Translating Methane Data to Action

Observations of methane emissions are just one piece in the mitigation puzzle. Collected data can be used to prioritize and plan next steps. For example, EMIT data can be used to prioritize the highest-emitting sites within a country for future mitigation action. While modeling tools like the WasteMAP Decision Support Tools can be used by cities and operators to find and test effective mitigation pathways for reducing emissions at the satellite-identified sites.

Alternatively, remote sensing data can be combined with site information at a particular site to identify work practices or specific infrastructure that contributes to super-emitter behavior.

For example, Carbon Mapper coordinated with U.S. state governments in California and Pennsylvania to share methane observations from airborne instruments with landfill operators. Operators conducted a voluntary follow-up investigation to identify the infrastructure and activities causing methane plumes. In California, these coordinated efforts between the state and industry helped identify the landfill work face – where new waste placement and construction activities occur – as a common source of emissions at landfills.

Once mitigation activities are underway, routine monitoring can be used to verify that emissions are decreasing as expected. In some cases, methane monitoring can provide short-term verification that an engineering or work practice adjustment addressed a known emission source.

Case studies in methane mitigation action in the waste sector

At the Sunshine Canyon landfill in California, for instance, observations from airborne instruments were used to identify parts of the landfill where the surface cover needed to be addressed. Improvements to the cover and the gas capture system were made as part of a coordinated effort between the operator and local enforcement agency, and follow-up monitoring verified emissions reductions.

In cases where mitigation action focuses on reducing the volume of organics sent to landfills (e.g., organics diversion and waste generation reduction), we expect methane generation at the final waste disposal site will decrease over time, leading to reduced emissions. Sustained methane monitoring at waste sites can be used to track the impact of these mitigation pathways on emission trends over time. Crucial to this is establishing an accurate baseline emission estimate for the site, which can be done through methane monitoring before mitigation action or estimation of baseline emissions using models that have been validated with observations.

The LOW-Methane Data Strategy demonstrates how satellite data and methane models can be used together to establish waste site baseline emissions and track post-mitigation trends over time. Many countries and sub-national jurisdictions with detected super-emitters (including some in Figure 3) are partners to the LOW-Methane Initiative, which is encouraging for future methane reductions in this sector. In addition to these global initiatives, major U.S. waste companies have committed to monitor methane and reduce emissions, showing promise for future data-driven mitigation.

The Global Methane Pledge, launched in 2021, looks to reduce methane emissions through country commitments to collectively reduce emissions by 30% below 2020 levels by 2030. Considering methane super-emitters can account for a large fraction of national waste methane emissions in many countries, addressing this issue represents a pathway to reduce overall national and global waste emissions. This opportunity — paired with greater accessibility of methane observations from space via satellite monitoring — can support informed decisionmaking and verify emissions reductions in this critical sector.

Resources

Articles: 2

Success in Colorado’s Denver-Julesburg Basin

California Mitigation Examples