Search

Methane is a major contributor to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Identifying large sources of methane, particularly from the oil and gas sectors, will be essential for mitigating climate change. Aircraft-based methane sensing platforms can rapidly detect and quantify methane point-source emissions across large geographic regions, and play an increasingly important role in industrial methane management and greenhouse gas inventory. We independently evaluate the performance of five major methane-sensing aircraft platforms: Carbon Mapper, GHGSat-AV, Insight M, MethaneAIR, and Scientific Aviation. Over a 6 week period, we released metered gas for over 700 single-blind measurements across all five platforms to evaluate their ability to detect and quantify emissions that range from 1 to over 1,500 kg(CH4)/h. Aircraft consistently quantified releases above 10 kg(CH4)/h, and GHGSat-AV and Insight M detected emissions below 5 kg(CH4)/h. Fully blinded quantification estimates for platforms using downward-facing imaging spectrometers have parity slopes ranging from 0.76 to 1.13, with R2 values of 0.61 to 0.93; the platform using continuous air sampling has a parity slope of 0.5 (R2 = 0.93). Results demonstrate that aircraft-based methane sensing has matured since previous studies and is ready for an increasingly important role in environmental policy and regulation.

Abstract. Satellite-based remote sensing enables detection and mitigation of large point sources of climate-warming methane. These satellites will have the greatest impact if stakeholders have a clear-eyed assessment of their capabilities. We performed a single-blind test of nine methane-sensing satellites from three continents and five countries, including both commercial and government satellites. Over 2 months, we conducted 82 controlled methane releases during satellite overpasses. Six teams analyzed the resulting data, producing 134 estimates of methane emissions. Of these, 80 (58 %) were correctly identified, with 46 true positive detections (34 %) and 34 true negative non-detections (25 %). There were 41 false negatives, in which teams missed a true emission, and 0 false positives, in which teams incorrectly claimed methane was present. All eight satellites that were given a nonzero emission detected methane at least once, including the first single-blind evaluation of the EnMAP, Gaofen 5, and Ziyuan 1 systems. In percent terms, quantification error across all satellites and teams is similar to aircraft-based methane remote sensing systems, with 55 % of mean estimates falling within ±50 % of the metered value. Although teams correctly detected emissions as low as 0.03 metric tons of methane per hour, it is unclear whether detection performance in this test is representative of real-world field performance. Full retrieval fields submitted by all teams suggest that in some cases it may be difficult to distinguish true emissions from background artifacts without a known source location. Cloud interference is significant and appears to vary across teams and satellites. This work confirms the basic efficacy of the tested satellite systems in detecting and quantifying methane, providing additional insight into detection limits and informing experimental design for future satellite-focused controlled methane release testing campaigns.