 Hi everyone. I'd really like to welcome you to this webinar on quantifying, modeling and mitigating process emissions. I'm Amanda Lake. I'm a process lead with Jacobs based in Edinburgh in Scotland. Although I'm hosting this from Slovakia where my partner's family are from. So really excited to be here. This is the first in a series of four master classes on process emissions. We're doing one a month except in July when we can all be on holidays. And we're really excited to bring you today the first of these master classes and also to launch an Iowa book on the topic quantification and modelling of fugitive greenhouse gas emissions from urban water systems. So we're here today with a panel which includes two of the guest editors of the book, two co-authors of the book and a special guest water utility who's taking action on process emissions. Next slide please. So good to know that the book has been published by the Iowa task group on greenhouse gas modelling. And this master class series has been brought to you by the Iowa climate smart utilities group. So the Iowa climate smart utilities group is a platform for knowledge exchange and it has two key topic areas and some active subgroups. I'm the leader of one of those subgroups on greenhouse gas monitoring. But if you're an Iowa member, please consider joining the community of practice and also joining the activities of the subgroups. And next slide, thanks. So just a bit of housekeeping. The webinar will be recorded and made available to everyone freely. And that will be on the Iowa website. I think that's all we need to say there. Next one please. If you've got questions, please raise them by the Q&A box. So we're going to hear from our four panellists to start with and then we'll have a Q&A session at the end. And so if you've got questions along the way, we will try to answer them, but please don't raise them by the chat. Raise them using the Q&A box and the instructions on how to do that are there. If you've got any general points or requests, please use the chat box. And next slide please. So just we've got a great agenda today. We've got four speakers. And so I've obviously just given a note, giving an overview, doing some housekeeping. We'll then hear from Louie, who will give us an overview of the book and will actually launch the book, which was really, which is really exciting. We'll hear from Ariane on the way we currently report process emissions. We'll then hear from Jose on some of the key issues around process emissions. And finally, we'll hear from the experience of Per-Hannrick and DCS Sternmark in terms of taking action on process emissions. We'll have the Q&A and discussion. And we'll also remind you of the upcoming webinars at the end. And we've got a few polls to do as well. So next slide please. We'll introduce each of the panellists as we go. But yeah, this is the five of us on the call today. And we'll, yeah, I think we'll get started with just two polls. So next slide please. And we'll leave these polls open until the end and we'll capture them in the discussion. So we're just trying to find out where folks work and what action that you're currently taking on process emissions. I'm guessing you're here because you know how important these emissions of nitrous oxide and methane are in terms of the water sector. And are probably well aware of the criticality of us taking action on these. And perhaps you're also aware that we actually have much of the information, if not all, that we need to be able to take action on these. So yeah, thanks very much for being here and for your interest in the topic. And just finally, next slide please. We are keen to share and like and tag on social media. So if you do this, please do tag us and tell us what action you're taking on greenhouse gas emission reduction. And next slide please. And so finally, I just would like to introduce our first panellist. So I'd like to introduce Associate Professor Luye, who's a wastewater expert and the greenhouse gas research program leader from the University of Queensland in Australia. Her research focuses on sustainable and cost effective water and wastewater treatment and she's an established. She has an established national and international leadership in the research field of understanding, modeling and mitigating fugitive greenhouse gas emissions from urban wastewater systems. Her research outcomes not only offer long term cost effective solutions for water utilities to reduce emissions, but also inform the development of new policies. She's the editor in chief of the new book that we're launching today, Quantification and Modelling of Fugitive Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Urban Water Systems. And with that, I'm really excited to hand across to you. Thanks very much. Thanks for the introduction Amanda. Okay, so before I give an overview for the fugitive greenhouse gas emissions from the urban water system. I will take this opportunity to do an official launch of the GH book. So this book is about quantification modeling of the fugitive greenhouse gas emissions from urban water systems. And the book is just available today for some of you, I think it's available yesterday. And this is a fully open access book and you can download just directly from the link I provided here. So on behalf of the editor team, we also accept myself. We also have Hosei Poro. Later on, Hosei will speak a few words and we also have Ingema Nopens, so as the editors. So first, I think I would like to, on behalf of the editor team to express our appreciation for the 33 co-authors that contributed to the 11 chapters of this book. We really spent nearly three years to get this book published. And in the meantime, I also would like to thank all the reviewers who reviewed the chapters for us, provided their valuable comments and feedbacks. Also in the meantime, I want to thank the IWA GH task group, also to provide the initial actions and support for us to generate this book. Okay, Hosei, do you want to turn on your camera and speak a few words? Yes. If it wasn't so early for me, I would maybe have a champagne glass to help commemorate the occasion. I just also want to thank the contributors of the co-authors and editors, Yuv Liu and Ingmar. The task group members, as Liu mentioned, it was because of their early work in helping to coordinate and direct the research that really started in 2009 and 2010 that helped us to get to this point. I'm glad we started back then because if we were starting now, I think we would be in trouble. So I think also I want to thank IWA for all of their support through the whole task group timeline and support through the development of the book. And I think it's a testament to what IWA can do in connecting people because we really had the best of the best working on this. So big thank you to IWA as well. Thanks, Hosei. Alright, after we launch the book, I will start to give an overview of the process admissions from the urban water systems. I hope you can see my mouse moving. So in terms of urban water systems, I did put a few systems together. So starting from the storage system, also with the water supply systems, and then it supplied the water to the household. Then after we use the water, so all the sewage was discharged into the sewer. So we have the collections, thousands of kilometers sewer pipelines, collect all the wastewater and transport them into the wastewater treatment plant. And after we treat the wastewater and the way discharge the treated water into the receiving water bodies, including rivers, estuaries, space. So you can see that in the whole urban water cycles, all of this may potentially be contributed to the greenhouse gas emissions. But for the book, and also for my today's topic that will be focused on the sewage collection and treatment system. The reason is majority of our pollutants are actually treated here. And then that means the two important greenhouse gas. One is called nitrous oxide and two O. Another one in the methane is also majority is contributed from these two systems. So for nitrous oxide, it is a greenhouse gas with a global warming potential between 260 to nearly 300 times as CO2. And the more methane is around between 25 to 30 times stronger global warming potential as CO2. We also have some CO2 emissions, but the CO2 emissions normally will be regarded majority is indirect emissions through the energy usage. Like when we burn fossil fuels to use this to generate CO2. If you use the green energy, then basically it is not counted as your CO2 emission. The other part is direct CO2 emission. And then this part is not the biogenic CO2 through the bacteria respiration process, but it's more through the fossil related carbon. For example, maybe the carbon related to when we're using personal care product and a detergent, but they are actually the ingredients is generated with some fossil fuels. So these probably contribute a minor percentage of the total process emissions. Okay, so where are these the major focus on methane and to also where are the GHC emissions from the urban water systems. So here I provided based on wastewater flow, you can see that from the beginning we have the sewage collection systems. And then that I will use the orange arrows that indicate a methane generation. So along with the system we have many places that were generated a method. So, but for N2O dominantly it is produced during the biological treatment unit. So nitrous oxide can be generated mainly during the nitrogen removal cycle. You have denitrification, natrification, many pathways, but the majority of the N2O generated were stripping there. But for methane, as long as you have anaerobic environment, like during the collection system, if you have anaerobic treatment processes, anaerobic digesters, large handling system, they can all be potential sources that will produce nitrous oxide and methane. Okay, so next slide I will show you talk about where the detailed pathways. This looks quite complex and overwhelmed. So my key message is not to get you to understand the whole nitrogen cycle. So this is basically telling you the whole nitrogen cycle involved in many different types of bacteria. But the key message will be N2O is normally key generated by AOB, which is ammonium oxidation bacteria during the nitrification. And also it can be produced during the denitrification by the heterotrophic denitrifiers. So these two contributed a majority of the N2O emissions. And also for example AOA, ammonium oxidation, archaea may generate some N2O. So these three are biological pathways. So biological pathway contributed more than 95% of N2O generation or 98. But a few other pathways like the chemical reactions, direct chemical reactions may also contribute to N2O generation. So key message here is N2O can be generated by multiple bacteria pathways in different conditions. And the biological pathway is a major contributor for N2O generation. And then for methan, well, so this in methan generation pathways is four steps. Well, it's basically what we use to produce biogas, right? So it's the same if you have anaerobic process, you have these four steps. And then the methanogenes will produce biogas. That's exactly how we want to recover energy using anaerobic digester. However, this anaerobic process will also be generated in other places. For example, during the sewage collection. So the first one, you can see this is a fulfilled sewage pipes that is called rising men. So this is coming from the pumping station that we have the pumps deliver all the wastewater to the next this wet well. And then in this rising men, you can see this, the wastewater have a lot of carbon. And then on the wastewater on the sewage pipes, there are a lot of biofuels generated there, the growth there. So they will use the COD, they carbon there and generate methan. And then this methan is generated during transportation. When it goes to the gravity server, you can see then the dissolved methan will be transformed, transformed into the gas phase. That's where you can see methan will be generated, will be emitted. And another, I put another figure, which on this side is a sludge drying lagoon. It's a long term like sludge treatment systems. Like in Australia, we, well, we do have a lot of land. So this is a quite common process like before the sludge is transported out from the plant that the sludge after digestion. They will put all the sludge in the shallow lagoon, and then we'll top up some water normally from the effluent and then we'll leave it for years. So two or three years time, you can see the sludge will keep digesting. And then we have some air coming into that will bring some transfer, gas liquid transfer, and then the generated methan will be emitted. So I give you these two cases to tell you how methan may also imitate during the wastewater treatment and sludge treatment process. So my next two slides is really about accounting guidelines. How do we report the GHG admissions? So Ariane, the next speaker or panel will have a whole dedicated session on this topic. So I just want to show you very simple. My key message here is both into an amazing if you report them, how much you generated from your process, you need to use a fixed emission factor to calculate. So how that works is basically this emission factor, for example, until is defined as how much into all is generated based on the nitrogen loaded into your plant. So that's all you can use a percentage, right? So that's defined as an emission factor. So what I want to show you here, the emission factor is mainly countries IPCC guideline. They gave you an emission factor. So in 2016 version, that's 0.5%. So that means you have 0.5% of your nitrogen loaded in your plant will be regarded as N2O. So you just use this emission factor to report your information. However, in 2019 when they published a refinement, so this emission factor changed to 1.6%. So you can see that no matter this is regardless of the process you are using, regardless of the performance you are doing, but you're going to use a fixed factor. And then similar for methane, it's also using emission factor, but then the good thing is the emission factor. So basically it's really based on the technology that you are using. So I will not go through the details of the table. I think my key point here is actually one of the major sources that we identified is the methane generation during the collection, the flowing sewer system. Basically in IPCC they said it is insignificant amount of methane. So this is not regarded as a source of methane, which based on the research and quantification study that has been proved it is not true. Okay, so the next slide I'll move to some general quantification methodology that we have been used to quantify full-scale greenhouse gas emissions. So the first one is called the tracer gas dispersion method. So for this method basically you're relying on a mobile. So this one is a mobile vehicles that carries some measurement equipment and say this one is the plant. So this shows a Google map how this plant layout looks like. So what you do is on these lines that you start to have some tracer gas cylinders. And then once you start to release this tracer gas, you can see it's basically the wind will blow the tracer gas into a direction. So if you draw your mobile and measuring all these gases you captured, right? So analyzer basically can measure the tracer gas, can measure neutral, can measure methane. And then based on the dilution factor of your tracer gas you can also calculate based on the measurement concentration of CO2 and N2O you can also calculate how much is generated from the plant. So this is one way it's basically on the whole plant quantification that you measure both N2O and methane. The other way very commonly used is called the floating hood method. So you can see this is a little like a chamber hood that will float on your wastewater plant. And this hood will capture the emitted, will capture all the flux, all the gas. So basically by measuring the flow rate under the hood and also measure the concentration of methane N2O, you can capture the flux of methane information under this covered hood area. And basically you have to need to have a faith that this covered area is representative to the whole, to the whatever size, and then you apply the size of the covered area, then you get the total methane N2O information from these zones. So this method also quantified both methane and N2O. The third one is a micro sensor base. So this one is mainly to measure dissolved N2O that is generated during your treatment plant. So by using this you also need to know which is a KLA, which is a volumetric transfer coefficient of N2O. So basically I think if you use this sensor the software will give you a calculation. So you need to use an empirical equation and estimate the KLA and based on the dissolved N2O concentration that you calculate the total N2O emissions. And then the methane specifically, here I put on the, the methane emission of the silver quantification. So based on, so still I separate it into rhizome and gravity silver. For rhizome, because it's all dissolved methane, right, there's no gas phase. So what you do is you measure three sampling point that you can say you measure dissolved methane here, dissolved methane here, and also after. Basically transferred into the gas phase. And then overall you can say, okay, all this lose in the dissolved methane, you can say that's the, it may take the methane in the gas phase. However, once we move to the gravity silver is more complex, because both gas and liquid that is happening you have methane generation, you also have a methane transfer in the gas phase. And it's very difficult to measure the gas phase all through the, the silver pipeline so far, we haven't, we have a few studies have been done, but it's no systematic ways that to do the online monitoring you have to rely on some modeling method to quantify the emissions from the gravity servers. Okay, in terms of measurements, you can see that this give you examples of this is a dissolved methane sensor that was applied at about four kilometers silver pipelines. This is a full scale study in Gold Coast city in Australia. So in this three weeks measurement, you can see that dissolved methane that they measure this is in the rising main or dissolved methane left one in the summer. And then right, right wise in the winter that we can see there are plenty of dissolved methane generated and also in summer you see higher methane than winter. All right, in terms of the results so until mentions there are quite a few full scale studies has been carried out worldwide. So this figure basically presented a summation of the emission factors of into all from the major configuration that currently being used in weight in full scale treatment plant. So the first six are the, the mainstream, the mainstream which is a low ammonia concentration between some 50 to less than 100 milligram ampulator. And then the last one is the sidestream sidestream normally look at the digest the liquor stream. So you can see that in general, the low stream which would have a much lower emission factor than the sidestream. The reason you sidestream you have a much higher nitrogen loading that you when you treated it you you do have a more like factors that will affect them to emissions. So average. So this one mainstream is varied between zero to to one point I think less than 2% and then for the sidestream it is much higher I think between one to 4% and in terms of configuration. Well, based on this summary SPR seems to be slightly higher than the rest of configurations. But basically, I didn't say configuration really play a major role it's more in terms of the operation that you are operating that you are operating in this. So what I also need to point it out because many. Sorry, so many studies, because this is the summary study and then they these really depend on the monitoring period and how are you actually quantify. So there are sometimes online mission some of the studies actually using offline grab the sample a some use short some use line some use one or some use multiple hoods. So there are a lot of variations in terms of our mission factors. The next slide is basically a study that we have done in Australia. Though so this is based on a step fade configuration we did have like a three hoods in in one of the step so the basically two steps. So what I want the key message I want to show you here that you can see in each of the hoods that we did say there are different concentrations of into a flux. So basically that along with the wastewater treatment we see a huge spatial variations. And in the meantime that some studies in Europe, they did say also huge variations in seasonal variation as well. Okay, the last two slides basically just a few more you right a few more minutes. Perfect. Yes, so I'll be very quickly. So, so with the mission I just want to show you like the mission really depend on whether you have a without without aeration, sorry, without anaerobic treatment or without without long term sludge sludge handling. So, overall the Mason mission from treatment plan contributed between four to 20%. So it's less contribution compared with how into all contribute to the total carbon footprint. And also may find missions from silver the key point will be you can see that majority of these are carried out in the rising name. So we don't have too much currently being done in the gravity silver yet. I think very quickly. So these are mean move to the modeling so there are a lot of work modeling kinetic benchmark. The hybrid model integrated with machine learning so later I will say we will have more slides introduced about the modeling program. So what I want to say there with all this modeling we have done that really advance us or assist us in terms fundamental fundamental understanding of the generation for these greenhouse gases and later on it helps us to provide or propose mitigation strategy in terms of how we can reduce the greenhouse gas emissions on mitigating emissions from that. I think my last slide is all these, all these graphs are taken from the book. So I think if you have any of the questions that I asked there, you can go to the chapters find your answers. Thanks, I think that's all I want to talk. Thanks very much. That was amazing. I'm really exciting to have the launch and and to have a really rapid overview. And the important thing to notice that we will have a focus masterclass on nitrous oxide and we'll also have a focus masterclass on methane. So those are happening on the 18th of May and the 22nd of June. And then we'll have a final one on taking action. So there's lots, lots more there to learn and but yeah, great overview and I'd now like to introduce Ariane Brotto. And so she's going to give us an overview of chapter four on greenhouse gas reporting guidelines. Ariane's principle carbon and energy consultant with Jacobs and she's got more than 10 years of experience in global academic government and consulting experience in environmental services and engineering her areas of expertise range from quantification and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions to delivery of energy management programs and innovation on resource recovery and secular economy. Ariane is currently working with key clients in Europe advising on energy carbon and secular economy strategies to support the achievement of sustainability and climate goals. In 2021 I'm proud to say that she was awarded the CyWim Young Environmentalist of the Year and she's called for chapter four and over to you Ariane. Thank you very much Amanda and sorry for my voice, excuse me, I'm recovering from a sore throat so I'll be keeping hydrated here during the presentation and I need a few stops. But yeah, thank you for the opportunity. I'm really happy to be part of this book. Along with Amanda we wrote chapter four and I'll be giving an overview, a quick overview because it's a big chapter and we only have a time slot here, but it will be focusing on the accounting methodologies and protocols supporting greenhouse gas emissions assessment and reporting that are relevant for the urban water system in wastewater. And Liu already gave some tips of what is happening on my presentation as well so I'll try to cover that very quickly. Next slide please. Yes, so we'll be covering the main points of the chapter and there's much more details there you can find yourself. So we go through accounting methodologies and protocols supporting national assessment and reporting of greenhouse gas. This will be specifically for greenhouse gas emissions of relevance to the water system and talking about the different greenhouse gas emission scopes and the relevance in how they are the boundaries are set for water utilities. And we'll be mainly based on the IPCC methodology for municipal emissions and the focus here is process emissions. So we'll be talking about nitrogen oxide and methane, how they reported based on the IPCC, both top down and bottom up approaches, including the latest update in 2019, the refinement of the IPCC. And we'll be talking briefly about some examples of application from the market, but we're going to hear more details later on with our next speakers. Next please. So the global reporting of greenhouse gas emissions, it came to be a spot of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1994. So it's been a while. And the goal was just to reduce emissions of greenhouse gas. And all the countries, the parties, they were required to develop, to update and publish their national emissions inventories every year of six different greenhouse gas. And this is for the whole country. So every industry and the urban water sector is just a part of that. And these inventories are made based on the IPCC, the International Panel on Climate Change Guidelines. And these include nitrogen oxide and methane from wastewater treatment as well. And in 2015, almost 20 years later, we had a historic agreement in Paris that we all know about. And to seek to limit the global temperature increase to well below two degrees Celsius above industrial levels. And in this case, all these countries, these parties, they are required to maintain nationally determined contributions and disease for greenhouse gas emissions. So basically saying what, what do they intend, what these countries, these parties intend to achieve in terms of reductions, and this must be reported every five years. And so the 2006 IPCC guideline is basically the base for most of these reporting for the other parties. And in the urban water sector, specifically the methodology to smate nitrogen oxide, it first came about in the 2006 IPCC guideline. But there were limited data back then. And we are going to give you more details later on. And finally, in 2019, we had a refinement in Japan. And that's the main guideline that we use for the urban water sector. And for the first time, introduced a higher tiered methodology for nitrogen oxide that we'll cover in more details here. And it's very detailed in the book. But this is basically what we're going to be talking about in the presentation. Next slide, please. But before we go into the reporting, we need to understand what these emissions are those and how we report them. And it's basically understanding the emission scopes and how they play a role in how we report. So greenhouse gas emissions, they can be quantified and reported by countries as I was talking about, but also by companies such as water utilities and organizations such as my company Jacobs by scope. And we have scope one, two and three, and they are differentiated by scope one being direct emissions on site and process emissions are considered direct emissions. And there's also scope two and three, which are indirect emissions. They were first introduced. So this nomenclature is not part of the IPCC guidelines. It was introduced by the GHG protocol of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development and the WRI and it's basically to categorize the ownership level of that emission. And we know we are talking here about the main greenhouse gas rates. It's about here, but it's CO2 methane and nitrous oxide and they were already covered where they emitted in the wastewater. So I'm not going through that. I just wanted to point out that we are going to have another mycicle specifically on nitrous oxide pathways and biotic and biotic production and to note that CO2 carbon dioxide. It's usually excluded from inventories from wastewater treatment because of the biogenic nature. However, there is an emerging issue with non-biogenic CO2 emissions that occur from result of fossil carbon in manufacture of personal products, cleaning products that ended up in our sewer system and wastewater treatment. These are currently not accounted for, but it's a matter of discussion and how to be included in the next IPCC. And what I want to highlight here and this is the importance of boundaries and how you define your scope one, two, and three, specifically for water utilities. If it's, for instance, a municipal water company, they are publicly owned and associated with a city, for instance. Their boundary will be a geographic boundary approach, so what they emit within the city boundaries. And in this case, everything that is emit outside the city boundaries would be considered scope three, for instance. But, and they will follow a specific protocol, the GHG protocol for cities. But if it's a regional water company, a public or private that covers a large regional area, they will usually use a control approach, either financially or operational control, so they will only report what they have control of. And in this case, scope three emissions will be, the value chain will be completely different from scope three emissions of a public municipal water utility. So it's important to characterize and have clarity of these boundaries for the water sector when we report emissions inventories. So we have consistency and a relevant baseline for the ambitious emission reductions that we are looking after. And this is all in very details in the book as well. Next, please. So then I think one of the main points to discuss here is the two different approaches for accounting for process emissions. They are now part of the IPCC based on the 2019 refinement. They were not there back in 2006. And these are top down and bottom up approaches. And this basically they are distinguished by how the data is obtained and the level of confidence. So for instance, top down approach refers to an equation and the emissions are estimated based on factors and constants. And they usually base these constants and equations are based on global data or default data. So for instance, here, how we calculate an emission rate, we have an emission factor times an activity data. So for nitrous oxide, for instance, we would be looking at the, on the basis of the protein content of the wastewater. So the nitrogen content and to which extent this protein generate nitrous oxide, which is the emission factor and so on so forth. So we can get emission factor from the IPCC, for instance, and the activity data from the WHO in terms of the protein content. So it's based on default values. It's not accurate, right? And on the same lines for methane is the same based on activity data will be the organic content. And then we have the emission factors as well. On the other hand, can you click the next place? I think it's an animation that yeah. We have a bottom up approach and this is what Leo was showing the different types of how we can monitor measure greenhouse gas emissions direct at a facility level. And they are based on defined methodologies depending on the type of method that you're using. And for instance, this could be to develop an emission factor for facilities across the country. And you develop one emission factor for that country instead of having a default global emission factor. Or another example is monitoring a facility itself and reporting the emissions of that facility. We should not be using the equations to top down approach. And we'll cover these more in details on the next slides next place. So as I was mentioning the 2019 refinement came with these three tier approach for natural oxide emissions, specifically they were there before for methane before natural oxide is the first time that it's presented. And we see here from two one to three is basically increasing the methodological complexity and data requirement. So it's a progression from one to three and you increase in confidence and accuracy of the assessment. And in general it goes from using a default data to site measurement and data collection. We acknowledge that it may not be feasible to use higher tiers, especially tier three, which is direct monitoring of a specific facility and reporting it. But that's the directions, the direction that we should be going if we do want to understand emissions and mitigate to achieve our goals with the Paris Agreement. So in more details to one, it's considered good practice. It's a top down. So we use that equation that I mentioned before based on global values for emission factor and activity data is to consider good practice, especially for countries that have no data at all. Nothing has been measured in that country yet. Tier two, it's a good practice is to develop an emission factor for that country based on few measurements. And we see an example of that from the mark in a couple of minutes. And we have more details of that as well from other countries in the book such as Australia, Austria, and so on. And tier three, which is the advanced method and we are happy that it was included in 2019 refinement because that's what we've been seeing through our research throughout these decades. That is to look at plant specific emissions and it is we acknowledge it is only for countries with good data and advanced methodologies. And these will give more accurate measurement from from each facility. So although tier three, the direct monitoring is now recognized by the IPCC as the most preferable option. We know the few water utilities have undertaken direct monitoring historically because most of the data available was for research to investigate the pathways of the process conditions leading to nitrous oxide and not necessarily as part of a emission inventory. So talking about tier one, I'm going to cover very briefly each tier for nitrous oxide and then go through methane. So the methodology I think Leo covered a little bit about this. So I'm going to go quickly. So we had a huge change from the 2006 emission value to what we have today to orders of magnitude. And it was based on peer reviewed work and many of us authors of this book contributed to the IPCC 2019 refinement. However, even with the new tier one emission factory, there are still challenges with it based on our recent analysis and other authors as well. So it's still not a good and more needs to be done, which takes us to really looking into site quantification and measurement for better accuracy. Also want to point out that there is a mission factor for receiving waters as well. Next. Yeah, so this is basically just how the emission factor 1.6% was derived and it was based on linear regression of 29 full scale monitoring data sets. Mainly in common suspended growth treatment processes, new and less common processes were not included and this was intentional from the IPCC. So many countries for many countries, these emission factor does not apply because they have other type of treatments, they're more relevant. And it's from data from around the road, but we see that he a larger treatment plants that treats over 300,000 population equivalent is driving this linear regression. Giving these emission factor and this is not common for many countries. So this is one of the challenges and also looking at how the unity if we should be reporting in terms of nitrogen load or not general remote. Okay, so quickly on methane. So methane. There's also many, there are also many different challenges. Different from nitrogen oxide, but it's still challenges as well. Methane came since 1995 actually so it's reported in the water sector for for longer. It's more known methane from another treatment than the nitrogen oxide. But it's basically a sum of the emissions from each treatment unit. And what is recovered. And it's based on this equation here. I'm just not going through because we don't have much time, but I think it's important to say that it's based on the maximum emissions are a function of the maximum methane production potential, which is this BO zero, which is the maximum amount of methane that can be produced based on the building and the methane correction factor the MCF and this is what is measured. So basically the emission factor is calculated is not measured as it is for nitrogen oxide and we didn't have a revision in 2019 for methane. It was based on those 14 full scale actually for us what we did have so it's based for 14 full scale measured methane and the emission factor is 0.018 kilograms of methane for BOG. And there's still a lot of limitation on these and significant variability. And it is recommended even by the IPCC more extensive monitoring and collection of data for methane. And from the slide, the IPCC doesn't even attempt to provide a mission factor for individual sources. So emissions from is large from an article digested, for instance, is due to unintentional leakages as a result of pipe or evolve tanks and think reflects. So it's difficult to measure, but the IPCC gives a general estimation between zero and 10% of the amount generated and in the absence choose 5% in the work that we did with the UK water industry here in the UK. We covered a few more emissions that are not covered under the IPCC and we are working with them to develop a good practice guide and master class three will cover more of that next. So conclusion and we'll just go to the final two points tier two for accurate reporting to tier three to support us to mitigate. It's good to have a global standardised approach, but if we want to see changes we need to go through the higher tier methodologies. Next please. How am I with time, Amanda? I think that, yeah, just probably need to skip through through these ones and refer folks to the book we'll hear about. We'll hear about Denmark soon. Yeah, so the IPCC online it provides a good and uniform practice. So it is good and we should follow it and all those countries of those 196 parties do so. So using it some have specific methodology for their own countries for tier two approach for instance and it's as covered in the book, but we do need other tiers to be able to mitigate and have a accurate baseline to start with. Some other considerations in terms of methane that we do need more measurements and because it would be very site specific and link to the operations of the plants specifically for for methane and the book will cover more on the quantification and modeling approaches of those and mitigation as well. And I think there is one more slide on. Brilliant. Thanks very much. Yeah, you can mention about the subgroup then. No, that's brilliant. Thank you so much. Thank you. Really great. Great overview. Hard to summarize. The good thing is we'll hear more about the approaches required for tier two and tier three throughout the master class series. But now I'd like to quickly pass on to Jose. He's going to cover briefly in his 15 minutes some of the key issues in quantification modeling and mitigation. Jose's founder and CEO of Cobot Water Global has 20 years experience in drinking and wastewater modeling model based decision support is an expert in techniques and internationally recognized expert on measuring modeling and mitigating wastewater nitrous oxide emissions. He's got an academic background in environmental engineering is a licensed professional engineer in the state of New York and his chair of the Iowa task group on greenhouse gases. Thanks very much. Jose, great to get. Yeah, great to hear from you now. And thank you. Thanks, Amanda. So I'll be presenting some of the key issues that we've identified in the book, as well as some key issues that will need to be addressed as the guidance in the book is implemented in practice. And I want to share a bit about the motivation behind the book and the launching of the IWA cast group on greenhouse gas modeling, which was launched in 2010. And in 2010, we were going through a paradigm shift towards sustainable urban water management and wanting to minimize environmental impact, besides just in the water environment. What's also interesting is that in 2010, there were really no drivers for greenhouse gas reduction. The people that were working on this were passionate about applying their knowledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but also thought that there was something we needed to do. And it's interesting because now we're officially in a climate crisis. So I think this is something we have to do. But also, at the time we were recognizing that our activities in the water sector were resulting in scope one emissions of nitrous oxide and methane. And that there were tools in place to include the processes for mechanistically describing N2O and methane production and emissions from wastewater treatment and sewers. So we need to synthesize and coordinate the research and extending these tools, but ultimately we wanted to provide a guide for practitioners to be able to take climate action in the water sector. And I encourage everyone to read the foreword written by Sadir Murthy who does a very good job in explaining this motivation. And Sadir is actually one of the people who helped found the task group. So in the book we break down the pathways for N2O production and emissions from wastewater treatment. And Leo went through the pathways. And we have a very good understanding at this point of how N2O is produced through nitrification and denitrification. There still might be some questions as, for example, exactly what role coma max plays and as we get a better understanding of this, perhaps it will help us better manage N2O. But what we've proven is that we can apply this knowledge to assess and model and mitigate N2O emissions today. And sure, we'll be learning more. There's lots left to learn. But if you think about it, the activated sludge process is over 100 years old. And what we knew 100 years ago is not nearly what we know today, but that didn't stop us from starting to use the activated sludge process. So the same needs to be true for N2O. And the authors in chapter two do an excellent job to break down the influencing factors and controllable process parameters. And this is really the heart of mitigating N2O emissions because the pathways are what they are. They don't change. And we can't change the bacteria's minds. If the right conditions exist, they will carry out the biochemical reactions to produce N2O. But what we can do is change the conditions in our favor so that we still meet our water quality goals, but also avoid N2O emissions. And these influencing factors or operational parameters have been directly linked to risk of nitrous oxide emissions through the research. And what we've done is leverage this knowledge and using knowledge-based AI techniques, develop the N2O risk model, which we presented in 2014. And is now actually the knowledge-based AI component of the N2O risk decision support system, which we're implementing at Cobalt Water Global. But what this does is it allows us to generate a dynamic risk score for each of the key operational parameters, which then allows us to easily identify control actions to reduce N2O emissions. If you have a framework for looking at each of the influencing factors, you have a framework for mitigation. The influencing factors and pathways don't change. What's different from site to site is the combination of these. But if you have a way of consistently looking at any combination and identify in each case why you have risk and what you can do to avoid it, then this is the key to mitigation. You did a great job explaining the methane production and sewers. And the key issue here is, as Bleu alluded to, is that methane emissions from sewers is not currently included in greenhouse gas emissions inventories. So we can no longer turn a blind eye to sewers and the methane emissions coming from sewers. We need to start looking at this and including this because we can't be net zero if we're not doing anything about the methane emissions from sewers. Another key issue that needs to be addressed is the use of the generic emission factors. As Ariane did a great job in summarizing the protocols and the various tiers. But Vassalaki et al. have reported on the range of the N2O emissions from monitoring campaigns that have been reported in the literature. And this range is essentially 0.001% to 12% of the incoming total nitrogen load. So essentially what we're doing when we're using generic emission factors is picking one number of a possible 12,000 and saying that this is what the emissions are. And I think Jacobs did some additional work, Ariane and Amanda, in summarizing the results from this work and from which we saw that if you apply the 2019 IPCC emission factor, you'll be correct in estimating the emissions for a specific site one out of 10 times. So 90% of the time you will be wrong with the IPCC emission factor. And Ariane explained that there are some challenges with this and the main challenges that it doesn't account for the site specific conditions. Another issue that needs to be addressed is also the comparison of process types. And Liu mentioned that it's not necessarily the process type, it's really the operation. So this is key. What will be interesting to see as we compare process types is comparing optimized sites for N2O versus optimized sites for N2O. And I think it'll be interesting to see what the comparisons are then. So in terms of the full-scale quantification of N2O and methane emissions from water resource recovery facilities and sewers, we see that a key issue is that the measurements are difficult. We can't get around them. We have to do them because if we don't measure, we don't know what the emissions actually are. We can use modeling tools to make good estimates, but as we see with using only the emission factors, it's very challenging. So what has been suggested is tailored measurement campaigns to identify process parameters or performance indicators that can be monitored with less effort. And one thing that we're doing is using machine learning to do this. As we are collecting data from measurements, we can develop and train a machine learning model that we can then use as essentially a soft sensor. I guess the question is how long are these machine learning models good for after the initial training? And what we've seen is that they can be good for up to several months. And then after which point, we replace it with a better model or go back and do more measurements to retrain it. For sewers, as Leo mentioned, it's difficult to be measuring for a whole network. So really need to be combining some measurements in hotspots and modeling to be able to quantify the emissions from sewer network. Also, we've seen that the objectives for monitoring will dictate which approach you take. And we mentioned there's the trace dispersion method, the off gas for floating hood method, measuring the off gas of an analyzer using a micro sensor and also doing grab samples with GC analysis afterwards. And I've used each of these except for the trace dispersion method and can say that each has their own pluses and minuses. So it really depends what your needs are, what your current situation is that will dictate what makes the most sense for you. We also see that the field measurements are also going to be very critical for verifying the reductions. So I guess a key question is, do we need to measure for 12 months? And from the research, we know that there can be seasonal variations over a 12 month period. But do we really need to see this? And I feel that we don't. If we're doing measurements, we should be mitigating. It seems kind of silly to be doing measurements and allow the emissions to continue to happen for a 12 month period after you start the measurements. And there's some things that we can do. Obviously, we know that there's seasonal variation. So we can look at the historical data, take into account the site specific conditions and make some good judgment as to how different the emissions can be during different periods. We can also use modeling, mechanistic modeling or machine learning to look at the historical data and see how much the emissions can vary. But I think the most important thing is to be mitigating. So as soon as we are able to do measurements to establish a baseline, we can then implement control actions to mitigate those emissions. So we have the modeling chapters and specifically for modeling and to emissions from water resource recovery facilities and we break down the model. So we have a series of denitrification models and with varying complexity as much as counting for electron competition and different approaches for doing this. And for the nitrification, we have single pathway models for AOB, we have dual pathway models. So we have also a complete series of AOB pathway models. And what we've seen is that we can achieve very accurate description and representation of the end to emissions with these models. And what they also allow us to do is to really understand what's happening on a mechanistic level. And we also have biofilm and two O models. And I think that these can play an important role because when we're doing measurements, we can't really measure in the biofilm. It's difficult to measure in the biofilm. So I think we can use the models to tell us what is happening in the different layers to then be able to use that information to identify control actions to reduce and two O emissions. But because the data has been limited for both the full scale and also start for the suspended systems and the biofilm systems, there's still some model calibration and validation work that can be done. But I think as we're collecting more data, we'll be able to do this. So some of the key issues I've been identified with modeling. Okay. Is that the application of these models and the calibration are not straightforward, but we now do have good guidance on applying these. And I guess there's a question on whether we have a unified model. I think we can say we have multiple unified models. And I think this is a testament to the, I guess, the site specific nature of into O emissions. So different models might be better for different purposes. Again, for the sewers, we've seen that mechanistic model can help empirical models which are easier to use. Modeling methane oxidation and water resource recovery facilities is important for understanding possible methane emissions from the activated sludge process. But again, the biggest issue is that we, we can't ignore sewers anymore. So significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. We also cover benchmarking. So there's going to extensive amount of work done in extending the BSM platform to be able to evaluate the greenhouse gas impacts of various control strategies and just provides a really good framework for benchmarking, which can then be extended to looking at various facilities. This is also a good platform for testing models. As an alternative to the mechanistic modeling, we also cover knowledge based and data driven approaches. And here is an example that we have in the book from the Eindhoven wastewater treatment plant from water board to Domo. And we can show how we can use the risk because do we see that the risk correlates very closely with the measure into O to then identify control actions and we see how we can significantly reduce the end to O. When we implement these control actions, we see that also we see the process efficiency improve when we're mitigating into O. But we also see the use of data driven approaches that was the knowledge based approach, but we can also use data driven approaches and also to answer the question whether we need to measure for 12 months. I'll have shown that we can significantly reduce this period by identifying changes in the process where which would change the end to O emissions profile, but this was only happening under certain time so we don't necessarily need to be monitoring 24 seven over a whole year. And in the conclusions perspectives we identify some additional key issues. So the emission factors one step in the right direction is taking into account the performance. So looking at the nitrogen removed, and this is an improvement but it's still not looking at the process and taking into account the site specific conditions of the process. Because if we look at this example which is a, I guess, an example of the mitigation for the first site that implemented permanently into mitigation actions. The total nitrogen before and after was very similar, but the end to O was significantly lower. So it's not so much how much nitrogen you're removing but how you're doing this because it's a wrong way and a right way. But also monitoring, we cover the role of soft sense soft sensors and digital twins as we move into the digital age, and we summarize the mitigation examples of mitigation actions. But again, these are site specific but what's important here is the framework, but I think that the biggest issue and the biggest take home message is that there's an urgency for taking climate action, and the time to be quantifying modeling and mitigating greenhouse gas emissions in the water sector is now. Again, just want to thank the task group for their contributions, Leo and Ingmar and Amanda and all of the contributors and Amanda for organizing this master class series. And there is an abridged version of acknowledgements to the task group and the supporters in the book, but I will be sharing an unabridged version. So I think you'll find that there's a note at the end of the book, acknowledging the members. Thank you. Thanks very much, Jose. Good to have that overview of key issues. But as you say, we can act on these emissions today. And with that, I'd like to introduce our Henrik from VCS Danmark. He's as a project director. He serves as a focal point for development of optimization possibilities in VCS Danmark. This work has been focused in recent years on making major treatment facilities energy positive, preparing VCS Danmark for wastewater treatment of the future, and very much focused around resource recovery and achieving carbon dioxide as well as the neutrality for the entire facility. As indeed, many progressive Danish utilities are striving towards pair brings more than 30 years of experience leading and participating in multidisciplinary teams and a large number of sanitary infrastructure projects, and general environmental projects and has a broad background, including work as a consultant managerial roles within water utilities. So with that, I'd love to hand across to pair for for our next 15 minutes slot. We'll then have just a few minutes for questions, but the majority of these will also pick up in the next master classes so please don't worry we'll carry over any questions that we haven't got to for the next, the next three master classes. Thanks again for joining us today and over to you now. Thank you very much Amanda and the next slide please. Thank you very much. Just a few words about our utility we're old utility the third largest in Denmark, and we are operating a number of water treatment plants and wastewater treatment plants covering both drinking water and wastewater. I've been Miller wastewater treatment plant, around 400,000 PE and and that's where we're doing a lot of our fun. We've been energy neutral since 2019, not just at the wastewater treatment plant but at the entire utility. We have a strong focus on implementing UN sustainability goals and that gives us an opportunity to to be committed to innovation and development, and looking at at all the fun stuff and try to do better in the world so next slide please. I'm trying to to progress fairly rapidly here because I think I'm a little bit behind on time. This is just an energy production utility showing what we've been doing. We used to to consume more energy than what we're producing but we've had a strong focus over the past 10 years or more on optimizing our production and and producing energy in the form of heat to the district and heating and electricity to the grid and now in an amount that's larger than our consumption as a utility. So it is possible for utility to become energy neutral if you have a possibility to coincide with your society. On the M2O and on the methane were just a few words about regulation. Currently we are regulated on BOD nitrogen and phosphorus so we're paying a tax on that and we expect future taxes on CO2 emissions as well. We don't know the magnitude of those but we know that it's going to cost our customers some money and hence it's an opportunity for us to save money by reducing our discharge. There will be a requirement for reduction of nitrous oxide on plants more than 30,000 people equivalent and the goal is to decrease about 50% of the emissions by 2025. The methods are still quite unclear so we're working together with the Danish EPA to try to come up with measurements and and schemes for how to optimize this and it's quite unclear where the reference point is right now. So we are trying not to be caught in a wrong place where we have already reduced our emissions and then not being forced to reduce even more if it's possible at all. We've already done quite a lot at our facility. And on the on the methane preliminary data shows that we are losing about between 2% and 7% and that will be regulated in the Danish context as well very soon. So we are looking into regulations in Denmark for for minimizing the emissions and and that will drive development and innovation to to minimize to achieve these goals. Next slide please. There was a reference to what we are doing in Denmark and we have this tier two and that was based on on eight or nine wastewater treatment plants where we had a lot of data collection for for a longer period of time. And based on that it was decided that the Danish factor will be 0.85% of instead of the IPCC factors. So, so in Denmark we decided on on a factor based on measurements from a number of wastewater treatment plants. So a couple of difficulties some of the wastewater treatment plants in Denmark are aerated by surface aerators and the and finding an emission factor for surface aerating aerated wastewater treatment plants is really really difficult and and we are looking into finding new methods to to address that as well. But the factor in Denmark right now is 0.84%. Next slide please. We made our own evaluation that our wastewater treatment plants and we can see here a little bit of the dilemma, depending on how we calculate the, the, the emission based on two different methods we get very different results from if we use power consumption or observe the oxygen concentrations. And with the KLA so so we're still a little bit frustrated by the fact that we cannot measure it very correctly and therefore we are looking into the possibility of finding new methods. This evaluation here was did cover the membrane aerated biofilm reactor as well as a solution which we have tested so next slide please. And we, we have at the algorithm wastewater facility tested membrane aerated biofilm reactors and for extended period of time we tried with a couple of reactors, different loading schemes, and a lot of lots of operational data has data have been been used to verify this and it, it very much indicates that we can lower the N2O emissions by quite a bit quite substantially if we if we use membrane aerated biofilm reactor and we are actually looking to to put that into one of our smaller wastewater treatment plants right now to see if we can, if we can mitigate some of the and reduce some of the emissions. And that's, of course, in a biofilm system where you have a very short slush returns in time and hydraulic re the resencing time. So we can, we can get, we can get to benefits here a very low footprint and a very low nitrous oxide emission factor. Next slide please. Another, another project that we're running right now, the RS project, the project goal is to reduce emissions from wastewater. We are addressing methane and nitrous oxide, of course, and it's supported by the Danish EPA, it's a cooperation with a number of utilities in Denmark, the bigger utilities, the EPA and a couple of universities and a consultant. We are looking at in this project to, to make a new advanced sludge handling system, advanced measurements at the wastewater treatment plant like the one Lou was was talking about earlier with trace gas measurements in the in the sewer system to find hotspots in the sewer system and pilot testing to enhance control strategies to minimize the the N2O emission. And we're trying a new online measurement with when I tried instead of to see if that's a possibility to, to bet get better control of nitrous oxide. Next slide please. And finding the emission that is really the big problem in practice. I mean, we have a number of places where we can where we have emissions from and and pinpointing that and making accurate. Metering out on wastewater treatment plant is really a problem. We're using the trace gas and we're using online measurements in dissolved in the fluid as well to to see if we can make correlations but it is really difficult and we find new places where we where we get these emissions from, especially methane is a little bit of a trick. So, so finding the emission and and controlling it is rather difficult. Next slide please. And the lower picture you can see a evaluation made by the car on the picture where we have a trace gas image trace gas measurement. And as you can see the blue plume there in the middle is from the from the digestion system and of course we we get quite a lot of methane there from from slip. But we do find other places around the wastewater treatment plan where we have unexpected emissions and and that is something we need to address in the future as well. The same goes for the for the sewer system where we can find hotspots in some places and in other places where we would have expected methane emissions, we find nothing. So it's still there's still quite a lot of work to do before we have a good picture of where we where we have to do something in practice to reduce the emissions. Next slide please. On reduction of methane we have just we're just installing a new covered slush storage facility and a lot of places around the world slush storage facilities after digestion. Open, open tanks and there will be a rather large amount of methane emissions from there. So we're we're covering it and and taking the gas back to the gas engine and the gas holding tanks. And at the same time we're introducing a vacuum system to try to get the dissolve the methane out of the of the digested slush to see where what to what level we can reduce the the methane methane slip from the wastewater treatment plan. So instead of having 7% we hope we can reduce it down to a very few percent. It's probably not possible to get down to zero that will be from the Codian units that will be a slight methane slip and there will be some leaks in a system traditionally. So so we are trying to find new methods to find the hole in the petrol tank and try to to to minimize the methane slip. Next slide please. We're running a pilot testing and that's one of our colleagues in all who said are doing that where they are trying to come up with new process control facilities and process combinations to minimize the the production and the emission of nitrous oxide. Both the conventional activated slush and granular systems are tested. And we are seeing very promising results right now where we can potentially have better control of of our of our notification and denitrification and and by by having a better control potentially reduce the emission quite dramatically. Next slide please. Another project that we are running right now is Nakats. What if you can't do anything about the formation of nitrous oxide? Why not just put it through a catalytical process and and get rid of it? So a little bit like on your car have putting a catalytical converter on on the exhaust from from the wastewater treatment plan. That's that's what we're trying right now. It might not be sustainable but from because there's a lot of air that needs to be heated up to to be able to be converted the nitrous oxide being converted in the in the catalytical process but from specific places like the amunification plants where we see a rather significant emission. It might be a possibility. So we're very much looking forward to testing this this process and to see if we can't do anything about the formation of nitrous oxide. At least we can we can we can turn that into free nitrogen via catalytical process. On the nitrous oxide side we've been working for more than 10 years and we are still posted by what what to do about it. We have been very active in developing of the liquid online sensor and we are seeing regulations coming in force pretty soon in Denmark. So we really need to do something on this. And with regulation there will be a very strong push for for more more innovation and more research into how we can minimize the emissions. The amunification processes are really a challenge. We put the amunification in process into I believe wastewater treatment plant some six eight years ago. I think we would probably reevaluate our this decision if we knew how much nitrous oxide that would produce the by having this demonification. So we really need to do something. We have found met methods to minimize it but it's still a rather substantial emission. It's still very difficult to measure if not impossible. So so modeling and and goes hand in hand with with measurements and methane of course is the the big problem that has been oversighted for for many years. On the sustainability side. There was a big push from 12 years ago starting 12 years ago in in our utility. We were very focused on energy production and as I indicated we we are producing a lot of energy and not using a lot. So but that's looking at scope one and two. And now and in the future we will be looking at scope three and be looking much more carefully and what resources we're using. We are not CO2 neutral by any stretch of the imagination due to all the emissions of methane and nitrous oxide. But when we get control of that and get a handle on that I think we can get a lot lot closer. We're using life cycle analysis evaluation and tools and we see that as a very important part of of what how we can address these issues in the future. And and we're working on absolute sustainability to see how much room do we actually can we actually take in in society for our our interaction and and emissions. Next slide please. Thank you very much for the opportunity. I know I rushed a little bit but I'm happy to answer questions. Thanks very much. That was fantastic and yeah our apologies for crowding you out a little bit. Actually, one of the questions that just just came up was I think you mentioned I mean there is a likelihood of the tax actually being on nitrous oxide and methane emissions is that correct. It's not just CO2 emissions from electricity use for example. No, it will be on N2O and on methane. There will be regulations on methane and will be penalized if we don't do anything about the unwanted emissions of methane that might come in force later this year already. But the N2O taxation will be enforced by 2025. Brilliant. Thanks and I just like to recognize the progressive work that you know you're doing to actually take action on these emissions. And also I think the progressive work of Denmark generally this is absolutely what we need to be doing. So we'll hear more from VCS Denmark as well as some other leading utilities across the next three master classes. I think actually given we've run out of time it's a good thing to say that we I think dealt with most of the questions. We've got our two poll results up right now which show that we're from a range of different places and very much in a learning mode and looking forward to taking action on these process emissions. But I think with that we've come up to time we've had some great presentations the next three master classes will really dive into some of these issues in more detail. Any questions that we haven't answered we will pick up in the series going forward. And I think I just really like to say what an honor it is to be on this panel with some real leaders in this field in terms of process emissions and on such a critical topic. I hope everyone has enjoyed it and if we could just maybe flick through the next few slides just to remind folks of an upcoming the upcoming. I would I would think so we've got industrial water coming up just as a reminder next one thanks. We've got the World Water Congress which will be brilliant definitely some must some workshops and process emissions there I believe. And finally please join our water and get and become part of our communities of practice and greenhouse gas action groups and and the opportunities to contribute to you know two events like this and and to the important work of mitigating these emissions there's a discount code there as well. And with that I think thank you very much a huge thank you to the panelists today and thank you very much for joining us. We really hope you can join us on the 18th of May for the next masterclass this will be on nitrous oxide in the meantime your homework of course is to is to read the book and come with your questions and yeah enjoy the rest of your day and thank you very much again and a huge thank you to the team at Iowa for organizing and supporting us in in hosting this and also recognizing the Institute of chemical engineers who've also co supported the webinars through their water special interest group.