kairos comments on arb reg - homepage | california … (or feast).6 this model simulates natural gas...

11
1 February 17, 2017 Clerk of the Board California Air Resources Board 1001 I Street Sacramento, California 95814 Kairos Aerospace Comments on the Modified Text for the Proposed Regulation for Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards for Crude Oil and Natural Gas Facilities We at Kairos Aerospace commend the ARB on its commitment to curb methane emissions from the oil and gas industry. The proposed regulation is one of the strongest, with the broadest applicability, in the nation. We would, however, respectfully recommend a modification to the rule that would achieve similar methane reductions at a lower cost to the regulated industry. We focus our comments on LDAR for fugitive methane emissions. The fugitive methane emissions detection technology landscape is highly dynamic, with innovation happening in real time. Innovation in technology invariably leads to better outcomes at lower costs. However, the current draft is prescriptive in terms of LDAR technology, sacrificing the opportunity for commercialization of new technologies that could both improve overall environmental outcomes and lower costs. The inflexible nature of the LDAR regulation also impacts different operators differently, as significant variations can exist in operators’ facilities, emissions, and costs of control. ARB should allow operators to seek approval to allow alternative compliance pathways, as long as the alternative is at least as effective in reducing methane emissions volume as quarterly OGI- based LDAR. ARB should also establish clear criteria by which the equivalence of alternative programs will be judged, and ensure that the approval process is transparent and open to public participation. Only by allowing space for new and innovative technologies can ARB ensure that it is achieving its goal of maximum environmental impact at minimal cost. Many Options Exist, and More Are in Development As ARB knows, there is already a wide range of proven technologies and implementations on the market, with different detection limits, frequencies, and underlying science. ARB has undertaken projects with a variety of instruments – identifying methane hot-spots, implementing a tiered methane observation system, using aerial surveys for Aliso Canyon-related monitoring. 1,2 ARB recently posted a research report, “Enhanced Inspection & Maintenance for GHG and VOCs at Upstream Facilities,” 3 that evaluates the effectiveness of six different instruments and finds the three remote sensing instruments (RMLD, IR camera, and Picarro Surveyor) to be similar in their 1 “California Methane Monitoring for Climate Action and Public Safety,” presented by Riley Duren. June 2016. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/oil-gas/Miller_2016-06-14%20-%20Duren_methane_hot_spots.pdf 2 “Airborne Estimation of Surface Emissions,” presented by Stephen Conley. June 2016. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/oil-gas/Conley_Presentation_ARB%20%281%29.pdf 3 “Air Resources Board RFP No. 13-414: Enhanced Inspection & Maintenance for GHG & VOCs at Upstream Facilities – Final (Revised),” prepared by Sage ATC Environmental Consulting LLC for the California Air Resources Board. December 2016. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/oil-gas/sage_i&m_ghg_voc_dec2016.pdf

Upload: hoangdiep

Post on 08-May-2018

214 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

1

February17,2017

ClerkoftheBoardCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard1001IStreetSacramento,California95814

KairosAerospaceCommentsontheModifiedTextfortheProposedRegulationforGreenhouseGasEmissionStandardsforCrudeOilandNaturalGasFacilities

WeatKairosAerospacecommendtheARBonitscommitmenttocurbmethaneemissionsfromthe oil and gas industry. The proposed regulation is one of the strongest,with the broadestapplicability,inthenation.Wewould,however,respectfullyrecommendamodificationtotherulethatwouldachievesimilarmethanereductionsatalowercosttotheregulatedindustry.WefocusourcommentsonLDARforfugitivemethaneemissions.

The fugitive methane emissions detection technology landscape is highly dynamic, withinnovationhappeninginrealtime.Innovationintechnologyinvariablyleadstobetteroutcomesatlowercosts.However,thecurrentdraftisprescriptiveintermsofLDARtechnology,sacrificingthe opportunity for commercialization of new technologies that could both improve overallenvironmental outcomes and lower costs. The inflexible nature of the LDAR regulation alsoimpactsdifferentoperatorsdifferently,assignificantvariationscanexistinoperators’facilities,emissions,andcostsofcontrol.

ARBshouldallowoperatorstoseekapprovaltoallowalternativecompliancepathways,aslongasthealternativeisatleastaseffectiveinreducingmethaneemissionsvolumeasquarterlyOGI-based LDAR. ARB should also establish clear criteria bywhich the equivalence of alternativeprogramswillbejudged,andensurethattheapprovalprocessistransparentandopentopublicparticipation.OnlybyallowingspacefornewandinnovativetechnologiescanARBensurethatitisachievingitsgoalofmaximumenvironmentalimpactatminimalcost.

ManyOptionsExist,andMoreAreinDevelopment

AsARBknows,thereisalreadyawiderangeofproventechnologiesandimplementationsonthemarket,withdifferentdetectionlimits,frequencies,andunderlyingscience.ARBhasundertakenprojectswithavarietyof instruments– identifyingmethanehot-spots, implementingatieredmethaneobservationsystem,usingaerialsurveysforAlisoCanyon-relatedmonitoring.1,2ARBrecentlypostedaresearchreport,“EnhancedInspection&MaintenanceforGHGandVOCsatUpstreamFacilities,”3thatevaluatestheeffectivenessofsixdifferentinstrumentsandfindsthethreeremotesensinginstruments(RMLD,IRcamera,andPicarroSurveyor)tobesimilarintheir

1“CaliforniaMethaneMonitoringforClimateActionandPublicSafety,”presentedbyRileyDuren.June2016.https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/oil-gas/Miller_2016-06-14%20-%20Duren_methane_hot_spots.pdf2“AirborneEstimationofSurfaceEmissions,”presentedbyStephenConley.June2016.https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/oil-gas/Conley_Presentation_ARB%20%281%29.pdf3“AirResourcesBoardRFPNo.13-414:EnhancedInspection&MaintenanceforGHG&VOCsatUpstreamFacilities–Final(Revised),”preparedbySageATCEnvironmentalConsultingLLCfortheCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard.December2016.https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/oil-gas/sage_i&m_ghg_voc_dec2016.pdf

2

ability todetectemissions.ARB isalsoapartof the ITRC’sEvaluationof InnovativeMethaneDetectionTechnologiesteam,whichisworkingtoevaluateandcomparedifferenttechnologies,andhasparticipatedinseveralworkshopsandconferencesdiscussingwaystoaddressfugitivemethaneemissions.TheseeffortsindicatetousthatARBisawareoftheplethoraofoptions,andthewaystheycanbecombinedtoyieldbetterandmorecost-effectiveresults,yettheregulationitselfdoesnotreflectthisunderstanding.

Inadditiontotheseexistingoptions,thereareseveralinnovativetechnologiesatdifferentpointsalongthespectrumfromconcepttocommercialization.Theseoptionsallhaveadifferentsetofmonitoring frequencies and technical capabilities. On one end of the spectrum there aretechnologies still in development, for example in ARPA-E’s MONITOR program and EDF’sMethaneDetectorsChallenge.Ontheotherend,forexample,thereisKairosAerospace,whichhas patented and newly commercialized an aerial-based methane imaging system calledLeakSurveyorthatleadstogreatermethanereductionatalowercostthantheOGIrequiredbythecurrentdraftregulation.Oursystemallowsoperatorstoconductlow-cost,high-frequencysurveysoftheirfieldstofindandfixlargeemittersfaster.Weimagemethaneinfalsecolorfromfixed-wing aircraft, similar toNASA JPL’s AVIRIS system, combinedwith simultaneous opticalimagery, toproducegeoreferencedopticalmapswithmethaneplumespinpointedandsized.Oncewescreenalargeareaandidentifytheemissionsources,targetedgroundcrewsfollowupto identifyandrepair thespecificcomponentthat is leaking.Thisapproachresults ina loweroverallcosttooperators,ascomparedtosendinggroundcrewstoeverysite.Andmorefrequentsurveysforlargeleaksresultinagreaterenvironmentalimpactthaninfrequentgroundsurveys.

It is, of course, critical that any alternative LDAR program achieves at least the sameenvironmentalimpactastheLDARprogramlaidoutintheregulation.ComparingdifferentLDARprogramsispossiblethroughcomputermodels,combinedwithreal-worlddemonstrations.

EquivalentEnvironmentalImpactistheImportantThing

Atabasiclevel,theemissioncontroleffectivenessofanyLDARprogramisafunctionofboththeabilityofthetechnologyusedtodetect leaksandthefrequencyofmonitoring.Anequivalentprogrammayrequiremorefrequentmonitoring,ifitsmassratethresholdfordetectingleaksishigher,becausehighermassemissionsreductions fromlarge leaks foundearlierareoffset tosomedegreebysmallerleakswhichgoundetected.Indeed,thisisreasoningputforthbytheEPAin2006inaproposedamendmenttoallowOGIasanalternativeworkpracticetoMethod21,4andextendseasilytoarangeofmonitoringinstruments.Thisreasoningisalsousedina2004AmericanPetroleumInstitutereport5,whichstates:

“Lowerleakdefinitionsforrepairdonotnecessarilyleadtobetteremissionscontrolsince,astheleaklevelisdecreased,fewadditionalleakingcomponentsareaddedtotherepairgroupand these contribute very little to theoverallmass emissions. The Smart LDAR

4EPAAlternativeWorkPracticetoDetectLeaksfromEquipment,71FR17401(April6,2006)(tobecodifiedat40CFR60).5“SmartLeakDetectionandRepairforControlofFugitiveEmissions,”preparedbyICFInternationalforAmericanPetroleumInstitute.June2004.

3

approach…focuseson identifyingandrepairing thehighest leakerssince theseare thesourceofalmostallthemassemissions.Equivalenceisobtainedbymorequicklyfindingand repairing these large leaks, which more than offsets the emission rates fromcomponents with low ppmv readings that leak for longer periods. The use of opticalimaging could provide a more cost effective approach to more quickly find the highleakers.”

Usingacomputermodel(alongwithlaboratorytestingandfieldvalidationofinstruments)solvesmanyofthereal-worlddifficultiesofcomparingtheequivalencyofdifferenttechnologiesinthefieldovertime.ThisapproachwasalsosupportedbytheEPAinits2006amendmentmentionedabove,andtheAPIinits2004report,indicatingbroadstakeholderagreementonitsusefulnessandvalidity.ItisthereforealsotheapproachweatKairosusetoarriveatouremissionsreductionestimates.Weuseanopen-sourcemodelcalledtheFugitiveEmissionsAbatementSimulationTestbed(orFEAST).6ThismodelsimulatesnaturalgasleakageovertimeunderdifferentLDARprograms.Weusedapower-lawdistribution7fittedtothe2011FortWorthAirQualitySurvey8datatogeneratetheleaksfromthegasfield.Wethenmodeledtheaveragereduction(relativetoanullscenario)inmethaneemissionswithquarterlyOpticalGasImagingsurveysandsemi-monthlyAerialMethaneImagingsurveys(whichinthiscaseisKairosAerospace’sLeakSurveyortechnologywithaminimumdetectionlimitof120g/hror500ppm-m).

Wefindthatsemi-monthlyLeakSurveyorsurveysresult in87%reductionofmethaneemittedandquarterlyOGIsurveysresultin76%reductionoveranullscenario9overfiveyears.

6FEASTDocumentation:https://pangea.stanford.edu/researchgroups/eao/sites/default/files/FEASTDocumentation_0.pdf7SeeAppendixB.8CityofFortWorthNaturalGasAirQualityStudy.EasternResearchGroupetal.fortheCityofFortWorth,2011.URL:http://fortworthtexas.gov/uploadedFiles/Gas\_Wells/AirQualityStudy\_final.pdf9Thenullscenarioismodeledasoperatorsrandomlynoticingandfixingleaksinthenormalcourseofoperations,withnoexplicitLDARprogram.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1Year 5Years 10Years

%CH4

Red

uced

MethaneReducedOverTimebyDifferentLDARPrograms

AerialMethaneImaging(semi-monthly) OpticalGasImaging(quarterly)

4

Therefore, LeakSurveyor would be a more effective LDAR program than OGI, which is anapproved technology in the current regulatory draft. (See Appendix A for more detail onLeakSurveyor’s capabilities, and Appendix B for more detail on FEAST.) Incidentally, theLeakSurveyorprogramisalsocheaperthantheOGIprogram,despitetheincreasedfrequencyofsurveys, since each LeakSurveyor survey is an order of magnitude less expensive than aconventionalOGIsurvey.LeakSurveyoralsooffers leakratequantification,direct imagingandgeoreferencedresults,andanauditablerecordofsurveysandresults.

The same FEASTmodel can be used to compare other technologies as well, by adding newmodulestotheprogram.Thusanoperatorcanchoosethemostcost-effectiveLDARprogrambased on their own needs and constraints, and ARB can estimate whether the proposedalternative compliance programwill reduce emissions from an operator at least asmuch asquarterlyOGI,ultimatelyresultinginmoreefficientregulation.

Conclusion

In LDAR, the current ARB draft actually falls behind EPA’s NSPS OOOOa regulations, whereinsteaditshouldbeanopportunityforARBtoleadtheEPA.CaliforniaishometoSiliconValleyinnovationandalong-timeleaderinairqualityregulation,yettheserulesdonotleavespaceforinnovation.NSPSOOOOaallowsanalternativecompliancepathwayforLDARofnewormodifiedwellsitesandcompressorstations,butthelackofcriteriaforjudgingequivalenceisunclearandhasledtoconfusionfrommanyoperators,andthedemonstrationperiodisprohibitivelylongandcostly.ARB’soilandgasregulationappliestobothnewandexistingsources,makingLDARevenmorecostprohibitivetooperators,yetdoesnotincludeanalternativecompliancepathwayoption.

We strongly urge the agency to adopt an alternative compliance pathway that is robust,minimally prescriptive, and specifically creates an entry point for demonstrated methanedetectingsolutions.Suchanapproachwillhelpcatalyzearacetothetopintechnology,reducecostsfortheregulatedcommunity,andboostenvironmentaloutcomes.

WegreatlyappreciatetheopportunitytobepartofthedialogueonGHGstandardsinCalifornia,andlookforwardtoworkingwithARBandindustrytowardourcommongoals.Wearehappytoanswerquestionsordiscussanythinginthesecommentsingreaterdetail.

StevenDeiker,ChiefExecutiveOfficerKairosAerospace777CuestaDrive,Suite202MountainView,CA94040

5

AppendixA:LeakSurveyor(AerialMethaneImaging)

LeakSurveyor isanewmethanedetectionservicethatcombinesanaerialmethanedetectioninstrumentwithaproprietarydataanalysispipeline.Ourgoalistoprovidecustomerswithclear,actionableinformationaboutwhere,andhowbig,theirmethaneemissionsare.LeakSurveyorisdesignedtosurveylargeareasfrequentlyatanaffordablecost–asingleinstrumentcancover30,000acresinoneday.Onceanemissionisdetectedaerially,thecustomersendsadirectedgroundcrewtoidentifyandrepairtheparticularcomponentthatisleaking.Thishybridapproach–frequentaerialsurveyscombinedwithtargetedfollow-upinspections–savesacompanytimeandmoney,andsavesmoremethanethansendinggroundcrewstoeverysite.Thisisbecause:

1) Sourcesareoftenremoteandmostarenotemittingsignificantamountsofmethane,sosendingcrewstoeachonewastesthetimeofengineersatameaningfulcost.

2) Finding a single large emission a day earlier can be more impactful than findinghundredsofsmallemissions,sotimeisbestspentlookingforthelargeemissions.

3) We can frequently survey unsafe- or difficult-to-monitor components that wouldotherwiserarelybesurveyed,andrecovergasthatwouldotherwisegoundetectedbyground-basedmonitoringmethodsforlongperiodsoftime.

Ultimately, LeakSurveyor stops the large emitters that causemost of the environmental andeconomicdamageearlier,foragreatercumulativeimpact.

HighlySpecificMethaneImaging

TheLeakSurveyorinstrumentconsistsofthreeparts:1)anopticalcameraforvisualverificationof sites, 2) aGPS and inertialmonitoring unit to record precise positions, and 3) a patentedspectrometer that detects methane. The spectrometer is sensitive to infrared sunlight thatreflectsofftheground.Whenthislightpassesthroughaplumeofmethane,themethaneabsorbscertainfrequenciesandletsotherspassthrough.Thespectrometeridentifiesthoseabsorptionfeatures,andassociatesthemwithaparticularpositionontheground.Thismakesoursystemhighlyspecificformethane,asitistheonlymoleculethatleavesthisparticularsignatureonthespectrum,andavoidssignalconfusionfromothergaseslikepropane.Itisalsospecifictolocation;the resolutionon theground (~20 feet) iswell-matched tomost gasplumes.Asa result,weproducedirect imagesof plumes, overlaidon simultaneously capturedoptical imagery.AfterreviewingthespecificationsandcapabilitiesofothercategoriesofmethanesensingtechnologieswebelieveLeakSurveyorbelongstoanewclassofinstrument,whichwehavebeencalling“AerialMethaneImagery.”

LeakSurveyor’sresolutionallowsustodistinguishbetweenseparatepointsourcesofmethaneanddifferentiatesusfromair-samplingtechniques.Intheimagebelow,forexample,weseparatethemethaneplumefromnaturalgasproductionfromthemethaneplumefromthefloodedricefield nearby, and would only report the former. What’s more, we distinguish between thelocationandconcentrationofseparateemissionswithinasinglesite,suchthatthegroundcrewfollowingupontheemissionscangodirectlytoaspecificareatoidentifyandrepairaspecificcomponent.

6

Clear,Actionable,PrioritizedResults

Theimagebelowisanexampleoftheresultsweprovide.Methaneplumes,highlightedinblue,areoverlaidonopticalimageryofasurveyareaaboutamilewidewithtenseparatewellpads.

Figure 1: LeakSurveyor’s direct point source methane imaging separates the gas production-related emission (on the left) from the nearby flooded field-related emission (on the right). This allows distinct attribution of methane between different sources.

MethanefromGasProduction

MethanefromFloodedField

Figure 2: Sample LeakSurveyor false color image; blue areas represent methane plumes.

7

TheminimumdetectionthresholdforLeakSurveyorincontrolledsettingsis500ppm-m.Witha5mphwind,thiscorrespondstoanemissionrateof10Mscf/day(thatis,8kg/hr,or2g/s.)Ourconservativereal-worlddetectionlimitis2500ppm-m,whichcorrespondstoanemissionrateof50Mscf/day.Intherealworld,LeakSurveyordetectsastatisticalfractionofemissionsbelow50Mscf/day.Aswecontinuetocollectvastquantitiesofdata–wehaverecentlysetuppartnershipstodosowithanumberofoperators,non-profits,andgovernmentagencies–wewillcontinueto refine the “probability of detection” curve we have built that shows the probability ofdetectingemissionsasafunctionoftheemissionrateandofexternalconditionslikeweatherandterrain.

LeakSurveyordistinguishesbetweendifferentsizesofmethaneemissionswithaprecisionwithin±25%; inFigure4above,areasofdarkblue represent lowerconcentrations, ranging towardslighterareaswhichrepresenthigherconcentrations.Ourabilitytoidentify,overawidearea,thesizeofemissionsallowsprioritizationof repairwork to stop thebiggestemissions fastest forgreater impacton theenvironment, and improveson thequalityofdataonwhichacademicresearchandpolicydecisionsarecurrentlybased.Figure3belowshowsacontrolledmethanereleasewherewesimultaneouslyoperatedLeakSurveyorfromanairplaneflyingat3,000ft.,aFLIRGasFinder320IRcamerapointedatthereleasevalvefrom50ft.away,andaMethod21analyzerheld20ft.fromthevalve.TheLeakSurveyorresultsshowaclearrelationshipbetweenthemethane release size and our signal size. Aswith ourminimumdetection threshold,wecontinuetorefineourquantificationabilityaswecollectmoreLeakSurveyordatacombinedwithground truthmeasurements.Wealsocontinue toconduct calibration studieswithcontrolledreleases,oftenflyingacontrolledreleaseatthesametimeasweareflyingoperators’fields.

Figure 3: Side-by-side comparison of emissions monitoring technology results during a controlled methane release. LeakSurveyor is able to distinguish between different leak sizes.

8

Faster,Cheaper,Safer

TheLeakSurveyorinstrumentiseasilymountedonlightaircraftandflownatstandardgeneralaviationaltitudesof3,000ft.,makingitordersofmagnitudefasterthanagroundcrewandabletoaccessterrainthatwouldbedifficultordangeroustoreachbycar.LeakSurveyorisalsofasterandsaferthanhelicopters.Itcanflylongerandfartherthancommerciallyavailabledrones,whichrarelyhavebatterylivesofmorethan30minutes,limitingtheirflightrangeandincreasingtheircost.Dronesarealsosubjecttocomplexandshiftingstate-by-stateregulatoryissues.

PlugandPlayService

Weoperatethepodasaservice,sothereisnotraining,calibration,orinstrumentmaintenanceorrepairsneededonthepartofourcustomers.Weeliminatethepossibilityofoperatorerrororvariation,asallprotocols,frompre-surveycalibrationtopost-surveydataqualityassurance,areperformedby highly trained Kairos engineers or automatically through our cloud-based datapipeline.Resultsarethusdirectlycomparablefromflighttoflight.Eachpodattachestoaplanewithnotools,wiring,ormodificationsrequired(seeimagebelow),whichmeanswedonotneedFAAapproval.

Figure 4: LeakSurveyor covers orders of magnitude more area than a ground crew, allowing frequent revisits.

Figure 5: Pod attaches to the wing strut of light aircraft with no tools, modifications, or wiring connections.

9

UniqueSoftwareCapability,ContinuousImprovement

Ourproprietarysoftwareanddataanalysiscapabilitiesareuniqueinthemarket.Ourmodern“bigdata”analyticspipelineimmediately,automatically,anduniformlyprocessesthedatawecollectintousableform–whetherthatformisanindividualreportthatintegrateswithexistinginfrastructuremanagementsoftwareusedbyoperators,oramainstreamtoollikeGoogleEarth.Ourprocessreducesthepossibilityofusererrorininterpretingresults,lowerscompliancecosts,andincreasesreportingaccuracy.Anadditionalbenefitisthattheaccuracyandcorrectnessofeachnewsurveywillbeimprovedbytheoverallanalysisofallthedatawehaveevercollected,asresultstakenovertimeareusedasafeedbacklooptoimprovetheLeakSurveyorservice.

NoCapitalExpendituresonEquipmentorTraining

BecauseweoperateLeakSurveyorasaservice,therearenoupfrontexpendituresoncapital(e.g.instruments or trucks) or labor (e.g. training or hiring). Thismeans that starting up an LDARprogram can yield savings for a company immediately. It also gives companies flexibility incraftinganLDARprogramthatworksfortheirparticularneeds.Forexample,acompanythatusesanIRcameraforoneareamaywanttouseLeakSurveyortomonitoranotherhard-to-reacharea.AcompanythathasonlyenoughlaborcapacitytoconductsemiannualsurveyscanincreaseitsmonitoringfrequencytoquarterlyorevenmonthlywithLeakSurveyor.

LowerCostPerSurveyThanAlternatives

LeakSurveyoralsoreducescostspersurveybecausewehavegreatlyreducedtheneedforon-the-groundsurveyors,themostsignificantcost inatraditionalprogram,whetheranoperatorconductshisownsurveysorhiresa thirdparty.Asaquickback-of-the-envelopecomparison,Carbon Limits10estimated that it costs $600 to hire a contractor to survey a singlewell site,whereas LeakSurveyor costs $100 perwell site. Realistically,most of the operatorswe havespokentoreportthatanIRcameracontractorcostsmorethan$600perwellsite,particularlyasthe companies still need to send in-house engineers to accompany the contractors on-site;anecdotally,thecosthasalsoincreasedduetoincreaseddemandandashortageofbothOGIcamerasandqualifiedcontractors.Wehavealsoruncostanalysesusingassumptionsfromothersources,forvarioussizesofproducerandforothermonitoringoptions(i.e.owninganIRcameraversushiringacontractor,usingaMethod21analyzerinsteadofanOGI).

SimplificationofReportingandRecordkeeping

Inadditiontonoupfrontcostsandlowongoingcosts,ourpost-surveycostsareloweraswell–oursoftwareandsecuredatapipelinestreamlinesnecessaryactivities likerecordkeepingandreportingforcompliancepurposes,aswellasmorein-depthanalysis.Wegenerateautomaticreportsregardingdataqualityandcompletenessduringeachsurveyandfortheentiretyofthesurvey.Allofourrawdataandmetadataisstoredinthecloudindefinitelyforrecordkeepingandtime-seriesanalysesforoperators.AndourautomatedsurveygreatlyreducesthetimeittakestorecordcomponentlocationsandIDsforanyfugitiveemissionsdetected.

10 “Quantifying Cost-effectiveness of Systematic Leak Detection and Repair Programs Using Infrared Cameras,” Carbon Limits SA. March 2014. URL: http://www.catf.us/resources/publications/files/Carbon_Limits_LDAR.pdf

10

AppendixB:FEAST,theFugitiveEmissionsAbatementSimulationTestbed

For an in-depth description of the FEAST model, please see the documentation online athttps://pangea.stanford.edu/researchgroups/eao/sites/default/files/FEASTDocumentation_0.pdf.Thisappendixismeanttoserveasabasicsummaryofthemodel’sstructureandhowweusedittomodeltheefficacyofdifferentLDARprograms.

Asdescribedinthedocumentation:“FEASTsimulatestheleakagefromanaturalgasfieldasafunctionof timeunderdifferentLDARprograms. ItdefinesanLDARprogramasa technologyused for leakdetection, the implementationof thedetection technology,and the leak repairprocess.Basedonaplumesimulation,FEASTappliesdetectioncriteriaforseveralLDARmethods,identifiestheleaksthatwillbedetectedundereachLDARprogram,andremovesthemfromthesetofleaksattheappropriatetime.ThetotalgassavedbytheLDARprogramiscalculatedasthetime-integrateddifferencebetweentheleakageinanullscenarioandascenariowiththeappliedLDAR program. The null scenario represents the status quo: it allows a steady leakage ratethroughtimeasnewleaksareproducedandoldleaksarerepairedrandomlywithoutanexplicitLDARprogram.”

TheinputdataforFEASTincludefieldparameters(numberofwells,numberofcomponentsperwell, average distance betweenwells), a dataset of leak rates, atmosphere data in order tosimulate the gas plumes (measured wind speeds and directions), and LDAR parameters(detectioncriteria,timetofindleaks).

Leak distribution: The FWAQS study sampled 375 well sites one time, which represents arelatively small sample size unlikely to capture the full range of extreme results. In order toaccountforsuper-emitters,weextendedtheFWAQSdatawithapowerlawdistribution,whichisusuallyusedtomodeldatawhosefrequencyofaneventvariesasapowerofsomeattributeof that event – in this case the event is a leak and the attribute is leak size. Thepower lawdistribution we used has an upper bound of 500 Mscf/day (meaning the simulation nevergeneratesaleaklargerthanthat.)Wechose-1.75forthepower,orexponent,inthepowerlawformulay = ax% , to match the national top-down estimates of petroleum-sector methaneemissions. If theexponent ismorenegative, excessivenumbersof tiny leaks are required toproducethemethanefromthetop-downestimates.Thisresultsinmanymoreleaksthanwells,suchthatthetypicalwellwouldhavethreetofiveleaks.Thisisoutofsyncwithreality,asmanywellsandfacilitiesarenot leakingatall. Iftheexponent is lessnegative(closertozero),thenmoreof themethane comes from truly enormousemissions.Wedon'thaveenoughdata tosupportthat,althoughitcouldstillbetrue.

LeakSurveyor:WeaddedamoduleforLeakSurveyor,whichisanimplementationofamethodwehavetermedAerialMethaneImaging.Weformedourexpectationsforperformancebasedonextensivecalibrationtests,bothinacontrolledsetting–whereacontrolledmethanereleasewasgradually turnedupwhilea LeakSurveyorplane flewbackand forthoverheadandan IRcamera operator and aMethod 21 instrument operator stood on the ground and recordedimagesandreadingsforcomparison–andintherealworld,wherewecollectedresultsforanoperatorandthenperformedgroundtruthmeasurementstovalidateourfieldresults.Thisreal-

11

worldperformancewasthenaddedtotheFEASTsimulationwiththeconsultationofoneoftheoriginalauthorsofthecodetoensurecorrectintegration.

ThechartbelowshowsonesimulationoftheFEASTmodeloverfiveyears(labeledasJanuary2018-December 2022.) The blue line represents total emissions from the 1,100 wells in thenatural gas fieldwith a semi-monthlyAerialMethane Imagingprogram,which in this case isLeakSurveyor.TheredlinerepresentstotalemissionsfromthenaturalgasfieldwithaquarterlyOGIprogram.Thegreylinerepresentstotalemissionsfromthefieldinthenullcase,whereleaksare randomly fixed in the normal course of operations. Over the time represented, theLeakSurveyor program reduces methane from the null scenario by 87%, and OGI reducesmethaneby76%.

Thechartbelowshowsthecumulativevolumeofmethanereducedovertimerelativetothenullscenario.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Jan-18

Apr-18

Jul-1

8

Oct-18

Jan-19

Apr-19

Jul-1

9

Oct-19

Jan-20

Apr-20

Jul-2

0

Oct-20

Jan-21

Apr-21

Jul-2

1

Oct-21

Jan-22

Apr-22

Jul-2

2

Oct-22

Metha

neEm

itted

PerDay(g/s)

GasFieldEmissionsWithDifferentControlTechniques

AerialMethaneImaging(semi-monthly) OpticalGasImaging(quarterly) Null

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

1Year 5Years 10Years

MillionsofT

onso

fCH4

MethaneReducedOverTimebyDifferentLDARPrograms

AerialMethaneImaging(semi-monthly) OpticalGasImaging(quarterly)