Swarthout, R. F. et al. Impact of marcellus shale natural gas development in southwest Pennsylvania on volatile organic compound emissions and regional air quality. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 3175–3184 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Karion, A. et al. Methane emissions estimate from airborne measurements over a western United States natural gas field. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 4393–4397 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Schnell, R. C. et al. Rapid photochemical production of ozone at high concentrations in a rural site during winter. Nature Geosci. 2, 120–122 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Oltmans, S. et al. Anatomy of wintertime ozone associated with oil and natural gas extraction activity in Wyoming and Utah. Elementa 2, 1–15 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Vinciguerra, T. et al. Regional air quality impacts of hydraulic fracturing and shale natural gas activity: evidence from ambient VOC observations. Atmos. Environ. 110, 144–150 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Schade, G. W. & Roest, G. S. Is the shale boom reversing progress in curbing ozone pollution? EOS 96, http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2015EO028279 (2015).

  22. US Greenhouse Gas Inventory (EPA, accessed 4 April, 2016); https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/index.html

  23. Kirschke, S. et al. Three decades of global methane sources and sinks. Nature Geosci. 6, 813–823 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Franco, B. et al. Evaluating ethane and methane emissions associated with the development of oil and natural gas extraction in North America. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 044010 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hausmann, P., Sussmann, R. & Smale, D. Contribution of oil and natural gas production to renewed increase of atmospheric methane (2007–2014): top-down estimate from ethane and methane column observations. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 16, 3227–3244 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Turner, A. J. et al. A large increase in US methane emissions over the past decade inferred from satellite data and surface observations. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 2218–2224 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Schaefer, H. et al. A 21st century shift from fossil-fuel to biogenic methane emissions indicated by 13CH4 . Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aad2705 (2016).

  28. Peischl, J. et al. Quantifying atmospheric methane emissions from the Haynesville, Fayetteville, and northeastern Marcellus shale gas production regions. J. Geophys. Res. 120, 2119–2139 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Karion, A. et al. Aircraft-based estimate of total methane emissions from the Barnett Shale region. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 8124–8131 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Petron, G. et al. A new look at methane and nonmethane hydrocarbon emissions from oil and natural gas operations in the Colorado Denver-Julesburg Basin. J. Geophys. Res. 119, 6836–6852 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Pollmann, J. et al. Sampling, storage, and analysis of C2–C7 non-methane hydrocarbons from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Cooperative Air Sampling Network glass flasks. J. Chromatogr. A 1188, 75–87 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Helmig, D. et al. Volatile organic compounds in the global atmosphere. Eos Trans. AGU 90, 513–514 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. World Calibration Centre for Volatile Organic Compounds (WCC-VOC) (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, accessed 14 April 2016); http://www.imk-ifu.kit.edu/wcc-voc

  34. A WMO/GAW Expert Workshop on Global Long-Term Measurements of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Report No. 171 36 (WMO, 2007).

  35. Pollmann, J., Helmig, D., Hueber, J., Tanner, D. & Tans, P. P. Evaluation of solid adsorbent materials for cryogen-free trapping—gas chromatographic analysis of atmospheric C2–C6 non-methane hydrocarbons. J. Chromatogr. A 1134, 1–15 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Global Atmospheric VOC Monitoring Program (Atmospheric Research Laboratory, Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado, accessed 31 March 2016); http://instaar.colorado.edu/arl/Global_VOC.html

  37. Helmig, D., Stephens, C. R., Caramore, J. & Hueber, J. Seasonal behavior of non-methane hydrocarbons in the firn air at Summit, Greenland. Atmos. Environ. 85, 234–246 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Miller, B. R. et al. Medusa: a sample preconcentration and GC/MS detector system for in situ measurements of atmospheric trace halocarbons, hydrocarbons, and sulfur compounds. Anal. Chem. 80, 1536–1545 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Rhoderick, G. C. et al. International comparison of a hydrocarbon gas standard at the picomol per mol level. Anal. Chem. 86, 2580–2589 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Thoning, K. W., Tans, P. P. & Komhyr, W. D. Atmospheric carbon-dioxide at Mauna Loa observatory.2. analysis of the NOAA GMCC data, 1974–1985. J. Geophys. Res. 94, 8549–8565 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Yue, S., Pilon, P. & Cavadias, G. Power of the Mann-Kendall and Spearman’s rho tests for detecting monotonic trends in hydrological series. J. Hydrol. 259, 254–271 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Masarie, K. A. & Tans, P. P. Extension and integration of atmospheric carbon-dioxide data into a globally consistent measurement record. J. Geophys. Res. 100, 11593–11610 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. GLOBALVIEW (NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory Global Monitoring Division, accessed 4 April 2016), http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/globalview

  44. Tans, P. P., Conway, T. J. & Nakazawa, T. Latitudinal distribution of the sources and sinks of atmospheric carbon-dioxide derived from surface observations and an atmospheric transport model. J. Geophys. Res. 94, 5151–5172 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rinsland, C. P. et al. Multiyear infrared solar spectroscopic measurements of HCN, CO, C2H6, and C2H2 tropospheric columns above Lauder, New Zealand (45 °S latitude). J. Geophys. Res. 107, ACH 1-1–ACH 1-12 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Zeng, G. et al. Trends and variations in CO, C2H6, and HCN in the Southern Hemisphere point to the declining anthropogenic emissions of CO and C2H6 . Atmos. Chem. Phys. 12, 7543–7555 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Gardiner, T. et al. Trend analysis of greenhouse gases over Europe measured by a network of ground-based remote FTIR instruments. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 8, 6719–6727 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Janssens-Maenhout, G. et al. HTAP_v2: a mosaic of regional and global emission gridmaps for 2008 and 2010 to study hemispheric transport of air pollution. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 15, 12867–12909 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Guenther, A. B. et al. The Model of Emissions of Gases and Aerosols from Nature version 2.1 (MEGAN2.1): an extended and updated framework for modeling biogenic emissions. Geosci. Model Dev. 5, 1471–1492 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Wiedinmyer, C. et al. The Fire INventory from NCAR (FINN): a high resolution global model to estimate the emissions from open burning. Geosci. Model Dev. 4, 625–641 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Riahi, K., Grübler, A. & Nakicenovic, N. Scenarios of long-term socio-economic and environmental development under climate stabilization. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 74, 887–935 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Pozzer, A. et al. AOD trends during 2001–2010 from observations and model simulations. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 15, 5521–5535 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Swarthout, R. F., Russo, R. S., Zhou, Y., Hart, A. H. & Sive, B. C. Volatile organic compound distributions during the NACHTT campaign at the Boulder Atmospheric Observatory: influence of urban and natural gas sources. J. Geophys. Res. 118, 10614–10637 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Jöckel, P. et al. Development cycle 2 of the modular earth submodel system (MESSy2). Geosci. Model Dev. 3, 717–752 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Pozzer, A. et al. Observed and simulated global distribution and budget of atmospheric C2-C5 alkanes. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 10, 4403–4422 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research would not have been possible without the contributions of many dedicated researchers that maintain the sampling programmes that provided the used data. The global VOC flask analyses are a component of NOAA’s Cooperative USA- and global-scale Greenhouse Gas Reference flask sampling network, which is supported in part by NOAA Climate Program Office’s AC4 Program. We greatly appreciate the work of many colleagues who have contributed to the programme operation and data processing, in particular C. Siso, P. Lang, J. Higgs, M. Crotwell, S. Wolter, D. Neff, J. Kofler, A. Andrews, B. Miller, D. Colegrove, C. Sweeney, E. Dlugokencky, and Y. Stenzel, and many unnamed CU Boulder undergraduate students who have processed the flask network data. The in situ monitoring at Summit is funded by the USA National Science Foundation, grant PLR-AON 1108391. We thank M. Fischer and S. Biraud for the operation of the STR and SGP site, respectively. The WGC and STR sites are operated with support from the California Energy Commission’s Natural Gas programme under USA Department of Energy Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. Financial support for the measurements at JFJ is provided by the International Foundation High Altitude Research Stations JFJ and Gornergrat (HFSJG), and for the GC/MS measurements also by the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) in the Swiss National Program HALCLIM. In situ VOC measurements at Cape Verde are made with the assistance of L. Mendes, K. Read, and J. Hopkins. The University of York thanks NCAS and NERC for funding. The FTIR measurements at NIWA, Lauder, are core funded through New Zealand’s Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment. J.W.H. is supported by NASA under contract No. NNX13AH87G. The National Center for Atmospheric Research is supported by the USA National Science Foundation. The University of Liège contribution has been primarily supported by BELSPO and the F.R.S.—FNRS (Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique), both in Brussels. We thank P. Martinerie, at LGGE, Grenoble, France, for the reconstructed ethane firn air history in Fig. 1a. The global VOC monitoring is under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organization Global Atmospheric Watch (WMO-GAW) programme, which facilitates coordination between participating partners and quality control efforts. The VOC World Calibration Centre is funded by the German Umweltbundesamt. We also thank the staff of the World Data Centre for Greenhouse Gases at the Japan Meteorological Agency for the archiving and public posting of data used in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80305, USA

    Detlev Helmig, Samuel Rossabi & Jacques Hueber

  2. Earth Systems Research Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, Colorado 80305, USA

    Pieter Tans, Stephen A. Montzka, Ken Masarie & Kirk Thoning

  3. Deutscher Wetterdienst, 82383 Hohenpeissenberg, Germany

    Christian Plass-Duelmer & Anja Claude

  4. Wolfson Atmospheric Chemistry Laboratories, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK

    Lucy J. Carpenter & Shalini Punjabi

  5. National Centre for Atmospheric Science, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK

    Alastair C. Lewis

  6. Laboratory for Air Pollution and Environmental Technology, Empa, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology, 8600 Duebendorf, Switzerland

    Stefan Reimann & Martin K. Vollmer

  7. Karlsruhe Institute for Technology, Campus Alpine, 82467 Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany

    Rainer Steinbrecher

  8. National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado 80301, USA

    James W. Hannigan & Louisa K. Emmons

  9. Institute of Astrophysics and Geophysics, University of Liège, 4000 Liège, Belgium

    Emmanuel Mahieu & Bruno Franco

  10. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Lauder 9352, New Zealand

    Dan Smale

  11. Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, 55128 Mainz, Germany

    Andrea Pozzer

Authors
  1. Detlev Helmig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samuel Rossabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jacques Hueber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pieter Tans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stephen A. Montzka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ken Masarie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Kirk Thoning
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Christian Plass-Duelmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Anja Claude
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Lucy J. Carpenter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Alastair C. Lewis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Shalini Punjabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Stefan Reimann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Martin K. Vollmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Rainer Steinbrecher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. James W. Hannigan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Louisa K. Emmons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Emmanuel Mahieu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Bruno Franco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Dan Smale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Andrea Pozzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

D.H., study design, global flask network operation, Summit in situ measurements, data analyses, quality control, site comparisons, manuscript preparation. S.R., data processing, preparation of graphs, manuscript preparation. J.H., global flask network operation, analytical work, Summit in situ measurements. P.T., global flask network operation, manuscript preparation. S.A.M., propane data from the North American Tower flask programme and its quality control, manuscript preparation. K.M., NOAA network data management, NMHC global graphs shown in Fig. 2, manuscript preparation. K.T., data filtering, trend analyses, data statistics, manuscript preparation. C.P.-D., HPB NMHC monitoring, flask–in situ comparisons, manuscript preparation. A.C., HPB in situ NMHC monitoring. A.C.L., CVO NMHC in situ observations, manuscript preparation. L.J.C., CVO NMHC in situ observations, manuscript preparation. S.P., CVO NMHC in situ observations. S.R., JFJ NMHC in situ observations. M.K.V., JFJ NMHC in situ observations, manuscript preparation. R.S., VOC World Calibration Center, NMHC quality control, manuscript preparation. J.W.H., FTIR data evaluations and coordination, manuscript preparation. L.K.E., emissions modelling, ethane inventory data, manuscript preparation. E.M., JFJ FTIR data processing and analyses, manuscript preparation. B.F., JFJ FTIR data processing and analyses, manuscript preparation. D.S., Lauder FTIR observations and data processing, manuscript preparation. A.P., ethane inventory data, photochemical ozone modelling, manuscript preparation.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Detlev Helmig.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information (PDF 743 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Helmig, D., Rossabi, S., Hueber, J. et al. Reversal of global atmospheric ethane and propane trends largely due to US oil and natural gas production. Nature Geosci 9, 490–495 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2721

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2721

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing