Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/112106
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: The Ginninderra CH₄ and CO₂ release experiment: An evaluation of gas detection and quantification techniques
Other Titles: The Ginninderra CH(4) and CO(2) release experiment: An evaluation of gas detection and quantification techniques
Author: Feitz, A.
Schroder, I.
Phillips, F.
Coates, T.
Neghandhi, K.
Day, S.
Luhar, A.
Bhatia, S.
Edwards, G.
Hrabar, S.
Hernandez, E.
Wood, B.
Naylor, T.
Kennedy, M.
Hamilton, M.
Hatch, M.
Malos, J.
Kochanek, M.
Reid, P.
Wilson, J.
et al.
Citation: International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2018; 70:202-224
Publisher: Elsevier
Issue Date: 2018
ISSN: 1750-5836
1878-0148
Statement of
Responsibility: 
Andrew Feitz, Ivan Schroder, Frances Phillips, Trevor Coates, Karita Negandhi, Stuart Day, Ashok Luhar, Sangeeta Bhatia, Grant Edwards, Stefan Hrabar, Emili Hernandez, Brett Wood, Travis Naylor, Martin Kennedy, Murray Hamilton, Mike Hatch, John Malos, Mark Kochanek, Peter Reid, Joel Wilson, Nicholas Deutscher, Steve Zegelin, Robert Vincent, Stephen White, Cindy Ong, Suman George, Peter Maas, Sean Towner, Nicholas Wokker, David Griffith
Abstract: A methane (CH₄) and carbon dioxide (CO₂) release experiment was held from April to June 2015 at the Ginninderra Controlled Release Facility in Canberra, Australia. The experiment provided an opportunity to compare different emission quantification techniques against a simulated CH₄ and CO₂ point source release, where the actual release rates were unknown to the participants. Eight quantification techniques were assessed: three tracer ratio techniques (two mobile); backwards Lagrangian stochastic modelling; forwards Lagrangian stochastic modelling; Lagrangian stochastic (LS) footprint modelling; atmospheric tomography using point and using integrated line sensors. The majority of CH₄ estimates were within 20% of the actual CH₄ release rate (5.8g/min), with the tracer ratio technique providing the closest estimate to both the CH₄ and CO₂ release rates (100g/min). Once the release rate was known, the majority of revised estimates were within 10% of the actual release rate. The study illustrates the power of measuring the emission rate using multiple simultaneous methods and obtaining an ensemble median or mean. An ensemble approach to estimating the CH₄ emission rate proved successful with the ensemble median estimate within 16% for the actual release rate for the blind release experiment and within 2% once the release rate was known. The release also provided an opportunity to assess the effectiveness of stationary andmobile ground and aerial CH₄ detection technologies. Sensor detection limits and sampling rates were found to be significant limitations for CH₄ and CO₂ detection. A hyperspectral imager’s capacity to image the CH₄ release from 100 m, and a Boreal CH₄ laser sensor’s ability to track moving targets suggest the future possibility to map gas plumes using a single laser and mobile aerial reflector.
Keywords: Fugitive emissions; methane; carbon dioxide; geological storage; geosquestration; quantification; measurement; modelling; atmospheric; leakage
Description: Available online 15 March 2018
Rights: Crown Copyright © 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0/).
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.11.018
Grant ID: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/LP140100460
http://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/LP120200086
Published version: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.11.018
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 3
Physics publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_112106.pdfPublished version2.74 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.