Satellites Empower Better Methane Detection from Individual Oil & Gas Sites, and Also Suggest Efforts by Some Companies to Avoid Detection: Implications of Greater Transparency

     The 2024 deployment of MethaneSAT, led by the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), another by Carbon Mapper, and others, has dramatically zoomed in scrutiny of oil & gas facility methane emissions. MethaneSAT is focusing on 12 oil & gas regions in the world and found 1,300 tonnes of methane released per hour between July 2024 and January 2025, worth about $200,000 per hour, or presumably, up to $4.8 million per day. This satellite and a few others mean that the oil & gas industry’s reported emissions can be measured and compared to actual measurements. Thus, inaccuracies and underreported emissions can be discovered. One important finding is that the majority (about 72%) of leaks are small, rather than the “super-emitters” that have been talked about.

“In the United States, sources emitting less than 100 kilograms of methane per hour now account for most of the total methane released, according to MethaneSAT’s 2025 findings. These small leaks, scattered across thousands of wells, add up to a staggering share of emissions—so much so that ignoring them would mean missing the real problem.”

“The majority of methane is coming from these small, persistent sources, not just the headline-making super-emitters,” explains a senior EDF scientist.

     Monitoring emissions from individual sites over time has also revealed that methane releases are sometimes episodic and unpredictable. The article in Climate Compass notes a global goal of 0.2% methane emissions by 2030. However, real-time satellite data reveals emissions rates in the Permian Basin of 1.8% to 2.9%. The satellites can pinpoint emissions from individual facilities or wells. It gives researchers hard evidence of each leak.

     The Global Methane Pledge, signed by 158 countries, has a goal of reducing total global anthropogenic methane emissions by 30% from 2020 levels by 2030. The methane emissions fee enacted by the Biden administration was expected to go into effect in 2025, but was repealed by the Trump administration. According to GHGSAT:

“Reports indicate that the EPA is planning to eliminate long-standing requirements for polluters to collect and report their emissions of greenhouse gases, including methane.”

I hope that doesn’t happen. Reducing regulatory burdens is one thing, but I think it is important for companies to do the science and technology required to collect and report emissions data.

     Satellite data for methane emissions is key for several reasons: 1) comprehensive coverage globally, 2) frequent monitoring at a daily level, 3) precision and scale – pinpoint accuracy over wide areas, and 4) scalability. Advancements in satellite tech have made a method once said to be less accurate than ground-based methods, much more accurate and applicable to a wide variety of sites. Satellite data is now becoming widely accepted in LDAR programs and certifications like MiQ. This also makes company ESG reporting more accurate and defendable.

 

 

Are Companies Purposely Hiding Flares?

     Evidence suggests that some companies may be hiding flares by using enclosed flares in which emissions are harder to detect. Flares usually don’t combust 100% of the methane, but do typically combust 98% or more. Some companies seem to suggest that the enclosed flares have close to 100% combustion, compared to open flares, and are considered emissions-free for all practical purposes. Others, such as refiners in Norway and Scotland, say enclosed flares are quieter and do not light up the night, which is preferable to people who live nearby. However, many experts say there is no difference in combustion rates between open and enclosed flares, and, in fact, enclosed flares may combust slightly less than open flares. It’s an open question whether companies are using enclosed flares to avoid detection from space. It seems like some probably are, while others are not. A May 2024 article in The Guardian shows open flares changing to enclosed flares in Colorado. An optical image camera detected methane leaks from the enclosed flare while the company stated they had eliminated all emissions.

 

AI is Being Used to Aid Methane Leak Detection

     Smart algorithms are needed to better understand and better quantify leaks. It also allows leaks to be discovered faster and more accurately. The combination of satellite data and AI is the emerging methodology. According to Climate Compass:

“In 2025, AI systems like MARS-S2L emerged as game-changers, analyzing Sentinel-2 satellite images to spot methane plumes faster and more accurately than ever before.”

“The system delivered a 216% improvement in precision over older methods, drastically reducing false alarms and missed leaks. “AI has become our microscope,” said a researcher involved in the project.

 

Accurate Satellite Data Availability Means New Legal and Reputational Risks

     According to the law firm Herbert Smith, Freehills, and Kramer, the now better accuracy and coverage of satellite emissions data means increasing legal and reputational risks for individual companies and facilities. They also note that it can help oil & gas companies when the data is used to find and fix their leaks faster.

“This greater availability of data amplifies the legal and reputational pressures on operators at every stage of the value chain (upstream, midstream, and downstream). Combined with tougher regulations, including the EU Methane Regulation and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) methane rules for oil and gas operations, and the California climate disclosure rules, the sector now faces changing levels of scrutiny from regulators, investors and the public.”

     They also point out that satellite data, while improving, is not foolproof, and there may be disputes about the origin and quantity of some emissions. The use of drones and aircraft monitoring can supplement satellite data and resolve such disputes. If natural gas is certified as responsibly sourced and found to be leaking from sites at higher rates, then that can lead to disputes. Shareholder activism may be enacted in such cases to hold companies to account. Discrepancies between reported and observed emissions can also have reputational effects for companies.

“Given the growing prevalence of third-party satellite data, it is prudent to periodically review publicly available imagery of one's assets. Early detection of discrepancies allows for timely investigations and repair work, demonstrating a proactive stance if questioned by authorities or stakeholders.”

“To further provide confidence in climate disclosures, many firms also seek independent third-party assurance for their climate reports, particularly in relation to emissions data.”

 

Greater Transparency is Now the Norm for All

     Finally, they note that the greater transparency provided by third-party satellite data is now the norm for all companies, which can all be scrutinized.

“For industry leaders, the benefits of proactive compliance can be substantial. By integrating robust monitoring technologies, refining contractual arrangements and embedding climate governance at the highest levels, companies stand a better chance of improving operational practices, driving financial benefit, safeguarding value, avoiding lawsuits, preserving their reputations and maintaining stable access to key markets. The alternative risks fines, legal actions and loss of trust among stakeholders.”

 

      

References:

 

Satellite Images Reveal Hidden Methane Leaks the Industry Didn’t Disclose. Jeff Blaumberg. Climate Compass. June 11, 2025. Satellite Images Reveal Hidden Methane Leaks the Industry Didn’t Disclose

How Satellite Monitoring Has Become the Gold Standard for Methane Detection. Jitha James. GHG Sat. April 23, 2025. How Satellite Monitoring Has Become the Gold Standard for Methane Detection - GHGSat

Satellite data and climate regulations in oil & gas: Navigating new legal and reputational risks. Lewis McDonald, Charlie Morgan, Louise Barber, Jannis Bille and Andrew Otis. Herbert Smith, Freehills, Kramer. April 4, 2025. Satellite data and climate regulations in oil & gas: Navigating new legal and reputational risks | Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer | Global law firm

Methane emissions from gas flaring being hidden from satellite monitors: Use of enclosed combustors leaves regulators heavily reliant on oil and gas companies’ own flaring data. Tom Brown and Christina Last. The Guardian. May 2, 2024. Methane emissions from gas flaring being hidden from satellite monitors | Climate crisis | The Guardian