Quantifying Uncontrolled Landfill Gas Emissions from Two Florida ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 1-2. Map of Site #2 detailing the location of the survey cells 1.2 Optical Remote Sensing Instrumentation The current study used two optical remote sensing instruments to collect path-integrated concentration data at the sites. Each instrument was mounted on a scanner, and collected pathintegrated methane concentration data along multiple path lengths. The Boreal GasFinder 2.0 OP-TDLAS instrument is designed for area and fugitive source emission characterization. The infrared laser emits radiation at a particular wavelength in the infrared region when an electrical current is passed through it. The light wavelength depends on the current and therefore allows scanning over an absorption feature and analyzing for the target gas concentration, using Beer’s law. The laser signal is transmitted from a single telescope to a retro-reflecting mirror target, which is usually set up at a range of 100 to 1500 m. The returned light signal is received by the single telescope and directed to a detector. The instrument provides instantaneous, path-integrated methane concentration data. The single channel methane GasFinder 2.0 was used for the current campaign. Figure 1-3 presents a picture of the GasFinder 2.0 instrument that was used for this study. 1-3
Figure 1-3. Scanning Boreal GasFinder 2.0 instrument The IMACC OP-FTIR Spectrometer is designed for both fence-line monitoring applications, and real-time, on-site, remediation monitoring and source characterization. An infrared light beam, modulated by a Michelson interferometer, is transmitted from a single telescope to a mirror target, which is usually set up at a range of 100 to 500 meters. The returned light signal is received by the single telescope and directed to a detector. The light is absorbed by the molecules in the beam path as the light propagates to the mirror and again as the light is reflected back to the analyzer. Thus, the round-trip path of the light doubles the chemical absorption signal. One advantage of OP-FTIR monitoring is that the concentrations of a multitude of infrared absorbing gaseous chemicals can be detected and measured simultaneously, with high temporal resolution. Figure 1-4 presents a picture of the IMACC OP-FTIR used for the current study. 1-4
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: instrument (IMACC, Inc.). Figures 1
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 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 and 100:
When the VRPM configuration consist
Page 101 and 102:
This page intentionally left blank.
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 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Table C-11. Methane Concentrations
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
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?