Analysis improved methane measurements in drone operations, suggesting enhanced quality control measures are needed.
In June 2024, Aeromon participated in a controlled methane release test campaign organized by the International Methane Emissions Observatory (IMEO) and Stanford University at the TADI test centre in Lacq, France. During the comparison between reported and actual methane release rates, Aeromon's measurements were found to be consistently lower than the known values. A detailed investigation traced the issue to an unexpected malfunction in the on-board wind sensor. To fully understand the impact, Aeromon reviewed its entire measurement process—from data collection to final analysis—and identified areas where quality assurance could be improved. This paper presents the main steps and findings from that review. To independently assess the reliability of Aeromon's method, a re-analysis was conducted using wind LIDAR data provided by TotalEnergies. This analysis showed a much stronger correlation with the actual release rates, improving the linear fit from a slope of 0.47 to 0.92. The results confirmed that Aeromon's system performs accurately when supported by correct wind data. Importantly, the analysis also demonstrated that Aeromon's measurement system can effectively use wind LIDAR data, something not previously tested. Integrating LIDAR as an alternative wind source marks a meaningful step forward in improving airborne methane measurement and opens up new possibilities for real-world monitoring. The TADI campaign was a valuable research and development opportunity that led to important improvements in Aeromon's quality control and methodology. The lessons learned will enhance future measurement campaigns and contribute to progress across the industry in methane detection and reporting. By addressing challenges head-on, Aeromon continues to drive innovation in airborne emission monitoring, raising the bar for accuracy, reliability, and scientific integrity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bullock et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: