Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparative use of different emission measurement approaches to determine methane emissions from a biogas plant
Deutsches Biomasseforschungszentrum gemeinnützige GmbH, Germany.
Technical University of Denmark, Denmark.
Deutsches Biomasseforschungszentrum gemeinnützige GmbH, Germany.
RISE - Research Institutes of Sweden, Built Environment, Energy and Circular Economy. (Urbana försörjningssystem)
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: Waste Management, ISSN 0956-053X, E-ISSN 1879-2456, Vol. 68, p. 173-185Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

A sustainable anaerobic biowaste treatment has to mitigate methane emissions from the entire biogas production chain, but the exact quantification of these emissions remains a challenge. This study presents a comparative measurement campaign carried out with on-site and ground-based remote sensing measurement approaches conducted by six measuring teams at a Swedish biowaste treatment plant. The measured emissions showed high variations, amongst others caused by different periods of measurement performance in connection with varying operational states of the plant. The overall methane emissions measured by ground-based remote sensing varied from 5 to 25 kg h−1 (corresponding to a methane loss of 0.6–3.0% of upgraded methane produced), depending on operating conditions and the measurement method applied. Overall methane emissions measured by the on-site measuring approaches varied between 5 and 17 kg h−1 (corresponding to a methane loss of 0.6 and 2.1%) from team to team, depending on the number of measured emission points, operational state during the measurements and the measurement method applied. Taking the operational conditions into account, the deviation between different approaches and teams could be explained, in that the two largest methane-emitting sources, contributing about 90% of the entire site’s emissions, were found to be the open digestate storage tank and a pressure release valve on the compressor station.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017. Vol. 68, p. 173-185
Keyword [en]
Biowaste; Biogas; Diffuse emissions; Tracer dispersion; Remote sensing; Leak detection
National Category
Energy Systems
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-32842DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.053OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-32842DiVA: diva2:1164120
Funder
Swedish Energy Agency
Available from: 2017-12-10 Created: 2017-12-10 Last updated: 2018-01-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full texthttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956053X17304361
By organisation
Energy and Circular Economy
In the same journal
Waste Management
Energy Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 7 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
v. 2.30.1