Search

Article

x

留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

Pollution gas concentration and diffusion model in shale gas flowback fluid

Cheng Xiao-Xiao Liu Jian-Guo Xu Liang Xu Han-Yang Jin Ling Shu Sheng-Quan Xue Ming

Citation:

Pollution gas concentration and diffusion model in shale gas flowback fluid

Cheng Xiao-Xiao, Liu Jian-Guo, Xu Liang, Xu Han-Yang, Jin Ling, Shu Sheng-Quan, Xue Ming
PDF
HTML
Get Citation
  • Aiming at the uncertainty of the concentration of the pollution gases and the spread of distribution in the process of shale gas development, the open optical path Fourier Transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) measurement system designed and built by ourselves is used to invert the concentration of pollution gases in the backflow, and the size of pollution source is calculated by the flow rate of backflow liquid and the size of pollution source. By combining with the field environment and establishing the reference coordinates, the Gaussian diffusion model is derived mathematically, and the non-point source diffusion model of pollution source is constructed and simulated. The result shows that the source intensity, distance, wind speed and atmospheric stability all affect gas concentration diffusion. The concentration of main pollution gas and the strength of non-point source are obtained by continuously measuring the backflow liquid for 80 h. The result shows that C3H8, C5H12, C3H6, CO and SO2 are the main pollution gases of the backflow liquid, and their maximum concentrations are 4.689 mg/m3, 25.494 mg/m3, 30.324 mg/m3, 0.656 mg/m3 and 4.620 mg/m3, respectively. The maximum strengths of non-point source are 1.9872 g/s, 10.9750 g/s, 12.8513 g/s, 0.2707 g/s and 1.9064 g/s, respectively. By combining the wind speed and daytime environmental conditions, the atmospheric stability is selected and the source strength is substituted into the non-point source diffusion model, the diffusion concentration of polluted gas is obtained, and the real-time monitoring of the concentration distribution of different polluted gases at different locations is realized. The traditional method is used to collect air samples in the field and determine them in the laboratory. It takes a long time and different sampling methods are affected by the preservation time of samples, etc., so there is a great difference between the measured values in the laboratory and the measured values in the field. The country has issued online monitoring standards for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), but most of them are for the determination of non-methane total hydrocarbon, which cannot realize in situ component analysis, and cannot implement the monitoring of VOC concentration distribution within the region. Compared with traditional measurement methods, the method of FTIR and non-point source diffusion model can not only realize the non-contact, long-distance, online measurement of pollution sources, but also set the dynamic factory boundary of the pollution area and determine the safe distribution area.
      Corresponding author: Xu Liang, xuliang@aiofm.ac.cn
    • Funds: Project supported by the Special Funds of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 41941011), the Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Grant No. QYZDY-SSW-DQC016), the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant Nos. 2016YFC0201002, 2016YFC0803001-08), the Key R&D Plan of Anhui Province, China (Grant No.1804d08020300), and the Major National Oil and Gas Special Project of the Ministry of Science and Technology, China (Grant No. 2016ZX05040-004)
    [1]

    Vedachalam N, Srinivasalu S, Rajendran G, Ramadass G A, Atmanand M A 2015 J. Nat. Gas. Sci. Eng. 26 163Google Scholar

    [2]

    Lim G Q, Matin M, John K 2019 Sci. Total Environ. 656 347Google Scholar

    [3]

    Douglas G, Anita A, Ben W, Cody F, Edward C F, Joda W 2017 Elem. Sci. Anth. 5 1Google Scholar

    [4]

    Lindsey B W, Aurelia L, Lorenzo C, Tim B 2019 Elem. Sci. Anth. 7 49Google Scholar

    [5]

    Klewiah I, Berawala D S, Alexander Walker H C, Andersen P Ø, Nadeau P H 2020 J. Nat. Gas. Sci. Eng. 73 103045Google Scholar

    [6]

    Lin K, Yuan Q, Zhao Y P 2017 Comput. Mater. Sci. 133 99Google Scholar

    [7]

    Roy A A, Adams P J, Robinson A L 2014 J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 64 19Google Scholar

    [8]

    Chang C Y, Faust E, Hou X, Lee P, Kim H C, Hedquist B C, Liao K J 2016 Atmos. Environ. 142 152Google Scholar

    [9]

    Lisak D, Cygan A, Bermejo D 2015 J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer 164 221Google Scholar

    [10]

    Zielinska B, Campbell D, Samburova V 2014 J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 64 1369Google Scholar

    [11]

    Zavala-Araiza D, Sullivan D W, Allen D T 2014 Environ. Sci. Technol. 48 5314Google Scholar

    [12]

    Pang X, Nan H, Zhong J, Ye D, Shaw M D, Lewis A C 2019 Sci. Total Environ. 664 771Google Scholar

    [13]

    Sun J, Xue N, Wang W, Wang H, Liu C, Ma T, Li T, Tan T 2019 J. Micromech. Microeng. 29

    [14]

    Bunch A G, Perry C S, Abraham L, Wikoff D S, Tachovsky J A, Hixon J G, Urban J D, Harris M A, Haws L C 2014 Sci. Total Environ. 832 468Google Scholar

    [15]

    Ojha D P, Song J H, Kim H J 2019 J. Environ. Sci. 79 35Google Scholar

    [16]

    Blommaerts N, Dingenen F, Middelkoop V, Savelkouls J, Goemans M, Tytgat T, Verbruggen S W, Lenaerts S 2018 Sep. Purif. Technol. 207 284Google Scholar

    [17]

    Francisco T S, Jia C, Stephan H, Frank H 2017 J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 169 177Google Scholar

    [18]

    Gregort C P, Chun Y W, Don B, John L A, Gurumurthy R, Thomas H S, Maria M, Ken S 2004 Environ. Sci. Technol. 38 1949Google Scholar

    [19]

    Jonathan D W K, Hillary L C 2018 Atmos. Environ. 187 196Google Scholar

    [20]

    Briant R, Seigneur C, Gadrat M, Bugajny C 2013 Geosci. Model Dev. 6 445Google Scholar

    [21]

    Siddiqui M, Jayanti S, Swaminathan T 2012 J. Hazard Mater. 177 209Google Scholar

  • 图 1  气体排放图 (a)V = 5 m/s; (b)V = 0 m/s

    Figure 1.  Emission map of gas: (a) V = 5 m/s; (b) V = 0 m/s.

    图 2  面源扩散模式

    Figure 2.  Diffusion pattern of area source.

    图 3  实验外场图 (a)现场情况; (b)设备布设情况

    Figure 3.  Experimental outfield diagram: (a) Environment; (b) system.

    图 4  气体仿真扩散分布图 (a)V = 1 m/s; (b)V = 3 m/s

    Figure 4.  Simulation diffusion distribution diagram of gas: (a) V = 1 m/s; (b) V = 3 m/s

    图 5  气体仿真浓度分布图 (a)V = 1 m/s; (b)V = 3 m/s

    Figure 5.  Simulation concentration distribution diagram of gas: (a) V = 1 m/s; (b) V = 3 m/s.

    图 6  污染气体浓度图

    Figure 6.  Concentration diagram of pollution gas.

    图 7  污水排放实时图

    Figure 7.  Discharge real-time map of sewage.

    图 8  污染气体扩散浓度分布图

    Figure 8.  Distribution map of diffusion concentration in pollutant gas.

    图 9  污染气体浓度分布图

    Figure 9.  Distribution map of concentration in pollutant gas.

    表 1  P-G扩散曲线幂函数数据参数表

    Table 1.  Diffusion curve power function data of P-G.

    稳定度${\gamma _1}$${\gamma _2}$${a_1}$${a_2}$
    A0.4258090.07999040.9010741.12154
    B0.2818460.1271900.9143700.964435
    B-C0.2295000.1146820.9193250.941015
    C0.1771540.1068130.9242790.917595
    C-D0.1439400.1261520.9268490.838628
    D0.1107260.1046340.9294180.826212
    D-E0.09856310.1117710.9251180.776864
    E0.08640010.09275290.9208180.788370
    F0.05536340.06207650.9294180.784400
    DownLoad: CSV

    表 2  P-G扩散模型的大气稳定度等级

    Table 2.  Levels of atmospheric stability for diffusion models of P-G.

    表面风速/(m·s–1)白天日照夜间条件
    适中很薄云层或
    大于4/8
    低沉云
    < 3/8朦胧
    < 2AA—BBFF
    2—3A—BBCEF
    3—4BB—CCDF
    4—6CC—DDDD
    > 6CDDDD
    DownLoad: CSV
  • [1]

    Vedachalam N, Srinivasalu S, Rajendran G, Ramadass G A, Atmanand M A 2015 J. Nat. Gas. Sci. Eng. 26 163Google Scholar

    [2]

    Lim G Q, Matin M, John K 2019 Sci. Total Environ. 656 347Google Scholar

    [3]

    Douglas G, Anita A, Ben W, Cody F, Edward C F, Joda W 2017 Elem. Sci. Anth. 5 1Google Scholar

    [4]

    Lindsey B W, Aurelia L, Lorenzo C, Tim B 2019 Elem. Sci. Anth. 7 49Google Scholar

    [5]

    Klewiah I, Berawala D S, Alexander Walker H C, Andersen P Ø, Nadeau P H 2020 J. Nat. Gas. Sci. Eng. 73 103045Google Scholar

    [6]

    Lin K, Yuan Q, Zhao Y P 2017 Comput. Mater. Sci. 133 99Google Scholar

    [7]

    Roy A A, Adams P J, Robinson A L 2014 J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 64 19Google Scholar

    [8]

    Chang C Y, Faust E, Hou X, Lee P, Kim H C, Hedquist B C, Liao K J 2016 Atmos. Environ. 142 152Google Scholar

    [9]

    Lisak D, Cygan A, Bermejo D 2015 J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer 164 221Google Scholar

    [10]

    Zielinska B, Campbell D, Samburova V 2014 J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 64 1369Google Scholar

    [11]

    Zavala-Araiza D, Sullivan D W, Allen D T 2014 Environ. Sci. Technol. 48 5314Google Scholar

    [12]

    Pang X, Nan H, Zhong J, Ye D, Shaw M D, Lewis A C 2019 Sci. Total Environ. 664 771Google Scholar

    [13]

    Sun J, Xue N, Wang W, Wang H, Liu C, Ma T, Li T, Tan T 2019 J. Micromech. Microeng. 29

    [14]

    Bunch A G, Perry C S, Abraham L, Wikoff D S, Tachovsky J A, Hixon J G, Urban J D, Harris M A, Haws L C 2014 Sci. Total Environ. 832 468Google Scholar

    [15]

    Ojha D P, Song J H, Kim H J 2019 J. Environ. Sci. 79 35Google Scholar

    [16]

    Blommaerts N, Dingenen F, Middelkoop V, Savelkouls J, Goemans M, Tytgat T, Verbruggen S W, Lenaerts S 2018 Sep. Purif. Technol. 207 284Google Scholar

    [17]

    Francisco T S, Jia C, Stephan H, Frank H 2017 J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 169 177Google Scholar

    [18]

    Gregort C P, Chun Y W, Don B, John L A, Gurumurthy R, Thomas H S, Maria M, Ken S 2004 Environ. Sci. Technol. 38 1949Google Scholar

    [19]

    Jonathan D W K, Hillary L C 2018 Atmos. Environ. 187 196Google Scholar

    [20]

    Briant R, Seigneur C, Gadrat M, Bugajny C 2013 Geosci. Model Dev. 6 445Google Scholar

    [21]

    Siddiqui M, Jayanti S, Swaminathan T 2012 J. Hazard Mater. 177 209Google Scholar

Metrics
  • Abstract views:  4448
  • PDF Downloads:  54
  • Cited By: 0
Publishing process
  • Received Date:  04 January 2021
  • Accepted Date:  13 February 2021
  • Available Online:  29 June 2021
  • Published Online:  05 July 2021

/

返回文章
返回