土壤表面通量测量是评估土壤和季节间逸散气体迁移的可靠手段

IF 4.7 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Mark Argento, F. Henderson, R. Lewis, D. Mallyon, D. Risk, N. Nickerson
{"title":"土壤表面通量测量是评估土壤和季节间逸散气体迁移的可靠手段","authors":"Mark Argento, F. Henderson, R. Lewis, D. Mallyon, D. Risk, N. Nickerson","doi":"10.1525/elementa.2021.00010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As oil and gas wells age and the number of wells drilled increases to meet demand, we may see more instances of fugitive soil gas migration (GM) and associated methane (CH4) emissions. Due to the immense spatiotemporal variability of soils and uncertainty in measurement practice, the detection and quantification of GM emissions is a challenge. Two common measurement techniques include the shallow in-soil gas concentration approach and soil surface flux measurements using flux chambers. In this numerical modeling study, both methods were compared to determine how soil texture, environmental conditions (water content, temperature), and CH4 leak rates into the soil profile influenced in-soil CH4 concentration and surface CH4 flux rates. We observed that in-soil CH4 concentration was strongly controlled by soil texture and environmental conditions, whereas surface CH4 flux rates were far less sensitive to those same parameters. Flux measurements were more useful for determining severity of the CH4 leak into the soil and allowed us to differentiate between leak and nonleak scenarios in soils with biological CH4 production which could complicate a GM assessment. We also evaluated field measurements of carbon dioxide from an enhanced oil recovery site to demonstrate how seasonal conditions can influence concentrations of trace gases in shallow soil. Based on our model results and supplemental field measurements, we propose that flux chamber measurements present a more reliable tool to assess the incidence and severity of fugitive GM.","PeriodicalId":54279,"journal":{"name":"Elementa-Science of the Anthropocene","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Soil surface flux measurements are a reliable means for assessing fugitive gas migration across soils and seasons\",\"authors\":\"Mark Argento, F. Henderson, R. Lewis, D. Mallyon, D. Risk, N. Nickerson\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/elementa.2021.00010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As oil and gas wells age and the number of wells drilled increases to meet demand, we may see more instances of fugitive soil gas migration (GM) and associated methane (CH4) emissions. Due to the immense spatiotemporal variability of soils and uncertainty in measurement practice, the detection and quantification of GM emissions is a challenge. Two common measurement techniques include the shallow in-soil gas concentration approach and soil surface flux measurements using flux chambers. In this numerical modeling study, both methods were compared to determine how soil texture, environmental conditions (water content, temperature), and CH4 leak rates into the soil profile influenced in-soil CH4 concentration and surface CH4 flux rates. We observed that in-soil CH4 concentration was strongly controlled by soil texture and environmental conditions, whereas surface CH4 flux rates were far less sensitive to those same parameters. Flux measurements were more useful for determining severity of the CH4 leak into the soil and allowed us to differentiate between leak and nonleak scenarios in soils with biological CH4 production which could complicate a GM assessment. We also evaluated field measurements of carbon dioxide from an enhanced oil recovery site to demonstrate how seasonal conditions can influence concentrations of trace gases in shallow soil. Based on our model results and supplemental field measurements, we propose that flux chamber measurements present a more reliable tool to assess the incidence and severity of fugitive GM.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Elementa-Science of the Anthropocene\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Elementa-Science of the Anthropocene\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2021.00010\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Elementa-Science of the Anthropocene","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2021.00010","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着油气井的老化和钻井数量的增加以满足需求,我们可能会看到更多的土壤逸散性气体迁移(GM)和相关甲烷(CH4)排放的实例。由于土壤的巨大时空变异性和测量实践中的不确定性,转基因排放的检测和量化是一个挑战。两种常用的测量技术包括浅层土壤内气体浓度法和利用通量室测量土壤表面通量。在这项数值模拟研究中,比较了这两种方法,以确定土壤质地、环境条件(含水量、温度)和土壤剖面中的CH4泄漏率如何影响土壤中CH4浓度和地表CH4通量率。土壤中CH4浓度受土壤质地和环境条件的强烈控制,而地表CH4通量速率对这些参数的敏感性要小得多。通量测量对于确定土壤中CH4泄漏的严重程度更有用,并使我们能够区分具有生物CH4产生的土壤中的泄漏和非泄漏情景,这可能使转基因评估复杂化。我们还评估了一个强化采油地点的二氧化碳现场测量值,以证明季节条件如何影响浅层土壤中微量气体的浓度。基于我们的模型结果和补充的现场测量,我们建议通量室测量提供了一个更可靠的工具来评估逸散性GM的发生率和严重程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Soil surface flux measurements are a reliable means for assessing fugitive gas migration across soils and seasons
As oil and gas wells age and the number of wells drilled increases to meet demand, we may see more instances of fugitive soil gas migration (GM) and associated methane (CH4) emissions. Due to the immense spatiotemporal variability of soils and uncertainty in measurement practice, the detection and quantification of GM emissions is a challenge. Two common measurement techniques include the shallow in-soil gas concentration approach and soil surface flux measurements using flux chambers. In this numerical modeling study, both methods were compared to determine how soil texture, environmental conditions (water content, temperature), and CH4 leak rates into the soil profile influenced in-soil CH4 concentration and surface CH4 flux rates. We observed that in-soil CH4 concentration was strongly controlled by soil texture and environmental conditions, whereas surface CH4 flux rates were far less sensitive to those same parameters. Flux measurements were more useful for determining severity of the CH4 leak into the soil and allowed us to differentiate between leak and nonleak scenarios in soils with biological CH4 production which could complicate a GM assessment. We also evaluated field measurements of carbon dioxide from an enhanced oil recovery site to demonstrate how seasonal conditions can influence concentrations of trace gases in shallow soil. Based on our model results and supplemental field measurements, we propose that flux chamber measurements present a more reliable tool to assess the incidence and severity of fugitive GM.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Elementa-Science of the Anthropocene
Elementa-Science of the Anthropocene Earth and Planetary Sciences-Atmospheric Science
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
5.10%
发文量
65
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: A new open-access scientific journal, Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene publishes original research reporting on new knowledge of the Earth’s physical, chemical, and biological systems; interactions between human and natural systems; and steps that can be taken to mitigate and adapt to global change. Elementa reports on fundamental advancements in research organized initially into six knowledge domains, embracing the concept that basic knowledge can foster sustainable solutions for society. Elementa is published on an open-access, public-good basis—available freely and immediately to the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信