Satellites That Can Pinpoint Methane and Carbon Dioxide Leaks (2018) | Hacker News Reader

Satellites That Can Pinpoint Methane and Carbon Dioxide Leaks (2018)

scientificamerican.com

112 pointslil-scamp24 comments

Here's an example of some of the early research on methane detection from space (using SCIAMACHY, which has enough sensitivity to detect but not to localize well):

https://www.pnas.org/content/113/35/9734

As documented in the paper, these space-based observations were later followed up by very high-spatial-resolution (1-3 m) airborne spectroscopic observations that revealed hundreds of sources in the Four Corners region of the US.

The linked paper has a nice video of such a leak. The rates follow a very heavy-tailed distribution, meaning that a few big leaks dominate the total, at least for now.

There are also complex time-dependent signatures associated with leaks depending on the source - gas pipelines vs. suboptimally-operated landfills. There's room in the observing system for ground, air, and space-based measurements.

'“The days are coming when we will have satellites in the sky that can monitor any facility on this planet,” said Rob Jackson, who heads Stanford University’s Earth system science department. “I’m quite excited about that. The environmental community will be able to watchdog any facility on Earth. I think everyone will benefit.”'

This is a potential taxation and fining powerhouse. Penalty payments for 'leaking' carbon dioxide will be mana from heaven for the UN IPCC carbon credits lobbyists.

I understand you're taking a critical stance but I see pollution taxes as one of the best forms of taxation, as they 1) obviously cut down on pollution and 2) increase efficiency and productivity.

Obviously who receives the taxes and how they are distributed is a very big and important question. But that question does not itself invalidate the idea of taxation of pollution.

The trillion [insert currency denomination here] question is what 'pollution' is.

I'm pretty sure that every sensible person agrees that GHGs are pollution. That question is settled for at least thirty years now.

How about any emission into the air/water/ground that changes the composition of the medium you're emitting into?

So, breathing?

The main problem I see is that these taxes serve as a friction to conducting business. That is, after all, the intent, but if they only apply locally and there is no international enforcement mechanism (there can't and won't be) then this will disadvantage more our already failing economies.

Killing people, even indirectly, is already illegal. We need enforcement (esp. abroad) and not more laws. Show me that there is a tractable enforcement mechanism for these taxes in other countries and I might support them.

Essentially polluting businesses are externalizing some of their costs to the public purse (who eventually have to clean up after them) - these are not really taxes, they are simply those externalized costs that they should have been paying in the first place. Really we should be criminalizing this behavior.

It's not any different that the city turning up on your front doorstep with the bags of rubbish you dumped on the side of the road and charging you for the cost of cleaning it up

Yes, I'm aware. But as this adds cost businesses are incentivized to move operations elsewhere where externalities are not taxed. That is why I asked "what is the enforcement mechanism in other countries?" If it is just applied internally it disadvantages the host country.

The EU is already discussing how to implement a 'carbon border tax' [1].

I believe other political entities have also looked at such import levies on goods coming from external domains where pollution taxes are lower or non existent.

With pollution of the atmosphere there is also a case for making the atmosphere itself a legal person that is 'damaged' by pollution and paid redress. Personally I'm interested in this kind of idea but it's probably extending the scope of this particular discussion too far.

[1] https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-mulls-a-carbon-border...

The 'greenhouse gas' tax efforts are essentially EU versus the WTO from a legal perspective. The EU has decided and ratified legally the concept that greenhouse gases are damaging and a revenue source while the jury is out at the WTO despite a lot of posturing

Countries enforcing locally can apply tariffs to foreign companies violating emissions.

It's just closing the loop on negative externalities, right?

Our startup is on track to deploy high precision methane monitoring microsatellites (http://bluefield.co). We've already received investments from Silicon Valley VCs, and signed contracts with the world's largest oil & gas companies. Please get in touch if you'd like to join us in creating the "breathing monitor" of our planet! y.ariel@bluefield.co

Hi, some short questions:

- What's your spectral resolution? (I'm assuming you're using spectrometers and not filters?)

- Is this a scanning setup?

- What is your minimum spatial and temporal resolution and what is the detection limit?

- What do you consider an 'optically rich image'?

Pretty important, as methane has 30 times the warming effect that carbon dioxide does.

.. must be related to this active investigation: https://www.edf.org/climate/methane-studies

This could make a solid plot for a Tom-Clancy-style thriller novel. Imagine a group of ecoterrorists that hijacks these satellites and some orbital bombardment satellites and starts dropping bombs on the carbon "leaks". And then a certain Refraction Numeral counterterrorist group gets sent in to stop them. All interspersed with heaps of exposition around various organizations and military technologies that may or may not have any basis in reality.

It seems that flying drones into carbon infrastructure is effective too.

Aren't there a lot of natural leaks?

I wouldn't be surprised if man-made leaks are dwarfed by natural ones

Volcanos and forest fires, "natural" gas leaks and more.

You don't give human activity enough credit !

"According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide."

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earthtalks-volcan...

thank you, that was very informative.

We looked at GHGSat back in 2016, really interesting tech and solid approach, with more limitations than expected (only land-based sites can be measured). They ultimate got investment from a collaborative vehicle.

I believe they deserve to exist in this world, though I do still wonder if their business model is self-sustaining.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com