Methane mass balance at three landfill sites: What is the efficiency of capture by gas collection systems?

Spokas, Kurt A.; Bogner, J.; Chanton, Jeffrey P.; Morcet, M.; Aran, Christophe; Graff, C.; Golvan, Yann Moreau-Le; Hébé, I.

doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2005.07.021

Cited by 324 publications

(217 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

193

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For sanitary landfills, a methane mass balance is the best way to completely constrain such estimates, and requires accurate measurement of the landfill gas collected, the methane oxidized by the landfill cover soils, and the methane lost as emissions (Spokas et al, 2006). The sum of these measurements is essentially equivalent to the total methane produced by the landfill (Spokas et al, 2006), then the landfill's gas collection efficiency can be calculated as the methane collected divided by the methane produced (Barlaz et al, 2009;Bogner and Spokas, 1993;Spokas et al, 2006). Overall, landfill carbon should ultimately be accounted for as collected, oxidized, emitted, or sequestered.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Methane emitted to the atmosphere is defined as 22.5% of the LandGEM (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005) (Landfill Gas Emissions Model)-produced quantity, and oxidized methane as 2.5% (10% of the emitted value). Recent literature indicates that the 75% value is an underestimate of methane capture efficiency in many cases and well-managed landfills currently perform better than the guidelines suggest (Spokas et al, 2006). Moreover, the oxidation capacity of the soil used in landfill covers has been found to be much greater than 10% Chanton et al, 2009;Chanton et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Methane emissions from 20 landfills across the United States using vertical radial plume mapping

Goldsmith¹,

Chanton

Abichou

et al. 2011

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Landfill fugitive methane emissions were quantified as a function of climate type and cover type at 20 landfills using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Other Test Method (OTM)-10 vertical radial plume mapping (VRPM) with tunable diode lasers (TDLs). The VRPM data were initially collected as g CH 4 /sec emission rates and subsequently converted to g CH 4 /m 2 / day rates using two recently published approaches. The first was based upon field tracer releases of methane or acetylene and multiple linear regression analysis (MLRM) A closed, synthetically capped landfill covered with soil and vegetation with a gas collection system in a humid continental warm summer climate gave mostly background methane readings and average emission rates of only 0.09 g CH 4 /m 2 /day flux when measurable.Implications: The OTM-10 method is being proposed by EPA to quantify surface methane emissions from landfill covers. This study of 20 landfills across the United States was done to determine the efficacy of using OTM-10 for this purpose. Two recently published models were used to evaluate the methane flux results found with VRPM optical remote sensing. The results should provide a sense of the practicality of the method, its limitations at landfills, and the impact of climate upon the cover's methane flux. Measured field data may assist landfill owners in refining previously modeled methane emission factor default values.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methane emissions from 20 landfills across the United States using vertical radial plume mapping

Goldsmith¹,

Chanton

Abichou

et al. 2011

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Landfill biocover soils have the highest aerobic methane oxidation capacity reported so far in any environment (Whalen et al, 1990;Bogner et al, 1995;Kightley et al, 1995;Borjesson et al, 1998;Streese and Stegmann, 2003). Microorganisms indigenous to landfill caps have the capacity to degrade 10-100% of the methane emitted, thereby representing a major biological sink for this greenhouse gas (Hanson and Hanson, 1996;Spokas et al, 2006). Biological methane oxidation to CO 2 can strongly reduce (B21-fold) climate forcing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of earthworms on the community structure of active methanotrophic bacteria in a landfill cover soil

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the United Kingdom, landfills are the primary anthropogenic source of methane emissions. Methanotrophic bacteria present in landfill biocovers can significantly reduce methane emissions via their capacity to oxidize up to 100% of the methane produced. Several biotic and abiotic parameters regulate methane oxidation in soil, such as oxygen, moisture, methane concentration and temperature. Earthworm-mediated bioturbation has been linked to an increase in methanotrophy in a landfill biocover soil (AC Singer et al., unpublished), but the mechanism of this trophic interaction remains unclear. The aims of this study were to determine the composition of the active methanotroph community and to investigate the interactions between earthworms and bacteria in this landfill biocover soil where the methane oxidation activity was significantly increased by the earthworms. Soil microcosms were incubated with 13 C-CH 4 and with or without earthworms. DNA and RNA were extracted to characterize the soil bacterial communities, with a particular emphasis on methanotroph populations, using phylogenetic (16S ribosomal RNA) and functional methane monooxygenase (pmoA and mmoX) gene probes, coupled with denaturing gradient-gel electrophoresis, clone libraries and pmoA microarray analyses. Stable isotope probing (SIP) using 13 C-CH 4 substrate allowed us to link microbial function with identity of bacteria via selective recovery of 'heavy' 13 C-labelled DNA or RNA and to assess the effect of earthworms on the active methanotroph populations. Both types I and II methanotrophs actively oxidized methane in the landfill soil studied. Results suggested that the earthworm-mediated increase in methane oxidation rate in the landfill soil was more likely to be due to the stimulation of bacterial growth or activity than to substantial shifts in the methanotroph community structure. A Bacteroidetes-related bacterium was identified only in the active bacterial community of earthworm-incubated soil but its capacity to actually oxidize methane has to be proven.

show abstract

“…The biogas can also be used as fuel, replacing fossil fuels in vehicles. The production of electricity may vary from 30kW to 50 MW, depending on the quantity of methane collected and the size of turbines used (Spokas et al, 2005). According to Bogner and Spokas (1993), the methane produced in a landfill is divided into five groups: recovered, discharged to the environment, sideways migrated, metabolized by methanotrophs and interiorly stocked.…”

Section: International Journal Of Academic Research In Business and Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental and Economical Assessment of MSW Management in Europe: An Analysis between the Landfill and WTE Impacts

Polzer

Persson

2015

IJARBSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Every year two billion tons of MSW are produced globally. Due to the impact of solid waste and population growth, it is necessary to develop an integrated solid waste management plan. Such a plan, holistic in scope, would aim to minimize the negative impact of this material in the environment while being economically viable. The designation and terming of any one mode of waste treatment as superior or preferable is an intricate issue in which a large set of standards and measures should be taken into account. The decision must consider not only economic and political aspects and realities but also environmental ones in the long term. According to the traditional method of life cycle assessment (LCA), it is possible to evaluate the environmental impact of different technologies and systems used for solid waste management such as recycling and biological treatments, waste-to-energy facilities and landfills. In order to provide examples and bases for comparison, several previous LCA studies are considered in this paper. Furthermore, various pros and cons of landfills and waste-to-energy facilities, taking into consideration European environmental, financial, and political realities are verified as well as the importance of European regulations and economic instruments adopted in several member countries. The results prove that the MSW hierarchy (avoid, reuse, recycle, recovery energy and landfill) present in the European regulation is the most adequate way to treat waste.

show abstract

Methane mass balance at three landfill sites: What is the efficiency of capture by gas collection systems?

Cited by 324 publications

References 31 publications

Methane emissions from 20 landfills across the United States using vertical radial plume mapping

Methane emissions from 20 landfills across the United States using vertical radial plume mapping

Effect of earthworms on the community structure of active methanotrophic bacteria in a landfill cover soil

Environmental and Economical Assessment of MSW Management in Europe: An Analysis between the Landfill and WTE Impacts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About