49 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Methane Mitigation: Methods to Reduce Emissions, on the Path to the Paris Agreement E. Nisbet et al. 10.1029/2019RG000675
2. Controlled-release experiment to investigate uncertainties in UAV-based emission quantification for methane point sources R. Morales et al. 10.5194/amt-15-2177-2022
3. Importance of Superemitter Natural Gas Well Pads in the Marcellus Shale D. Caulton et al. 10.1021/acs.est.8b06965
4. The evolution of environmental forensics: From laboratory to field analysis V. Spikmans 10.1002/wfs2.1334
5. Development and validation of a route planning methodology for vehicle-based remote measurements of methane and other emissions from oil and gas wells and facilities M. Gao et al. 10.1080/10962247.2022.2113182
6. Open-path cavity ring-down methane sensor for mobile monitoring of natural gas emissions L. Mchale et al. 10.1364/OE.27.020084
7. Uncertainty in the Mobile Observation of Wind E. Leibensperger et al. 10.3390/atmos14050765
8. Contributing to a Greener New York: Analysis of Methane Emissions in New York State M. Weil et al. 10.1063/10.0022471
9. Methane Emission Estimation of Oil and Gas Sector: A Review of Measurement Technologies, Data Analysis Methods and Uncertainty Estimation S. Sun et al. 10.3390/su132413895
10. Quantification of methane emission rate from oil and gas wells in Romania using ground-based measurement techniques P. Korbeń et al. 10.1525/elementa.2022.00070
11. Gathering Pipeline Methane Emissions in Utica Shale Using an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle and Ground-Based Mobile Sampling H. Li et al. 10.3390/atmos11070716
12. Stationary and drone-assisted methane plume localization with dispersion spectroscopy M. Soskind et al. 10.1016/j.rse.2023.113513
13. Evaluation of two common source estimation measurement strategies using large-eddy simulation of plume dispersion under neutral atmospheric conditions A. Ražnjević et al. 10.5194/amt-15-3611-2022
14. Using controlled subsurface releases to investigate the effect of leak variation on above-ground natural gas detection M. Mbua et al. 10.1016/j.jgsce.2023.205153
15. Methane and ethane emission quantifications from onshore oil and gas sites in Romania, using a tracer gas dispersion method A. Delre et al. 10.1525/elementa.2021.000111
16. Estimating methane emissions from underground natural gas pipelines using an atmospheric dispersion-based method S. Tian et al. 10.1525/elementa.2022.00045
17. Optimizing an airborne mass-balance methodology for accurate emission rate quantification of industrial facilities: A case study of industrial facilities in South Korea G. Wong et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.169204
18. A review of close-range and screening technologies for mitigating fugitive methane emissions in upstream oil and gas T. Fox et al. 10.1088/1748-9326/ab0cc3
19. Quantifying CH4 concentration spikes above baseline and attributing CH4 sources to hydraulic fracturing activities by continuous monitoring at an off-site tower S. Russell et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117452
20. Technical note: Interpretation of field observations of point-source methane plume using observation-driven large-eddy simulations A. Ražnjević et al. 10.5194/acp-22-6489-2022
21. Abnormal tank emissions in the Permian Basin identified using ethane to methane ratios D. Caulton et al. 10.1525/elementa.2022.00121
22. Determining methane mole fraction at a landfill site using the Figaro Taguchi gas sensor 2611-C00 and wind direction measurements A. Shah et al. 10.1039/D3EA00138E
23. Mobile atmospheric measurements and local-scale inverse estimation of the location and rates of brief CH<sub>4</sub> and CO<sub>2</sub> releases from point sources P. Kumar et al. 10.5194/amt-14-5987-2021
24. Ethylene Oxide Exposure Attribution and Emissions Quantification Based on Ambient Air Measurements near a Sterilization Facility E. Olaguer et al. 10.3390/ijerph17010042
25. Fugitive and vented methane emissions surveying on the Weyburn CO2-EOR field in southeastern Saskatchewan, Canada K. MacKay et al. 10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.05.032
26. Underestimation of Sector-Wide Methane Emissions from United States Wastewater Treatment D. Moore et al. 10.1021/acs.est.2c05373
27. Breakthroughs in CH4 capture technologies: Key to reducing fugitive methane emissions in the energy sector W. Deng et al. 10.1016/j.ccst.2024.100316
28. A methane emissions reduction equivalence framework for alternative leak detection and repair programs T. Fox et al. 10.1525/elementa.369
29. Estimation and Applications of Uncertainty in Methane Emissions Quantification Technologies: A Bayesian Approach A. Wigle et al. 10.1021/acsestair.4c00030
30. Methane mapping, emission quantification, and attribution in two European cities: Utrecht (NL) and Hamburg (DE) H. Maazallahi et al. 10.5194/acp-20-14717-2020
31. A quantitative comparison of methods used to measure smaller methane emissions typically observed from superannuated oil and gas infrastructure S. Riddick et al. 10.5194/amt-15-6285-2022
32. On the Viability of Video Imaging in Leak Rate Quantification: A Theoretical Error Analysis A. Montazeri et al. 10.3390/s21175683
33. Variability of Ammonia and Methane Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations in Northeastern Colorado L. Golston et al. 10.1021/acs.est.0c00301
34. Retrieving CH4-emission rates from coal mine ventilation shafts using UAV-based AirCore observations and the genetic algorithm–interior point penalty function (GA-IPPF) model T. Shi et al. 10.5194/acp-22-13881-2022
35. Comparison of Sub-Ppm Instrument Response Suggests Higher Detection Limits Could Be Used to Quantify Methane Emissions from Oil and Gas Infrastructure S. Riddick et al. 10.3390/s24113407
36. Potential Underestimate in Reported Bottom-up Methane Emissions from Oil and Gas Operations in the Delaware Basin S. Riddick et al. 10.3390/atmos15020202
37. Mobile sampling of methane emissions from natural gas well pads in California X. Zhou et al. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117930
38. Addressing Low-Cost Methane Sensor Calibration Shortcomings with Machine Learning E. Kiplimo et al. 10.3390/atmos15111313
39. Constraining the accuracy of flux estimates using OTM 33A R. Edie et al. 10.5194/amt-13-341-2020
40. Can new mobile technologies enable fugitive methane reductions from the oil and gas industry? T. Fox et al. 10.1088/1748-9326/ac0565
41. A Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) Approach to Large Eddy Simulation (LES) for Transport and Contaminant Dispersion P. Bieringer et al. 10.3390/atmos12070890
42. Estimation of methane emission from an urban wastewater treatment plant applying inverse Gaussian model C. Stadler et al. 10.1007/s10661-021-09660-4
43. Quantification of methane emissions from UK biogas plants S. Bakkaloglu et al. 10.1016/j.wasman.2021.01.011
44. Cavity Ring-Down Methane Sensor for Small Unmanned Aerial Systems B. Martinez et al. 10.3390/s20020454
45. Ozone Detection via Deep-Ultraviolet Cavity-Enhanced Absorption Spectroscopy with a Laser Driven Light Source A. Puga & A. Yalin 10.3390/s23114989
46. A modeling framework to assess fenceline monitoring and self-reported upset emissions of benzene from multiple oil refineries in Texas Q. Li et al. 10.1016/j.aeaoa.2024.100281
47. Reconciling a national methane emission inventory with in-situ measurements Y. Liu et al. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.165896
48. Evaluating Methods To Estimate Methane Emissions from Oil and Gas Production Facilities Using LES Simulations P. Saide et al. 10.1021/acs.est.8b01767
49. Methane emissions from conventional and unconventional oil and gas production sites in southeastern Saskatchewan, Canada J. Baillie et al. 10.1088/2515-7620/ab01f2