A Techno-Economic Analysis of Abatement Opportunities for Measured Sources of Methane Emissions in Saskatchewan’s Upstream Oil and Gas Sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leveraging measured source distributions from recent aerial surveys, a techno-economic analysis of methane mitigation potential was completed for upstream oil and gas production sites in Saskatchewan, Canada. Abatement cost models for gas conservation, combustion, conversion of gas driven pneumatic equipment to air drive, and decommissioning of on-site wells were derived following a review of literature supplemented with data from technology vendors. Potential to mitigate measured sources at 1,112 analyzed sites was evaluated under 4 scenarios: mitigating only the cheapest sources at each site, addressing all vent sources at each site, maximizing mitigation regardless of cost, and addressing all vent sources with an additional option to decommission wells if cheaper. Results suggest a 75% reduction in total measured methane is readily achievable, consistent with Canada’s Global Methane Pledge commitment and with negligible production impact. Even greater reductions are possible while still keeping costs below the nominal Canadian carbon price of $65/tCO2e.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".