Using Real-time Nitrite Monitoring to Understand and Reduce Nitrous Oxide Emissions


Achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions is one of the most challenging targets facing the wastewater sector. In terms of energy inputs, the industry has been aided by progressive decarbonisation of grid electricity and the addition of onsite renewables. Many players have also begun to electrify their vehicle fleets, with further longer-term scope for biogas, biofuel and, potentially, hydrogen-powered HGVs.


That leaves emissions from the actual treatment process itself as the outlier, with no convenient solution in sight. The three process-generated greenhouse gases of concern are carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide (N2


O). Of these, the


dynamics surrounding nitrous oxide formation are the least well understood. The knowns and unknowns


What we do know is that the global warming potential of nitrous oxide is about 300 times higher than that of CO2 and that, unlike carbon dioxide, there are no obvious sinks for N2


time in the atmosphere (over 100 years), after which, it enters the stratosphere, with the potential to cause ozone depletion and ozone holes.


In wastewater treatment, we also know that N2 of biological nitrogen removal (BNR).


O is produced in both the nitrification and the denitrification stages However, it seems that no one generic emission factor can predict N2 O emissions at the individual plant level.


For instance, there are significant variations in emission characteristics from different BNR processes, such as Conventional Activated Sludge, Sequencing Batch Activated Sludge, Oxidation Ditch, SBBR and CANON.


That’s not surprising, perhaps. However, within a process, nitrous oxide emissions can vary by time of day and by season - possibly due to changes in microbial communities. Likewise, at a fixed point in time, there can be variations in emissions from different lanes within the same tanks.


Even at an overarching sectoral level, the contribution of wastewater treatment to total anthropogenic nitrous oxide emissions is unclear. Historic estimates based on ‘top down’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2006 figures are believed to be too low. In 2019, the IPPC refined its approach. However, some within the industry question whether this revised emission factor is too high.


Building consensus


Although there is no silver bullet, experiences from WWTP monitoring programmes in Denmark, the Netherlands and elsewhere are showing strong convergence on the major variables that influence nitrous oxide formation.


For instance, with dissolved oxygen, there appears to be a Goldilocks factor at play – in that both low and high DO levels can be risk factors for increased N2


factors include a low COD/N ratio, spikes in ammonia load and nitrite accumulation. Modelling N2


O emission risks


Several models have also emerged for use at the plant level. At an Aquaenviro conference on Net Zero earlier this year, Paul Lavender, Director of Water Utilities (UK) at Royal HaskoningDHV, highlighted some of the early work coming from the Netherlands over a decade ago. This included outputs from his own company and others, such as STOWA (the Dutch Foundation for Applied Water Research), working with the Global Water Research Coalition.


The thrust of the STOWA model is that nitrite and ammonia concentrations in the final effluent provide a good indicator of nitrous oxide risks. In a nutshell, high-quality effluents (low ammonia and low nitrite concentrations) indicate a low risk of N2


O emissions.


More recently, several Dutch WTTP operators, including Waterboard de Dommel, have been using an AI-based N2


O emissions by 70%.


O risk model developed by Jose Porro, the founder of New York-headquartered Cobalt Water. In September 2020, Jose presented some of the results at a webinar chaired by Amanda Lake, European Process Lead for Water at Jacobs. One of the treatment plants in Eindhoven reduced emissions by 30%, while a plant in Land van Cuijk reduced N2


The Jacob’s webinar also looked at experiences in Denmark, where the N2 of N2 O microsensor producer Unisense, and


WWTP operators like Biofos, have been at the coalface. Unisense’s CTO Mikkel Andersen reinforced the point that a control strategy based on DO is not adequate for operators serious about N2


O reduction. He advocated the use O measurements as a proxy for nitrite – in tandem with dissolved oxygen.


Advances in instrumentation to better control BNR processes There has also been progress on the instrumentation side. Operators are already measuring DO, and Unisense’s gas microsensor for nitrous oxide has been around for some time. Now, new real-time analysers to help with other parameters are coming to the market. This includes our own Aquamonitrix®


real-time nitrate and nitrite analyser. Aquamonitrix®


with high accuracy and specificity. So, although the challenge of tackling N2 time has come to know more and to do more.


is robust in wastewater, with good biofouling resistance, and it directly measures nitrite and nitrate O is not easy, the toolkit is there. The


O emissions. The concentration range should be ‘just right’. Other risk The Aquamonitrix® analyser provides an easy way for WWTP


operators to accurately monitor nitrite (and nitrate) in real-time, offering the following advantages over conventional sensors:


- Specific, directly measured values of nitrate and nitrite (not calculated/compensated or combined values for the two anions)


Unlike conventional optical analysers that rely solely on UV or LED detection, Aquamonitrix®


incorporates a rapid ion chromatography


column that separates the nitrogen anions before they reach the UV LED detector. This allows the unit to measure nitrite and nitrate separately – with unrivalled specificity.


- Lab-quality accuracy in both fresh and wastewater


The integration of the ion chromatography column also overcomes interference issues encountered in wastewater when using standard UV- and LED-based analysers. As a result, Aquamonitrix® laboratory-quality accuracy in both fresh water and wastewater.


provides


sample intake system is robust against biofouling and blockages. Moreover, the ability to analyse a microfluidic volume greatly simplifies sample handling demands. This can eliminate the need for sampling infrastructure, pre-treatment or costly, add-on sampling equipment.


- Low blockage and biofouling potential in wastewater The Aquamonitrix®


- Near-continuous monitoring with real-time data communication


Capable of sampling every 15 minutes, Aquamonitrix® allows for


near-continuous monitoring. Data is instantaneously transmitted to the user’s choice of SCADA/central control system and/or telemetry/data management system. We also provide the proprietary Datamonitrix data management platform, for configurable alarms and alerts, and analyser self-diagnostics, all direct to your PC.


- Stable accuracy and calibration combined with portability Even when Aquamonitrix®


is moved to a different location or a


different sampling matrix, its calibration remains stable. The analyser unit is lightweight and portable, allowing for easy monitoring at multiple points around a plant.


- Plug and play setup Order Aquamonitrix®


today, and once it’s on-site, unbox it, and you


can have your analyser up and monitoring in about two hours. You don’t need any additional site or sampling infrastructure.


For further information, contact John McGrath, Sales Director Email info@aquamonitrix.com, www.aquamonitrix.com


For more information, visit https://aquamonitrix.com or email info@aquamonitrix.com


O. Furthermore, nitrous oxide has a long residence Aquamonitrix® for nitrite


(and nitrate) monitoring to tackle nitrous oxide emissions


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