Deep dive: satellite & remote sensing for climate — a buyer's guide: how to evaluate solutions

Satellite-based emissions monitoring has evolved from experimental technology to a regulatory-grade measurement system in less than a decade. With the EPA approving satellite monitoring as an alternative test method in February 2025 and major energy companies integrating space-based data into their compliance workflows, the question for sustainability professionals is no longer whether to adopt these solutions but how to evaluate them effectively.

This guide provides a comprehensive framework for assessing satellite and remote sensing solutions, drawing on real-world performance data, regulatory developments, and sector-specific benchmarks to help buyers make informed decisions.

Why It Matters

The urgency of accurate emissions monitoring cannot be overstated. Methane, with a global warming potential 80 times greater than CO2 over a 20-year horizon, represents the single largest near-term lever for climate mitigation. Yet traditional ground-based monitoring has consistently underestimated emissions, with peer-reviewed studies showing actual methane releases from fossil fuel operations exceeding reported inventories by 60% or more.

A December 2025 study using satellite data identified approximately 8.3 million tons of methane emissions annually from over 3,000 energy sites globally. This represents a staggering climate impact equivalent to hundreds of coal-fired power plants operating continuously. The same research revealed that coal mines leak methane 48% of the time during observations, while oil and gas facilities show intermittent emissions patterns with leaks detected during only 16% of satellite passes. This intermittency underscores why continuous or high-frequency monitoring capabilities are essential for accurate emissions quantification.

The International Energy Agency's 2025 Global Methane Tracker, powered by satellite data from GHGSat and other providers, now serves as the authoritative global reference for methane emissions from energy operations. This institutional adoption signals that satellite monitoring has crossed the threshold from innovative technology to essential infrastructure for climate accountability.

Key Concepts

Detection Thresholds and Sensitivity

The minimum detectable emission rate is the most critical specification for any satellite monitoring solution. Current commercial systems demonstrate detection thresholds around 100 kg/hr for methane, though this figure varies significantly based on atmospheric conditions, surface characteristics, and satellite geometry. For context, a 100 kg/hr methane leak has the same near-term warming impact as 8,000 kg/hr of CO2 emissions.

When evaluating detection thresholds, buyers should request performance data across different conditions: clear sky versus partial cloud cover, varying surface albedo (reflectivity), and different seasons. A system that achieves 100 kg/hr detection under ideal laboratory conditions may only reach 500 kg/hr sensitivity in real operational environments.

Spatial Resolution and Coverage

Spatial resolution determines the precision with which emissions can be localized. GHGSat's current constellation of 16 satellites (as of 2025) delivers approximately 25-meter resolution, enabling attribution of emissions to specific equipment within industrial facilities. The Carbon Mapper Tanager-1 satellite, launched in partnership with Planet Labs, achieves 30-meter resolution with over 400 spectral bands, providing both methane and CO2 detection with high spatial precision.

Coverage frequency represents an equally important consideration. GHGSat's constellation enables daily monitoring for millions of facilities worldwide, while some research-grade instruments may only revisit the same location every 16 days. For compliance applications requiring weekly or monthly averages, less frequent revisit times may suffice, but for operational leak detection and rapid response, daily or near-daily coverage is essential.

Quantification Accuracy

Beyond detection, buyers must evaluate quantification accuracy, meaning how precisely the system can measure the magnitude of detected emissions. Current satellite systems typically achieve 20-30% uncertainty in emission rate quantification for individual observations. This improves significantly with multiple observations, as statistical averaging reduces random errors.

The February 2025 EPA approval of GHGSat as an alternative test method (designated MATM-007) provides an important regulatory benchmark. To receive this approval, GHGSat demonstrated quantification performance equivalent to or better than traditional optical gas imaging cameras under controlled test conditions.

Spectral Capabilities

Modern hyperspectral satellites measure hundreds of distinct wavelengths of reflected sunlight, enabling identification of multiple gas species simultaneously. The Tanager-1 satellite's 400+ spectral bands allow differentiation between methane, CO2, and other atmospheric constituents. This multi-gas capability becomes increasingly important as regulatory frameworks expand beyond methane to encompass comprehensive greenhouse gas monitoring.

Japan's GOSAT-GW satellite, launched in June 2025, represents the latest addition to the global observation infrastructure. This government-operated system provides independent verification of commercial satellite measurements and extends coverage to regions underserved by commercial operators.

What's Working and What Isn't

What's Working

The integration of satellite monitoring into corporate emissions management programs has yielded measurable results. GHGSat reports that operators using its monitoring services have mitigated over 20 million tons of CO2-equivalent emissions to date. This figure reflects the combination of improved leak detection, faster repair response times, and systematic identification of previously unknown emission sources.

Major energy companies have embraced satellite monitoring as a core component of their methane reduction strategies. ExxonMobil, Saudi Aramco, Petrobras, TotalEnergies, and Chevron maintain ongoing contracts with satellite monitoring providers, using the data both for internal operations optimization and external emissions reporting. These contracts typically combine regular facility monitoring with on-demand tasking for incident investigation or acquisition due diligence.

The standardization of satellite data formats and quality metrics has accelerated integration with existing enterprise systems. Most providers now offer API access to monitoring results, enabling automated ingestion into asset management platforms, environmental compliance databases, and sustainability reporting tools. This technical maturity reduces implementation friction and accelerates time-to-value for new adopters.

What Isn't Working

Despite significant progress, several limitations constrain the current generation of satellite monitoring solutions. Cloud cover remains a fundamental obstacle, as optical and shortwave infrared sensors cannot penetrate thick clouds. In regions with persistent cloud cover, such as tropical rainforests or coastal industrial zones, effective monitoring may be limited to a fraction of calendar days.

Nighttime detection represents another capability gap. Most current commercial satellites rely on reflected sunlight, limiting observations to daytime hours. Given that industrial operations and associated emissions continue around the clock, this creates a systematic blind spot in coverage. Thermal infrared instruments can operate at night but generally achieve lower sensitivity and spatial resolution.

The distinction between detection and attribution poses challenges in densely developed industrial areas. When multiple potential emission sources exist within a single satellite pixel, pinpointing the exact equipment responsible for observed emissions requires integration with ground-based measurements or detailed facility maps.

Cost structures remain a barrier for smaller operators and facilities in developing economies. While per-observation costs have declined substantially, comprehensive monitoring programs for large asset portfolios can still require significant annual investment. The emergence of consortium-based purchasing and regulatory mandates may help democratize access over time.

Examples

1. Karachi Landfill Methane Detection

The Carbon Mapper Tanager-1 satellite demonstrated its capabilities shortly after launch with the detection of a major methane plume from a landfill facility near Karachi, Pakistan. The satellite measured emissions of approximately 1,200 kg of methane per hour, making this one of the largest landfill emission sources documented via satellite in South Asia. This detection illustrated both the global reach of commercial satellite monitoring and the significant climate impact of waste sector emissions in rapidly urbanizing regions. Following public disclosure of the satellite data, local authorities initiated discussions regarding landfill gas capture and flaring infrastructure.

2. Permian Basin Oil and Gas Monitoring

The Permian Basin of Texas and New Mexico, one of the world's most prolific hydrocarbon provinces, has become a focal point for satellite-based methane monitoring. Satellite operators have documented thousands of individual emission events across the basin, ranging from routine venting operations to equipment malfunctions and unreported flaring. Analysis of satellite data revealed that actual basin-wide methane emissions substantially exceeded regulatory inventories. This discrepancy prompted both regulatory investigation and voluntary industry initiatives to improve detection and repair programs. Several operators now maintain continuous satellite monitoring contracts covering their entire Permian acreage positions.

3. Kendal Coal Power Plant CO2 Emissions

Carbon Mapper's Tanager-1 satellite captured CO2 emissions from the Kendal coal-fired power station in South Africa at a rate of approximately 600,000 kg per hour. This observation demonstrated the feasibility of power sector emissions monitoring from space and provided independent verification of emissions intensity for one of Africa's largest thermal generating stations. The measurement aligned closely with emissions calculated from fuel consumption data, validating the satellite's quantification accuracy for large point sources. This capability has significant implications for carbon pricing mechanisms and international climate finance, where verified emissions data is essential.

Action Checklist

• Define monitoring objectives and required detection thresholds based on your emissions profile, regulatory requirements, and target sites (oil and gas facilities typically require sub-200 kg/hr methane sensitivity)

• Request performance validation data from prospective vendors, including detection probability curves, quantification uncertainty metrics, and independent verification results such as the EPA MATM-007 approval

• Evaluate integration pathways by mapping how satellite data will flow into existing systems for asset management, environmental compliance, and sustainability reporting, including API compatibility and data format requirements

• Develop a hybrid monitoring strategy that combines satellite observations with ground-based continuous monitors and periodic aerial surveys for comprehensive coverage across detection sensitivity ranges and weather conditions

• Establish baseline measurements before operational deployment by conducting initial surveys to characterize existing emissions and identify priority sites for ongoing monitoring focus

FAQ

Q: How do satellite monitoring costs compare to traditional ground-based or aerial measurement methods?

A: Satellite monitoring typically costs $10,000 to $50,000 annually per major facility for regular observation packages, compared to $50,000 to $200,000 for equivalent coverage using manned aircraft surveys. Ground-based continuous monitors offer the lowest per-observation cost but require significant upfront capital investment ($50,000 to $150,000 per installation) and ongoing maintenance. The optimal approach for most operators combines satellites for broad spatial coverage with targeted ground monitors at high-risk or high-value locations.

Q: What regulatory frameworks currently accept satellite monitoring data for compliance purposes?

A: The US EPA's February 2025 approval of GHGSat as an alternative test method (MATM-007) represents the most significant regulatory milestone to date. The European Union's proposed Methane Regulation includes provisions for satellite verification of reported emissions. Canada's federal methane regulations also reference satellite monitoring as an acceptable verification methodology. Many operators are proactively adopting satellite monitoring in anticipation of expanding regulatory requirements and to demonstrate good faith emissions management to stakeholders.

Q: How should buyers evaluate the difference between commercial and government-operated satellite systems?

A: Government satellites like GOSAT-GW (Japan), TROPOMI (ESA), and the planned MethaneSAT (Environmental Defense Fund) provide broad spatial coverage and independent verification but typically lack the spatial resolution and tasking flexibility of commercial systems. Commercial operators like GHGSat and Carbon Mapper offer higher resolution and can direct satellites to specific facilities on demand. A comprehensive monitoring strategy may incorporate data from both source types, using government satellites for regional context and commercial systems for facility-level quantification.

Q: What advances in satellite monitoring technology should buyers anticipate over the next 2 to 3 years?

A: Near-term developments include improved detection sensitivity approaching 25 to 50 kg/hr for methane, expanded constellation sizes enabling multiple daily observations of priority sites, and enhanced CO2 monitoring capabilities closing the gap with methane detection maturity. Artificial intelligence integration will accelerate data processing from observation to actionable insight. Standardized data products and interoperability protocols will enable seamless switching between providers and reduce vendor lock-in risks.

Sources

• GHGSat Official Website: Satellite Constellation and Capabilities
• Carbon Mapper: Tanager-1 Mission and First Detections
• EPA Alternative Test Method Approval for GHGSat (MATM-007)
• IEA Global Methane Tracker 2025
• JAXA GOSAT-GW Mission Overview
• Planet Labs: Earth Observation Data Platform