MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408428250 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-13054

Estimating methane emissions from surface coal mines using satellite observations

2025· preprint· en· W4408428250 on OpenAlexaff
Shubham Sharma, Joannes D. Maasakkers, Matthieu Dogniaux, Jason McKeever, Dylan Jervis, Marianne Girard, Berend J. Schuit, Tobias A. de Jong, Itziar Irakulis‐Loitxate, Nicholas Balasus, Daniel J. Varon, Ilse Aben

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCoal Properties and Utilization
Canadian institutionsGHGSat (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethaneCoalEnvironmental scienceMethane emissionsSatelliteCoal miningEarth scienceMining engineeringGeologyWaste managementEngineeringChemistryAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monitoring and mitigating methane emissions from super-emitting sources is critical for addressing climate change. The TROPOMI instrument onboard Sentinel-5P provides daily global coverage of methane concentrations at 5.5 × 7 km² resolution, enabling the detection of methane super-emitters (>~8 t hr⁻¹). These data are instrumental in identifying hotspots that can be further investigated using high-resolution (~25 m) satellite instruments to pinpoint facility-level emissions. In support of the UNEP-IMEO Methane Alert and Response System (MARS), we have identified over 250 super-emitter hotspots. These hotspots include oil and gas production sites and urban landfills, while a third are associated with coal mining operations, including unexpected sources like surface coal mines. Given the crucial role of coal in the global energy landscape and steel production, it is essential to monitor and accurately estimate the associated methane emissions.This work highlights the synergy between TROPOMI and high-resolution instruments through an analysis of surface coal mine clusters in Kazakhstan, Russia, and India. We estimate 2021-2023 annual methane emissions from these three clusters using TROPOMI data in a Bayesian inversion approach. Our results align with emissions calculated using UNFCCC emission factors and mine-level production data, except in India, where significantly lower emissions are observed. Comparisons with bottom-up gridded emission inventories EDGAR v7 & GFEI v2 reveal notable discrepancies, primarily due to inaccuracies in spatial disaggregation. In Kazakhstan, methane emissions increase substantially between 2021 and 2023 despite stable coal production, suggesting that coal seam characteristics and other factors influence emission dynamics. Our emission estimates align closely with GHGSat-based estimates across all mines and years where a sufficient number of GHGSat observations are available. Moreover, spatial correlations are identified between GHGSat-detected methane enhancements and mining activities within the mine. Additionally, atmospheric temperature inversions are found to significantly contribute to the accumulation of methane within the mine pit, complicating emission quantifications based on high-resolution observations. The findings of this study underscore the importance of combining TROPOMI data with high-resolution satellite data to refine methane emission estimates from complex sources like surface coal mines.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCoal Properties and UtilizationFrench-language works237,207