REDUCTION OF METHANE EMISSIONS IN THE EU NATURAL GAS INDUSTRY

Jrgen Vorgang, E.ON Ruhrgas AG, Germany; Angelo Riva, Eni S.p.A, G&P Div. G&P, Italy; Alessandro
Cigni, Marcogaz, Belgium; Daniel Hec, Marcogaz, Belgium
Keywords: Methane emissions, methodology, emission factor, best practice
1. Background
Global climate change led to an intensive discussion about greenhouse gases. The most important
anthropogenic greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide (CO2), but other emissions also contribute to the
greenhouse effect. Burning of fossil fuels to provide energy and heat is recognised as a significant source of
greenhouse gas emissions. Natural gas has a growing role in energy and heat production because it is
recognised as the fossil fuel with the lowest specific CO2 emissions per unit of energy provided. But its
principal component, methane (CH4), is the second important anthropogenic greenhouse gas, which has a
1
global warming potential 25 times that of CO2. In terms of climate change effects, burning natural gas is
better than releasing it into the atmosphere. Compared to oil or coal the life cycle analysis regarding CO2
equivalents for natural gas from production to the customer in the EU is better. Greenhouse gas emissions of
natural gas from the European transmission, storage and distribution systems have been recognised for
some time by Marcogaz, the Technical Association of the European Natural Gas Industry, as a subject to
study.
One of the standing committees of Marcogaz is the Joint Group Environment, Health & Safety, led together
with Eurogas. The question of how methane emissions are determined in the member countries led to the
2
founding of a working group Methane Emissions, in which members from 9 different EU countries took part
to share their experiences. The final results of this working group were internal reports describing
A methodology for estimating methane emissions in the gas industry
Guidelines for choosing methane emission factors
The working group is aware of the fact that this is a first approach to support companies in building up an
inventory of releases and to start communication for a better comparability. In the given framework of this
working group it was not possible to verify the emission factors.
A report on Reduction of methane emissions in the European gas industry Practices and technologies
containing a number of case studies adopted by European gas companies to reduce methane emissions has
3
also been prepared by the working group and has been published on the Marcogaz website.
This paper shows the efforts of the European gas industry in addressing methane emissions and provides
best practice guidance for reducing methane emissions which other companies may learn from or which they
can adopt.
2. Objectives of the Paper
The objective of this paper is to give a short introduction to the Marcogaz-Eurogas study. Here the broader
study covering different sectors of the natural gas supply chain will be limited to the transmission sector with
special focus on the methodology for evaluating methane releases to the atmosphere. The main parameters
are emission factors, which can vary from one gas company to another for various reasons. A proposal is
made to recommend choosing emission factors within a range identified by the study.
3. Methodology
3.1 Conditions and Definitions
The conditions for using a common methodology for different companies were defined as:

1
2
3

Applicable to gas transmission, storage, distribution and LNG,

Covering normal operations as well as routine maintenance, malfunction of the system and external
factors, e. g. damage from excavators,
Mass-related, see IPCC Assessment Report 4, 2007
Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Slovakia, Spain, UK
www.marcogaz.org

Based on existing knowledge (no R&D required),

Considering fugitive emissions, vented gas, incomplete combustion and pneumatic devices.

Terms to be defined are as follows:

Fugitive emissions are all small leaks from flanges, pipe equipment, valves, joints, etc. that are more or
less continuous sources.
Vented emissions can be distinguished as
o intended vents for maintenance or operational reasons and
o vents from incidents, when the content of the gas equipment is released to the atmosphere.
Incomplete combustion emissions are unburnt methane gases in the exhaust gases mainly from gas
engines, but also smaller amounts from gas turbines and combustion facilities.
Pneumatic emissions are all emissions caused by gas operating valves and other devices, continuous as
well as intermittent emissions.

3.2 Evaluation Basis

The evaluation of some methane emissions is difficult because these emissions are very low in relation to
the volumes of gas transported and because of a high number of emission sources, different operating
procedures and different inspection intervals and time until repair. For these reasons it is in practice
impossible to measure all the emissions exactly. Therefore the way to calculate methane emissions is based
on the use of emission factors and activity factors with the following equation:
Emissions = (Activity Factor x Emission Factor)
The activity factors are the population of emitting equipment such as length of pipelines, number and type
of valves, number and type of pneumatic devices, and the frequency of emitting events such as number of
operating vents and frequency of operation of gas-driven pneumatic devices for pressure regulation. Activity
factors can be determined by knowledge of the infrastructure and the operation (e.g. length of pipelines,
number of valve stations and number of natural gas-operated startups of gas turbines).
The emission factors are defined as the quantity of methane emitted from each emitting source and for
each emitting event and period of time, respectively. Some emission factors can be calculated or measured,
such as the gas vented for operating reasons or for maintenance, others can be evaluated on the basis of
the characteristic of components, such as the emissions from each intervention of pneumatic devices, and
others are very difficult to be evaluated or measured, such as those deriving from fugitive emissions.
This equation can be used for fugitive and pneumatic emissions as well as for incomplete combustion. It is
also applicable to the calculation of periodic vents, e.g. methane emissions caused by starting a turbine with
pressurised natural gas.
3.3 Emission Factors
On the basis of this calculation equation a spreadsheet for transmission, storage, distribution up to the meter
and LNG was created to cover all relevant sources of methane emissions and make sure that all are
systematically taken into account.

Figure 1: Spreadsheets for transmission, storage, distribution and LNG

These spreadsheets were circulated among the Marcogaz-Eurogas working group members coming from
9 different EU member states to determine how the emission factors vary from one company to another. Not
all companies used this methodology and therefore they were not able to supply all factors, so sometimes
the number of answers for an individual factor was low. The result was a high variability of emission factors
(examples in Figures 2 and 3).

12000

9.000
8.000

10000

7.000
8000

6.000
5.000

6000

4.000
3.000

4000

2.000
2000

1.000
0

Company

Figure 2: Emission factor for compressor station

fugitive emissions

Company

Figure 3: Emission factor for M&R station

fugitive emissions

The working group investigated reasons for this variability:

Sources of factors: The different factors were only partly based on measurements, but mainly based on
estimations or literature data.
The working group investigated the different approaches to measuring emissions. Some approaches are
described in the literature. Common to all types of measurement up to now is the relatively high effort
needed to get reliable results. The actual knowledge needs improvement, but due to increasing
discussions about climate change and greenhouse gas emissions the tendency to take environmental
reasons into account is growing.
Equipment: Different companies in different countries are purchasing equipment according to national
standards, therefore one can find a broad range of types of equipment within the companies. Thus,
comparability does not exist.
Groups of equipment: In some companies different sources were treated as one one group with only one
emission factor, e.g. pipelines including valve stations or a complete city gate station.
Age: Following the increasing use of natural gas as an energy source the development of technology
has improved, so one can find different technical generations of equipment even within one company
and of course in different companies in Europe.

The working group discussed many more different parameters like pipeline material for distribution pipes,
maintenance and operating philosophy, location and, in some cases, pipeline ageing. The qualitative effect

of parameters on the emission factor was estimated (see table in Annex I), but should be decided by each
company individually.
In the given framework of this working group it was not possible to verify the emission factors, so the values
were all accepted as correct. A further investigation has been initiated, but needs more time to be
undertaken.
The dissimilarity of all those parameters among companies or among countries also makes the adoption of
these coefficients a very tricky issue. To evaluate its individual methane releases, each company should use
factors based on its specific conditions. Without knowing these factors, the working group proposes a range
of emission factors, where each company using this methodology chooses its appropriate emission factor.
The working group considers this proposal as a first approach, which shall be updated regularily with better
knowledge of gas companies and of investigations on main influencing parameters with the aim of choosing
appropriate emission factors.
Emission Factors
Subsystem and Souce
Pipeline System
- Fugitive Emissions
Pipeline System
- Pneumatic Emissions
Compressor Stations
- Fugitive Emissions
Compressor Stations
- Fugitive Emissions
Compressor Stations
- Fugitive Emissions
Compressor Stations
- Pneumatic Emissions
Compressor Stations
- Combustion Waste Gas
Compressor Stations
- Combustion Waste Gas
M&R Stations
- Fugitive Emissions
M&R Stations
- Pneumatic Emissions
M&R Stations
- Combustion
5
City Gate Stations
- Fugitive & pneumatic Emiss.

Type of Factor
Length of pipelines
including valves, flanges etc.
Number of valves with pneumatic
operation
Mechanical power of gas turbines

Marcogaz Range
Minimum
Maximum
0,8
107

Unit
m/km/a

129*

129*

m3/No./a

450

6500

m3/MW/a

Mechanical power of gas engines

7800

97000

m3/MW/a

Number of blow down Valves

1850

35000

m3/No./a

Number of valves with pneumatic

operation
Fuel gas consumption turbines

1106

3200

m3/No./a

0,001

0,95

Fuel gas consumption engines

0,114

3,7

Number of stations

5000

10000

m3/No./a

Number of stations

22300

24500

m3/No./a

0,0113*

0,0113*

43

62

Fuel gas consumption

Number of stations

%
m3/No./a

*Only one value for this factor

Table 1: Emission factors for transmission Range of values from EU member companies of the Marcogaz
working group
3.4 Venting
Venting, i.e. the release of unburnt natural gas to the atmosphere, is often caused by operational
requirements (e.g. depressurising of a compressor), maintenance and repair measures, when working at the
equipment requires a non-explosive atmosphere. Venting also might occur after third party interference,
when e.g. excavation machines damage a pipeline.
For the determination of vented volumes the above-mentioned equation cannot be used. In these cases the
individual geometric volume of the vented sector of equipment must be calculated and the result is multiplied
by the pressure of natural gas before venting.
4. Results of Data Collection

4
5

One extremely high value differs from most other very low ones
Depending on the national definition either part of transmission or distribution sector

The analysis of collected data from seven major western European gas transmission companies in 2004
shows similar distribution of emissions to the different sources of equipment (figure 4).
M&R Stations;
44%

City Gate
Stations; 3%

Compressor
Stations; 33%

Pipeline System;
21%

Figure 4: Distribution of methane releases by transmission equipment

It was surprising that the releases form Metering & Regulating Stations have the highest share of emissions,
whereas compressor stations and pipelines follow with a difference of 10 % each. In Figure 5 a more
detailed view of individual reasons for releasing gas is shown.

M&R - Pneumatic; 26%

M&R - Fugitive; 17%

M&R - Vents; 1%
City Gate Stations; 3%
Pipeline - Fugitive; 2%

Com pr. Station Vents; 12%

Pipeline - Pneum atic;

1%

Compr. Station Pneum atic; 4%

Pipeline - Vents; 19%

Com pr.Station Fugitive; 16%

Figure 5: Distribution of releases in transmission in detail

On the other hand it was interesting to see the distribution of releases by kind of release (figure 6).

Vents; 32%

City Gate
Stations; 3%

Pneumatic
Emissions; 31%

Fugitive
Emissions; 35%

Figure 6: Distribution of methane releases by kind

It can be stated that fugitive and pneumatic emissions as well as venting are on the same level. Fugitive
emissions are unintended releases, whereas pneumatic emissions and venting are caused by the technical
requirements of the operator and the equipment in use. To reduce fugitive emissions it is important to identify
the leaks responsible for the release and then take action to avoid them. To reduce other releases it is
necessary to modify either the technology (reinvestment) or, if possible, the operating philosophy (e.g. keep
compressors under pressure when taken out of operation).
5. Best Practice Cases
To demonstrate that a lot of measures can be taken, a collection of best practice cases was made. Different
companies offered their case descriptions to explain how emissions can be reduced or avoided. Each case
study is combined with the name of an expert in the company together with contact details. The main items
were:

Flaring: Use of a mobile flare unit to burn vented gas at pipeline maintenance works.
Reduction of maintenance emissions: Use of a mobile compressor to pump gas from a section to be
vented into a neighbouring section.
Reduction of operating emissions: Use of low or zero emitting pneumatic systems with re-use of the gas
instead of venting.
Inspection and maintenance programmes: Organisational measures to detect emissions earlier and stop
them.
6

This report can be downloaded directly from the Marcogaz website . As the report produced by IGU Study
Group 3.3 of the Working Committee 3 for Transmission is based on the Marcogaz-Eurogas collection of
best practice cases, any interested reader can also refer to that report.
6. Conclusions
To determine methane emissions the companies have only a limited number of exactly measured data. Due
to (still) high costs of measurements they usually use estimated or literature data instead.
For companies it is a good starting point to use the recommended range of emission factors mentioned in
the Marcogaz-Eurogas study unless they have a better knowledge about their individual emissions.

6
www.marcogaz.org Marcogaz publications Environment, Health & Safety 2008 Reduction of methane emissions in the
European gas industry Practices and technologies

The variety of emission factors and their dependency on many influencing parameters require further
investigations. A common approach has been adopted by some European companies to obtain a better
knowledge of these influences.
Preparing an inventory of emissions is a task which will be more and more important for the gas industry
because scientific and public pressure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will rise in the future. Due to the
shorter lifetime of methane molecules compared to CO2, a reduction of methane emissions has a more rapid
positive influence on the climate than reducing CO2.
Various options are used to minimise emissions from the gas supply system for reasons of safety, economic
considerations and operational efficiency. Against the backdrop of scientific knowledge about climate
warming, the environmental consciousness of operators is growing. European gas companies have
assumed technical and financial commitments to reduce methane emissions through the supply chain up to
the customer's meter. It is the responsibility of individual system operators to approach this in the most costeffective way, best suited to their particular circumstances, and taking full account of safety and security of
supply.
7. Summary
This report uses the previous work of the Marcogaz-Eurogas working group Methane Emissions to provide
a baseline. It enables operators of transmission systems to evaluate their releases of methane to the
atmosphere. A methodology is proposed to calculate emissions e.g. by the use of activity and emission
factors. The paper proposes an interval for emission factors identified by European gas transmission
companies as a first approach in case no better knowledge is available.
Various options are used to minimise emissions from the gas supply system for reasons of safety, economic
considerations, operational efficiency and environmental concerns. European gas companies have for many
years been making a continuous technical and financial commitment to reduce methane emissions through
the supply chain up to the customer's meter. Opportunities for reduction of methane emissions have been
identified for a range of transmission and distribution activities and documented in a collection of best
practice cases.
Adoption of the methodologies and best practice cases should help to demonstrate that the proactive
approach taken for decades limits the need for any legislation aimed at reducing methane emissions in the
gas industry.

Acknowledgement:
The authors wish to thank the members of the Marcogaz working group Methane Emissions for their
cooperation and contributions and especially Mr. Luciano Occhio from Snam Rete Gas S.p.A. for his
support.
Annex I: Qualitative influence of parameters on emission factors

Pipeline System - Fugitive Emissions from

pipelines including valves, flanges etc.
Pipeline System - Pneumatic Emissions from
valves with pneumatic operation
Compressor Stations - Fugitive Emissions
from gas turbines
Compressor Stations - Fugitive Emissions
from gas engines
Compressor Stations - Fugitive Emissions
from blow down valves
Compressor Stations - Pneumatic Emissions
from valves with pneumatic operation
Compressor Stations - Combustion Waste Gas
from fuel gas consumption turbines
Compressor Stations - Combustion Waste Gas
from fuel gas consumption engines

M&R Stations - Fugitive Emissions

from stations
M&R Stations - Pneumatic Emissions
from stations
M&R Stations - Combustion
of fuel gas
City Gate Stations
Emissions

Emission
Factor

Parameter
Age of the
equipment

Frequency of
maintenance













Time to repair

Time between 2
inspections

Pressure in the
equipment

Diameter of pipe

Number of valves

Type of soil
X
-

Protection of the
pipe


-

Type of
equipment
X
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
x
x
x
X

Sealing quality






Operating
philosophy
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
x
x
x
x

Symbol



X
-

Meaning
the emission factor increases with the parameter
the emission factor decreases while the parameter increases
the parameter has an influence on the value but no trend can be defined
there is no influence