Goes without saying that this is a very preliminary result, and should be treated as one measurement of a time series. That the same result after three months of every other day flights would be far more significant.

That the same results from direct measurement of all the different processes at the source would be seriously more significant.

But we're trying to analyze, with very limited funding, a technology which has already been allowed to expand at incredibly high levels of new installations, before any actual independent testing was done.

For an industry which is allowed to bypass current environmental law. For an industry which is allowed to keep the chemicals used secret. For a technology and a resource which is already a known polluter to a very high degree.

The object of a civil society is to embark on such serious, expensive testing, BEFORE the vast deployment of such a potentially dangerous technology.

Under those circumstances, including the poor likelihood of finding sufficient funding, ANY reputable data point is all the more valuable, EVEN if it's only a data point.

Bjinse (from the link):

Practically, Obama committed himself to a 5 percent decrease up to 2020. A cynical person could comment that bit more fracking should do the job.

Heh. Double Heh.

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin