The Ginninderra CH4 and CO2 release experiment: An evaluation of gas detection and quantification techniques

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 & 10 others Nicholas Deutscher, Steve Zegelin, Robert Vincent, Stephen White, Cindy Ong, Suman George, Peter Maas, Sean Towner, Nicholas Wokker, David Griffith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

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 (5.8 g/min), with the tracer ratio technique providing the closest estimate to both the CH4 and CO2 release rates (100 g/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 and mobile 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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)202-224
Number of pages23
JournalInternational Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control
Volume70
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2018

Cite this

Feitz, Andrew ; Schroder, Ivan ; Phillips, Frances ; Coates, Trevor ; Negandhi, Karita ; Day, Stuart ; Luhar, Ashok ; Bhatia, Sangeeta ; Edwards, Grant ; Hrabar, Stefan ; Hernandez, Emili ; Wood, Brett ; Naylor, Travis ; Kennedy, Martin ; Hamilton, Murray ; Hatch, Mike ; Malos, John ; Kochanek, Mark ; Reid, Peter ; Wilson, Joel ; Deutscher, Nicholas ; Zegelin, Steve ; Vincent, Robert ; White, Stephen ; Ong, Cindy ; George, Suman ; Maas, Peter ; Towner, Sean ; Wokker, Nicholas ; Griffith, David. / The Ginninderra CH4 and CO2 release experiment : An evaluation of gas detection and quantification techniques. In: International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control. 2018 ; Vol. 70. pp. 202-224.
@article{c6a264f209fe4afa9f66c6ba2a5e768e,
title = "The Ginninderra CH4 and CO2 release experiment: An evaluation of gas detection and quantification techniques",
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 (5.8 g/min), with the tracer ratio technique providing the closest estimate to both the CH4 and CO2 release rates (100 g/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 and mobile 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, EDDY COVARIANCE TECHNIQUE, ATMOSPHERIC TOMOGRAPHY, METHANE EMISSIONS, STOCHASTIC-MODELS, STORAGE PROJECTS, LEAK DETECTION, FLUX, TRAJECTORIES, QUALITY, SENSOR",
author = "Andrew Feitz and Ivan Schroder and Frances Phillips and Trevor Coates and Karita Negandhi and Stuart Day and Ashok Luhar and Sangeeta Bhatia and Grant Edwards and Stefan Hrabar and Emili Hernandez and Brett Wood and Travis Naylor and Martin Kennedy and Murray Hamilton and Mike Hatch and John Malos and Mark Kochanek and Peter Reid and Joel Wilson and Nicholas Deutscher and Steve Zegelin and Robert Vincent and Stephen White and Cindy Ong and Suman George and Peter Maas and Sean Towner and Nicholas Wokker and David Griffith",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.11.018",
language = "English",
volume = "70",
pages = "202--224",
journal = "International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control",
issn = "1750-5836",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Feitz, A, Schroder, I, Phillips, F, Coates, T, Negandhi, 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, Deutscher, N, Zegelin, S, Vincent, R, White, S, Ong, C, George, S, Maas, P, Towner, S, Wokker, N & Griffith, D 2018, 'The Ginninderra CH4 and CO2 release experiment: An evaluation of gas detection and quantification techniques' International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, vol. 70, pp. 202-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.11.018

The Ginninderra CH4 and CO2 release experiment : An evaluation of gas detection and quantification techniques. / Feitz, Andrew; Schroder, Ivan; Phillips, Frances; Coates, Trevor; Negandhi, Karita; Day, Stuart; Luhar, Ashok; Bhatia, Sangeeta; Edwards, Grant; Hrabar, Stefan; Hernandez, Emili; Wood, Brett; Naylor, Travis; Kennedy, Martin; Hamilton, Murray; Hatch, Mike; Malos, John; Kochanek, Mark; Reid, Peter; Wilson, Joel; Deutscher, Nicholas; Zegelin, Steve; Vincent, Robert; White, Stephen; Ong, Cindy; George, Suman; Maas, Peter; Towner, Sean; Wokker, Nicholas; Griffith, David.

In: International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, Vol. 70, 03.2018, p. 202-224.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Ginninderra CH4 and CO2 release experiment

T2 - An evaluation of gas detection and quantification techniques

AU - Feitz, Andrew

AU - Schroder, Ivan

AU - Phillips, Frances

AU - Coates, Trevor

AU - Negandhi, Karita

AU - Day, Stuart

AU - Luhar, Ashok

AU - Bhatia, Sangeeta

AU - Edwards, Grant

AU - Hrabar, Stefan

AU - Hernandez, Emili

AU - Wood, Brett

AU - Naylor, Travis

AU - Kennedy, Martin

AU - Hamilton, Murray

AU - Hatch, Mike

AU - Malos, John

AU - Kochanek, Mark

AU - Reid, Peter

AU - Wilson, Joel

AU - Deutscher, Nicholas

AU - Zegelin, Steve

AU - Vincent, Robert

AU - White, Stephen

AU - Ong, Cindy

AU - George, Suman

AU - Maas, Peter

AU - Towner, Sean

AU - Wokker, Nicholas

AU - Griffith, David

PY - 2018/3

Y1 - 2018/3

N2 - 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 (5.8 g/min), with the tracer ratio technique providing the closest estimate to both the CH4 and CO2 release rates (100 g/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 and mobile 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.

AB - 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 (5.8 g/min), with the tracer ratio technique providing the closest estimate to both the CH4 and CO2 release rates (100 g/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 and mobile 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.

KW - Fugitive emissions

KW - Methane

KW - Carbon dioxide

KW - Geological storage

KW - Geosquestration

KW - Quantification

KW - Measurement

KW - Modelling

KW - Atmospheric

KW - Leakage

KW - EDDY COVARIANCE TECHNIQUE

KW - ATMOSPHERIC TOMOGRAPHY

KW - METHANE EMISSIONS

KW - STOCHASTIC-MODELS

KW - STORAGE PROJECTS

KW - LEAK DETECTION

KW - FLUX

KW - TRAJECTORIES

KW - QUALITY

KW - SENSOR

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.11.018

DO - 10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.11.018

M3 - Article

VL - 70

SP - 202

EP - 224

JO - International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

JF - International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

SN - 1750-5836

ER -