"Flaring" Wastes 3.5 Percent of the World's Natural Gas

Satellite measurements track burned gas by country as policy makers seek to reduce emissions

gas flare up

Flaring is common in oil and gas fields because producers deem it faster and cheaper to burn natural gas than to capture and use it, typically because they lack pipelines to economically transport the gas to market.

©iStock

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

TREND WATCH: Around 3.5% of the world’s natural-gas supply was wastefully burned, or ‘flared’, at oil and gas fields in 2012, according to the latest estimates from satellite data.

The United States has the greatest number of flares, but Russia leads the world in the total volume of flared natural gas (see chart, 'Top natural-gas-flaring nations'). In 2012, the 143 billion cubic metres of gas flared led to the emission of more than 350 million tons of carbon dioxide, around 10% of the annual emissions of European Union member states.

Estimates for later years have yet to be published. But a preliminary analysis suggests that the overall volume of gas flared has remained fairly constant, says Christopher Elvidge, a remote-sensing specialist who leads a team at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in Washington DC that collects gas-flaring data.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Flaring is common in oil and gas fields because producers deem it faster and cheaper to burn natural gas than to capture and use it, typically because they lack pipelines to economically transport the gas to market. But official data on the extent of the practice are scarce.

In a December 25 paper, the NOAA researchers report tracking flares using an instrument aboard a NASA weather satellite that takes images of Earth in infrared and visible light.  (Previously, the team had used images from a US Air Force defence satellite, but a degradation in the satellite’s orbit made it impossible to collect accurate global data on gas flaring).

“Flaring is an unproductive waste of a valuable, non-renewable resource and a significant source of carbon dioxide and methane emissions,” says Bjørn Håmsø, who manages the Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership at the World Bank in Washington DC.

The World Bank aims to end routine gas flaring at oil production sites around the world by 2030, in an initiative launched last year. Some 45 governments, organizations and oil companies had signed up to the plan by the end of the international climate negotiations in Paris.

High-quality national estimates, with detail on how much natural gas is being burned off where, will help governments to implement policies to reduce flaring and track progress, Håmsø says. Estimates for subsequent years are expected to be published in the next few weeks.

Read More: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/north-dakota-flared-off-1-billion-worth-of-natural-gas-last-year/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/landmark-deal-curbs-flaring-pollution/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-methane-leaks-from-fracking-be-turned-into-valuable-gasoline/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/turning-natural-gas-pollution-into-gasoline/

This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on January 11, 2016.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe