Assessing the Performance of Emerging and Existing Continuous Monitoring Solutions under a Single-blind Controlled Testing Protocol

29 April 2025, Version 2
This content is a preprint and has not undergone peer review at the time of posting.

Abstract

Continuous Monitoring (CM) solutions have been identified as a method to address methane emissions at oil and gas (O&G) facilities, as these solutions can facilitate faster emission detection and repair compared to traditional survey methods. This study tested 13 CM solutions over 12 weeks using single-blind controlled testing. Controlled release rates ranged from 0.08 to 6.75 kg CH4/hr and lasted 18 minutes to 8 hours. Six solutions demonstrated 90 % method detection limits (DL90s) within the range of controlled releases, from 0.5 [0.3, 0.6] kg CH4/hr to 6.7 [5.9, 8.0] kg CH4/hr. Of the six solutions, four had False Positive (FP) rates between 7.8% and 14.0% (less than 15%), and four had False Negative rates (FN) of 8.0% to 34.1% (less than 50%). Compared with Ilonze et al., these results show retested solutions balancing method sensitivity with FP and FN rates. All scanning/imaging solutions had high localization (≥ 40%) precision and accuracy to the equipment unit. Eleven of the 13 solutions were tested for quantification. Single quantification estimates exhibited high relative quantification errors, outside the -90 % to 1000% range. The mean quantification error ranged from 33 [0.9, 66] %, 95% CI to 1326 [1003, 1648] %, 95 % CI for small emissions, between 0.1 and 1 kg CH4/hr, and from 3 [-20, 26] %, 95% CI to 3578 [-2832, 9988] %, 95% CI for larger emissions, greater than 1 kg CH4/hr. There were 3 and 9 solutions in the small and large emissions categories, respectively, that had less than 100% relative quantification error. Relative to previous studies, errors in quantification estimates decreased, as did FN and FP rates, with improved DL90s for two of the four retested solutions. These findings highlight that continuous, rigorous testing enhances solution performance, with notable improvements observed across multiple testing programs using the same test protocol.

Keywords

Methane
Detection
Detection Limit
Quantification
Continuous Monitoring
Probability of Detection

Supplementary materials

Title
Description
Actions
Title
Supplementary Material for Assessing the Performance of Emerging and Existing Continuous Monitoring Solutions under a Single-blind Controlled Testing Protocol
Description
The SI contains additional information about the old test facility's configuration and supplementary results. The final reports on each solution’s performance can be found on METEC’s ADED Results website.
Actions

Supplementary weblinks

Comments

Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting Policy [opens in a new tab] - please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy [opens in a new tab] and Terms of Service [opens in a new tab] apply.