Publications

Detailed Information

Verification of methodologies and estimation of IPCC model parameters for solid waste landfills : 폐기물매립지 온실가스 배출량 산정을 위한 IPCC 모델의 배출계수 개발방법론 검증 및 배출계수 개발

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.advisor김재영-
dc.contributor.author정상재-
dc.date.accessioned2017-07-13T06:40:45Z-
dc.date.available2017-07-13T06:40:45Z-
dc.date.issued2016-08-
dc.identifier.other000000137198-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/118739-
dc.description학위논문 (박사)-- 서울대학교 대학원 : 건설환경공학부, 2016. 8. 김재영.-
dc.description.abstractSolid waste landfill is one of the major anthropogenic methane source around world contributing 3 to 4 % of the annual anthropogenic GHG emissions (IPCC, 2001). Landfill is the 3rd largest methane emission source accounting for 21% of methane emissions in Korea (GIR, 2014). However, uncertainty of landfill gas emission estimate is still high. In case of United States of America, uncertainty of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission estimates from landfills has been estimated from -52 to 44% while total emission uncertainty is between -2 and 5% (US EPA, 2012).
The objective of this study are to suggest developing method for each emission factors in IPCC reference model for solid waste landfill sector. Also DOC, DOCF, F and OX is developed following suggested methods.
Moisture content analysis, organic matter content analysis and element analysis have been conducted for papers, food wastes and woods. Evaluating TOC content by multiplying TC content and VS content has significant error. The error has been derived from the difference of carbon content between organic fraction and inorganic fraction of the wastes. DOC for food wastes and woods were evaluated as 10.46 % and 43.66 % by wet waste basis with uncertainties of 3.65 % and 33.55 %, respectively. The key factor of high uncertainty of DOC for woods were the uncertainty of moisture content. High uncertainty of moisture content is resulted in low moisture containing waste and vice versa.
Biochemical methane potential test have been conducted for papers, food wastes and woods to develop DOCF. Biogas conversion rate was most proper index. Mass balance approach is not recommended due to low carbon recovery rate. Biogas conversion rate has advantages on low uncertainty than methane conversion rate. DOCF for papers, food wastes and woods were evaluated as 0.568, 0.696 and 0.462 with uncertainties of 2.72 %. 9.38% and 10.23 %, respectively.
Criteria determining landfill type have been developed to apply MCF. Field investigation and landfill gas monitoring has been conducted in five landfills to develop criteria. Operation conditions were most important in categorizing landfill types. Five semi-aerobically designed landfills satisfied systems for semi-aerobic landfill in IPCC guidelines. However, the end of leachate collection pipes were closed of submerged that introduction of fresh air is prohibited. CH4/CO2 ratio can be the index to categorize landfill type. In semi-aerobic landfills, CH4/CO2 ratio at LFG in vent pipes need to be smaller than 1.0 considering other references.
To develop F, landfill gas at landfill gas collection pipes and vent pipes have been monitored. By the carbon mass balance model, CH4 concentration at vent pipes or LFG collection pipes corresponds to the value MCF×F. Also, the LFG at vent pipes or LFG collection pipes contains fresh air. According to LFG collection data at two SLC landfills, temporal changes can be neglected and handled as one dataset. MCF×F can be developed using CH4/CO2 ratio. MCF×F were evaluated as 0.527 to 0.607 in seven landfills with uncertainties lower than 5%.
Landfill gas emission from landfill surface has been monitored in ten landfills. Flux chamber was used to measure CH4 fluxes. Bilinear model is applied for spatial interpolation. Surface methane emission estimate utilizing mean value of CH4 fluxes measured from flux chamber made significant bias due to heterogeneity of landfills. The 20 % of total area contributed more than 65 % of total surface methane emissions. Identifying the hot spots before the flux measurement is required. The required number of flux chamber measurements depend on size of landfill has been made based on reproducibility test. The required number of samples suggested in US EPA guidelines is expected to have 20 % error in the emission estimate.
Fluxes of CH4 and CO2 are monitored in four landfills using closed flux chamber to evaluate OX. Evaluating OX with mean or median value of fluxes measured by flux chambers have chances to over- or under-estimate. Due to heterogeneity of landfill gas emissions spatial interpolation model need to be applied to the flux from surface. OX is evaluated as 0.42 to 0.88 in four landfills.
-
dc.description.tableofcontentsChapter 1. Introduction 1
1.1. Backgrounds 1
1.2. Objectives of study 3
1.3. Structure of dissertation 3
References 5

Chapter 2. Estimation of degradable organic carbon (DOC) content by carbon content analysis and solid content analysis 6
2.1. Introduction 6
2.2. Literature review 7
2.2.1. DOC in Annex 1 countries 7
2.2.2. Developing methods of DOC 8
2.3. Materials and methods 9
2.3.1. Materials 9
2.3.2. Moisture content and Organic matter content 10
2.4. Result and Discussions 11
2.4.1. Moisture content and organic matter content 11
2.4.2. Carbon content in fresh sample and ash 14
2.4.3. Determination of DOC 17
2.5. Summary 20
References 21

Chapter 3. Determination of fraction of degradable organic carbon which decomposes (DOCF) by biochemical methane potential (BMP) tests 22
3.1. Introduction 22
3.2. Literature review 23
3.2.1. DOCF in Annex 1 countries 23
3.2.2. Developing methods of DOCF 25
3.3. Materials and methods 28
3.3.1. Materials 28
3.3.2. Methods 29
3.4. Result and Discussions 31
3.4.1. Theoretical biogas potential 31
3.4.2. BMP test – cumulative methane production 33
3.4.3. Carbon mass balance 38
3.4.4. Methane conversion rate and biogas conversion rate 41
3.4.5. DOCF for papers, food wastes, woods 43
3.5. Summary 46
References 47

Chapter 4. Field assessment of landfill types by field investigation and monitoring landfill gas composition in vent-pipes 48
4.1. Introduction 48
4.2. Literature review 50
4.2.1. MCF in Annex 1 countries 50
4.2.2. Developing methods of MCF 53
4.3. Materials and methods 55
4.3.1. Study sites 55
4.3.2. Site investigations 56
4.3.3. Landfill gas Measurements 56
4.4. Result and Discussions 58
4.4.1. Site investigation 58
4.4.2. Analysis of Landfill gas 61
4.5. Summary 70
References 72

Chapter 5. Determination of fraction of methane in generated biogas (F) by monitoring landfill gas in vent-pipes and landfill gas collection pipes 75
5.1. Introduction 75
5.2. Literature review 76
5.2.1. F in Annex 1 countries 76
5.3. Materials and methods 80
5.3.1. Landfill gas monitoring 80
5.3.2. Equations to develop MCF*F 83
5.4. Result and Discussions 85
5.4.1. Gas composition in gas collection pipes and vent pipes 85
5.4.2. Evaluation of F 88
5.5. Summary 91
References 92

Chapter 6. Design of flux chamber network using spatial interpolation models to estimate surface methane emissions 93
6.1. Introduction 93
6.2. Literature review 95
6.2.1. k in Annex 1 countries 95
6.2.2. Developing methods of k 97
6.3. Materials and methods 98
6.3.1. Site description and flux chamber measurements 98
6.3.2. Analysis of semi-variance and application of spatial interpolation models 102
6.3.3. Reproducibility test 103
6.4. Result and Discussions 104
6.4.1. Flux measurement results 104
6.4.2. Semi-variogram anlaysis of chamber measurement 106
6.4.3. Deterministic interpolation models 107
6.5. Summary 118
References 119

Chapter 7. Determination of oxidation factor (OX) by mass balance approach combined with flux chamber measurements 122
7.1. Introduction 122
7.2. Literature review 123
7.2.1. OX in Annex 1 countries 123
7.2.2. Developing methods of OX 125
7.3. Materials and methods 126
7.3.1. Study sites 126
7.3.2. Surface flux measurement 127
7.3.3. Surface mapping and reproducibility test 128
7.4. Result and Discussions 129
7.4.1. Flux measurement results 129
7.4.2. Spatial distribution of fluxes 130
7.4.3. Evaluation of OX 133
7.5. Summary 134
References 135

Chapter 8. Conclusions 136

국문 초록 138
-
dc.formatapplication/pdf-
dc.format.extent2525578 bytes-
dc.format.mediumapplication/pdf-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisher서울대학교 대학원-
dc.subjectGreenhouse gas-
dc.subjectSolid waste landfill-
dc.subjectIPCC model-
dc.subjectEmission factors-
dc.subject.ddc624-
dc.titleVerification of methodologies and estimation of IPCC model parameters for solid waste landfills-
dc.title.alternative폐기물매립지 온실가스 배출량 산정을 위한 IPCC 모델의 배출계수 개발방법론 검증 및 배출계수 개발-
dc.typeThesis-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthorJEONG, Sangjae-
dc.description.degreeDoctor-
dc.citation.pages142-
dc.contributor.affiliation공과대학 건설환경공학부-
dc.date.awarded2016-08-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share