 All right, I hope that people have managed to log on. So I'll start by welcoming everyone to this webinar, which is the third in a series that have been organized in form of IWA within the Climate Smart Cities Working Group. This one is gonna focus on nitrogen oxide and we're gonna try and take you through the Danish lessons of what have been done here so far. So to give inspiration as to what can be done for everyone. All right, now I can also see that there's a bunch of people that are locked on. So welcome, I hope that you have managed to hear the introduction as well. Just to start out, there's a couple of general information and housekeeping rules. So this webinar will be recorded. It will be available online afterwards. The speakers are securing copyright for what they're talking about and what they're presenting is their sole responsibility and not necessarily reflecting IWA's opinion. A couple of housekeeping rules. If you want to ask questions to any of the speakers, please use the Q&A box, which is located in the bottom part of your, of the screen of the Zoom meeting. The chat can be used to say hello and sort of more informal things, but it will not be questions that will be directed at the speakers. So if you have anything for the speakers, please use the Q&A box. We'll do our best to try and answer the questions during the session. There's a dedicated time for some question and answers just after each speaker. And there's also a bit of time in the end. The ones that we won't have time to answer will be, will answer by text or by writing later and will be shared in the post webinar information that you can find online as well. Today's program is packed. So I'm just gonna go ramming through it. I have a few words in the beginning. My name is Anna-Katrina Vansko and I'm a senior process engineer with the consultant company Envidan working in Denmark and in the Nordics. After I've introduced this, my colleague Jakob will take you through some of the basics, let's say of how things have been, how natural dioxide have been handled in Denmark in terms of funding results and legislation. It's been, we've gotten a lot of input from the Danish EPA for that. Then we'll continue on to Mikl Holmen Andersen from Unicense, who knows a lot about the practical applications of how to try and go about measuring natural dioxide. And then we'll round off with a modern web store from Ohusvent, giving us some intel, some practical, both possibilities, but maybe also challenges when you're dealing with natural dioxide out in the real world from a utilities perspective. And then finally, I'll round out with a very short note on what's happening in terms of new developments along with Amanda Lake from Jacobs, looking a little bit towards what's happening on a global scale. Just to set the scene of natural dioxide, I'm sure that most of you who are locked on out there already know that this is a quite important climate gas or greenhouse gas. When we talk about natural dioxide and we talk about greenhouse gas counting, we look often at scope one, two and three. And when we look within scope one, we have, I'll see if I can get my, well, you can't get my point to see, but natural dioxide is a big contributor in the scope one emissions to the direct process emissions from the wastewater treatment plant. And especially what you have down in the lower left corner in the biological nitrogen conversion processes. Just to emphasize this, this is an illustration from Padavicini from the Joint Research Council, the European Joint Research Council, where they've looked across many, many different types of plants and topologies of plants. And what you see in the dark green color is the direct nitrogen oxide emissions. And we can see that where you have nitrogen conversion, they're one of the biggest contributors to the CO2 footprint, even when you take into consideration the infrastructure. So the steel and the concrete that the plants are also and the collection system are also being used up. So it's just to say, this is an important post within the greenhouse gas accounting when we talk about wastewater treatment and water treatment as a whole. And so that's why it's important that we increase knowledge and start to do something about it. So with those few words, I'm gonna pass it on to my colleague Jakob who's sitting here next to me and for him to talk about the legislation's point of view. Sorry, just to say, these are the people that you'll be seeing popping up on the camera during this webinar. So you have myself, my colleague Jakob, Mika from Unicense and Morten from Oswent and finally Amanda from Jacobs. All right, over to you. Thank you, Anna-Katrina. My name is Jakob and I'm the head of R&D within the sustainability in Bidane. And I'm here to talk about, as Anna-Katrina said, a little bit about the Danish story which has very much been a kind of collaboration between the legislators, the technology providers, consultants and the utilities. I will go through, tell you a little bit about funding and political agreements. And I'll tell about early funding projects and have a lot of the emphasis on this national funding pool results, very big study that was carried out in Denmark. I'll go through links to other initiatives. Next steps, what is going on right now in terms of legislative actions and also a very quick outlook to what's happening in other countries. First of all, as Anna-Katrina also said, we've been in dialogue with the Danish EPA. We actually also asked them whether they could be here today and talk a little bit and tell the story. But they said that it would be great if we could help them out. So I'll try my best to tell the story. I'll start here with some time in action, a political agreement that was introduced in 2020, a political agreement for a green waste sector. And especially for the water sector, there were six very important topics. You can see them here and you can see the highlighted ones. First of all, the nitrous oxide limits which was introduced. It was stated that we need to have nitrous oxide limits before the beginning of 2025. So that has actually had a lot of implications in what's going on in Denmark. And also the other one highlighted Paris model for an energy and climate neutral water sector has also been quite interesting. And I will of course get back to these two parts. To give you an overview, a timeline of what has been going on in Denmark, you can see it here. As you will see later, with Mikkel from Unicense, this timeline goes even more back in time. But this is mostly related to the initiatives by the Danish EPA and Ministry of Environment of Denmark. And you can see if you go back to prior to 2018, the EPA had funding for more than 3 million euro. In various projects, not only related to nitrous oxide, but also related to resource recovery in general. But all of the project has some kind of link to nitrous oxide also. So trying to establish measurements, but also already back then trying to control reduce nitrous oxide emissions. Then in 1819, the Danish EPA came out with this dedicated nitrous oxide funding pool. In order to get a lot of data that could then be used to establish a baseline. Then in 2020, this agreement was made. And one example is the nitrous oxide limits, as I just said. The other one was the Paris model, which then came out the year after. And here, the Danish utilities was urged to get the status of the CO2 calculations from a baseline year and also tell, so what is gonna be the the expected CO2 emissions in 25, 30, 35. And based on that, the Danish water business actually made this goal, being both energy and CO2 neutral in the entire water sector, in the operational phase, I must say. And then what's going on right now is that it's actually being worked on right now, the nitrous oxide legislation. And again, it has to come into force in January 2025. So it's actually quite soon. Just to give a little bit background also on the early projects, as I said, it was not only projects dedicated to nitrous oxide emission measurements, but also a lot of other things. But common to these projects was that there was some kind of measurements with different kind of measurement equipment, both liquid phase measurements and also gas phase measurements. And it was very big projects going back to, as you can see here, 2014 to 18. And also the one on the right-hand side is from the Barger project, which Mikkel from Unicent also will go into a little bit more details on later today. Yeah, then I promised to say a little bit more about this dedicated nitrous oxide funding, which was released by the Danish EPA. The budget was 5 million Danish Kroner, about 0.7 million euros. The aim was to increase knowledge on nitrous oxide emissions, improve the national inventories and reduce emissions from wastewater treatment plants. The goal was to reduce the emissions by 50%. And nine utilities took up this, or made projects to get this funding. And they actually invested in measurement equipment, installed it at wastewater treatment plants and have provided data for up to about a year of measurements. And based on these measurements, Inbidane made this reporting, you can see it on the right-hand side in Danish, though. It was published in December, 2020, and it actually came out with a new emission factor for using in a Danish context. I'll get back to the emission factor. Here I'll just show a little bit on the results from this big funding pool. We saw, of course, in these nine different data sets. The common thing was that it's very dynamic emission profiles. We all know this by now. You can see some on the right-hand side. Big changes from day to day and also during the day. Or it's also interesting. You can see here some examples of some special cases on these wastewater treatment plants in Denmark. You can see to the right on the top-hand graph, you see an example with a music festival during the summertime. And the load in this period actually increased to the double load. And there you see that this specific ammonia load that comes in has a lot of implication on the processes. And it also leads to very big peaks of nitrous oxide emissions. You can see a little bit of the same story in the bottom graph where you have two tanks in series. And the wastewater that comes into the first tank has a lot higher, gives a lot higher specific ammonium load to the first tank. And thereby it gives a lot higher nitrous oxide emissions from that tank. You can see those with the green dots compared to the second tank in series, which is the ones with the red dots. Yes. This is just a little bit on the story of emission factors from a Danish perspective. In the very beginning, we were using these IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. As you can see the 2006 release, the emission factor was 0.05% nitrous oxide per total nitrogen in the inlet, also with very big variations as you can also see in the graph. And refinement came to this report in 2019. Now the emission factor was 1.6, so significantly higher. Also a very big standard deviation. Also in 2019, in Denmark's national inventory report, a new emission factor came in that we could use specifically for plants in Denmark. And it was 0.32. So this one we have been using so far until this Danish EPA report came out. And as you can see here, the new value is now 0.84. So yeah, a lot of changes over time. And as you can see the standard deviation is still very high. And it really gives a large demand on doing emission measurements as specific plants because it is a little bit difficult to just use this like a national mean value because it doesn't say a lot about your specific plant. So overall conclusions on this big nitrous oxide funding project shown here, 0.84% of the total end into the system is released as nitrous oxide. That's the new national emission factor. Then you see very high variations. We also see increased emissions from highly loaded biological processes. So when you have a very high, when you have a high specific ammonium load to the system, also high emissions from sidestream processes, and an oxotype systems on reject water, you see maybe five, six, seven times higher nitrous oxide emissions. There was also some recommendations from this report. First of all, we need to do more measurements over longer time periods and different operational conditions. So we all the time are getting much more knowledge on this dynamics of the nitrous oxide production and also on the emissions. We need to reduce a specific ammonium load and then do more online control. So first of all, get more measurements, find out what's going on and then do the online control to reduce the nitrous oxide emissions. I just mentioned this Paris model, which was introduced to the Danish utilities in 2021. It was a very simple CO2 accounting model. And the aim was to try to include all the biggest contributors to the utilities operation to the CO2 balance. It was a voluntary reporting. And it showed, as I said, the utilities needed to stay. Where will they be in 2025, 2030, 2035? And based on these results, yeah, we now have this very ambitious goal in the Danish water sector to be CO2 neutral by 2030. Right now, NBDEN has also provided the Danish EPA with some recommendations to update this Paris model. So it's more aligned with the international standards of CO2 accounting. And also it's including a little bit more than this first Paris model. This new model will be introduced sometime next year, with a new reporting round is expected. Good. And as I also said, right now, there's a consultant working on trying to prepare this nitrous oxide limit. Trying to figure out how is that gonna be, how's that gonna build up? And as I said, it should be ready by 2025. And in this project, it is also expected that more data will be processed. And we will get even closer to this intro baseline, this emission factor. Maybe we'll get an updated version of the emission factor with this work. And that's going on right now. Good. Then, yeah, this whole story was based on a Danish context. A lot of things has happened here, but it's not the only place where things are really moving forward in terms of this whole nitrous oxide emission scope. We all know from the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive that there's focus, maybe not ambitious enough. Right now in the draft, I think the CO2 emissions from wastewater utilities are only linked to the energy. So no scope one emissions, but that could be more ambitious, unfortunately. But as you can see here, in other countries and especially Europe, things are happening in kind of some of the same things as what's happening in Denmark. And I think Amanda will also make a little bit of an outlook also other places than Europe. She'll get back with that. Yeah, I also wanted to mention a few ongoing research projects where in Bidane is also a part of. They are also both of these projects as and are funded by the Danish EPA. The first one is on reduction of emissions from wastewater treatment plants. It's both nitrous oxide and also methane. But when we move into the NACAT project, we go even further and where we try to not only reduce the emissions, but actually eliminate them. So it's about nitrous oxide abatement by catalytic treatment. And that's where we're not quite there yet, but this could be very interesting for the future that we can actually not only control emissions, but maybe get a hold of the emissions and eliminate them. Yeah, good. Thank you, that's all for me. Thank you, Jakob. It's the Q&A box is open for questions for how, let's say, this collaboration between regulators, utilities, consultants and technology providers has been done in Denmark. Maybe we'll also say a little bit about that in the next presentation. So far we've gotten one question from Ivan, which is, have you collected any data from pure oxygen activated slide system? So where a ratio is provided by pure oxygen? As far as I know, not in the reporting, in the national study, I'm actually not aware of other places where this might have been done. It's been quite a few studies on the effect of DO concentrations, both up and down and so on, within some of the nine utilities that Jakob mentioned, some of them have played a bit around with the aeration control and seeing how that impacted it. But as far as I know, nobody has tried to see what the effect of adding having pure oxygen as an aeration sources. All right, Ellen is saying that they're looking into it in the Netherlands, so there'll be, let's see if we can share some information on that later, maybe in some links or something to links to those projects. All right, then Owen is asking if we think that wastewater treatment sizes can impact the emission factor. Do you have a? It's what we see from this Danish funding project is that we can see that it's very much related to the load of the plants. So the harder, the more loaded the plants are, the higher the emissions. I don't think we saw any relation to size, yeah, maybe you remember, Anna. So it says in many cases, maybe smaller plants are more inefficient and don't have the same possibilities to control the aeration. So it's true, maybe you don't have as a refined system to operate your plants, but I think as long as you, yeah. Of course you have to have the control handles to do something about it. So there could be something in that. But at the same time, I think also what we've seen here is that the bigger plants are the ones that are actually maybe higher loaded compared to their capacity. I guess they have been built quite, you know, taken a lot, but also what we've seen in centralization is that more and more loads come to the big plants and the smaller ones are maybe being shut down. And so they're approaching maybe their limits, which is then promoting that you do see a nice oxide production from those. Then we have, I think we'll take one last question and then go on to the next presentation. But can you comment on the environmental and operating conditions that influence the emissions variations? So what have we seen in terms of temperature feed variations? Yeah, we see that especially the COD and ratio when that is low, we see higher emissions. Yeah, maybe you can emphasize that. Yeah, I think maybe also Morden will later say a little bit about that you see also, do start to see and to her say, refine the seasonal variation in many plants where you see some time in the spring, there is a peak or there is an increase in production. So that seems to indicate that there's something going on. I don't think it's the temperature as such in itself. There's something going on in the probably the composition, microbial composition of the sludge when there is a seasonal change, especially if you then have an active sludge age control that impacts the microbial composition and that has an impact on when we see this variation, especially increase in nitrogen oxide emissions. Right, thank you all for your questions. I think with that, we're gonna go on to our next presenter. Maybe we'll talk a little bit more about the instrumentation and the actual measurement of nitrogen oxide. Okay, thank you. So I'll try to cover plus 20 years of collected know-how around the N2O and a little bit of history. So I've been working with nitrogen oxide in full scale for more than a decade now, but just to say that I was born in 1970 at a fairly low concentration of nitrogen oxide in the atmosphere. And today it's actually increased significantly and due to the increased influx of nitrogen into our food chain, that number will continue to increase even though that we tackle CO2 emissions as such. So today I'll try just to outline the challenge for the utilities in terms of the carbon footprint and the changing landscape, then how nitrogen oxide monitoring has evolved and also just a single slide on mitigation and where we are, and then regulation as a driver for greenhouse gas reductions. So the challenge really for the wastewater treatment plants is that they are currently measuring the amount of power that goes into aeration that wastewater treatment plant can easily use around 25% of the cities or the city's power consumption. And it's of course obvious that you would like to save as much power as possible. The backside of this is that actually this leads to a more higher increase of nitrogen oxide emission. And similarly, when you start to produce a biogas then you will also see that you will have a higher N2O emission as part of this. So these unbiased energy savings actually have a backside. And Jacobs have actually made a very easy to read essay on the challenges that are here. And also again, in the UK, here is Anglian water, which is providing a sewer system, clean water and wastewater treatment for around the population of Denmark. They have seen in their carbon footprint bookkeeping that actually the CO2 footprint will decrease as time goes by, and mainly because the power becomes more and more clean. Whereas the process emissions that we are talking about today will in percentage continue to increase, but still we tag a lot of CO2 emissions by reducing power consumption. And if you look at it in the case when I entered into nitrogen oxide you would have a grid where you would import electricity from and for power use for a reason that would leave fairly large carbon footprint in CO2 equivalents per day. Whereas the rest of the types of operation had little impact on the CO2 emissions. And the power that you produced would also generate actually a discount in terms of the CO2 emissions. Note that we are using quite a lot of power per cubic meter of water treated, whereas the emission factor was still regarded as very low and very little energy was produced. Fast forward then to a place where we would be in around 2030. Now the grid has become more or less green due to all of the solar windmill power and other sustainable energy sources. We have effectively energy optimized the plants bought all the smart equipment and the energy efficient aviation systems. So we use very few kilowatt hours per cubic meter of water. We produce a lot of energy as well. But the emission factor has gone up and as Jakob showed before the IPCC has actually changed the emission factor in the latest update many, many fold compared to what we had back in 2006. So the challenge is really this changing landscape in terms of CO2 footprint. If we look at where we got to where we are today and we look at nitrogen oxide then actually some of the first papers on nitrogen oxide that bacteriaally produced comes in the 70s when we started to map out and understand the denitrification better. And through the 80s and also in the 90s then we start to see the first scientific work on full-scale wastewater treatment plants. Japan and Japan actually have a study similar to what we've done in Denmark and the first emission factors are made here all published in Japanese and sort of under the radar for many of us. But we have a key paper here in environmental science that actually leads to the first 2006 emission factor that was then published with the guidelines in 2006 and you can see the range that came along with it so a high uncertainty. You also see the amount of the science papers that are published along the way are increasingly steadily. Our admunicence we enter in 2006 when the first of our sensors are starting to be used and the publications around this sensor increases over the years. In the Netherlands, that's when we see the next sort of national monitoring campaign or where there's actually a work to get a better handle on the emissions. And then we come into 2010 and onwards all of the monitoring that has been done until now has been with the off-gas instruments or gas sampling. We introduced a liquid sensor as a process sensor where you can get real-time data in the liquid and then later we start to have improved off-gas equipment but also drones and other types of equipment that can sniff sort of the off-gas. You also see that the amount of papers that are published are increasingly significant. And today we have almost 50,000 wastewater-related papers related to nitrous oxide. What is interesting is that the move in terms of doing something about nitrous oxide is actually coming from a lot of cities. So in Denmark it's the EPA but in the UK it's actually the water association and the same in the Netherlands and Melbourne water as well are trying to push sort of the agenda and acknowledging the problem with nitrous oxide. IWA is early on as well on the scientific side to put the focus in different work groups in terms of both doing accounting but also looking at the full circular rounded with LCA analysis. So in Denmark we've done monitoring. You saw the nine plans that went into the emission factor before but we have of course been tracking a lot of our customers and all the results that have been done in various projects in Denmark and right now the average is around 1.37% of the kilo in that comes in will leave as a nitrous oxide. And one key message here is really to focus on the larger plant as Anikatini said before where the load is actually to the full biological capacity of the plant. City grows around the wastewater treatment plant. That's where we will see the higher emissions and you can see that clearly in Copenhagen and in all this as modern will present that we will actually have a higher emissions there than the new national emission factor. So you can see how the emission factors is actually a poor measurement in terms of gauging what the CO2 footprint from a single wastewater treatment plant is and you can see how the number of the studies that went into the different emission factors have changed over the years. And then we have been measuring in real time for more than four years and then we with the real time data series get a new emission factor that is much, much higher than what is reported elsewhere. The point is not here to find an emission factor. It is exactly to measure to get to it. And you can see how a landscape for a wastewater treatment plant here in Denmark looks like followed over four years how it changes as a function of season but also as a function of the different years. And actually the load here on the plant is more or less the same all years. So something else is changing and bacteria are one possibility. It's also important to know that the IPCC emission factor was actually made by trying to make a sort of a linear regression on the data presented here. You can see the IPCC data here in orange and in the IPCC the new report from 2019 they actually draw a line like this. But there are actually lots of outliers to this. And the point is really here that you can get whatever number that you want. And if you are doing a couple of footprint bookkeeping at a utility then measuring is somehow measuring nitrous oxide is the only way forward to get something that is fairly accurate. And also note that a lot of the new technologies that are coming out and used for intensification actually leads to much higher emission factors. So bear in mind that we need to monitor long term also on new technologies to understand them when it comes to carbon footprinting. It's also, there's also been said that there should be a correlation between how well we purify the amount of nitrogen that goes through the plant. But what actually happens in the wastewater treatment plants when you get up to having a sort of a high standard and both the denitrification so full B&R plants, what they also do is that they will energy optimize. And when you start to energy optimize, then you start to take a lot of the carbon out that is needed to reduce the nitrogen oxide. So you'll actually see that all the plants in Denmark they are removing more or less than 90% or more of the nitrogen that flows in. But you will have emission factors from the various plants that are all over the chart here. And we cannot make any correlation between load or treatment type. You simply have to measure to reach a utility footprint. So in terms of what we can then do to deal with this, instead of showing a lot of the different projects that we have already shown, we now see a lot of the commercial activity as well. And I presented three here and it's probably not the full picture but all Haskell and for example have what they call a twin where they do a process optimization by tracking and modeling all of the nitrogen that is turned over in the wastewater treatment plan and with your objective to save energy but of course also nitrogen oxide. And in the day and I've been involved in this project myself where we've tried to make a simultaneous modification, denitrification controller where we both reduce the energy use on the plant significantly, we reduced the nitrogen oxide as well. And we also increased the capacity of the plant. So a different type of intensification by not adding more equipment but actually using the tanks differently to control them. And lastly, the earlier or clear with the upgrade solution which is actually a very nice cohort of different methods that are needed to come and play if you want to really balance both nitrogen and nitrates, ammonia, and also energy production so that you reach an overall objective of becoming as climate neutral as possible. So lastly, just to touch on regulation, right now the European Urban Wastewater Treatment Directory is under revision. And one of the saddening things to learn is that really in the draft to the regulation, the process emissions are shown here to be around 13 million tons of CO2. But what it deals with is actually only reducing the emission. So the scope to emission from the grid by enhancing more biogas production at the plants. So focusing again on energy neutrality. And the key is really here that the process emissions are completely avoided as part of the regulation as the draft is today, where it's actually both the green energy is not regulated by the directory and the infrastructure as well. So this is mainly CO2 footprint from concrete that is part of the infrastructure that is also not regulated by the Wastewater Treatment Directory. So calling the directory a green improvement of the water sector is actually not fair in my assessment. And we've seen in Denmark that actually a driver in terms of regulation is something that utilities would really like to have because that will allow them actually to have focus on this as part of the process engineering and optimization of their wastewater treatment plants and not just the energy side. So in conclusion, it's really important to reduce energy consumption. That is always the first so buy and install energy efficient equipment so that you can get the kilowatt hours used per cubic meter of treated water as low as possible. But the next thing is then to look at the scope one emissions from the processes. And here nitrous oxide, but also methane are important, but with nitrous oxide as being the highest. And only then, once you master this, then look at producing energy at the plant but also looking at making sustainable energy production that can be transferred elsewhere. And that is my last slide, but just to say that the UN, so the IPCC has already, and they do know that the uncertainty on nitrous oxide is simply so high that they actually call out to all utilities and process holders to actually monitor so that we can get the uncertainty down. So over to you. Thank you very much, Miguel. This thorough taking us through the history way from the beginning of the interest where people actually started to mention this, the connection between nitrous oxide and wastewater treatment plants. There is one specific question for you, Miguel, which is, in your opinion, what sensor setup should be present in utilities in order for them to monitor but also report nitrous oxide emissions? I'm, of course, biased because I sell a liquid sensor, but any online and real-time measurement of nitrous oxide will be important. But you don't have to put a sensor or an off-gas hood in every tank. We actually shown that if you measure one-third or half of the tanks, then you actually get a very good average of the emissions from the wastewater treatment plants. We do measure in the liquid and that adds some opportunities in terms of also tracking the denitrification tanks, which can also both be a sink but also a production of nitrous oxide depending on how your COD to enter your carbon balance is. But the most important message here is to get started starting to measure. So even less is better than nothing. I think it's a, and I'm sure we'll come back to that. There is two different objectives, whether you're trying to monitor and get an idea of what's going on and whether the point is to report a very accurate number. And I think there can be different means to obtain those two results. Sometimes they can go hand in hand. Sometimes maybe you need different things. But whatever we do, we will always increase the certainty of what we do because the uncertainties on the emission factors is so high that it's guesswork. Yeah. Then there was from the previous, I think, which actually I can also pass on to you, which is a question on controlling the aeration. Does that minimize the energy demand or even, I guess, increase the energy demand from blowers when you try and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the different projects that you've been involved in? Do you mention a few words on that? So I think I've done around 10 full-scale optimizations. And we actually always end up saving both energy and nitrous oxide emission. So balancing the carbon, balancing the aeration rate so that we don't over-evaluate and turn over too much ammonium at the same time and build up nitrates. But instead, lowering the aeration slightly having enough carbon for efficient denitrification. So you can actually manage to do both energy and nitrous oxide optimizations at the same time. So I would say that it's a win-win seen from where I sit. All right, so it's not a matter of giving in on the energy efficiency goal in your experience. It might be giving in on the energy production on site, but not on the energy efficiency. So if energy efficiency means that you would use a lot of electricity to sort of make up for the high use of electricity, then that will have an impact if you want to be sort of climate neutral. All right. Thank you and thank you for a very nice presentation. There's a couple more questions, but I think we'll try either to answer them by text during this webinar or later because I think we should move on to the final bigger presentation in this webinar, which is from Morten and giving us a little bit of practical intel, probably. So Flores, yours Morten. Thank you very much. Hope everyone is enjoying this webinar. I'll give you some insights on what we have been doing and we have been so lucky to live quite by Mikael Anderson and Junis, and so we have been using their instruments for some years and been a part of this development. Anyhow, we'll see if it works by clicking and I was told to be patient, so we hope it works. Okay, a little about the content. First about the ambition that we have in August van, the problems of measuring correctly, which trials we have done and then some about the collaboration we have with other utilities around the world and then something about our results and then a little wrap up. And this is me, age five and 50 years later, I'm still quite intrigued by water. So yeah, it's the best place to be. Always municipality has a goal of being CO2 neutral in 2030 and it applies for OSVAN as well. And yeah, when we have goals set in some years back, something new happens and the new corporate sustainability reporting directive will enforce the GHG accounting system by using the GHG protocol where you put the different emissions into scopes and what I could, yeah, perhaps be a little afraid of is this should not shift the focus on being efficient in what we are doing and just trying to minimize the scopes just for the scopes itself. It's to have a holistic view on this. So we hopefully not will act as we are measured but a way to get there is to the standardization and transparent accounting and the new GHG accounting will in my opinion give us this transparent way of calculating how our emissions will be in the future and are now if you're using GHG protocols. Okay, this is... The phrase that Molden has frozen. So hopefully you'll come back on in a second or two. Otherwise we will jump to some of the questions. So now I think he's logged off and probably will try to log in again. I think in the meantime, maybe we'll see if Miguel is there. We can take a couple of questions for him. There's one about the optimization slide where you talked about which possibilities there are to reduce the nitrous oxide emissions. And it's Peter that asks, a slide change is an interesting one. Do we have data which indicates how the influence of slide change changes the microblur composition? So we do have data, but it's not my data or in the VARGA project. But along with the VARGA project that we did in Copenhagen over the four years so the slide DNA samples were taken along the way. And what we clearly see is that every high emission season leads to also coincides with a specific community. So that has been published and we can add the reference to the minutes. So we believe that sludge will change in composition but we don't know how and why. And there was another question on whether I think emissions will be by operating plants differently or by new technologies. And I'm writing and I'll submit it in writing as well. But in all the cases that I've been involved with including the one with the invadain we've actually used existing planned operation sensors and so but then changed the operational sort of scheme and this has led to 30 to 70% reduction of nitrous oxide without any sort of significant change in the use of extra power. So ammonium based controllers, nitrate controllers are very efficient also in reducing nitrous oxide. Yep, there's also one on whether you have experiences on oxidation ditches or a plug flow system, I guess, versus a complete, oh, there we have more than that. Oh, hi everyone. I'm so sorry for this. My computer just shut down just without a notice. We hope it will work now. So I think something I heard from you. We've been entertaining, well answering questions in the meantime, but please go on. Great, thanks. Yeah, so what I wanted to point out on this slide here is that we have the scope and scope one emissions. You can see this ray one. It's a nitrous oxide emissions from the treatment processes of OZVAN. And this is important. So if we said that we perhaps could minimum half our emission on nitrous oxide we will never get to zero on the scope one emissions. We'll see if I can, it works still on this. Yeah, it works. So how will we ensure reliable measurements, finding true values? We have been using liquid phase sensors and I will show you about how we have used off gas analysis as well. We have to look into the calculations methods and how to develop these new control levels. And then of course, the reporting principles. This is an example from one hour treatment plants, EO wastewater treatment plant, the capacity of 120,000 peas and not completely loaded, but around 85,000 peas. We have liquid phase sensors. It's the blue dots. And then we had a off gas hood. It's the red dot. And we have made intensively calibrations and efforts regarding the airflow, especially to be sure of what is in fact coming up the hood. And as you can see in the graph down here, it's the dates on the X axis and the percentage of nitrous oxide emissions as a percentage of the total nitrogen inlet. And you can see hugely variations on the seasons and especially in the spring. And sometimes during the summer we have very large emissions. And then in the wintertime and the fall it's way, way lower. Okay, so what have we been done doing at EO? This is the off gas hood. We have a specified diffuser pipe with a specified diffuser locations when we calibrate the airflow to the gas analyzer then we are completely aware of what is the exact airflow into the system. And then we have made calibrations on the flow meter on in the hood. And then we have in fact got quite good results. And when we have corrected for the aerated area then we have perhaps around 10 to 15% in difference in using the calculation method with the liquid phase sensors and with the gas sensor. Something like that. Anyhow, this takes time. And this is good in controlling and trying to understand what is going on in the soup. But anyhow, it is quite laborious to run these off gas analysis. But I think it's important in understanding what is in fact going on. And then I'll go to some collaboration we have called the net zero partnership with the seven trends in the UK. Melbourne wars are in Australia and then ourselves. And you can see on the left-hand side the IPCC factor of 1.6% of national stock side compared to the total nitrogen in that. The UK use 0.4 Australia 0.5 and we use 0.84. So what have we been doing? It's over a yearly period, both in Spirno in the UK and at very B in Melbourne water and EO we have been looking into the data here. And in the gray row here you can see that the average emission factor it's here based on ammonia. It's 1.8% and for the Australian plant it's 1.5 and for EO it's 1.2 in average. So, and you can see the differences in the total nitrogen removal because the Spirno sites is only a nitrifying plant. Anyhow, different emissions factors from different countries and quite, could you say similar results on an average? And here I will go a little more into details. I know that you can't see all the graphs here but what is important is that we have the nitrous oxide emissions over here on the Spirno site and you have the nitrous oxide emissions on the EO site over here. And even though we could say we are more or less in the same climate zone, we have different loadings, we have different process conditions and you will see different patterns of the emission factors. And here more in details, you can see the Spirno site and the EO site. And as you can see, there are large variations as I showed you on the graph before. So, how come we have these variations? Is it due to temperature as has been proposed? Is it due to loading? I guess it is. Is it due to the compositions of the wastewater? Yes, it does. And, but what about the microbes down there? Do we see some variations in that? And this is the relative abundance of different species which are responsible for the conversion of nitrogen. And we have been looking into this for a year now and could you say that there might be something going on in the spring for the nitrosomonas? It might be, but the relative abundance, yeah. I think it's worthwhile looking more into that because we see this very temporal variance in the actual emissions, but do we see it in the bacterias as well? So, we will follow this development. And I know that we have been using this PCR sequencing and I was told that we might look more into the fish analysis of the different species because all these species are not well exposed in the PCR test, but I'm not an expert on that. Okay, finally, conclusions and recommendations. We still need to measure. And I can tell you that on the EO plan we use around 20 to 25,000 euros in maintaining the OPEX on these sensors on annual basis. So it's not cheap to do this, but it's necessary. And how do we calculate? And we should have equally or not equally emission factors. We cannot use an average emission factor as a fair option in my opinion for this regulative instrument in terms of if you will get CO2 taxes as we will in Denmark in 2030. And I would recommend that that should be looked more into the seasonal variants on the microbial communities in order to give insights on the nitrous oxide pathways. And of course, also looking into the different types of plants, how are they operated? Is it simultaneously in nitrification, denitrification? Is it only nitrifying plant and so forth? How about equalization control? It could be nice. We could use the loading, but you know, it's concrete. It's not that easy and it's quite expensive. We need to look into the aeration controls and different sensors as well to build this network that can give us both reduction in nitrous oxide emissions and hopefully also not giving us an extra use of energy as Michael mentioned. And a lot of tanks, if we cannot control everything and I don't think we can, then we could cover the process tanks and then do something with the ventured air and how could we convert and reuse nitrous oxide? And I know that and Katrina and Amanda will look into that afterwards. And then my dream is that we perhaps get this molecular sieve that we could sieve out the off gases and then get pure nitrous oxide in one pipe and then CO2 in another pipe. But I think it's a little far fetched at the moment. And finally, acknowledgements for all this work which has been done both from seven Trent Melbourne Water and all my colleagues at the Ores Vent and the ARAS partners. I did not tell you much about that, but we have this development project going on where we are looking very much into how to control the nitrous oxide and we will disseminate this work in the last part of this year in December. And thanks for the, yeah, in EPA, Danish EPA, which are funding a lot of this work. And those who slip by my thanks for those as well. So, and for me here. Thank you very much, Morten, for that. It was a little speedy, but... Yeah, and for the, and getting back on track with all the practical joys of modern technology. I think it was very interesting. I think it's quite nice that you guys have also done this collaboration with the utilities that have very different geographies than yourselves to see what you can learn from each other and where you have common points and where you have differences. There is one question, sort of a general one that maybe you can also reflect on, Morten, which is whether Denmark has developed updated the sign guidelines for selecting nitrous oxide emissions. I might just add that we don't have sort of national guidelines for design of plants. But I don't know, Morten, if you have any thoughts on maybe how are you operating? Are you not going as far to the limits as you would otherwise do maybe based on the knowledge that you've gathered? One of the major problems with nitrous oxide emissions is that we have, if we are very heavily loaded, we have seen this, and Jacob mentioned it and Madele mentioned it. This is one very severe problem because we are not always in control of how we're loaded. So how to do this in a design process? Then you have to build larger tanks, but it's expensive. So you have to minimize the footprint and get more intensive perhaps technologies. But when you raise the intensity, then you have to be sure that you have the carbon at the right place. And so I think we are not there where we can say, okay, we have to design it like this or like that. I don't think so, no. But it's just my opinion. That might be more clever guys in this room. Yeah, I think there's also a few reflections on this point that you made about the emission factor, using standard emission factor. If you're then talking about reductions, it's going to be a little bit difficult to show if you're just, or to quantify or to show your efforts if you are still just using a standard emission factor. Yes. So there were some people out there that agreed with you on that point. Okay. Great. So we are free now. There's one more technical question that maybe I'll give to you and maybe also Mikkel will chip in on that, which is saying that some people are using Henry's law to calculate the off gas from the liquid phase. But you guess there's also what you're doing when you have the unicense sensor. And maybe just giving a few words on whether that's how well that works and what the benefits or pitfalls that you have to be aware of when doing that is. I could perhaps start and then Mikkel can be more technical. If it's okay for you, Mikkel, but anyhow, I think it works pretty well. We've seen quite nice comparison with the off gas and the liquid phase sensors. So in terms of having a day to day operation of measuring the emission of nitrous oxide, I would recommend having liquid phase sensors, but you can control it once in a while because there might be some shifts, but I'm not the Henry's law expert, but perhaps you can elaborate a little on that, Mikkel. Well, I can. I've spent a lot of time on this because actually when I started calculating emissions based on the liquid sensors, I got the calculations all wrong when we compared to off gas. And one of the reasons for this is that all math until we started producing a liquid sensor were based on sort of the classical oxygen mass transfer formulas, but nitrous oxide has a very different solubility compared to oxygen. And that is why Henry's law applies to this gas in wastewater, whereas for oxygen, it's actually a sort of a mass transfer based calculation that you have to do instead. We can spend an hour or more on this, but I'd be happy to connect or please connect, and then we can take this offline. But the key here is that the solubility of nitrous oxide is very different from oxygen, and that's why Henry's law applies. And that is of course for bottom aerated. So fine bubble diffuses. If we're talking surface aerators or oxidation pits where you have a rotor or brass aerator, then it's a different set of formulas. But all of these systems are impossible to measure with off gas equipment as well. So here are drones or some other equipment might be abused. Right, thank you. I'm sure we could do a whole webinar just on measurement technologies and calculations, which might be one in the idea pile for next year. Thank you all for the questions, I think. I'm gonna say a few words, and I've seen that there's also been a question on this. So it's quite well, whether there are any mature technologies to convert N2O. I'm just gonna say a few words on that. So now we've been talking a little bit about how do we measure it, what's been the approach to try and mainly gain knowledge, but also see if we can do something about reducing the emissions that we do see in the treatment plants. What we sort of experienced is that we're also maybe broadening what we look at a little bit to see if there might be ways of saying, okay, we've got this problem, can we try and capture it in a body, so the ventilation of gas where we can, might be able to do something about it afterwards in a post-treatment step. So it's well known that you can destruct nitrous oxide by thermal destruction. The problem is that it requires very high temperatures. So I have one slide on this afterwards which is a project that we're involved in which Jakob mentioned before also, which is trying to lower the thermal need by catalysis in order to try and degrade nitrous oxide from the off gas. There are also research going on in trying to see if you can biologically convert nitrous oxide. We know that we can from what's happening in the biological tanks, but whether you can then also apply this denitrification approach to the post-treatment that you have on the off gas. And there are some research going on to that, so I'll point you towards that direction if you're interested in looking into that. All of these things are at a feasibility study level. So we're not quite there where we have full-scale implementations that we can go out and look at. And I think one of the most important thing, I'm not so worried about whether we can show that it's possible or not, I think we can. But what will be very interesting is to see whether there is any viable business case in terms of both monetary, but also for certain environmental advantages in doing these things. So how much does it cost for us in terms of energy to try and remove nitrous oxide from these streams? Just to say we're working on this project with a technology provider called Topsu that does catalysis for all sorts of other chemical technologies, but we've said, hey, why don't we try and see if we can do something within this field? So we're at the stage now, actually, it's gonna be in a couple of weeks that the pilot scale will arrive at the first treatment plant. So we're gonna look into trying to apply this technology on three treatment plants, two, which have full-scale covering of the process tanks and the ventilation gas will then go out and a side stream of that will go through the catalysis and the heat exchanger and then we'll measure before and after to see what the efficiency is, but also try and get an idea of how much does it require in terms of energy. The third place is at a plant with an anamox-based side stream treatment to see if, where we have a smaller amount of air at a higher concentration to try and evaluate where the business case might make sense or might not to see if we can apply it to these specific locations where we have high concentrations and maybe not as much air to treat. This is just a little, some drawings from where it's gonna get installed. It's gonna be put on the ventilation shafts coming out from the treatment plant. What will also be done in this is that at that plant there are existing biological filters for odor treatment which we'll try and measure on just to see if anything should happen in that filter as well, to see if that could be something that had a benefit on the nitrous oxide reduction. That was just a few words for me to sort of, that's what I see coming forward is that we can see whether we can, instead of trying to eliminate the problem at the root, try and handle it downstream. And then I'll hand it over to Amanda to say what's going on in the rest of the world so that we don't just get lost in our own little navel-gazing perspective in Denmark. Hey, I think there's a lot to get lost in in Denmark and I just wanna thank all of you guys, the Danish water sector for presenting this English speaking webinar obviously because I think there's just so much to share and it's been, the series has been brilliant but in particular just such a wealth of wealth going on a nitrous oxide. But this is just a few signposts I guess to some other and others have mentioned some of this already to some other globally interesting work and maybe we start across the pond in the United States and here it's great because I guess we're seeing some momentum and some significant new funding opportunities for decarbonization. But I think picking up on a point Mikau made the, some of these are really focused on carbon redirection and shortcut nitrogen or nutrient removal processes and there's a lot of evidence to suggest that these are higher emitting processes in terms of nitrous oxide from the empirical data that's there. So I think this will be a place to watch but great to see that level of new funding and support and moving across back to France is interesting new emission factors there for some process typologies based on work that's been done by INRA and collaboration with utilities or operators there. And so that's given some emission factors for buffs and also extended aeration plants and I think also from NBR. In Sweden we see a talk of a national study from the research institute there and of course there's been a lot of existing progress already in Sweden and lots of lots to read there. Switzerland is really interesting and I think it's definitely worth a webinar here as well on the into abatement program that they have which is funded by or which provides basically national carbon offsetting through anti-oam mitigation including things like nitrogen ammonia recovery, regenerative thermal oxidation, process optimization and also sidestream treatment or doing away with particular types of sidestream treatment which are higher emitting. Moving staying in Europe, I guess Mikau's mentioned the disappointment of the current urban wastewater treatment directive. Netherlands, I thought was on there and now I've taken off but I've got a hot off the press update from Ellen on the Dutch work which is that they're about, well in the process of deciding on a national research program which will last four years with almost 50 wastewater treatment works measuring anti-oam in combination with other process parameters including nitrite. So the goal of that's to develop representative emission factors perhaps and to learn how to reduce emissions, what level of reduction is possible and what influence is this. So thanks for Ellen, hot off the press update there from the Netherlands. Back to United Kingdom, I'll go to Australia first, I guess Australia and New Zealand, there's plenty ongoing there which and Morten alluded to the work by Melbourne Water and I see Peter on the call. But also I think there's discussion of more collective aggregation of data so that thinking about protocols for monitoring but also a collective database for what's collected. And then finally just finishing in the United Kingdom, I think here we've seen an interesting project which is evidence to improve the national inventory reporting for nitrous oxide and methane. So that could support hopefully government decision-making and around funding. Some good practice guidance within our queer. Some interesting, it's interesting in the UK and some other geographies because we've got a lot of nitrifying only sites with quite tapered plug flow conditions and a lot of sidestream treatment or not sidestream treatment with intensive really high ammonia liquors from thermal hydrolysis plants. So some interesting considerations there with regards to nitrous oxide and also some interesting technology trials ongoing. And I think I'll leave it at that. Thanks, Manacra Trin. Thank you, Amanda. So I think this also shows that there is a lot going on globally and I think it's just important that we stay aware of what's going on in other places so we can really add to the common knowledge pool and build on top of that. And thank you to all the speakers. I think there are a couple of questions. I'll dive into them in a second. I think I'm gonna sort of ask one general one for all of our presenters now that maybe you can think of. So I'll start with you, Yaya Kapi. You can just answer in this room here. So with the information that we've gathered so far and also what was presented today, what do you think the efforts should be put if you were the one sitting on the pot of money? Is it more research, more knowledge or is it trying to act on the stuff we have now to consolidate that or? I think we need to do, I mean, we need to do both. I mean, we're not quite there yet. So we still need to gather a lot of data, a lot of information. Amanda just said a huge project in the Netherlands, say 50 ways to work in France. I mean, stuff like that, we're getting a lot of information when we take into that data. We're getting more and more knowledge, not every day, but almost, and it has really moved fast the last four to five years. So I think we just need to continue on that path, getting more knowledge, look into control strategies, also look into what you mentioned, trying to eliminate nitrous oxide from the systems where you have the off gas ready for you. I mean, I think we need to act on everything. I mean, that's not one solution but it would all be X and one basket. I think we need to just keep doing what we're doing. You'll keep on signing the check. Thank you. Mietje, I'm just going to go on the order of the speakers. Do you have, what would you add if you had a finite amount of money to throw into this field? I would, you know, increase monitoring. So making sure that we get data in a project like what is proposed in the Netherlands is a very good, but one important thing is also that we sort of get an international framework for collecting the data so that we get the metadata around the nitrous oxide because what we've seen and what I showed in the slide before is that we have sort of emission factors that are all over the place, both when we look at purification rate, when we look at the treatment efficiency and when we look at load on the plant and on different technologies. So I think that there has been done some great work also as input into the urban wastewater treatment directory from the Joint Research Center, but we need sort of a metadata guideline to report this. So emission factors as percentage of nitrous oxide emission as treated and also as incoming load is fine, but we need also the process volume, we need the slots, information, COD, and so on. So if we could improve that as well, then I think we will gain a lot of know-how fast. Yeah, so like a protocol on the data collection. Yes. And Morten, you had a nice sort of perspective slide where you also would like to do a lot of things a little bit like Jacob, but if you have to sort of pick out one or two, what do you think would be, where is that that we really need to focus our efforts now? Yeah, it is seen from a utility perspective because what we are doing now is partly funded by the government, but it's also partly funded by the citizens of, for instance, Orhus or another utility. And if we do not get demands, we have to use, to find this money in our very empty pockets. So I would like the demands because then we can issue the bill for us doing this stuff. And I think it is very important, but I would acknowledge that we have to look further into the details as I mentioned before. Yeah, that's a good point to sort of that regulation needs to come in order to justify that we're spending the citizens' money on this. Yeah, if I can add one thing more then, I think that the new urban wastewater directive where you will, in a lot of countries, will get strict demands on nitrogen. It will press perhaps the nitrogen oxide emissions further up, but this is something to worthwhile looking into, I guess. It was the last for me. Yeah, thank you. I think that also brings me, thank you all and I would like to thank all the speakers again for nice presentations. If anyone still have still questions, we have a couple in the Q&A box that haven't been answered. We'll be sure to do that in the post webinar information that's gonna get sent out. Otherwise, I'm gonna say thank you, of course, to the speakers, but also to all the listeners out there. Thank you for tuning in and spending part of your day on this. This was the third webinar in the series and we have the fourth one coming up, not so long from now and the third of October, which is looking more, a little bit broader on how this greenhouse gas emissions fit into a broader sustainability perspective. And we have a very nice program lined up for that as well. So I'm just gonna encourage you to also join there. Apart from that, there are also arranging lots of other interesting webinars. Here are two of the next coming ones in the next coming weeks that you're very welcome to join. And by listening to this, you now have this code to discount off if you wanna join as a member, which I'll just encourage you to do. And apart from that, I'll say thank you to everyone for listening and I hope to see you out there in various forms on or offline with talking about the great field of measures outside. So I think that's all for me for now. Thank you all and have a continued nice day or evening or morning wherever you are in the world. Bye.