Methane flaring (not industrial)

Industry

High Arctic Tundra, Northern Taymyr, Russia July 1990

Methane is a highly potent greenhouse gas and its reduction is given ever greater priority in international emission reduction policies. Given the increasing, and potentially catastrophic rate of methane release from the thawing Arctic and Northern permafrost, these regions are crucial in this endeavor. Apart from the methane release from microbial activity in thawing permafrost on land, methane also escapes in the form of hydrates which have been formed under sediments beneath the sea.

Apart from proposals to destroy atmospheric methane or capturing it, some have suggested it could be possible to prevent methane from reaching the atmosphere or flaring it. Sellers (2011) noted that it could be possible to cover a certain subsea area and, instead of trying to capture the hydrates, flaring them, thereby turning the methane into relatively less potent GHG CO2. Lockley (2012) also writes about ‘Small, inexpensive spark devices can ignite combustible methane/air mixtures at source’. Paul Klinkman equally writes about 'Compact wind-powered sparking devices with small batteries' to flare methane at source. Alternatively, Stolaroff et al. (2012) and Lockley (2012) suggested ideas to disturb the methane bubbles while they traveled through the water column, thereby making it less likely for them to reach the surface and enter into the atmosphere.

Technological Readiness Level (TRL)

Low 1

There has not been major scientific interest in the idea, as major difficulties arise from non-point source emissions mitigation (Johannisson, and Hiete, 2020). Small scale experiments with capturing and flaring methane using recycled parachutes is done by the company Frost Methane (https://www.frostmethane.com/, see Catalog of Research Funding Needs to Advance Methane Removal (2023) at methaneaction.org). Methane flaring development is also part of the US Reducing Emissions of Methane Every Day of the Year (REMEDY) program (arpa-e.energy.gov/news-and-media/press-releases/us-department-energy-awards-35-million-technologies-reduce-methane). Ming et al (2022) however argue that such ideas remain speculative without concrete details.

Technological Readiness Level (TRL)

A technology with a TRL of 1-3: TRL 1 – Basic; TRL 2 – Concept formulated; TRL 3 – Experimental proof of concept

Scalability

Low 1

It might be that certain measures could be able to capture methane or hydrates from concentrated sources, although given the huge surface area and logistical difficulties, Stolaroff et al, (2012) write that 'Few of the known mitigation measures appear applicable to large-scale aqueous sources.'

Scalability

Physically unable to scale; sub-linear/logarithmic efficiency of scalability

Timeliness for near-future effects

Unknown 0

Northern + Arctic potential

Unknown 0

Global potential

Unknown 0

Cost - benefit

Unknown 0

Environmental risks

Unknown 0

Community impacts

Unknown 0

Ease of reversibility

Unknown 0

Risk of termination shock

Low 3

Risk of termination shock

Low or insignificant termination shock or damage

Legality/governance

High 3

It is likely that nation states could implement such measures on their own territory.

Legality/governance

Currently legal to deploy, with governance structures in place to facilitate it and/or financial incentives to develop it

Scientific/media attention

Low 1

Apart from a few studies, there has been relatively little attention for this measure.

Scientific/media attention

Very low attention from individuals and/or abandoned ideas; low media attention; no commercial interest.

References

Johannisson, J., & Hiete, M. (2020). A structured approach for the mitigation of natural methane emissions—lessons learned from anthropogenic emissions. C, 6(2), 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/c6020024

Lockley, A. (2012). Comment on “Review of methane mitigation technologies with application to rapid release of methane from the Arctic”. Environmental science & technology, 46(24), 13552-13553. https://doi.org/10.1021/es303074j

Ming, T., Li, W., Yuan, Q., Davies, P., De Richter, R., Peng, C., ... & Zhou, N. (2022). Perspectives on removal of atmospheric methane. Advances in Applied Energy, 100085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adapen.2022.100085

Salter, S. H. (2011). Can we capture methane from the Arctic seabed? Retrieved April 6, 2018. Available at: http://arctic-news.blogspot.co.uk/p/methane-capture.html [Accessed 22 July 2024]

Stolaroff, J. K., Bhattacharyya, S., Smith, C. A., Bourcier, W. L., Cameron-Smith, P. J., & Aines, R. D. (2012). Review of methane mitigation technologies with application to rapid release of methane from the Arctic. Environmental Science & Technology, 46(12), 6455-6469. https://doi.org/10.1021/es204686w

Related ideas

Polar bear looking for whale cadaver under water, Svalbard

Industry

Direct ocean capture

The majority of the inorganic carbon on Earth is stored in the oceans. There is a natural carbon exchange between the ocean and the land.

Land-based measures

Agricultural soil management

Terrestrial carbon can be stored in biomass above or below the ground, and in soils themselves. Soil organic matter can form differently, and have different amounts of plant and microbial components depending on the availability of water (Cotrufo and Lavallee, 2022). The large amounts of the Earth that have been brought under cultivation over the past 12.000 years have significantly degraded soil carbon levels, and have released some 110 billion metric tons of carbon (Sanderman et al. 2017). Soil security and health is increasingly being recognised as essential for planetary health (Kopittke et al. (2022).

Nuclear icebreaker "Taymyr" operating in sea ice North of Dickson, Taymyr, Russia

Sea ice & icebergs

Sea ice breakup in winter

Sea ice can be an effective insulator between colder winter air and the warmer ocean below, thereby reducing the potential dissipation of heat into space.

Nickel Smelters, Norilsk, Siberia, Russia

Industry

Carbon capture and storage

Both emission reductions and CDR measures that actively reduce carbon dioxide are essential to reduce the amount of GHGs in the atmosphere and mitigate the effects of climate change. However, some carbon emissions, especially in the industrial and energy sectors, will be difficult to fully decarbonise.

Ice sheets and glaciers

Increasing humidity around glaciers and ice sheets

Up to 50% of the world’s glaciers are set to disappear this century, with many more at risk if emission reduction targets are not met (Rounce et al. 2023).

A school of juveniles of the Dusky spinefoot Siganus luridus (second)

Oceans & marine

Artificial upwelling

Oceans play an important role in global heat transfer and carbon storage processes. As global temperatures and atmospheric carbon levels rise, some have suggested artificially modifying the vertical movement of water to enhance these processes.

Inuit hunter traveling by snow scooter on melting sea ice, Pond Inlet, Canada

Sea ice & icebergs

Sea ice albedo modification

Arctic sea ice extent has rapidly decreased over the last few decades, with most multi-year ice disappearing altogether. This has already had major effects on local communities and ecosystems. The disappearance of the relatively reflective sea ice also leads to a dramatic decrease of albedo in the Arctic and subsequent high energy uptakes by the darker water during the Arctic summers.

Industry

Built-environment albedo enhancement (white roofs etc.)

An increase in GHGs in the atmosphere leads to a greater amount of outgoing infrared radiation from the earth being retained. There are several SRM ideas that seek to compensate for this by reflecting more radiation back to space.