CA2955844C - Method for quantifying fugitive methane emissions rate using surface methane concentration - Google Patents
Method for quantifying fugitive methane emissions rate using surface methane concentration Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CA2955844C CA2955844C CA2955844A CA2955844A CA2955844C CA 2955844 C CA2955844 C CA 2955844C CA 2955844 A CA2955844 A CA 2955844A CA 2955844 A CA2955844 A CA 2955844A CA 2955844 C CA2955844 C CA 2955844C
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- methane
- concentration
- emission
- zone
- smc
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Active
Links
- VNWKTOKETHGBQD-UHFFFAOYSA-N methane Chemical compound C VNWKTOKETHGBQD-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 title claims abstract description 188
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 44
- 238000005259 measurement Methods 0.000 claims description 36
- 238000005070 sampling Methods 0.000 claims description 16
- 230000008859 change Effects 0.000 claims description 10
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 claims description 7
- 230000001105 regulatory effect Effects 0.000 claims description 5
- 239000010813 municipal solid waste Substances 0.000 claims description 4
- 230000002596 correlated effect Effects 0.000 claims description 3
- 230000036541 health Effects 0.000 claims description 3
- 230000003466 anti-cipated effect Effects 0.000 claims description 2
- 230000000875 corresponding effect Effects 0.000 claims description 2
- 230000004907 flux Effects 0.000 description 18
- 239000007789 gas Substances 0.000 description 13
- 239000005431 greenhouse gas Substances 0.000 description 9
- CURLTUGMZLYLDI-UHFFFAOYSA-N Carbon dioxide Chemical compound O=C=O CURLTUGMZLYLDI-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 8
- 239000000700 radioactive tracer Substances 0.000 description 8
- 238000011002 quantification Methods 0.000 description 6
- 229910002092 carbon dioxide Inorganic materials 0.000 description 4
- 239000001569 carbon dioxide Substances 0.000 description 4
- 239000002699 waste material Substances 0.000 description 4
- 230000008901 benefit Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000011161 development Methods 0.000 description 3
- 239000011368 organic material Substances 0.000 description 3
- 238000013316 zoning Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000013459 approach Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000007796 conventional method Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000000354 decomposition reaction Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000006185 dispersion Substances 0.000 description 2
- 230000007774 longterm Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000013507 mapping Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000012544 monitoring process Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000002689 soil Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000010561 standard procedure Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000000007 visual effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000010792 warming Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000005033 Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000004847 absorption spectroscopy Methods 0.000 description 1
- HSFWRNGVRCDJHI-UHFFFAOYSA-N alpha-acetylene Natural products C#C HSFWRNGVRCDJHI-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000000035 biogenic effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000006227 byproduct Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000006243 chemical reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000001816 cooling Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000001419 dependent effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000001514 detection method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000001658 differential optical absorption spectrophotometry Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000007613 environmental effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 125000002534 ethynyl group Chemical group [H]C#C* 0.000 description 1
- 230000002349 favourable effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000002803 fossil fuel Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000007726 management method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000003287 optical effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 150000002894 organic compounds Chemical class 0.000 description 1
- 230000010355 oscillation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000003389 potentiating effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000009467 reduction Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011160 research Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012552 review Methods 0.000 description 1
- 229920006395 saturated elastomer Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 230000001932 seasonal effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000004611 spectroscopical analysis Methods 0.000 description 1
- 229920002994 synthetic fiber Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 230000002123 temporal effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000010998 test method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012876 topography Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000000041 tunable diode laser absorption spectroscopy Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000004065 wastewater treatment Methods 0.000 description 1
Classifications
-
- B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
- B09—DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE; RECLAMATION OF CONTAMINATED SOIL
- B09B—DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- B09B1/00—Dumping solid waste
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Environmental & Geological Engineering (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
- Investigating, Analyzing Materials By Fluorescence Or Luminescence (AREA)
Abstract
A method was invented to convert methane concentration at the surfaces emitting fugitive methane into methane emission rate. This method requires surface scan of methane concentration using handled devices such as flame ionization detector (FID) to measure the fugitive methane near-surface concentration based on which, the methane emission rate can be calculated using a correlation expressed in a mathematical form.
Description
METHOD FOR QUANTIFYING FUGITIVE METHANE EMISSIONS RATE USING
SURFACE METHANE CONCENTRATION
RELATED APPLICATIONS: NONE
BACKGROUND OF INVENTION
1. Field of Invention This invention relates generally to methods for measurement and estimation of fugitive methane emission rates from the surface of a landfill or any other source of fugitive methane emission specifically using concentration of fugitive methane near the surface of the emitting source.
SURFACE METHANE CONCENTRATION
RELATED APPLICATIONS: NONE
BACKGROUND OF INVENTION
1. Field of Invention This invention relates generally to methods for measurement and estimation of fugitive methane emission rates from the surface of a landfill or any other source of fugitive methane emission specifically using concentration of fugitive methane near the surface of the emitting source.
2. Description of the Related Art Landfill gas (LFG) is a by-product of natural decomposition of organic materials in landfills that can create unsafe air quality, health issues, unpleasant odours, and contribute to global climate change. LFG predominantly consists of methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2);
both being potent greenhouse gases (GHG). While CO2 produced in the waste sector (e.g.
municipal landfills, wastewater treatment plants, and burning of non-fossil fuel waste) is not accounted for as a GHG
due to its biogenic origin, the fugitive emission of CH4 from landfills is of significant concern (IPCC, 2006) in terms of global warming potential (GWP). Methane is a naturally occurring GHG
with a GWP 28 to 34 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 100-year timeframe (IPCC, 2013).
In Canada, about 3% of the 2010 national GHG emissions were reported to be from the waste sector, of which about 91% was attributed to fugitive methane emissions from landfills (Environment Canada. 2012).
Methane is an important GHG with a much shorter atmospheric lifetime, approximately 10 years, in comparison with other greenhouse gases (Bogner and Matthews, 2003).
Accordingly, changes made to CH4 emission sources can affect the atmospheric concentrations on relatively shorter timescales.
Attention to methane emissions from landfills has grown significantly due to the fact that emission reduction from landfills is amongst the most feasible and cost-effective measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Kormi et al, 2018). However, quantifying landfill fugitive methane emissions is challenging due to the high temporal variability and spatial heterogeneity. Thus, development of reliable and cost-effective methods for measurements of landfill methane emissions is critically important.
Various methods have been attempted by scientists and practitioners over the past few decades.
The most widely method seemingly more favorable for the purpose of regulatory compliance assessment is the use of flux chamber which directly measures methane emission flux from the surface of landfills. In addition to chamber methods, other methods including but not limited to eddy covariance and co-advected proxy tracer plume measurements and methods relying on remote sensing and plume mapping have been used (Gardiner et al., 2017; Detre etal., 2018; Kormi et al., 2017; Goldsmith et al., 2012; Gollapalli et al., 2018; Monster et al., 2014; Innocenti et al., 2017; Delkash et al., 2016; Allen et al., 2018). Chamber-based measurements are relatively easy to conduct as emissions can be estimated from the rate of change of CH4 concentration in a chamber, the footprint area of the chamber and volume of the chamber. However, the chamber method suffers practical drawback due to the typically heterogeneous nature of the landfill resulting in high spatial variability of emissions (Riddick etal., 2018).
Eddy covariance (EC) methods have also been studied for methane emission estimation from landfills over longer periods of time, Xu etal. (2014). Eddy covariance which calculates a gas flux from the covariance between vertical wind speed and gas concentration at a high sampling rate has the main advantages of providing mean flux estimates over a larger area and being automated. The drawbacks however are that the emission in the fetch needs to be homogeneous and that the measurement needs to be carried out on a topographically flat surface to obtain meaningful results (Riddick et al., 2018).
Using acetylene as the tracer gas is the current state of the art tracer gas dispersion measurements for determining methane emissions from landfills. Measurements of the tracer gas and methane concentrations are made downwind of the source (Monster etal. 2015). The tracer gas dispersion technique relies on the assumption that full mixing between the tracer and landfill plume has occurred at the point of monitoring (Rees-White et al., 2018). A key logistical limitation of the tracer release method is that it requires a mobile measurement team to coordinate with the person releasing the gas and then traverse an accessible road perpendicular to the landfill plume in the time it takes for the plume to travel from the release site. Furthermore, it should be ensured that the tracer gas is well mixed with the landfill methane as insufficiently mixed plumes can invalidate the co-advection assumption, result in large uncertainties in the emission estimate (Riddick et al., 2018).
Additionally, the relationship between the emission rate and the gas concentration at a given location is dependent on the meteorological conditions and local topography, preventing accurate quantification of the emission rate.
Remote sensing techniques represent a more integrated approach for quantification of methane flux. These techniques have gained popularity in recent years. One of these techniques is the Radial Plume Mapping (RPM) methodology recognized by the US-EPA as "other test method 10 (OTM-10)" since July 2006 (USEPA, 2006). This technique uses optical remote sensing (ORS) instrumentation to characterize gas emissions from non-point sources. Some of these ORS
instruments include; (i) Open-Path Fourier Transform Infrared (OP-FTIR) spectroscopy, (ii) Ultraviolet Differential Absorption Spectroscopy (UV-DOAS), and (iii) Open-Path Tunable Diode Laser Absorption Spectroscopy (OP-TDLAS) (USEPA, 2007).
The RPM techniques carry many advantages over the "close range measurement"
methodologies, such as the flux chamber technique. However, the relatively high cost of the RPM method, as well as the uncertainties associated with the possible effect of the methane plume buoyancy on the results, made the flux chamber methodology a more suitable option for the present invention.
Prior to the applicant's invention, no methods were known to utilize a relationship between surface concentration of fugitive methane from a landfill surface and the emission rate of methane typically or as an accepted standard method measured using flux chamber. More specifically, prior to this invention, a correlation between the concentration of fugitive surface concentration of methane and methane flux or emission rate that can be generalized to other typically similar landfills, only through adjustment of barometric pressure has not been developed.
Several embodiments of the present invention relate to a methodology using which fugitive methane emission can be characterized and quantified for further applications such as reporting methane emissions for regulatory purposes, evaluating performance of landfill bio-covers and identifying hotspots in terms of methane emission.
SUMMARY
In accordance with several embodiments of the invention, a method wherein the fugitive methane emission rate is calculated based on surface concentration of fugitive methane measured using surface scanning.
In one embodiment of the method in accordance with this invention, this method is based upon a strong correlation developed between landfill surface methane concentration (SMC, part per million volume (ppmv) CHO and methane emission rate (MER, g CH4/m2/d).
In one embodiment, landfill is a confined or semi-confined space wherein different types of waste materials are disposed of following a standard procedure prescribed by local, regional, national or international authorities and regulatory bodies.
In a preferred embodiment, landfill as defined above, receives municipal solid waste that includes organic materials which can decompose and generate methane.
In one embodiment, the landfill is equipped with a cover or a cap through which fugitive methane generated as a result of anaerobic decomposition of organic material inside the landfill is emitted to the atmosphere.
In one embodiment, the landfill is equipped with landfill gas collection system through which all gases including methane generated within the body of landfill excluding the portion emitted fugitively into the atmosphere are collected for further processing.
In one embodiment, the cap over the landfill will be made of layers of different earthen or synthetic materials aimed at reducing fugitive methane emission.
In preferred embodiment, quantification of fugitive emission is critically important to quantify the landfill contribution to overall greenhouse gas emission and climate change.
In one embodiment, the landfill is divided into several zones. In preferred embodiment, the zones are selected based on geometry, type of cover, type or status of vegetation including but not limited to healthy and stressed, other visual observation, expected emission levels and pre-sampling results if such results are available.
both being potent greenhouse gases (GHG). While CO2 produced in the waste sector (e.g.
municipal landfills, wastewater treatment plants, and burning of non-fossil fuel waste) is not accounted for as a GHG
due to its biogenic origin, the fugitive emission of CH4 from landfills is of significant concern (IPCC, 2006) in terms of global warming potential (GWP). Methane is a naturally occurring GHG
with a GWP 28 to 34 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 100-year timeframe (IPCC, 2013).
In Canada, about 3% of the 2010 national GHG emissions were reported to be from the waste sector, of which about 91% was attributed to fugitive methane emissions from landfills (Environment Canada. 2012).
Methane is an important GHG with a much shorter atmospheric lifetime, approximately 10 years, in comparison with other greenhouse gases (Bogner and Matthews, 2003).
Accordingly, changes made to CH4 emission sources can affect the atmospheric concentrations on relatively shorter timescales.
Attention to methane emissions from landfills has grown significantly due to the fact that emission reduction from landfills is amongst the most feasible and cost-effective measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Kormi et al, 2018). However, quantifying landfill fugitive methane emissions is challenging due to the high temporal variability and spatial heterogeneity. Thus, development of reliable and cost-effective methods for measurements of landfill methane emissions is critically important.
Various methods have been attempted by scientists and practitioners over the past few decades.
The most widely method seemingly more favorable for the purpose of regulatory compliance assessment is the use of flux chamber which directly measures methane emission flux from the surface of landfills. In addition to chamber methods, other methods including but not limited to eddy covariance and co-advected proxy tracer plume measurements and methods relying on remote sensing and plume mapping have been used (Gardiner et al., 2017; Detre etal., 2018; Kormi et al., 2017; Goldsmith et al., 2012; Gollapalli et al., 2018; Monster et al., 2014; Innocenti et al., 2017; Delkash et al., 2016; Allen et al., 2018). Chamber-based measurements are relatively easy to conduct as emissions can be estimated from the rate of change of CH4 concentration in a chamber, the footprint area of the chamber and volume of the chamber. However, the chamber method suffers practical drawback due to the typically heterogeneous nature of the landfill resulting in high spatial variability of emissions (Riddick etal., 2018).
Eddy covariance (EC) methods have also been studied for methane emission estimation from landfills over longer periods of time, Xu etal. (2014). Eddy covariance which calculates a gas flux from the covariance between vertical wind speed and gas concentration at a high sampling rate has the main advantages of providing mean flux estimates over a larger area and being automated. The drawbacks however are that the emission in the fetch needs to be homogeneous and that the measurement needs to be carried out on a topographically flat surface to obtain meaningful results (Riddick et al., 2018).
Using acetylene as the tracer gas is the current state of the art tracer gas dispersion measurements for determining methane emissions from landfills. Measurements of the tracer gas and methane concentrations are made downwind of the source (Monster etal. 2015). The tracer gas dispersion technique relies on the assumption that full mixing between the tracer and landfill plume has occurred at the point of monitoring (Rees-White et al., 2018). A key logistical limitation of the tracer release method is that it requires a mobile measurement team to coordinate with the person releasing the gas and then traverse an accessible road perpendicular to the landfill plume in the time it takes for the plume to travel from the release site. Furthermore, it should be ensured that the tracer gas is well mixed with the landfill methane as insufficiently mixed plumes can invalidate the co-advection assumption, result in large uncertainties in the emission estimate (Riddick et al., 2018).
Additionally, the relationship between the emission rate and the gas concentration at a given location is dependent on the meteorological conditions and local topography, preventing accurate quantification of the emission rate.
Remote sensing techniques represent a more integrated approach for quantification of methane flux. These techniques have gained popularity in recent years. One of these techniques is the Radial Plume Mapping (RPM) methodology recognized by the US-EPA as "other test method 10 (OTM-10)" since July 2006 (USEPA, 2006). This technique uses optical remote sensing (ORS) instrumentation to characterize gas emissions from non-point sources. Some of these ORS
instruments include; (i) Open-Path Fourier Transform Infrared (OP-FTIR) spectroscopy, (ii) Ultraviolet Differential Absorption Spectroscopy (UV-DOAS), and (iii) Open-Path Tunable Diode Laser Absorption Spectroscopy (OP-TDLAS) (USEPA, 2007).
The RPM techniques carry many advantages over the "close range measurement"
methodologies, such as the flux chamber technique. However, the relatively high cost of the RPM method, as well as the uncertainties associated with the possible effect of the methane plume buoyancy on the results, made the flux chamber methodology a more suitable option for the present invention.
Prior to the applicant's invention, no methods were known to utilize a relationship between surface concentration of fugitive methane from a landfill surface and the emission rate of methane typically or as an accepted standard method measured using flux chamber. More specifically, prior to this invention, a correlation between the concentration of fugitive surface concentration of methane and methane flux or emission rate that can be generalized to other typically similar landfills, only through adjustment of barometric pressure has not been developed.
Several embodiments of the present invention relate to a methodology using which fugitive methane emission can be characterized and quantified for further applications such as reporting methane emissions for regulatory purposes, evaluating performance of landfill bio-covers and identifying hotspots in terms of methane emission.
SUMMARY
In accordance with several embodiments of the invention, a method wherein the fugitive methane emission rate is calculated based on surface concentration of fugitive methane measured using surface scanning.
In one embodiment of the method in accordance with this invention, this method is based upon a strong correlation developed between landfill surface methane concentration (SMC, part per million volume (ppmv) CHO and methane emission rate (MER, g CH4/m2/d).
In one embodiment, landfill is a confined or semi-confined space wherein different types of waste materials are disposed of following a standard procedure prescribed by local, regional, national or international authorities and regulatory bodies.
In a preferred embodiment, landfill as defined above, receives municipal solid waste that includes organic materials which can decompose and generate methane.
In one embodiment, the landfill is equipped with a cover or a cap through which fugitive methane generated as a result of anaerobic decomposition of organic material inside the landfill is emitted to the atmosphere.
In one embodiment, the landfill is equipped with landfill gas collection system through which all gases including methane generated within the body of landfill excluding the portion emitted fugitively into the atmosphere are collected for further processing.
In one embodiment, the cap over the landfill will be made of layers of different earthen or synthetic materials aimed at reducing fugitive methane emission.
In preferred embodiment, quantification of fugitive emission is critically important to quantify the landfill contribution to overall greenhouse gas emission and climate change.
In one embodiment, the landfill is divided into several zones. In preferred embodiment, the zones are selected based on geometry, type of cover, type or status of vegetation including but not limited to healthy and stressed, other visual observation, expected emission levels and pre-sampling results if such results are available.
3 In preferred embodiment, measurement of surface methane concentration (SMC) is completed through a modified version of an existing protocol for qualitative assessment of emissions from municipal landfills established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) (Title 40 CFR Pat 60, Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills).
In preferred embodiment, SMC values are adjusted accounting for effects of barometric pressure rate of change during sampling campaign.
In one embodiment, adjusted SMC data are integrated for each measurement zone to calculate an average adjusted SMC for each zone.
In preferred embodiment, the adjusted average SMC in each zone is correlated with the average methane flux measured within each zone based on standard protocols available including but not limited to the Flux Chamber method.
In preferred embodiment, the resulting correlation in form of an equation can be used under a variety of methane emitting surfaces such as landfills, to calculate methane emission rate solely based on surface methane concentration requiring none, minimum or limited number of emission rate measurements through methods such as flux chamber.
In preferred embodiment, the method presented in this invention can be used in a variety of landfills where methane emission rate is to be reported.
The preferred embodiment relies solely on significantly cost effective and less time-consuming measurement of surface methane concentration as an advantage to the existing methods such as using flux chambers for methane emission rate measurement.
The one embodiment, the equation can be recalibrated and/or validated for a new methane emitting site or a methane emitting site with significantly different surficial features through additional yet limited number of flux chamber measurement data points.
In preferred embodiment, SMC values are adjusted accounting for effects of barometric pressure rate of change during sampling campaign.
In one embodiment, adjusted SMC data are integrated for each measurement zone to calculate an average adjusted SMC for each zone.
In preferred embodiment, the adjusted average SMC in each zone is correlated with the average methane flux measured within each zone based on standard protocols available including but not limited to the Flux Chamber method.
In preferred embodiment, the resulting correlation in form of an equation can be used under a variety of methane emitting surfaces such as landfills, to calculate methane emission rate solely based on surface methane concentration requiring none, minimum or limited number of emission rate measurements through methods such as flux chamber.
In preferred embodiment, the method presented in this invention can be used in a variety of landfills where methane emission rate is to be reported.
The preferred embodiment relies solely on significantly cost effective and less time-consuming measurement of surface methane concentration as an advantage to the existing methods such as using flux chambers for methane emission rate measurement.
The one embodiment, the equation can be recalibrated and/or validated for a new methane emitting site or a methane emitting site with significantly different surficial features through additional yet limited number of flux chamber measurement data points.
4 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
A unique approach was developed under this research allowing for quantification of the fugitive methane emissions rate (MER) from the entirety of a given landfill surface area at a considerably lower cost in comparison with the conventional methods. The core of the proposed method is to use measured surface methane concentration (SMC) data obtained through surface scan by handheld devices such as a portable flame ionization detector (FID). The correlation between SMC
data and MER values was developed based on representative emission rate values measured using flux chamber technique and adjustments made in terms of barometric pressure fluctuations during the fieldwork. The resulting equation can be used to simply predict the methane flux through the surface of any given landfill (active, cover soil, or biocover), using SMC
data which are obtained through a less costly method.
In this invention, this method may be accomplished through the following steps:
(i) Area of interest or the project boundary such as landfill footprint is divided into several zones denoted as Z,, based on one or more of the following attributes of a given site;
landfill or otherwise:
a. The geometry of the site, b. Type of cover including but not limited to earthen covers, geosynthetics, biocover and a combination of different types of covers c. Type of vegetation, d. Status of vegetation in terms of density, health and level of stress e. Other visual observations, f. Expected emission levels in terms of concentration or rate based on any previous field measurement records g. Expected or anticipated emission levels in terms of concentration or rate based on the results of previous emission rate or concentration modeling (ii) Measurement of SMC is completed through any of existing or future protocols and standards for qualitative assessment of emissions from municipal landfills established by regulatory or otherwise organizations such as the US EPA, Title 40 CFR Pat 60, Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, (iii) SMC values are adjusted to SMCa accounting for effects of barometric pressure rate of change during sampling campaign, (iv) SMCa data are integrated for each measurement zone to calculate an average SMCa for each zone denoted as SMCa.,, and (v) SMCa_, values in form of data points or measurements for each zone is correlated linearly to quantitative measurement data points of MER, which is the Average Methane Emission Rate for Zone Z, (vi) The correlation as shown in Equation 1, and in Figure 4, results in a Correlation Factor Cf.
MERa_i = SMC, X Cf A SMC, Equation 1 Where:
MER = average methane emission rate for zone Z, in g CH4/m2/d SMCa_, = average surface methane concentration for zone Z, in ppmv CH4 Cf = Correlation factor For every calculated numeric value of the SMC,, for each zone, a corresponding MERa can be calculated using Equation 1 and the line shown in Figure 4 denoted as Correlation.
Values for the correlation factor and variation are developed under this work and provided through the correlation and the total methane emission from the project boundary abbreviated as ET can be then calculated as:
ET = xMERa_, x3.65 x 104) Equation 2 Where:
ET = total annual methane emission from the project boundary in tonnes/year A, = Footprint Area of zone Z, in m2 MERa_, = average methane emission rate for zone Z, calculated from Equation 1 in g CH4/m2/d 3.65 x 10-4 = unit conversion multiplier Note: The default correlation factor Cf is developed by completing a quantitative field measurement of MER using the US EPA flux chamber methodology for various zones with different emission levels, qualitative assessment of SMC for the same areas, and plotting the SMC
data against the MER values. Similar exercise can be repeated, when possible and desired, to calculate a site-specific value for Cf.
A) Zoning: Zoning of a site is necessary only if different areas of the site are expected to have significantly different methane emission rates. This is done prior to completing the field measurements. The area of interest is divided into different zones based on expected levels of methane emission rates such as landfill crest, side slopes, type of cover, type of vegetation, etc..
While the end results in form of the estimated total methane emission from the site will remain the same, zoning of the site will help identifying the areas with higher emission rates.
B) Field measurement abbreviated as SMC: Surface methane concentration of each zone is measured by continuous and instantaneous sampling of air using a portable device with minimum detection limit of 0.0001% methane or 1 part per million or ppm. One of the devices that can be used to measure SMC with this accuracy is portable Flame Ionization Detector denoted as FID to measure the concentration of total organic compounds measured as methane at the landfill surface.
SMC measurement is completed following the protocols similar to US EPA
protocol for qualitative surface methane emission monitoring under Title 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart WWW.
Method includes instantaneous sampling of air at 2.5 to 10 cm above landfill surface and on paths of approximately 30 m. Reducing the distance between the measurement paths which is recommended to be 10 m or less, will increase number of samples and accuracy of the results. The SMC measurement field work can be completed only when the landfill cover soil, bio-cover, or other form of covers is not saturated, and wind speed is less than 16 km/hr equal to about 4.5 m/sec. The SMC readings are recorded at minimum every 5 to10 seconds at sampling points approximately every 1 to 2 m along the sampling route or path. These readings are separately collected for each zone along with GPS records, time of sampling, climate conditions, ambient temperature and barometric pressure. Figure 1 shows an example of how a site boundary is divided into different zones and how sampling path should be in an example zone.
C) Other field readings and field data adjustments:
Variations in the weather conditions, and in particular the barometric pressure abbreviated as BP, have an impact on rate of methane fugitive emissions from landfill's surface.
Higher emission rates at landfills are reported to occur at lower ambient pressures. In general, variations in atmospheric pressure happen due to several factors including;
- Auto oscillation of air which is reported to have an insignificant effect, - Daily warming and cooling of air caused by solarization causing diurnal variations, and - Passage of atmospheric pressure lows and highs leading to long term variations.
Therefore, short term daily and long term seasonal variations in atmospheric pressure should be considered when conducting methane fugitive emission measurements at a landfill site. The present methodology includes development of an equation for adjusting the calculated MER values for effect of barometric pressure fluctuations at time of sampling. The true value of MER at the landfill could be measured when the atmospheric pressure remained constant, causing an equilibrium condition between landfill and the surrounding environment. The following equation was developed through finding a good correlation between change in MER values and rate of change in barometric pressure.
Therefore, the MER values should be adjusted to the true values presented as MERa, based on the recorded AP/t at the time of sampling relative to the equalized condition meaning that AP/t equals zero.
MERa = MER x (1 + 1.9731 x 1AP/t) ^ (AP/t / AP/0 Equation 3 Where:
AP/t = change in barometric pressure over time during sampling AP/t /1AP/tIwould be equal to -1 or +1, represent the sign of the AP/t. This adjustment for effect of BP shall be made once on either measured SMC data or calculated MER at the end as suggest in Equation3. If field data is intended to be adjusted before calculation of MER, Equation 4 below can be used to find adjusted SMC, based on which true value of MER can be calculated.
SMCa = SMC x (1 + 1.9731 x IAP/t1) A (AP/t /IAP/t ) Equation 4 D) Data compilation and analyses:
This invention is based on the correlation that was found between SMC and MER.
This correlation, illustrated in Figures 3 and 4 below, was developed through extensive field measurement on 12-hectare area consisting of 12 different measurement zones.
As shown in Figure 3, plotting the SMCa data against the MERa values showed a reasonable correlation between these two values.
Based on this correlation;
MER = SMC x (0.32 0.034) + (1.39 0.755) Equation 5 Where:
MER = methane emission rate in g CH4 m-2 d-1 SMC = surface methane concentration in ppmv CH4 The development of this invention can be practically very important in the LFG
management industry, saving time and money when full scale fugitive methane emission measurements are required. Another very important application of this methodology is performance review and/or quantification of methane emission from surfaces with very low methane emissions such as bio-cover systems, bio-filters, and bio-window systems.
Main objective of these systems is to minimize methane emission to the atmosphere, making it almost impossible to use conventional methods, such as flux chamber technique, for quantification of the remaining methane emission through these systems.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES
Figure 1. One zone (e.g. Zone A) with 1 ha footprint requiring 1 km of sampling path (with 10 m spacing) and 500¨ 1000 SMC readings Figure 2. Correlation between rate of change in BP and adjusting multiplier for MER
Figure 3. Averaged surface methane concentration (SMCa) and methane emission rate (MERa) for 12 measurement zones Figure 4. Correlation between SMC and MER values
A unique approach was developed under this research allowing for quantification of the fugitive methane emissions rate (MER) from the entirety of a given landfill surface area at a considerably lower cost in comparison with the conventional methods. The core of the proposed method is to use measured surface methane concentration (SMC) data obtained through surface scan by handheld devices such as a portable flame ionization detector (FID). The correlation between SMC
data and MER values was developed based on representative emission rate values measured using flux chamber technique and adjustments made in terms of barometric pressure fluctuations during the fieldwork. The resulting equation can be used to simply predict the methane flux through the surface of any given landfill (active, cover soil, or biocover), using SMC
data which are obtained through a less costly method.
In this invention, this method may be accomplished through the following steps:
(i) Area of interest or the project boundary such as landfill footprint is divided into several zones denoted as Z,, based on one or more of the following attributes of a given site;
landfill or otherwise:
a. The geometry of the site, b. Type of cover including but not limited to earthen covers, geosynthetics, biocover and a combination of different types of covers c. Type of vegetation, d. Status of vegetation in terms of density, health and level of stress e. Other visual observations, f. Expected emission levels in terms of concentration or rate based on any previous field measurement records g. Expected or anticipated emission levels in terms of concentration or rate based on the results of previous emission rate or concentration modeling (ii) Measurement of SMC is completed through any of existing or future protocols and standards for qualitative assessment of emissions from municipal landfills established by regulatory or otherwise organizations such as the US EPA, Title 40 CFR Pat 60, Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, (iii) SMC values are adjusted to SMCa accounting for effects of barometric pressure rate of change during sampling campaign, (iv) SMCa data are integrated for each measurement zone to calculate an average SMCa for each zone denoted as SMCa.,, and (v) SMCa_, values in form of data points or measurements for each zone is correlated linearly to quantitative measurement data points of MER, which is the Average Methane Emission Rate for Zone Z, (vi) The correlation as shown in Equation 1, and in Figure 4, results in a Correlation Factor Cf.
MERa_i = SMC, X Cf A SMC, Equation 1 Where:
MER = average methane emission rate for zone Z, in g CH4/m2/d SMCa_, = average surface methane concentration for zone Z, in ppmv CH4 Cf = Correlation factor For every calculated numeric value of the SMC,, for each zone, a corresponding MERa can be calculated using Equation 1 and the line shown in Figure 4 denoted as Correlation.
Values for the correlation factor and variation are developed under this work and provided through the correlation and the total methane emission from the project boundary abbreviated as ET can be then calculated as:
ET = xMERa_, x3.65 x 104) Equation 2 Where:
ET = total annual methane emission from the project boundary in tonnes/year A, = Footprint Area of zone Z, in m2 MERa_, = average methane emission rate for zone Z, calculated from Equation 1 in g CH4/m2/d 3.65 x 10-4 = unit conversion multiplier Note: The default correlation factor Cf is developed by completing a quantitative field measurement of MER using the US EPA flux chamber methodology for various zones with different emission levels, qualitative assessment of SMC for the same areas, and plotting the SMC
data against the MER values. Similar exercise can be repeated, when possible and desired, to calculate a site-specific value for Cf.
A) Zoning: Zoning of a site is necessary only if different areas of the site are expected to have significantly different methane emission rates. This is done prior to completing the field measurements. The area of interest is divided into different zones based on expected levels of methane emission rates such as landfill crest, side slopes, type of cover, type of vegetation, etc..
While the end results in form of the estimated total methane emission from the site will remain the same, zoning of the site will help identifying the areas with higher emission rates.
B) Field measurement abbreviated as SMC: Surface methane concentration of each zone is measured by continuous and instantaneous sampling of air using a portable device with minimum detection limit of 0.0001% methane or 1 part per million or ppm. One of the devices that can be used to measure SMC with this accuracy is portable Flame Ionization Detector denoted as FID to measure the concentration of total organic compounds measured as methane at the landfill surface.
SMC measurement is completed following the protocols similar to US EPA
protocol for qualitative surface methane emission monitoring under Title 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart WWW.
Method includes instantaneous sampling of air at 2.5 to 10 cm above landfill surface and on paths of approximately 30 m. Reducing the distance between the measurement paths which is recommended to be 10 m or less, will increase number of samples and accuracy of the results. The SMC measurement field work can be completed only when the landfill cover soil, bio-cover, or other form of covers is not saturated, and wind speed is less than 16 km/hr equal to about 4.5 m/sec. The SMC readings are recorded at minimum every 5 to10 seconds at sampling points approximately every 1 to 2 m along the sampling route or path. These readings are separately collected for each zone along with GPS records, time of sampling, climate conditions, ambient temperature and barometric pressure. Figure 1 shows an example of how a site boundary is divided into different zones and how sampling path should be in an example zone.
C) Other field readings and field data adjustments:
Variations in the weather conditions, and in particular the barometric pressure abbreviated as BP, have an impact on rate of methane fugitive emissions from landfill's surface.
Higher emission rates at landfills are reported to occur at lower ambient pressures. In general, variations in atmospheric pressure happen due to several factors including;
- Auto oscillation of air which is reported to have an insignificant effect, - Daily warming and cooling of air caused by solarization causing diurnal variations, and - Passage of atmospheric pressure lows and highs leading to long term variations.
Therefore, short term daily and long term seasonal variations in atmospheric pressure should be considered when conducting methane fugitive emission measurements at a landfill site. The present methodology includes development of an equation for adjusting the calculated MER values for effect of barometric pressure fluctuations at time of sampling. The true value of MER at the landfill could be measured when the atmospheric pressure remained constant, causing an equilibrium condition between landfill and the surrounding environment. The following equation was developed through finding a good correlation between change in MER values and rate of change in barometric pressure.
Therefore, the MER values should be adjusted to the true values presented as MERa, based on the recorded AP/t at the time of sampling relative to the equalized condition meaning that AP/t equals zero.
MERa = MER x (1 + 1.9731 x 1AP/t) ^ (AP/t / AP/0 Equation 3 Where:
AP/t = change in barometric pressure over time during sampling AP/t /1AP/tIwould be equal to -1 or +1, represent the sign of the AP/t. This adjustment for effect of BP shall be made once on either measured SMC data or calculated MER at the end as suggest in Equation3. If field data is intended to be adjusted before calculation of MER, Equation 4 below can be used to find adjusted SMC, based on which true value of MER can be calculated.
SMCa = SMC x (1 + 1.9731 x IAP/t1) A (AP/t /IAP/t ) Equation 4 D) Data compilation and analyses:
This invention is based on the correlation that was found between SMC and MER.
This correlation, illustrated in Figures 3 and 4 below, was developed through extensive field measurement on 12-hectare area consisting of 12 different measurement zones.
As shown in Figure 3, plotting the SMCa data against the MERa values showed a reasonable correlation between these two values.
Based on this correlation;
MER = SMC x (0.32 0.034) + (1.39 0.755) Equation 5 Where:
MER = methane emission rate in g CH4 m-2 d-1 SMC = surface methane concentration in ppmv CH4 The development of this invention can be practically very important in the LFG
management industry, saving time and money when full scale fugitive methane emission measurements are required. Another very important application of this methodology is performance review and/or quantification of methane emission from surfaces with very low methane emissions such as bio-cover systems, bio-filters, and bio-window systems.
Main objective of these systems is to minimize methane emission to the atmosphere, making it almost impossible to use conventional methods, such as flux chamber technique, for quantification of the remaining methane emission through these systems.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES
Figure 1. One zone (e.g. Zone A) with 1 ha footprint requiring 1 km of sampling path (with 10 m spacing) and 500¨ 1000 SMC readings Figure 2. Correlation between rate of change in BP and adjusting multiplier for MER
Figure 3. Averaged surface methane concentration (SMCa) and methane emission rate (MERa) for 12 measurement zones Figure 4. Correlation between SMC and MER values
Claims
1 - A method for estimating fugitive methane emission rate over the surface of a landfill and similar fugitive methane emission surfaces, by sole measurement of surface methane concentration and using a generalizable correlation equation between surface concentration of fugitive methane measured at the surface of different zones of fugitive methane emitting surface, and corresponding emission rates adjusted against barometric pressure, wherein:
a. An area of interest is divided into several zones (Zi) based on any one or any combination of the following attributes:
i. The geometry of the site, ii. Type of cover including but not limited to earthen covers, geosynthetics, bio-cover and a combination of different types of covers, iii. Type of vegetation, iv. Status of vegetation in terms of density, health and level of stress.
v. Expected emission levels in form of concentration or rate based on any previous field measurement records, vi. Expected or anticipated emission levels in form of concentration or rate based on the results of previous emission rate or concentration modeling, b. Sampling of surface methane concentration (SMC) is conducted in accordance with any of existing or future protocols and standards for qualitative assessment of emissions from municipal landfills established by regulatory or otherwise organizations such as the US
EPA, Title 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart WWW, Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.
c. SMC values are adjusted (SMCa) to account for effects of barometric pressure rate of change during the sampling, d. Methane Emission Rate abbreviated as MER is measured in each zone, e. Average SMCa is calculated for each zone (Z) presented as SMCa-i, f. Average MER is calculated for each zone abbreviated as MERa-i, g. SMCa-i values of the data points or average measurements for each zone are correlated linearly to quantitative measurement data points of MER, or Average Methane Emission Rate for Zone Z1, h. The correlation results in a Correlation Factor presented as Cf, i. The Correlation Factor Cf is used to convert SMC measurement data points into MER
values for every zone over the entire methane emitting surface, j. For any methane emitting surface a site-specific value for Cf can be calculated, k. Site-specific Cf can then be used to calculate MER from SMC for each specific site.
a. An area of interest is divided into several zones (Zi) based on any one or any combination of the following attributes:
i. The geometry of the site, ii. Type of cover including but not limited to earthen covers, geosynthetics, bio-cover and a combination of different types of covers, iii. Type of vegetation, iv. Status of vegetation in terms of density, health and level of stress.
v. Expected emission levels in form of concentration or rate based on any previous field measurement records, vi. Expected or anticipated emission levels in form of concentration or rate based on the results of previous emission rate or concentration modeling, b. Sampling of surface methane concentration (SMC) is conducted in accordance with any of existing or future protocols and standards for qualitative assessment of emissions from municipal landfills established by regulatory or otherwise organizations such as the US
EPA, Title 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart WWW, Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.
c. SMC values are adjusted (SMCa) to account for effects of barometric pressure rate of change during the sampling, d. Methane Emission Rate abbreviated as MER is measured in each zone, e. Average SMCa is calculated for each zone (Z) presented as SMCa-i, f. Average MER is calculated for each zone abbreviated as MERa-i, g. SMCa-i values of the data points or average measurements for each zone are correlated linearly to quantitative measurement data points of MER, or Average Methane Emission Rate for Zone Z1, h. The correlation results in a Correlation Factor presented as Cf, i. The Correlation Factor Cf is used to convert SMC measurement data points into MER
values for every zone over the entire methane emitting surface, j. For any methane emitting surface a site-specific value for Cf can be calculated, k. Site-specific Cf can then be used to calculate MER from SMC for each specific site.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA2955844A CA2955844C (en) | 2017-01-24 | 2017-01-24 | Method for quantifying fugitive methane emissions rate using surface methane concentration |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA2955844A CA2955844C (en) | 2017-01-24 | 2017-01-24 | Method for quantifying fugitive methane emissions rate using surface methane concentration |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA2955844A1 CA2955844A1 (en) | 2018-07-24 |
| CA2955844C true CA2955844C (en) | 2019-08-13 |
Family
ID=62976757
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA2955844A Active CA2955844C (en) | 2017-01-24 | 2017-01-24 | Method for quantifying fugitive methane emissions rate using surface methane concentration |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CA (1) | CA2955844C (en) |
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US20220176422A1 (en) * | 2020-12-03 | 2022-06-09 | Loci Controls, Inc. | Greenhouse gas emissions control |
Families Citing this family (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN114912158B (en) * | 2022-05-13 | 2023-02-14 | 华中科技大学 | Design method of soil covering layer of solid waste landfill with consideration of plant root system effect |
-
2017
- 2017-01-24 CA CA2955844A patent/CA2955844C/en active Active
Cited By (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US20220176422A1 (en) * | 2020-12-03 | 2022-06-09 | Loci Controls, Inc. | Greenhouse gas emissions control |
| US11865594B2 (en) * | 2020-12-03 | 2024-01-09 | Loci Controls, Inc. | Greenhouse gas emissions control |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| CA2955844A1 (en) | 2018-07-24 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| US11378563B2 (en) | Method for quantifying fugitive methane emissions rate using surface methane concentration | |
| Ebinghaus et al. | Decreasing trends in total gaseous mercury observations in baseline air at Mace Head, Ireland from 1996 to 2009 | |
| Czepiel et al. | The influence of atmospheric pressure on landfill methane emissions | |
| CN104736987B (en) | The method of Leakage inspection and positioning is carried out in densely populated areas using horizontal analysis | |
| Zhu et al. | A new approach to estimation of methane emission rates from landfills | |
| Rees-White et al. | Measuring methane emissions from a UK landfill using the tracer dispersion method and the influence of operational and environmental factors | |
| US20110213554A1 (en) | Method and system for screening an area of the atmosphere for sources of emissions | |
| You et al. | Methane emissions from an oil sands tailings pond: a quantitative comparison of fluxes derived by different methods | |
| Chen et al. | Methane emissions from the Munich Oktoberfest | |
| CA2955844C (en) | Method for quantifying fugitive methane emissions rate using surface methane concentration | |
| Sanchez et al. | Exploratory study of atmospheric methane enhancements derived from natural gas use in the Houston urban area | |
| Font et al. | Daytime CO2 urban surface fluxes from airborne measurements, eddy-covariance observations and emissions inventory in Greater London | |
| Taylor et al. | Atmospheric modeling to assess wind dependence in tracer dilution method measurements of landfill methane emissions | |
| Niwa et al. | Seasonal variations of CO2, CH4, N2O and CO in the mid-troposphere over the western North Pacific observed using a C-130H cargo aircraft | |
| Mosher et al. | Mitigation of methane emissions at landfill sites in New England, USA | |
| Shi et al. | High-precision methodology for quantifying gas point source emission | |
| Di Gilio et al. | An integrated high temporal resolution approach to monitor VOCs concentrations and odour annoyance near a petroleum plant. | |
| Bateman et al. | Preliminary observations from robot-enabled surface methane concentration monitoring at a MSW landfill | |
| Chang et al. | Finding the missing link in methane emission inventories using aircraft and mobile observations | |
| Samir et al. | Evaluation and Applicability of Flame Ionization Detector for Fugitive Emission | |
| Liao et al. | Formaldehyde evolution in US wildfire plumes during FIREX-AQ | |
| Giordano et al. | Landfill gas collection efficiency: Categorization of data from existing in-situ measurements | |
| Weil et al. | Contributing to a Greener New York: Analysis of Methane Emissions in New York State | |
| Chang et al. | Odor load investigation for a pharmaceutical plant by open path Fourier transform infrared (OP-FTIR)/environmental protection agency regulatory dispersion model (AERMOD) | |
| Myers et al. | Using IR-based sensors to monitor fugitive greenhouse gas emissions in the Australian context |