0 Datasets
0 Files
Get instant academic access to this publication’s datasets.
Yes. After verification, you can browse and download datasets at no cost. Some premium assets may require author approval.
Files are stored on encrypted storage. Access is restricted to verified users and all downloads are logged.
Yes, message the author after sign-up to request supplementary files or replication code.
Join 50,000+ researchers worldwide. Get instant access to peer-reviewed datasets, advanced analytics, and global collaboration tools.
✓ Immediate verification • ✓ Free institutional access • ✓ Global collaborationJoin our academic network to download verified datasets and collaborate with researchers worldwide.
Get Free AccessAbstract. The dependable reporting of methane (CH4) emissions from point sources, such as fugitive leaks from oil and gas infrastructure, is important for profit maximization (retaining more hydrocarbons), evaluating climate impacts, assessing CH4 fees for regulatory programs, and validating CH4 intensity in differentiated gas programs. Currently, there are disagreements between emissions reported by different quantification techniques for the same sources. It has been suggested that downwind CH4 quantification methods using CH4 measurements on the fence line of production facilities could be used to generate emission estimates from oil and gas operations at the site level, but it is currently unclear how accurate the quantified emissions are. To investigate the accuracy of downwind methods, this study uses fence-line simulated data collected during controlled-release experiments as input for a non-standard closed-path eddy covariance (EC), the Gaussian plume inverse model (GPIM), and the backward Lagrangian stochastic (bLs) model in a range of atmospheric conditions. This study's EC attempt was unsuccessful due to data collection and instrumentation issues, resulting in invalid results characterized by underestimated emissions, large negative fluxes, and cospectra/ogives that deviated from their ideal shapes. Consequently, the EC results could not be compared with the GPIM and bLS model. The bLs model demonstrated the highest accuracy for single-release single-point emissions, though it exhibited greater uncertainty than GPIM under multi-release conditions. Across the GPIM and bLs model, the most reliable quantification was achieved with 15 min averaging and a narrow 5° wind sector range. Although EC was limited in this context, future studies should consider employing a standard EC system and further optimizing GPIM and bLs approaches – particularly for complex multi-source scenarios – to enhance quantification accuracy and reduce uncertainty.
Mercy Mbua, Stuart N. Riddick, Elijah Kiplimo, K. B. Shonkwiler, Anna L. Hodshire, Daniel Zimmerle (2025). Evaluating the feasibility of using downwind methods to quantify point source oil and gas emissions using continuously monitoring fence-line sensors. , 18(20), DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-5687-2025.
Datasets shared by verified academics with rich metadata and previews.
Authors choose access levels; downloads are logged for transparency.
Students and faculty get instant access after verification.
Type
Article
Year
2025
Authors
6
Datasets
0
Total Files
0
Language
en
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-5687-2025
Access datasets from 50,000+ researchers worldwide with institutional verification.
Get Free Access