Accreditation and Quality Assurance

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 161–165 | Cite as

Mass emissions and carbon trading: a critical review of available reference methods for industrial stack flow measurement

Discussion Forum
  • 84 Downloads

Abstract

Flow measurements in industrial ducts and stacks are combined with pollutant or greenhouse gas concentrations to deduce mass emissions. These are then used to populate pollutant emission inventories and are traded under emissions trading schemes. Reference methods for flow are described in ISO 10780 and more recently in EN ISO 16911-1. This paper discusses the key differences between the two standards. We consider sources of error in flow measurement and discuss how each standard addresses them. We find that EN ISO 16911-1 introduces a series of improvements that when combined provide critical uncertainty gains that support compliance with the EU’s Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). All these areas are either not addressed or only partially dealt with in ISO 10780. More specifically, EN ISO 16911-1, (a) specifies a wider range of reference techniques enabling the optimal one to be used for different flue gas environments. (b) Provides a method to correct for cyclonic flow effects. (c) Addresses measurement assembly misalignment and specifies tolerance values for it and (d) provides wall effect correction factors. Most importantly, it has been validated through laboratory and field work. However, the quality control specified in EN ISO 16911-1 is more suitable for measurements to support EU ETS requirements and at times can be too onerous for pollutant mass emission reporting that will usually have less stringent uncertainty requirements.

Keywords

Emissions trading Stack testing EU ETS Flue gas flow Atmospheric mass emissions Measurement uncertainty 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge funding from the European Metrology Programme for Innovation and Research (which is jointly funded by the EMPIR participating countries within EURAMET and the European Union) and the UK’s Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy National Measurement System under the Optical, Gas & Particle Metrology Programme.

References

  1. 1.
    Directive 2003/87/EC of the European parliament and of the council (2003) Establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/ECGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    UNFCC (2015) Adoption of the Paris agreement—Annex Paris agreement. FCCC/CP/2015/L.9/Rev.1Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR). http://prtr.ec.europa.eu/#/home
  4. 4.
    Directive 2010/75/EU of the European parliament and of the council (2010) On industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ISO 10780 (1994) Stationary source emissions—Measurement of velocity and volume flowrate of gas streams in ductsGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Commission Regulation (EU) No 601/2012 (2012) On the monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the CouncilGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    EN ISO 16911-1 (2013) Stationary source emissions—Manual and automatic determination of velocity and volume flow rate in ducts—Part 1: manual reference methodGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Electric power research Institute (1996) Flue gas measurement errors. Interim report TR-106698Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gerhart PM, et al (1979) An evaluation of velocity probes for measuring non-uniform gas in large ducts. V. of engineering for power Vol. 101, p. 655Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    RMB consulting & research, Inc. (1997) The electric power research institute continuous emissions monitoring heat rate discrepancy project—What has been learned and future activities. http://www.rmb-consulting.com/denpaper/rdmdenpa.htm
  11. 11.
    EN 13284-1 (2002) Stationary source emissions—Determination of low range mass concentration of dust—Part 1: manual gravimetric methodGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shinder II, Khromchenko VB, Moldover MR (2015) NIST’s New 3D airspeed calibration rig addresses turbulent flow measurement challenges—9th international symposium on fluid flow measurement (ISFFM) http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=918356
  13. 13.
    CEN/TC264/WG23 Volumetric flow from stationary sources–Air emissions (2010) Validation of methods for the determination of velocity and volumetric flow in stationary source emissions—exposition of the collected data and statistical evaluation of the lab test at TU Berlin (TUB) site from 22/02/2010 to 08/03/2010–Final Lab Test ReportGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Williams JC, DeJarnette FR (1977) A study on the accuracy of type S Pitot tubes. US EPA report, EPA-600/4-77-030Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leland B et al (1977) Connection of S-type pitot-static tube coefficients when used for isokinetic sampling from stationary sources. Environ Sci Technol 11:694–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kang W et al (2015) Experimental and numerical investigations of the factors affecting the S-type pitot tube coefficients. Flow Meas Instrum 44:11–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Robinson RA, Butterfield D, Curtis D, Thompson T (2004) Problems with pitots—issues with flow measurement in stacks. Environmental technology online http://www.s-t-a.org/Files%20Public%20Area/News%20and%20articles/articlepitots.pdf
  18. 18.
    US EPA (1999) EPA flow reference method testing and analysis: findings report. EPA/430-R-99-009aGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    US EPA (1999) Method 2H—determination of stack gas velocity taking into account velocity decay near the stack wallGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    US EPA (2003) Conditional test method (CTM-041)—determination of volumetric gas flow in rectangular ducts or stacks taking into account velocity decay near the stack or duct wallsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Crown Copyright 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Physical LaboratoryTeddingtonUK

Personalised recommendations