Air Quality and Emissions Monitoring: What does best practice look like?
When we turn on the tap, we know that the water coming out should be of a consistently high quality. And we can choose - if we prefer - to drink bottled water instead. This is not so with the air that we breathe. Unlike the water that we drink, we have no guarantee, and in many cases no
information, telling us that the air quality in our towns, cities and even rural areas is of an acceptable and safe quality.
Headline grabbing stories earlier this year about the number of UK deaths hastened by air pollution invariably came as a shock to many people who had not fully understood the danger of modern air pollution. However, governmental and industry org - anisations alike take air quality very seriously and significant improvements have been made over the past two decades.
Air quality monitoring and emissions monitoring equipment
becomes more sophisticated, more precise and more accurate every year. However, this alone is not enough to fully address the complex challenges of air pollution. The specification and integration of different pieces of kit and its ongoing service and maintenance also play a crucial role. And the way in which the data is segmented, disseminated and shared with relevant people and organisations – including the general public – is beginning to receive greater attention.
Bearing this in mind, it seems strange that whilst the quality and
performance of equipment itself can be verified by industry certification, such as MCERTs, there is no such requirement for associated services. The organisations which package, install and service environmental monitoring equipment are not subject to any defined standards. That’s why it is vital that environmental managers – whether from Local Authorities or organisations covered by industrial emissions directives – understand what best practice looks like. This enables them to demand the utmost from their suppliers, and to compare different suppliers more objectively.
When it comes to selecting equipment, the first step towards best practice is ensuring you opt for something that meets all current and horizon legislative requirements. It’s not so long since many Local Authorities were stung by the findings of the DEFRA report into EU First Daughter Directive equivalency requirements. Dust analysers which should have been good for years to come simply didn’t make the grade. This spotlights a critical procurement issue: with a field as complex as air quality, a purely transactional relationship with suppliers could prevent you from sourcing the best solution for your needs. Instead, it’s preferable to establish a consultative relationship with equipment
providers, where you draw on their expertise and experience to ensure a more bespoke – and future-proof - solution that meets your requirements today and for years to come.
Air quality and emissions monitoring equipment should not be treated as a commodity purchase. Systems integrators and service providers ought to work collaboratively with you to develop a tailored solution that has all the required capabilities and qualities. That means sourcing the best combination of equipment from different manufacturers – whether gas analysers, dust monitors or meteorological equipment. It also means finding ways to fit the equipment in the appropriate housing – whether it’s for an unobtrusive roadside box, stack monitoring, or mobile monitoring. And it means developing a working system to access the data as and when required, segmenting and presenting it in accessible formats such as graphs and charts. A good provider will proactively challenge your brief and seek to drill down into exactly what you require so that you receive the best possible installation for your needs.
It’s not only the kit itself that needs consideration. The whole process, from the moment the brief is given until the final product is delivered, deserves scrutiny – and suppliers should be happy to provide this insight. When it comes to large scale monitoring needs, such as for power stations, this should be regarded as a critical factor. You need absolute confidence that the supplier has the engineering and project management skills to see things through on-time, on- budget and on-brief.
Naturally, the story doesn’t end with the successful delivery and installation of the kit. Air quality and emissions monitoring equipment generally run 24/7 and require ongoing service and maintenance to keep performing at an optimum level. Without an adequate servicing strategy – including rapid response capability – there is an increased risk of equipment failure, and of any breakdown taking a long time to be rectified. In many cases this would result in falling foul of environmental laws and regulations. In the case of CEM (continuous emissions monitoring) for industrial plants, a gap in data could result in closure by the Environment Agency, regardless of whether there was an air pollution incident.
Clearly, servicing and maintenance need to be equally as sophisticated as the equipment itself. However, this is an area where many environmental managers can be drawn into false economy. What might seem like a thrifty decision in the short term can mean exposure to expensive pitfalls down the road, not to mention the associated stress, inconvenience and contravention of environmental policy.
When it comes to routine maintenance, environmental managers should be assured that due diligence is being paid. This means the timely replacement of expendables and consumables with new, good quality parts that are up to the task. It is vital to read the small print when awarding a service contract to ensure that you are not left exposed to potential corner-cutting. Ideally the cost of expendable parts should be covered by the fee, so that you don’t receive an extra bill.
In addition to ongoing periodic testing, a robust call-out element to the service is essential. Ensure that there are concrete service level agreements written into the contract, and request testimonials from existing customers. Service providers should have a network of
Annual Buyers Guide 2010
IET
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 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148
