A literature-based comparison of embodied GHG emissions of forced main sewer additives with potential reductions in methane generation

Fugitive emissions of methane (CH4) from force main sewers are of increasing concern. Dosing of additives into force main sewers could be employed to mitigate methane emissions. However, all additives will have embodied greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This study examined commonly employed additives...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Wayne J. Parker, J. R. Walton
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: IWA Publishing 2023-12-01
Series:Water Practice and Technology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://wpt.iwaponline.com/content/18/12/3387
_version_ 1797368607450071040
author Wayne J. Parker
J. R. Walton
author_facet Wayne J. Parker
J. R. Walton
author_sort Wayne J. Parker
collection DOAJ
description Fugitive emissions of methane (CH4) from force main sewers are of increasing concern. Dosing of additives into force main sewers could be employed to mitigate methane emissions. However, all additives will have embodied greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This study examined commonly employed additives in terms of modes of action and potential to mitigate methane generation. Typical dosing strategies reported in the literature for each chemical were compiled and their embodied GHG emissions were summarised from sources in the literature. The net emissions considering mitigated methane generation and embodied GHG emissions were calculated on the basis of typical usage reported in the literature. The results revealed that biofilm shocking strategies and addition of iron have the greatest net reduction in GHG emissions. There is, however, uncertainty associated with the mechanisms by which iron reduces CH4 generation in force mains. Furthermore, future changes in the sourcing of iron may increase its embodied emissions. A qualitative assessment of the impacts of additive use on downstream GHG emissions revealed that they are highly case specific. HIGHLIGHTS Sewer additives for reducing CH4 generation are compared.; Embodied emissions of additives are estimated.; Estimates of embodied emissions with reductions in CH4 generation are compared.; Additives with the best net emissions are identified.;
first_indexed 2024-03-08T17:35:11Z
format Article
id doaj.art-ab120f70216a494eb5be3e4ad7e49fd2
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1751-231X
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T17:35:11Z
publishDate 2023-12-01
publisher IWA Publishing
record_format Article
series Water Practice and Technology
spelling doaj.art-ab120f70216a494eb5be3e4ad7e49fd22024-01-02T12:58:52ZengIWA PublishingWater Practice and Technology1751-231X2023-12-0118123387339810.2166/wpt.2023.219219A literature-based comparison of embodied GHG emissions of forced main sewer additives with potential reductions in methane generationWayne J. Parker0J. R. Walton1 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada USP Technologies, 5640 Cox Rd., Glen Allen, VA 23060, USA Fugitive emissions of methane (CH4) from force main sewers are of increasing concern. Dosing of additives into force main sewers could be employed to mitigate methane emissions. However, all additives will have embodied greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This study examined commonly employed additives in terms of modes of action and potential to mitigate methane generation. Typical dosing strategies reported in the literature for each chemical were compiled and their embodied GHG emissions were summarised from sources in the literature. The net emissions considering mitigated methane generation and embodied GHG emissions were calculated on the basis of typical usage reported in the literature. The results revealed that biofilm shocking strategies and addition of iron have the greatest net reduction in GHG emissions. There is, however, uncertainty associated with the mechanisms by which iron reduces CH4 generation in force mains. Furthermore, future changes in the sourcing of iron may increase its embodied emissions. A qualitative assessment of the impacts of additive use on downstream GHG emissions revealed that they are highly case specific. HIGHLIGHTS Sewer additives for reducing CH4 generation are compared.; Embodied emissions of additives are estimated.; Estimates of embodied emissions with reductions in CH4 generation are compared.; Additives with the best net emissions are identified.;http://wpt.iwaponline.com/content/18/12/3387embodied emissionsgreenhouse gasesmethanemitigationsewerwastewater
spellingShingle Wayne J. Parker
J. R. Walton
A literature-based comparison of embodied GHG emissions of forced main sewer additives with potential reductions in methane generation
Water Practice and Technology
embodied emissions
greenhouse gases
methane
mitigation
sewer
wastewater
title A literature-based comparison of embodied GHG emissions of forced main sewer additives with potential reductions in methane generation
title_full A literature-based comparison of embodied GHG emissions of forced main sewer additives with potential reductions in methane generation
title_fullStr A literature-based comparison of embodied GHG emissions of forced main sewer additives with potential reductions in methane generation
title_full_unstemmed A literature-based comparison of embodied GHG emissions of forced main sewer additives with potential reductions in methane generation
title_short A literature-based comparison of embodied GHG emissions of forced main sewer additives with potential reductions in methane generation
title_sort literature based comparison of embodied ghg emissions of forced main sewer additives with potential reductions in methane generation
topic embodied emissions
greenhouse gases
methane
mitigation
sewer
wastewater
url http://wpt.iwaponline.com/content/18/12/3387
work_keys_str_mv AT waynejparker aliteraturebasedcomparisonofembodiedghgemissionsofforcedmainseweradditiveswithpotentialreductionsinmethanegeneration
AT jrwalton aliteraturebasedcomparisonofembodiedghgemissionsofforcedmainseweradditiveswithpotentialreductionsinmethanegeneration
AT waynejparker literaturebasedcomparisonofembodiedghgemissionsofforcedmainseweradditiveswithpotentialreductionsinmethanegeneration
AT jrwalton literaturebasedcomparisonofembodiedghgemissionsofforcedmainseweradditiveswithpotentialreductionsinmethanegeneration