Literature DB >> 16198554

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

K Spokas1, J Bogner, J P Chanton, M Morcet, C Aran, C Graff, Y Moreau-Le Golvan, I Hebe.   

Abstract

Many developed countries have targeted landfill methane recovery among greenhouse gas mitigation strategies, since methane is the second most important greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide. Major questions remain with respect to actual methane production rates in field settings and the relative mass of methane that is recovered, emitted, oxidized by methanotrophic bacteria, laterally migrated, or temporarily stored within the landfill volume. This paper presents the results of extensive field campaigns at three landfill sites to elucidate the total methane balance and provide field measurements to quantify these pathways. We assessed the overall methane mass balance in field cells with a variety of designs, cover materials, and gas management strategies. Sites included different cell configurations, including temporary clay cover, final clay cover, geosynthetic clay liners, and geomembrane composite covers, and cells with and without gas collection systems. Methane emission rates ranged from -2.2 to >10,000 mg CH(4) m(-2) d(-1). Total methane oxidation rates ranged from 4% to 50% of the methane flux through the cover at sites with positive emissions. Oxidation of atmospheric methane was occurring in vegetated soils above a geomembrane. The results of these studies were used as the basis for guidelines by the French environment agency (ADEME) for default values for percent recovery: 35% for an operating cell with an active landfill gas (LFG) recovery system, 65% for a temporary covered cell with an active LFG recovery system, 85% for a cell with clay final cover and active LFG recovery, and 90% for a cell with a geomembrane final cover and active LFG recovery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16198554     DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2005.07.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Waste Manag        ISSN: 0956-053X            Impact factor:   7.145


  5 in total

1.  Ecological risk assessment of an open dumping site at Mehmood Booti Lahore, Pakistan.

Authors:  Asifa Alam; Amtul Bari Tabinda; Abdul Qadir; Talib E Butt; Sidra Siddique; Adeel Mahmood
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-06-15       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Detection of hotspots and rapid determination of methane emissions from landfills via a ground-surface method.

Authors:  R Gonzalez-Valencia; F Magana-Rodriguez; E Maldonado; J Salinas; F Thalasso
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2014-11-16       Impact factor: 2.513

3.  Alternative carbon dioxide modelling approaches accounting for high residual gases in LandGEM.

Authors:  Nathan Bruce; Kelvin Tsun Wai Ng; Amy Richter
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-04-20       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Assessment of methane generation, oxidation, and emission in a subtropical landfill test cell.

Authors:  João M L Moreira; Giovano Candiani
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 2.513

5.  Application of the IPCC Waste Model to solid waste disposal sites in tropical countries: case study of Thailand.

Authors:  Komsilp Wangyao; Sirintornthep Towprayoon; Chart Chiemchaisri; Shabbir H Gheewala; Annop Nopharatana
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2009-05-05       Impact factor: 2.513

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.