Complementary approaches to measure environmental odours emitted by landfill areas

This study aimed at analysing the utilization of an electronic nose (e-nose) to serve as a specific monitoring tool for anaerobic digestion process, especially for detecting organic overload. An array of non specific metal oxide semiconductor gas sensors were used to detect process faults due to organic overload events in twelve 1.8-L anaerobic semi-continuous reactors. Three different load strategies were followed: (1) a cautious organic load (1.3 gVS L -1 day -1 ); (2) an increasing load strategy (1.3-5.3 gVS L -1 day -1 ) and (3) a cautious organic load with load pulses of up to 12 gVS L -1 day -1 . A first monitoring campaign was conducted with three different substrates: sucrose, maize oil and a mix of sucrose/oil during 60 days. The second campaign was run with dry sugar beet pulp for 45 days. Hotelling's T 2 value and upper control limit to a reference set of digesters fed with a cautious OLR (1.3 gVS L -1 day -1 ) was used as indirect state variable of the reactors. Overload situations were identified by the e-nose apparatus with Hotelling's T 2 values at least four times higher in magnitude than the upper control limit of 23.7. These results confirmed that the e-nose technology appeared promising for online detection of process imbalances in the domain of anaerobic digestion.

show abstract

“…1) was adapted from the systems described in [22][23][24]. Sensors were selected according to the biogas composition.…”

Section: Monitoring With the E-nosementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of an electronic nose for the early detection of organic overload of anaerobic digesters

Adam

Lemaigre²,

Romain

et al. 2012

Bioprocess Biosyst Eng

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nowadays GC-O/MS represents the most popular integration of both chemical characterization and odor measurement techniques, being employed in the performance evaluations of odor abatement (Munoz et al, 2010). Electronic noses, initially developed as instruments capable to mimic the human olfactory system with quicker responses with respect to chemical analysis, are limited by their lack of specificity (as they detect both odorous and odorless volatile compounds), lack of efficiency at remotely located sites and remain promising instruments to monitor the transient odor level near the source, or to serve as inputs to mathematical dispersion models that can predict odor concentrations at remote locations (Romain et al, 2008;Nagle et al, 2003). In literature, array of sensors have been used to differentiate and quantify the main gases emitted from MSWs or to respond to sewage odors over a wide range of odor concentrations (Delgado-Rodríguez et al, 2012;Stuetz et al, 1999) and also in a combination with GCeMS and dynamic olfactometry demonstrating that the three different odor characterization techniques do not necessarily correlate, due to synergistic and masking effects of VOCs in determining odor perception (Capelli et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving recognition of odors in a waste management plant by using electronic noses with different technologies, gas chromatography–mass spectrometry/olfactometry and dynamic olfactometry

Giungato

Gennaro

Barbieri

et al. 2016

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In addition to the complexity created by the relative juxtaposition of odor sources and receptors, the characteristics of odor emissions can change during different operation times of treatment facilities (De Feo et al, 2013), which further increases the complexity of source identification. Until now, although the odor emissions from individual composting plants (Cadena et al, 2009), landfill sites (Capelli et al, 2008;Romain et al, 2008;Saral et al, 2009;Scaglia et al, 2011;Ding et al, 2012;Li et al, 2013), and transfer stations (Fang et al, 2013b) have been separately investigated, little research has been done on the interactive influence of odors from multiple sources at MSW facilities (Dorado et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Odor compounds released from different zones of two adjacent waste treatment facilities: Interactive influence and source identification

Fang¹,

Lü²,

Zhang³

et al. 2015

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An integrated approach was applied to identify the key odorants comprising emissions from different zones in two adjacent waste treatment facilities (an aerobic biological treatment plant and an anaerobic landfill site), identify their precise sources, and distinguish the interactive influences between them. Seven odor families were investigated, including alcohols, terpenes, carbonyls, aromatics, volatile fatty acids (VFAs), sulfur compounds, and ammonia. Principal components analysis, characteristic molecular ratios, and ternary diagrams were used to differentiate the interactive influence of the odor sources. Among typical biotic compounds, terpenes were found to be more suitable as odor markers for their better fingerprinting character than sulfur compounds and VFAs. Ratios of p-cymene at sampling locations related to the biological treatment plant (aerobic status) were between 0.00 and 0.25, whereas those at landfill-related sampling points (anaerobic status) were between 0.25 and 1.0. The molecular ratio of terpenes was also found to be an appropriate means to differentiate between homologous and similar odor sources such as an aerobic biological treatment plant and anaerobic landfill.Implications: The aim of this work is to identify the key odorants comprising emissions from different zones in two adjacent waste treatment facilities, identify their precise sources, and distinguish the interactive influences between them. The emission of gaseous pollutants greatly affects the living quality of nearby residents, and odor complaints are becoming a major problem. In this study we utilized various pretreatment and analytical methods to obtain integrated emission information of gaseous pollutants. The results showed terpenes were found to be more suitable as odor markers for their better fingerprinting character than sulfur compounds and VFAs.

show abstract

Complementary approaches to measure environmental odours emitted by landfill areas

Cited by 70 publications

References 10 publications

Evaluation of an electronic nose for the early detection of organic overload of anaerobic digesters

Evaluation of an electronic nose for the early detection of organic overload of anaerobic digesters

Improving recognition of odors in a waste management plant by using electronic noses with different technologies, gas chromatography–mass spectrometry/olfactometry and dynamic olfactometry

Odor compounds released from different zones of two adjacent waste treatment facilities: Interactive influence and source identification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About