Quantifying Uncontrolled Landfill Gas Emissions from Two Florida ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Where: σ PICP = standard deviation of the predicted PIC vector; σ PICM = standard deviation of the measured PIC vector; PIC P = the mean of the predicted PIC vector; and PIC M = the mean of the measured PIC vector. The Pearson correlation coefficient is a good indicator of the quality of fit to the Gaussian mathematical function. In this procedure, typically an r close to 1 will be followed by an A very close to 1. This means that the averages and standard deviations in the two concentration vectors are very similar and the mass is conserved (good flux value). However, when a poor CCF is reported (CCF0.90). However, when both r and A are low one can assume that the flux calculation is inaccurate. A-5
This page intentionally left blank. A-6
Page 1 and 2:
Quantifying Uncontrolled Landfill G
Page 3 and 4:
Foreword The U.S. Environmental Pro
Page 5 and 6:
3.1.3 Total Site Methane Emissions
Page 7 and 8:
List of Tables Table 1-1. Target Co
Page 9 and 10:
Table 3-28. Calculated Methane Flux
Page 11 and 12:
Table C-6. Methane Concentrations (
Page 13 and 14:
List of Figures Figure 1-1. Map of
Page 15 and 16:
Executive Summary Waste decompositi
Page 17 and 18:
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 19 and 20:
instrument (IMACC, Inc.). Figures 1
Page 21 and 22:
Figure 1-3. Scanning Boreal GasFind
Page 23 and 24:
wind direction data are collected n
Page 25 and 26:
adsorption spectrometer. The analyz
Page 27 and 28:
Table 1-2. Schedule of Work Perform
Page 29 and 30:
Figure 2-2. Detail of measurement c
Page 31 and 32:
corners of the cell, respectively.
Page 33 and 34:
2.2.3 Background Measurements Backg
Page 35 and 36:
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 37 and 38:
was aligned on the mirror targets i
Page 39 and 40:
methane concentrations measured alo
Page 41 and 42:
Figure 3-3 Summary of ORS measureme
Page 43 and 44:
Table 3-5. Calculated methane flux
Page 45 and 46:
Table 3-7. Calculated methane flux
Page 47 and 48:
cell to the base. The following equ
Page 49 and 50: Table 3-9. Results of TO-15 analysi
Page 51 and 52: Table 3-10. Results of C1 to C6 and
Page 53 and 54: Table 3-14. Monomethyl Mercury Conc
Page 55 and 56: 3.2 Landfill Site #2 3.2.1 Control
Page 57 and 58: Table 3-17. Calculated Methane Flux
Page 63 and 64: 3.2.2 Bioreactor Cell 3.2.2.1 Febru
Page 69 and 70: Based on the calculations presented
Page 71 and 72: Table 3-34. Results for C1 to C6 an
Page 73 and 74: Table 3-38. Monomethyl Mercury Conc
Page 75 and 76: 3.3 Gas and Mercury Sampling Result
Page 77 and 78: Site #1 with a level of 83 ppmv. Th
Page 79 and 80: The surveys also found significant
Page 81 and 82: Monomethyl mercury concentrations i
Page 83 and 84: 5.1 Equipment Calibration Chapter 5
Page 85 and 86: The R 2 value was used to assess th
Page 87 and 88: the measured path-integrated methan
Page 89 and 90: 5.2.7 DQI Check of Total Mercury Sa
Page 91 and 92: Site #1 5.4 Site #2 77.9 Completene
Page 93 and 94: This page intentionally left blank.
Page 95 and 96: U.S. Environmental Protection Agenc
Page 97 and 98: d f e c b PDCs Y X a 2 12( y)( z) (
Page 99: When the VRPM configuration consist
Page 103 and 104: Table B-3. Distance, and Horizontal
Page 105 and 106: Table B-7. Distance, and Horizontal
Page 107 and 108: APPENDIX C Path-Averaged Methane Co
Page 109 and 110: Table C-3. Methane Concentrations (
Page 117 and 118: Table C-11. Methane Concentrations
show all

Quantifying Uncontrolled Landfill Gas Emissions from Two Florida ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?