3 ms·

I work for an operating company rather than a design contractor, and I'm involved in topsides. I can't quite imagine what benefit aerial/satellite detection wou

I work for an operating company rather than a design contractor, and I'm involved in topsides. I can't quite imagine what benefit aerial/satellite detection would have. Before we start up a process system, the last stage of commissioning is to pressurise with a nitrogen-helium mix and get a contractor to go round with a very sensitive helium detector to catch any tiny leaks. To put it in perspective, we have another low-tech approach where you put tape around a potential leak point, spray a soapy mixture, then count the bubbles. The pass/fail criterion is measured in bubbles per minute. Yet inside the pipe you measure the flowrate in tens or hundreds of tonnes of gas per hour. Possibly unburnt hydrocarbon in the flare could contribute to this "leakage" but flares are designed for complete combustion so I can't imagine it would make any difference in terms of GHG emissions compared to the already-considerable CO2. We already have plenty of fixed gas detectors and personal gas monitors around site that are sensitive to about 0.04% methane (I think) so I can't really picture a satellite doing anything better.

iamthemonster 6y ago
Also, as you can probably tell from my comment already, I know very little about satellite surveillance for methane leakage, only that it is not common practice for operating companies.
joe-collins 6y ago
I'd like to interrogate those ideas, if you don't mind? I'm truly curious here. Somewhat skeptical from the impression my reading has given me, but I don't mean to be hostile. The initial testing is all very well, and I have no reason to expect it's at all ineffective, but I imagine it would be more interesting to look at the consequences of wear/weathering over time. I suppose my biggest question is the mechanism by which those (fixed and personal) detectors work. I know that the aerial solutions work via lidar, and I expect satellite similarly looks for absorption in particular wavelengths. https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/at-work/test-and-measurement/catching-fugitive-methane-on-the-fly https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/at-work/test-and-measure...

iamthemonster 6y ago

Also, as you can probably tell from my comment already, I know very little about satellite surveillance for methane leakage, only that it is not common practice for operating companies.

joe-collins 6y ago

I'd like to interrogate those ideas, if you don't mind? I'm truly curious here. Somewhat skeptical from the impression my reading has given me, but I don't mean to be hostile. The initial testing is all very well, and I have no reason to expect it's at all ineffective, but I imagine it would be more interesting to look at the consequences of wear/weathering over time. I suppose my biggest question is the mechanism by which those (fixed and personal) detectors work. I know that the aerial solutions work via lidar, and I expect satellite similarly looks for absorption in particular wavelengths. https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/at-work/test-and-measurement/catching-fugitive-methane-on-the-fly https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/at-work/test-and-measure...