CEM 2011 - the Conference Promoting the Advancement and Future of Emission Monitoring
Requirements for reducing emissions of air pollution have been evolving since middle of the 20th century and, as a result, they are now a complex medley of limits, targets and caps.
Sources must not only comply with rigid emission limits but must also provide emissions data to a number of different agencies and bodies to conform with the different legislative formats and reporting systems at the regional, national and international level.
Reporting requirements therefore vary throughout the world according to local, national and international legislation and action plans. In most situations, the methods for measuring and monitoring emissions use either commercially based automated monitoring systems or use manual methodologies which are based on empirical assumptions. However, despite this, different requirements and methodologies have been developed independently around the world.
CEN, the European Standards Committee, produces standards for emissions monitoring which are obligatory in EU member states. The US EPA produces distinct but similar standards for use in the USA. ISO, the International Standards Organisation, produces voluntary standards which may be used by countries when there are no relevant national standards available. Although these standards may vary between CEN, ISO and the US EPA, they are generally based upon the same empirical measurement principles. The accuracy and comparability of data from different regions of the world are often hindered more by the different units of measurement used than the methods themselves.
For the major pollutants - particulates, SO2 and NOx - CEM systems are standard on all plants in developed nations and
are becoming increasingly common in China and other regions in Asia for compliance monitoring. However, for estimation of emissions at the national level, for reporting to national and international level, emission factors remain the method of choice. But these emission factors are based on data from actual plant-specific measurements.
Over and above the moves towards the improvement and standardisation of measurement technologies and approaches, there is also a move towards certification of monitoring equipment, laboratories and stack testing personnel. Again, there are different schemes appearing in different areas of the world but the ultimate aim is the same - to ensure that the best quality data is obtained and reported.
CEM provides an open forum for experts to discuss the different methods and technologies that are used to ensure that emission sources comply with applicable emission legislation and related performance requirements and, where possible, to learn from these discussions in order to promote more coordination in future.
The international community is currently working to improve the co-ordination between monitoring systems and the legislation they support - for example, the EU aims to improve the alignment between the Large Combustion Plant Directive and the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive with the introduction of the Industrial Emissions Directive. But what will these and other changes in emission legislation mean for the pollution monitoring industry?
• more pollutants will require monitoring from a greater number of sources (for example, mercury has moved up the agenda in the EU, USA and Asia ahead of the legally
binding UN EP Global Treaty on Mercury to be set in 2013). Other trace elements such as selenium and arsenic are also being raised as potential issues to be dealt with in future;
• advanced systems and methods will be required to measure lower and lower concentrations of pollutants as emission limits tighten and pollution control equipment becomes more efficient;
• speciation of pollutants such as PM10/2.5 will become a priority as non-attainment areas struggle to determine how
best to target reductions; • increased accuracy will become paramount as pollutants
such as N2O and CH4 are introduced to trading markets in the EU and USA. Once a monetary value comes into play, measurement accuracy becomes an economic target as well as an environmental one. Emission factors may be called into question, with real data being used to confirm or refute;
• as legislation and action plans grow in number and stringency, the importance of monitoring and quantifying this pollution in an accurate and transparent manner will become a priority. Real-time and on-line reporting systems will be the aim for most large sources.
IET May / June 2011
www.envirotech-online.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65
