Design, Build, and Initial Testing of a Portable Methane Measurement Platform
The quantification of methane concentrations in air is essential for the quantification of methane emissions, which in turn is necessary to determine absolute emissions and the efficacy of emission mitigation strategies. These are essential if countries are to meet climate goals. Large-scale deploym...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-03-01
|
| Series: | Sensors |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/25/7/1954 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850212833067794432 |
|---|---|
| author | Stuart N. Riddick John C. Riddick Elijah Kiplimo Bryan Rainwater Mercy Mbua Fancy Cheptonui Kate Laughery Ezra Levin Daniel J. Zimmerle |
| author_facet | Stuart N. Riddick John C. Riddick Elijah Kiplimo Bryan Rainwater Mercy Mbua Fancy Cheptonui Kate Laughery Ezra Levin Daniel J. Zimmerle |
| author_sort | Stuart N. Riddick |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The quantification of methane concentrations in air is essential for the quantification of methane emissions, which in turn is necessary to determine absolute emissions and the efficacy of emission mitigation strategies. These are essential if countries are to meet climate goals. Large-scale deployment of methane analyzers across millions of emission sites is prohibitively expensive, and lower-cost instrumentation has been recently developed as an alternative. Currently, it is unclear how cheaper instrumentation will affect measurement resolution or accuracy. To test this, the Wireless Autonomous Transportable Methane Emission Reporting System (WATCH<sub>4</sub>ERS) has been developed, comprising four commercially available sensing technologies: metal oxide (MOx,), Non-dispersion Infrared (NDIR), integrated infrared (INIR), and tunable diode laser absorption spectrometer (TDLAS). WATCHERS is the accumulated knowledge of several long-term methane measurement projects at Colorado State University’s Methane Emission Technology Evaluation Center (METEC), and this study describes the integration of these sensors into a single unit and reports initial instrument response to calibration procedures and controlled release experiments. Specifically, this paper aims to describe the development of the WATCH<sub>4</sub>ERS unit, report initial sensor responses, and describe future research goals. Meanwhile, future work will use data gathered by multiple WATCH<sub>4</sub>ERS units to 1. better understand the cost–benefit balance of methane sensors, and 2. identify how decreasing instrumentation costs could increase deployment coverage and therefore inform large-scale methane monitoring strategies. Both calibration and response experiments indicate the INIR has little practical use for measuring methane concentrations less than 500 ppm. The MOx sensor is shown to have a logarithmic response to methane concentration change between background and 600 ppm but it is strongly suggested that passively sampling MOx sensors cannot respond fast enough to report concentrations that change in a sub-minute time frame. The NDIR sensor reported a linear change to methane concentration between background and 600 ppm, although there was a noticeable lag in reporting changing concentration, especially at higher values, and individual peaks could be observed throughout the experiment even when the plumes were released 5 s apart. The TDLAS sensor reported all changes in concentration but remains prohibitively expensive. Our findings suggest that each sensor technology could be optimized by either operational design or deployment location to quantify methane emissions. The WATCH<sub>4</sub>ERS units will be deployed in real-world environments to investigate the utility of each in the future. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-ec1a0287cdb54f0ab2d7a804789603f2 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 1424-8220 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-03-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Sensors |
| spelling | doaj-art-ec1a0287cdb54f0ab2d7a804789603f22025-08-20T02:09:14ZengMDPI AGSensors1424-82202025-03-01257195410.3390/s25071954Design, Build, and Initial Testing of a Portable Methane Measurement PlatformStuart N. Riddick0John C. Riddick1Elijah Kiplimo2Bryan Rainwater3Mercy Mbua4Fancy Cheptonui5Kate Laughery6Ezra Levin7Daniel J. Zimmerle8Department of Science, Engineering and Aviation, University of the Highlands and Islands Perth, Crieff Road, Perth PH1 2NX, UKIndependent Researcher, Lockerbie DG11 2BE, UKMethane Emission Technology Evaluation Center (METEC), Energy Institute, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80524, USAMethane Emission Technology Evaluation Center (METEC), Energy Institute, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80524, USAMethane Emission Technology Evaluation Center (METEC), Energy Institute, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80524, USAMethane Emission Technology Evaluation Center (METEC), Energy Institute, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80524, USAMethane Emission Technology Evaluation Center (METEC), Energy Institute, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80524, USAMethane Emission Technology Evaluation Center (METEC), Energy Institute, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80524, USAMethane Emission Technology Evaluation Center (METEC), Energy Institute, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80524, USAThe quantification of methane concentrations in air is essential for the quantification of methane emissions, which in turn is necessary to determine absolute emissions and the efficacy of emission mitigation strategies. These are essential if countries are to meet climate goals. Large-scale deployment of methane analyzers across millions of emission sites is prohibitively expensive, and lower-cost instrumentation has been recently developed as an alternative. Currently, it is unclear how cheaper instrumentation will affect measurement resolution or accuracy. To test this, the Wireless Autonomous Transportable Methane Emission Reporting System (WATCH<sub>4</sub>ERS) has been developed, comprising four commercially available sensing technologies: metal oxide (MOx,), Non-dispersion Infrared (NDIR), integrated infrared (INIR), and tunable diode laser absorption spectrometer (TDLAS). WATCHERS is the accumulated knowledge of several long-term methane measurement projects at Colorado State University’s Methane Emission Technology Evaluation Center (METEC), and this study describes the integration of these sensors into a single unit and reports initial instrument response to calibration procedures and controlled release experiments. Specifically, this paper aims to describe the development of the WATCH<sub>4</sub>ERS unit, report initial sensor responses, and describe future research goals. Meanwhile, future work will use data gathered by multiple WATCH<sub>4</sub>ERS units to 1. better understand the cost–benefit balance of methane sensors, and 2. identify how decreasing instrumentation costs could increase deployment coverage and therefore inform large-scale methane monitoring strategies. Both calibration and response experiments indicate the INIR has little practical use for measuring methane concentrations less than 500 ppm. The MOx sensor is shown to have a logarithmic response to methane concentration change between background and 600 ppm but it is strongly suggested that passively sampling MOx sensors cannot respond fast enough to report concentrations that change in a sub-minute time frame. The NDIR sensor reported a linear change to methane concentration between background and 600 ppm, although there was a noticeable lag in reporting changing concentration, especially at higher values, and individual peaks could be observed throughout the experiment even when the plumes were released 5 s apart. The TDLAS sensor reported all changes in concentration but remains prohibitively expensive. Our findings suggest that each sensor technology could be optimized by either operational design or deployment location to quantify methane emissions. The WATCH<sub>4</sub>ERS units will be deployed in real-world environments to investigate the utility of each in the future.https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/25/7/1954methaneconcentrationquantification |
| spellingShingle | Stuart N. Riddick John C. Riddick Elijah Kiplimo Bryan Rainwater Mercy Mbua Fancy Cheptonui Kate Laughery Ezra Levin Daniel J. Zimmerle Design, Build, and Initial Testing of a Portable Methane Measurement Platform Sensors methane concentration quantification |
| title | Design, Build, and Initial Testing of a Portable Methane Measurement Platform |
| title_full | Design, Build, and Initial Testing of a Portable Methane Measurement Platform |
| title_fullStr | Design, Build, and Initial Testing of a Portable Methane Measurement Platform |
| title_full_unstemmed | Design, Build, and Initial Testing of a Portable Methane Measurement Platform |
| title_short | Design, Build, and Initial Testing of a Portable Methane Measurement Platform |
| title_sort | design build and initial testing of a portable methane measurement platform |
| topic | methane concentration quantification |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/25/7/1954 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT stuartnriddick designbuildandinitialtestingofaportablemethanemeasurementplatform AT johncriddick designbuildandinitialtestingofaportablemethanemeasurementplatform AT elijahkiplimo designbuildandinitialtestingofaportablemethanemeasurementplatform AT bryanrainwater designbuildandinitialtestingofaportablemethanemeasurementplatform AT mercymbua designbuildandinitialtestingofaportablemethanemeasurementplatform AT fancycheptonui designbuildandinitialtestingofaportablemethanemeasurementplatform AT katelaughery designbuildandinitialtestingofaportablemethanemeasurementplatform AT ezralevin designbuildandinitialtestingofaportablemethanemeasurementplatform AT danieljzimmerle designbuildandinitialtestingofaportablemethanemeasurementplatform |