Re:Why are there so many methane satellites?
by chris_va on Tuesday March 05, 2024 @01:25PM
(#39607321)
(disclaimer I work on climate/methane mapping)
Companies do survey from the ground, and for large facilities there is often permanent monitoring.
Detecting methane from the ground still requires an expensive instrument, and it covers a very tiny area.
Having said that, a lot of methane leaks are from abandoned well heads, and in many places there just are no economic incentives to care about it.
Anyway, satellites are not cheap from a capex standpoint, but they are surprisingly cheap in terms of $/m^2. A camera moving over the earth at 7km/s mapping a 200km swath can cover a million square km for O($1000). Getting a team with expensive equipment into the field for a day on one site could easily be more than that.
Companies do survey from the ground, and for large facilities there is often permanent monitoring.
Detecting methane from the ground still requires an expensive instrument, and it covers a very tiny area.
Having said that, a lot of methane leaks are from abandoned well heads, and in many places there just are no economic incentives to care about it.
Anyway, satellites are not cheap from a capex standpoint, but they are surprisingly cheap in terms of $/m^2. A camera moving over the earth at 7km/s mapping a 200km swath can cover a million square km for O($1000). Getting a team with expensive equipment into the field for a day on one site could easily be more than that.