MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025347969 · doi:10.1071/aj19071

Satellite monitoring of fugitive methane emissions from oil and gas facilities in Australia

2020· article· en· W3025347969 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐François Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueThe APPEA Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsGHGSat (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethane emissionsSatelliteMethaneFossil fuelFugitive emissionsNatural gasPetroleum industryOil and natural gasEnvironmental scienceAnalyticsEngineeringPetroleum engineeringGreenhouse gasWaste managementComputer scienceGeologyEnvironmental engineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2016, GHGSat has been operating the world’s first and only satellite specifically designed to monitor methane emissions from industrial facilities around the world. The lessons learned through the success of this demonstration satellite have been incorporated into the company’s next two satellites, the first of which was originally scheduled to launch in September 2019 but was delayed as a result of a rocket failure. The satellite’s technology is ideally suited to the oil and gas industry, particularly unconventional developments in which a high density of facilities can be present. This paper introduces the technology briefly and discusses the predictive analytics applications being developed to augment the efficacy of the satellites in detecting methane emissions. An example of successful application of the predictive analytics engine to detect a methane leak in the Delaware Basin in New Mexico is presented. Parallels are drawn between shale basins in the US and the Surat Basin in Australia, highlighting the applicability of the technology for the oil and gas industry in Australia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe APPEA JournalSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207