Pennsylvania

Energy. Environment. Economy.

Study: small fraction of Pa. wells contribute large portion of methane emissions

Researchers used the Purdue Airborne Laboratory for Atmospheric Research, a specially equipped airplane, to measure plumes of methane gas above shale gas wells in southwestern Pennsylvania.

Photo courtesy of Paul Shepson

Researchers used the Purdue Airborne Laboratory for Atmospheric Research, a specially equipped airplane, to measure plumes of methane gas above shale gas wells in southwestern Pennsylvania.

In a new study on methane emissions from natural gas development, researchers found that a significant portion of the emissions they measured came from just a small fraction of Marcellus Shale wells. Those wells were in the drilling phase and had not yet been hydraulically fractured to release natural gas.

The study, published Monday in the Proceedings of the Natural Academy of Sciences, comes as the Obama administration pursues a plan to curb methane emissions that contribute to climate change. On Tuesday, the EPA released five white papers on emissions of methane and volatile organic compounds in the oil and gas sector.

Scientists from Purdue and Cornell Universities gathered emissions data using a special research plane that flew above natural gas well sites in southwest Pennsylvania and West Virginia. They found that seven well pads, representing about 1 percent of all the wells in the research area, accounted for 4 to 30 percent of the emissions they recorded.

EnergyWire reports the study challenges the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s estimates that show emissions during the drilling phase are much lower.

More from EnergyWire:

The scientists cataloged emissions over parts of Greene, Washington and Fayette counties in Pennsylvania and Marshall and Ohio counties in West Virginia. They soon homed in on a region between Washington County and the border of West Virginia that seemed to be emitting particularly high amounts of methane.

They flew into the wind to identify the source of the plumes and quantified the rate at which gas was escaping.

The 40 wells were together emitting 34 grams of methane per second per well. That is two to three orders of magnitude higher than the amount estimated by the EPA emissions inventory for drilling.

“It is particularly noteworthy that large emissions were measured for wells in the drilling phase, in some cases 100 to 1,000 times greater than the inventory estimates,” said Purdue professor Paul Shepson, a co-author of the study.

This study is the latest attempt by scientists to understand sources of methane emissions from oil and gas development. A Stanford study published in February found federal estimates significantly undercount the amount of methane emitted in the U.S. That study also noted that a small number of “super-emitters” could be responsible for a significant amount of the leakage from natural gas systems.

Methane is a more potent, but shorter-lived greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Burning natural gas instead of coal at large power plants has helped lower energy-related carbon emissions in the U.S., but methane leaks could dampen those climate benefits.

A spokesman for the Marcellus Shale Coalition said in an e-mail that the trade group is still reviewing the study, but that the EPA’s annual greenhouse gas inventory, released on Tuesday afternoon, “reaffirms the fact that shale gas production is soaring and emissions continue to drop, especially here across the Appalachian Basin, where strong regulations are in place and operators are deeply committed to enhancing air quality through leveraging industry-leading technologies.”

Comments

  • JimBarth

    Why were no readings taken over Susquehanna and Bradford, especially Susquehanna? Methane migration and fugitive emissions have been a major problem in these counties, and the Appalachian Basin is known to be riddled with existing faults and fractures that would become activated by drilling and frac’ing. Also, the western counties are know for their “wet” gas, while Susquehanna and Bradford are “dry” gas. Is there a difference relating to emissions from the production field?

    The MSC is quoted as writing that this report “reaffirms the fact that shale gas production is soaring and emissions continue to drop, especially here across the Appalachian Basin, where strong regulations are in place and operators are deeply committed to enhancing air quality…”. This stands truth on its head. First, what study are they referring to regarding the Appalachian Basin that backs the lobbying group’s assertion of “dropping emissions”? Second, what “strong regulations” in the Appalachian Basin are they referring to that are creating this fictional drop, and how would those regulations be different than any other part of either PA, or W. VA? Third, how is production in the Appalachian basin “soaring” in the two counties I mentioned, when the rig count, and drilling, have decreased radically over the past two years? Lastly, for the group to state that “operators are deeply committed to enhancing air quality” is comparable to saying that “The Koch brothers are strong supporters of a progressive, graduated income tax with the bulk of the weight being borne by the wealthy.” I don’t think so.

    • NorthernTier

      Studies like this require interested qualified scientists, support of the organizations that employ them, and funding. Plus in this case, specialized equipment – the Purdue Airborne Laboratory. The (primary) funding was a 2011 Academic Venture Grant from Cornell’s Atkinson Center. The study was led by Paul Shepson (Purdue) and Jed Sparks (Cornell). The area to be studied was their call.

  • Julieann Wozniak

    I live in Bobtown, home of Chevron’s exploding gas well, and even before the cause was known PADEP rubber stamped more of Chevron’s nearby drilling permits. We had an air quality action day…in February. Although Hatfield, our belching coal burner, has been closed, our our quality is still deplorable. Cancer, COPD, and heart disease are still endemic, even among the non-smokers. This is unacceptable.

  • George Wythe

    Why would anyone believe these fools?

    • NorthernTier

      You don’t make clear who you mean by “these fools”. The researchers? The Marcellus Shale Coalition? Other commenters?

About StateImpact

StateImpact seeks to inform and engage local communities with broadcast and online news focused on how state government decisions affect your lives.
Learn More »

Economy
Education