What questions should operators ask before selecting a methane detection provider?

Before selecting a methane detection provider, operators should ask about the detection technology used, the provider’s regulatory certifications, survey speed and sensitivity, how results are delivered, and the provider’s track record with pipeline inspection. These five questions help separate genuinely capable providers from those who cannot meet the technical and regulatory demands of modern gas infrastructure management. The sections below unpack each question in detail.

What detection technology should a methane survey provider use?

A methane survey provider should use a laser-based remote sensing technology, ideally Differential Absorption LIDAR (DIAL), which is currently the most sensitive and reliable method available for aerial gas leak detection. DIAL works by emitting two laser pulses at different wavelengths and measuring the difference in absorption to identify methane concentrations with high precision, even at very low leakage rates.

Not all detection technologies are equal. Optical gas imaging cameras, for example, are useful for close-range inspections but lack the speed and sensitivity needed for large-scale pipeline surveys. DIAL-based airborne methane survey systems can cover vast distances quickly while detecting trace amounts of gas that other technologies would miss entirely.

When evaluating technology, operators should ask whether the system is passive or active. Active laser systems like DIAL generate their own light source, making them effective day or night and in a wide range of atmospheric conditions. Passive systems depend on ambient light and can be significantly less reliable under variable conditions.

What certifications and regulatory approvals should a provider hold?

A methane detection provider should hold recognized industry certifications and, where applicable, regulatory approvals that validate the accuracy and reliability of their detection system. In Europe, DVGW approval is the most significant benchmark for gas remote detection systems, as it confirms the technology meets strict technical standards for gas grid inspection.

Regulatory compliance is increasingly important in 2026, with the EU Methane Regulation placing clear obligations on gas operators to detect and report fugitive emissions. Providers operating in this environment should demonstrate that their technology and survey methodology meet the Type 2 requirements for underground equipment under that regulation.

Beyond certifications for the technology itself, operators should verify that the provider follows documented quality assurance processes, can produce traceable survey records, and has experience working within the compliance frameworks of different European grid operators. A provider without verifiable approvals introduces regulatory and operational risk.

How fast and how sensitive does aerial methane detection need to be?

For aerial methane detection to be practical at scale, a system should be capable of surveying at speeds of at least 100 to 180 km/h while detecting leakage rates as low as 150 litres per hour, even in moderate wind conditions. Speed and sensitivity together determine how efficiently a provider can survey large pipeline networks without sacrificing detection quality.

Survey speed matters because gas grid operators often manage thousands of kilometres of pipeline and need inspections completed within defined operational windows. A system that flies too slowly becomes impractical for large networks, while one that flies fast but lacks sensitivity will miss small leaks that can escalate over time.

Sensitivity is equally critical. Wind disperses gas rapidly, so a system must be able to detect diluted methane plumes at wind speeds that reflect real-world conditions. A benchmark of detection capability at wind speeds up to around 24 km/h is a reasonable minimum standard to ask about. Operators should request clear technical specifications rather than accepting general claims about system performance.

How are survey results delivered and how actionable are they?

Survey results should be delivered through a secure, accessible platform that allows operators to view, verify, and act on gas indications without delay. The most effective providers offer results through a Web GIS platform, giving grid operators geospatially referenced data that can be accessed on both desktop and mobile devices in the field.

Raw data alone is not enough. The value of an aerial gas leak detection service lies in how quickly operators can move from survey completion to on-the-ground verification and repair. Results should include precise location data, indication severity, and enough contextual information for field teams to prioritise their response effectively.

Operators should ask providers the following questions about result delivery:

• How soon after a survey are results available?
• Are results delivered in a format compatible with the operator’s existing GIS systems?
• Can field teams access results on mobile devices during verification?
• Is the platform secure and compliant with data protection requirements?
• Does the provider offer support in interpreting results or prioritising findings?

A provider who delivers data in static reports with no spatial context forces operators into additional processing steps, which slows down the response and increases operational costs.

How much pipeline inspection experience should a provider have?

A methane detection provider should have a substantial track record of completed pipeline inspections, ideally spanning multiple countries, grid types, and operating conditions. Experience directly affects the reliability of survey methodology, the accuracy of result interpretation, and the provider’s ability to handle unexpected field conditions.

Volume of inspected infrastructure is one useful indicator, but it should be considered alongside the diversity of that experience. A provider who has inspected high-pressure transmission pipelines, distribution networks, and site-level facilities across different regulatory environments brings a depth of knowledge that a newer entrant simply cannot replicate.

Operators should also ask how long the provider has been operating commercially, not just how long the technology has existed. A system that has been in active commercial use for over a decade has been tested against real-world variability in ways that newer systems have not. Ask for references from comparable grid operators and, where possible, request examples of how the provider has handled complex or ambiguous survey results.

How ADLARES answers every one of these questions

We are ADLARES, and our CHARM® technology was built specifically to meet the demands that these questions uncover. Here is how we address each one directly:

• Technology: CHARM® uses the DIAL (Differential Absorption LIDAR) method, the most sensitive laser-based approach available for airborne methane detection, jointly developed with the German Aerospace Center (DLR).
• Certifications: CHARM® is the world’s only DVGW-approved gas remote detection system, and it provides the sensitivity required to comply with EU Methane Regulation Type 2 for underground equipment.
• Speed and sensitivity: Our helicopter surveys operate at up to 180 km/h at 100 to 150 metres altitude, with a measuring rate of 1,000 points per second, detecting leakage rates from 150 l/h at wind speeds up to 24 km/h.
• Result delivery: Survey findings are delivered through a secure Web GIS platform, accessible on desktop and mobile, enabling operators to verify and act on indications efficiently.
• Experience: CHARM® has been in commercial use since 2008, and we have inspected over 250,000 km of gas pipelines for grid operators across Europe.

If you are evaluating methane detection providers and want to understand how we can support your pipeline inspection programme, get in touch with our team to discuss your network’s specific requirements.