A systematic decision-making framework for selecting nitrous oxide quantification methods in water utilities

With the growing emphasis on reducing nitrous oxide (N 2 O) emissions in the wastewater treatment sector, an increasing number of water utilities are keen to quantify the actual N 2 O emissions from sewage treatment plants. Two main unit-based quantification methods are the liquid N 2 O sensor-based method and the gas flux hood-based method, both of which allow for real-time measurement at specific monitoring locations. Despite their widespread use, there is no clear, evidence-based framework to help utilities choose the most suitable method for their specific needs. This study addresses this gap by developing a systematic decision-making framework that considers the impact of key factors, including plant covering (full-covered or open surface), aeration type (diffused aeration or surface aerator), configurations (number of monitoring locations), monitoring duration, cost and technical difficulties etc. The framework incorporates a comprehensive multi-criteria evaluation to balance five essential criteria, including equipment cost, consumable cost, commissioning, maintenance and complexity in data analysis. Results indicate that the liquid-based method is more suitable for scenarios with fewer monitoring locations and shorter durations. In contrast, the gas-based quantification method proves more advantageous in scenarios requiring high monitoring intensity. For intermediate-intensity scenarios, the likelihood of selecting gas-based quantification increases with monitoring intensity, with the decision being highly dependent on the choice of weighting of the factors. The findings also highlight the importance of determining the weights of criteria and scores based on specific operational needs, available resources, and technical capacity prior to multi-criteria evaluation process, which may vary the evaluation results accordingly. This framework provides utilities with an evidence-based tool to optimize N 2 O monitoring strategies and support emission reduction.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Water Research X
Published
2025-05-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wroa.2025.100350
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Water Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A systematic decision-making framework for selecting nitrous oxide quantification methods in water utilities

Haoran Duan, Kaili Li, Liu Ye, Shuting Wang et al.
1 citations
Water Research X
Water Quality Monitoring and Analysis
1.00
article

A systematic decision-making framework for selecting nitrous oxide quantification methods in water utilities

Haoran Duan, Kaili Li, Liu Ye, Shuting Wang, Mohammad Shakil Ahmmed
article en
1 citations

Abstract

With the growing emphasis on reducing nitrous oxide (N 2 O) emissions in the wastewater treatment sector, an increasing number of water utilities are keen to quantify the actual N 2 O emissions from sewage treatment plants. Two main unit-based quantification methods are the liquid N 2 O sensor-based method and the gas flux hood-based method, both of which allow for real-time measurement at specific monitoring locations. Despite their widespread use, there is no clear, evidence-based framework to help utilities choose the most suitable method for their specific needs. This study addresses this gap by developing a systematic decision-making framework that considers the impact of key factors, including plant covering (full-covered or open surface), aeration type (diffused aeration or surface aerator), configurations (number of monitoring locations), monitoring duration, cost and technical difficulties etc. The framework incorporates a comprehensive multi-criteria evaluation to balance five essential criteria, including equipment cost, consumable cost, commissioning, maintenance and complexity in data analysis. Results indicate that the liquid-based method is more suitable for scenarios with fewer monitoring locations and shorter durations. In contrast, the gas-based quantification method proves more advantageous in scenarios requiring high monitoring intensity. For intermediate-intensity scenarios, the likelihood of selecting gas-based quantification increases with monitoring intensity, with the decision being highly dependent on the choice of weighting of the factors. The findings also highlight the importance of determining the weights of criteria and scores based on specific operational needs, available resources, and technical capacity prior to multi-criteria evaluation process, which may vary the evaluation results accordingly. This framework provides utilities with an evidence-based tool to optimize N 2 O monitoring strategies and support emission reduction.

Water Research XVol. 28
The University of Queensland (AU), UNSW Sydney (AU), Australian Water Quality Centre (AU)
Clean water and sanitation
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Water Quality Monitoring and Analysis
1.00
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.