By EDF Blogs

By Ritesh Gautam and Steven Hamburg

Artist’s rendition of TROPOMI onboard Sentinel-5P satellite. Source: European Space Agency.

Last Friday, the European Space Agency Sentinel-5p satellite went into orbit above the earth. Onboard is an imaging spectrometer instrument called TROPOMI, led by SRON (Dutch Space Agency) and KNMI (Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute) to monitor the amount of methane, ozone and other air quality-related pollutants in the atmosphere.

There has been quite a buzz around this unique advancement in space, and the valuable data it will provide on methane, a powerful greenhouse gas that accounts for a quarter of the warming our planet is experiencing today. Curbing anthropogenic methane emissions is one of the most efficient and economical options available to slow the rate of warming over the next few decades, while efforts continue to reduce CO2 emissions worldwide.

Detecting methane from space

Methane sources include both natural and manmade emissions from livestock, agriculture, oil & gas operations, and landfills. These sources are distributed around the world and vary widely at local, regional and temporal scales—which makes it challenging to quantify emissions from diverse sources.

This is where satellites come into play. They bring together the unique capability of continuously monitoring the entire planet, measuring critical geophysical variables, and mapping change by collecting long-term datasets.

The TROPOMI satellite sensor brings significant advances in the monitoring of air pollution in terms of better resolving methane, and other major pollutants affecting air quality (e.g. NO2, SO2, formaldehyde, aerosols). For instance, data from TROPOMI will be available at 7 km x 7 km grids around the world, on a daily basis—which has never been available a this level of spatial-temporal resolution for methane or the other pollutants.

Since clouds affect the detection of methane from space, TROPOMI’s daily data coverage will be critically important to ensuring we have regular measurements of emission levels in order to build robust statistical pictures of what is happening. Combined with sophisticated techniques such as atmospheric inverse modeling, data from TROPOMI will be used to derive methane emissions occurring on the ground.

So-called “bottom-up” methods of characterizing emissions—measuring from facilities on the ground—provide valuable and detailed information about emission sources. But the bottom-up emissions inventory often has gaps. For technical, political and proprietary reasons, accurate on-the-ground data on emissions of pollutants is not available for many parts of the planet.

Yet, atmospheric inversion allows us to produce “top-down” estimates of emissions which can be done without access to a site and much less expensively. This technique accounts for complex atmospheric transport processes in determining the emission source and magnitude. The resulting emission data is key to improving emission inventories, and helping inform effective policymaking.

Relevance to monitoring oil & gas emissions

EDF is partnering with researchers from the Dutch Space Agency responsible for TROPOMI to characterize methane emission hotspots linked to the global oil & gas sector, in addition to other emissions/leaks occurring from the fossil fuel energy sector.

Using data from TROPOMI, the project aims to attribute emissions to specific sources over time, from days to months to years, as well as quantifying those emissions. This project will involve developing state-of-the-art algorithms for processing vast amounts of raw satellite data to derive value-added methane emissions data.

This multi-year project, led by Ilse Aben from SRON, also involves other partners including Airbus Defense and Space Netherlands, Shell and TNO. EDF will provide technical expertise and advisory in the spatial-temporal characteristics of methane sources from the O&G sector, and participate in the data analysis and synthesis of the results from this project.

This satellite mission is a big step forward in painting a clearer picture of worldwide methane emission sources and the associated rates of emissions.

* TROPOMI is a partnership between SRON, Airbus Defense and Space Netherlands, KNMI and TNO, as part of the European Space Agency’s Sentinel-5P satellite mission.

By Ritesh Gautam and Steven Hamburg Last Friday, the European Space Agency Sentinel-5p satellite went into orbit above the earth. Onboard is an imaging spectrometer instrument called TROPOMI, led by SRON (Dutch Space Agency) and KNMI (Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute) to monitor the amount of methane, ozone and other air quality-related pollutants in the atmosphere. […]

By Ritesh Gautam and Steven Hamburg Last Friday, the European Space Agency Sentinel-5p satellite went into orbit above the earth. Onboard is an imaging spectrometer instrument called TROPOMI, led by SRON (Dutch Space Agency) and KNMI (Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute) to monitor the amount of methane, ozone and other air quality-related pollutants in the atmosphere. […]

By Richard Denison

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.

[Use this link to see all of our posts on Dourson.]

Today a letter was submitted to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee signed by more than 50 public health scientists from dozens of universities voicing their strong opposition to the nomination of Michael Dourson to lead the EPA Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP).

The scientists' letter states, in part:

Granting Dr. Dourson the responsibility of overseeing EPA OCSPP would threaten the agency’s ability to credibly and effectively address harmful chemical exposures.  Dr. Dourson has built a career of abusing science to mischaracterize real-world chemical risks and in doing so has jeopardized public health, including the health of those most vulnerable among us like pregnant women and children.

The letter comes in advance of a vote on his nomination by the Senate Committee, currently scheduled for this Wednesday at 10am EDT.  If he is voted out of committee, a majority vote of the full Senate would then be required for his nomination to be confirmed.

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist. [Use this link to see all of our posts on Dourson.] Today a letter was submitted to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee signed by more than 50 public health scientists from dozens of universities voicing their strong opposition to the nomination of Michael Dourson to lead the EPA […]

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist. [Use this link to see all of our posts on Dourson.] Today a letter was submitted to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee signed by more than 50 public health scientists from dozens of universities voicing their strong opposition to the nomination of Michael Dourson to lead the EPA […]

Secretary of Energy Rick Perry – whose agenda as governor of Texas was squarely focused on states’ rights and free markets – is now pushing for a federal plan that could disrupt organized electric markets. Perry’s proposal to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) aims to prop up uneconomic coal at the expense of Americans’ health […]

By Michael Panfil

Secretary of Energy Rick Perry – whose agenda as governor of Texas was squarely focused on states’ rights and free markets – is now pushing for a federal plan that could disrupt organized electric markets.

Perry’s proposal to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) aims to prop up uneconomic coal at the expense of Americans’ health and wallets.

Perry’s proposal would effectively pay owners of coal and nuclear power plants their operating costs, plus a guaranteed profit, regardless of whether those plants are selling electricity at a competitive price. These aging plants are currently being driven out of the competitive market by flattened energy demand and a growing list of cheaper, cleaner, more efficient alternatives – from natural gas and renewables to demand response and grid-scale battery systems. Simply put, Perry’s proposal shields uneconomic coal power, replacing competitive markets with profit guarantees.

That’s not a thumb on the scale supporting obsolete and expensive energy; it’s an elephant.

Because carbon pollution from coal plants causes asthma attacks, heart attacks, and a staggering number of premature deaths every year, propping up this dirty energy source will not only raise electricity bills, it will hurt American families.

Rick Perry’s coal bailout attacks competitive energy markets, while customers foot the bill.
Click To Tweet

Undercutting markets, stifling innovation

Perry’s plan promises more than just a subsidy: It’s a legally guaranteed, multi-billion dollar profit margin for coal owners, paid for by millions of families and businesses nationwide.

What Perry’s proposing is a complete abandonment of the market principles we were led to believe this administration supports. In fact, just last week, Environmental Protection Agency head Scott Pruitt himself proclaimed that "regulatory power should not be used by any regulatory body to pick winners and losers."

Moreover, federal law clearly prohibits FERC from favoring energy resources for political reasons.

Federal law clearly prohibits FERC from favoring energy resources for political reasons.

The plan is also a death sentence for innovation, applying discriminatorily (in fact, only) to the competitive, regional energy markets where cost-effective wind, solar and other clean energy solutions are now flourishing. It’s no wonder virtually every stakeholder is lining up against the proposal. It’s rare to see oil and gas producers align with wind and solar developers, consumer advocates and environmental groups. But that’s exactly what’s happening.

Billions of dollars have been invested in renewables and energy efficiency, responsive and efficient natural gas, and smart energy management solutions in almost every state across the nation, based on thoughtful, rigorous stakeholders’ processes and the expectation that they will fairly compete in an open marketplace. Abandoning that premise poses a direct threat to one of the most dynamic, promising sectors of the economy.

Fake solutions for real problems

Recently, the National Academy of Sciences issued a comprehensive energy resiliency report that says nothing about rescuing inefficient, uncompetitive coal and nuclear units. Rather, it looks to the future, suggesting refinements to strengthen and improve market competition (including by strengthening alignment between wholesale gas and electric markets). The author of Perry’s own grid reliability “study” said much the same earlier this month.

Embracing the truth – rather than drawing at straws to save a dying industry – would be a boon for our health and our economy.

Perry claims his plan will improve resilience and reliability. But experience proves that new energy competitors are holding up just fine – whether it’s Texas wind generators weathering a hurricane or California’s solar system surviving a massive eclipse. When major disruptions do occur within our heavily-matrixed electricity system, power generation is almost never the problem. Instead, it’s distribution failure, as we see today with the extreme devastation in Puerto Rico.

By attempting to cook the books in favor of Trump’s broader pro-coal agenda, Perry ignores extensive research – including his own DOE study – that shows the transition to cleaner energy is making America’s electricity system more affordable, resilient, and reliable. Embracing the truth – rather than drawing at straws to save a dying industry – would be a boon for our health and our economy nationwide.

Secretary of Energy Rick Perry – whose agenda as governor of Texas was squarely focused on states’ rights and free markets – is now pushing for a federal plan that could disrupt organized electric markets. Perry’s proposal to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) aims to prop up uneconomic coal at the expense of Americans’ health […]

Secretary of Energy Rick Perry – whose agenda as governor of Texas was squarely focused on states’ rights and free markets – is now pushing for a federal plan that could disrupt organized electric markets. Perry’s proposal to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) aims to prop up uneconomic coal at the expense of Americans’ health […]

The post Rick Perry’s coal bailout is an attack on competitive energy markets, with customers footing the bill appeared first on Energy Exchange.

By Michael Panfil

Secretary of Energy Rick Perry – whose agenda as governor of Texas was squarely focused on states’ rights and free markets – is now pushing for a federal plan that could disrupt organized electric markets.

Perry’s proposal to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) aims to prop up uneconomic coal at the expense of Americans’ health and wallets.

Perry’s proposal would effectively pay owners of coal and nuclear power plants their operating costs, plus a guaranteed profit, regardless of whether those plants are selling electricity at a competitive price. These aging plants are currently being driven out of the competitive market by flattened energy demand and a growing list of cheaper, cleaner, more efficient alternatives – from natural gas and renewables to demand response and grid-scale battery systems. Simply put, Perry’s proposal shields uneconomic coal power, replacing competitive markets with profit guarantees.

That’s not a thumb on the scale supporting obsolete and expensive energy; it’s an elephant.

Because carbon pollution from coal plants causes asthma attacks, heart attacks, and a staggering number of premature deaths every year, propping up this dirty energy source will not only raise electricity bills, it will hurt American families.

Rick Perry’s coal bailout attacks competitive energy markets, while customers foot the bill.
Click To Tweet

Undercutting markets, stifling innovation

Perry’s plan promises more than just a subsidy: It’s a legally guaranteed, multi-billion dollar profit margin for coal owners, paid for by millions of families and businesses nationwide.

What Perry’s proposing is a complete abandonment of the market principles we were led to believe this administration supports. In fact, just last week, Environmental Protection Agency head Scott Pruitt himself proclaimed that "regulatory power should not be used by any regulatory body to pick winners and losers."

Moreover, federal law clearly prohibits FERC from favoring energy resources for political reasons.

Federal law clearly prohibits FERC from favoring energy resources for political reasons.

The plan is also a death sentence for innovation, applying discriminatorily (in fact, only) to the competitive, regional energy markets where cost-effective wind, solar and other clean energy solutions are now flourishing. It’s no wonder virtually every stakeholder is lining up against the proposal. It’s rare to see oil and gas producers align with wind and solar developers, consumer advocates and environmental groups. But that’s exactly what’s happening.

Billions of dollars have been invested in renewables and energy efficiency, responsive and efficient natural gas, and smart energy management solutions in almost every state across the nation, based on thoughtful, rigorous stakeholders’ processes and the expectation that they will fairly compete in an open marketplace. Abandoning that premise poses a direct threat to one of the most dynamic, promising sectors of the economy.

Fake solutions for real problems

Recently, the National Academy of Sciences issued a comprehensive energy resiliency report that says nothing about rescuing inefficient, uncompetitive coal and nuclear units. Rather, it looks to the future, suggesting refinements to strengthen and improve market competition (including by strengthening alignment between wholesale gas and electric markets). The author of Perry’s own grid reliability “study” said much the same earlier this month.

Embracing the truth – rather than drawing at straws to save a dying industry – would be a boon for our health and our economy.

Perry claims his plan will improve resilience and reliability. But experience proves that new energy competitors are holding up just fine – whether it’s Texas wind generators weathering a hurricane or California’s solar system surviving a massive eclipse. When major disruptions do occur within our heavily-matrixed electricity system, power generation is almost never the problem. Instead, it’s distribution failure, as we see today with the extreme devastation in Puerto Rico.

By attempting to cook the books in favor of Trump’s broader pro-coal agenda, Perry ignores extensive research – including his own DOE study – that shows the transition to cleaner energy is making America’s electricity system more affordable, resilient, and reliable. Embracing the truth – rather than drawing at straws to save a dying industry – would be a boon for our health and our economy nationwide.

Secretary of Energy Rick Perry – whose agenda as governor of Texas was squarely focused on states’ rights and free markets – is now pushing for a federal plan that could disrupt organized electric markets. Perry’s proposal to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) aims to prop up uneconomic coal at the expense of Americans’ health […]

Secretary of Energy Rick Perry – whose agenda as governor of Texas was squarely focused on states’ rights and free markets – is now pushing for a federal plan that could disrupt organized electric markets. Perry’s proposal to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) aims to prop up uneconomic coal at the expense of Americans’ health […]

I’ve studied coastal wetland restoration in Louisiana since the 1990s and have visited with landowners and managers who want to slow wetland loss and build new land across the coast, from Lake Sabine to Slidell. I’ve also studied coastal wetland management and restoration outside Louisiana, by reading articles and attending conferences, but until recently, I’d only visited a handful of sites. This summer, I traveled to New England to participate in the workshop “Tidal Marsh Restoration: A Traveling Course from ...

Read The Full Story

The post What New England Marshes Can Teach Us About Coastal Louisiana Restoration appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

I’ve studied coastal wetland restoration in Louisiana since the 1990s and have visited with landowners and managers who want to slow wetland loss and build new land across the coast, from Lake Sabine to Slidell. I’ve also studied coastal wetland management and restoration outside Louisiana, by reading articles and attending conferences, but until recently, I’d only visited a handful of sites. This summer, I traveled to New England to participate in the workshop “Tidal Marsh Restoration: A Traveling Course from ...

Read The Full Story

The post What New England Marshes Can Teach Us About Coastal Louisiana Restoration appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

I’ve studied coastal wetland restoration in Louisiana since the 1990s and have visited with landowners and managers who want to slow wetland loss and build new land across the coast, from Lake Sabine to Slidell. I’ve also studied coastal wetland management and restoration outside Louisiana, by reading articles and attending conferences, but until recently, I’d only visited a handful of sites. This summer, I traveled to New England to participate in the workshop “Tidal Marsh Restoration: A Traveling Course from ...

Read The Full Story

The post What New England Marshes Can Teach Us About Coastal Louisiana Restoration appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

By Drew Nelson

Alberta’s oil and gas industry is emitting at least 25 to 50 percent more methane than current estimates suggest, according to a new peer-reviewed study. Published in Environmental Science and Technology, a clear pattern of energy waste is occurring across Canada – a problem worth a minimum of $530 million dollars (CAD) of natural gas a year, or enough gas to heat nearly every home in Alberta.

Researchers indicate that the volumes of methane – the main ingredient in natural gas and a powerful climate pollutant – observed in Alberta are higher because two key emission sources, unintentional leaks and intentional venting of methane, are happening at rates much larger than the oil and gas industry reports.

This is not the first scientific study to draw this conclusion. The Carleton University research builds on previous studies underscoring the climate risks of an unabated methane gas problem, but widespread leaks and persistent venting are making the problem worse. Canada’s oil and gas industry is already the country’s largest source of methane emissions.

Aside from the energy loss and climate concerns, numerous pollutants laced with these emissions are known to degrade air quality, worsen smog and harm public health. Yet, many low-cost solutions are in hand to solve this problem.

Further, companies that opt-out of using proven emission controls are impeding new engines of economic growth. Over 170 Canadian companies, most of which are in Alberta, provide methane mitigation products and services. Eighty percent expect their market and job growth to expand as a result of federal and provincial methane rules.

Industry at a crossroads

Canada and Alberta are among many key oil and gas jurisdictions worldwide that are taking action on methane. What motivates each locale varies, but a common thread is preparation for the future.

In fact, the world’s leading energy authority, the International Energy Agency, has said the extent to which natural gas can “play a credible role” in future energy supplies “fundamentally depends on minimising these emissions.” It’s a warning some in industry are heeding.

Exxon Mobil announced this month an aggressive methane reduction plan covering its U.S. shale operations. Major oil and gas giants, including Shell Canada, are also field-testing innovative solutions to continuously monitor methane emissions, pushing the boundaries of technology that has the potential to help industry transition to a low-carbon economy.

If Alberta ignores these market signals, it risks falling behind other energy-producing regions.

The Policy Nexus

Alberta was one of the first forward-thinking jurisdictions to recognize the opportunity to drive down greenhouse gas emissions quickly and cost-effectively by tackling methane. In 2015, Premiere Notley prioritized a 45 percent cut in oil and gas methane reductions by 2025 as part of the Climate Leadership Plan.

The new data from Carleton University, however, raises serious questions over whether the government can meet its target without strong regulations in place.

In order for Alberta’s methane regulations to be effective, and for Alberta to deliver on its climate commitments, provincial leaders need to show an eagerness to meet the scale of the challenge at hand and rigorously pursue the following:

1. Require oil and gas operators to quarterly check for and fix their leaks – a best practice applied across key oil-and-gas producing U.S. states;
2. Limit intentional vented emissions;
3. Improve reporting so that inventories reflect the reality on the ground; and
4. Phase in the lowest-hanging fruit reductions immediately – saving energy that can stimulate Alberta’s economy and keep pollution out of the air today.

Seventy-one percent of Albertans want stricter methane rules. One reason: the impact methane has on intensifying the rate of today’s warming. For example, data from the Carleton paper indicates that Canada’s oil and gas methane emissions annually have a greater climate impact than all of the vehicles combined in Canada.

Fortunately, fixing the problem is both highly-feasible and cost-effective with existing technologies. And, when deployed, these solutions can significantly reduce air and climate pollution.

Alberta moving ahead on strong methane rules not only helps to ensure it delivers on its climate goals, but it helps the province prepare for the low-carbon economy. Environmental preservation and economic prosperity are not mutually exclusive. Stopping needless natural gas waste with sensible methane standards can show both Albertans and the world that conservation and competiveness, not complacency, will fuel Alberta’s energy future.

By Drew Nelson

Alberta’s oil and gas industry is emitting at least 25 to 50 percent more methane than current estimates suggest, according to a new peer-reviewed study. Published in Environmental Science and Technology, a clear pattern of energy waste is occurring across Canada – a problem worth a minimum of $530 million dollars (CAD) of natural gas a year, or enough gas to heat nearly every home in Alberta.

Researchers indicate that the volumes of methane – the main ingredient in natural gas and a powerful climate pollutant – observed in Alberta are higher because two key emission sources, unintentional leaks and intentional venting of methane, are happening at rates much larger than the oil and gas industry reports.

This is not the first scientific study to draw this conclusion. The Carleton University research builds on previous studies underscoring the climate risks of an unabated methane gas problem, but widespread leaks and persistent venting are making the problem worse. Canada’s oil and gas industry is already the country’s largest source of methane emissions.

Aside from the energy loss and climate concerns, numerous pollutants laced with these emissions are known to degrade air quality, worsen smog and harm public health. Yet, many low-cost solutions are in hand to solve this problem.

Further, companies that opt-out of using proven emission controls are impeding new engines of economic growth. Over 170 Canadian companies, most of which are in Alberta, provide methane mitigation products and services. Eighty percent expect their market and job growth to expand as a result of federal and provincial methane rules.

Industry at a crossroads

Canada and Alberta are among many key oil and gas jurisdictions worldwide that are taking action on methane. What motivates each locale varies, but a common thread is preparation for the future.

In fact, the world’s leading energy authority, the International Energy Agency, has said the extent to which natural gas can “play a credible role” in future energy supplies “fundamentally depends on minimising these emissions.” It’s a warning some in industry are heeding.

Exxon Mobil announced this month an aggressive methane reduction plan covering its U.S. shale operations. Major oil and gas giants, including Shell Canada, are also field-testing innovative solutions to continuously monitor methane emissions, pushing the boundaries of technology that has the potential to help industry transition to a low-carbon economy.

If Alberta ignores these market signals, it risks falling behind other energy-producing regions.

The Policy Nexus

Alberta was one of the first forward-thinking jurisdictions to recognize the opportunity to drive down greenhouse gas emissions quickly and cost-effectively by tackling methane. In 2015, Premiere Notley prioritized a 45 percent cut in oil and gas methane reductions by 2025 as part of the Climate Leadership Plan.

The new data from Carleton University, however, raises serious questions over whether the government can meet its target without strong regulations in place.

In order for Alberta’s methane regulations to be effective, and for Alberta to deliver on its climate commitments, provincial leaders need to show an eagerness to meet the scale of the challenge at hand and rigorously pursue the following:

1. Require oil and gas operators to quarterly check for and fix their leaks – a best practice applied across key oil-and-gas producing U.S. states;
2. Limit intentional vented emissions;
3. Improve reporting so that inventories reflect the reality on the ground; and
4. Phase in the lowest-hanging fruit reductions immediately – saving energy that can stimulate Alberta’s economy and keep pollution out of the air today.

Seventy-one percent of Albertans want stricter methane rules. One reason: the impact methane has on intensifying the rate of today’s warming. For example, data from the Carleton paper indicates that Canada’s oil and gas methane emissions annually have a greater climate impact than all of the vehicles combined in Canada.

Fortunately, fixing the problem is both highly-feasible and cost-effective with existing technologies. And, when deployed, these solutions can significantly reduce air and climate pollution.

Alberta moving ahead on strong methane rules not only helps to ensure it delivers on its climate goals, but it helps the province prepare for the low-carbon economy. Environmental preservation and economic prosperity are not mutually exclusive. Stopping needless natural gas waste with sensible methane standards can show both Albertans and the world that conservation and competiveness, not complacency, will fuel Alberta’s energy future.

Alberta’s oil and gas industry is emitting at least 25 to 50 percent more methane than current estimates suggest, according to a new peer-reviewed study. Published in Environmental Science and Technology, a clear pattern of energy waste is occurring across Canada – a problem worth a minimum of $530 million dollars (CAD) of natural gas […]

Alberta’s oil and gas industry is emitting at least 25 to 50 percent more methane than current estimates suggest, according to a new peer-reviewed study. Published in Environmental Science and Technology, a clear pattern of energy waste is occurring across Canada – a problem worth a minimum of $530 million dollars (CAD) of natural gas […]