Description
A large-scale controlled release study was performed at a closed landfill in Petrolia, Ontario Canada between November 6, 2023, and November 14, 2023. During this time, 16 combinations of vendors and methodologies were assessed for their performance of quantification and detection of methane during 71 experiments.
Quantification methods performed well during the study. Truck-based systems using the Gaussian model tend to underestimate and the tracer correlation method was the most accurate among the truck-based methodologies. Using onsite weather data improved accuracy of LiDAR and should be an important consideration for vendors. Detection methods and vendor performance varied greatly. LiDAR was very effective in localizing leaks and detecting emissions as low as 1 kg/hr. TDLAS systems, at a rate of around 80%, provided a high number of false positive leak estimates. This occurred with both vendors, who used the same technology.
Key takeaways from the study are listed below:
- MTCEA provided good quantification estimates while being flexible to operate in various weather conditions. UPSEA provided accurate quantification estimates as well , however the
- methodology requires good weather conditions to operate (no precipitation, windspeed below 12 m/s).
- Collecting onsite weather data is recommended as it has shown to improve quantification estimates
- LiDAR was able to detect all active emitting points including flowrates as low as 1 kg/hr.
- UCSEA reported high number of false positives (False positive fraction > 0.79) with limited visibility when measuring active emission points on slopes.
- RPSEA showed promising results; however, require further validation in a landfill setting to ensure its accuracy.
$0.00
