MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estimating methane emissions from the waste sector in Southern Ontario using atmospheric measurements

2025· article· en· W6921004882 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandfill Environmental Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethaneMethane emissionsTonneAtmospheric methaneGreenhouse gasEmission inventoryMunicipal solid wastePlumeFugitive emissions

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We estimate methane emissions for urban waste treatment facilities from mobile in situ atmospheric concentration measurements using an inverse Gaussian plume methodology at facilities in Southern Ontario, Canada. We use these emission rates to assess and improve the existing high-resolution methane inventories for waste sources throughout Southwestern Ontario. Our measurements encompass tens of thousands of kilometres worth of mobile survey data collected over 7 years, including more than 650 downwind transects where we surveyed 14 active landfills, 11 closed landfills, 2 organic waste processing facilities, 3 open-air windrow compost facilities, and 11 water resource recovery facilities. These sources account for 77% of the active landfills within Southern Ontario, which is estimated in inventories to be the largest source of methane emissions in the region. Within the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) megacity, the measured facilities represent about 52% of the total inventoried non-wetland methane emissions. We find that emissions from closed landfills are lower than inventory estimates, with significant implications for the methane budget in the GTA. We update the Facility Level and Area Methane Emissions for the GTA inventory with our measured emissions rates, which results in a 54% decline in the solid waste emissions, effecting a 35% lower estimate for the total anthropogenic methane emissions in the region. We attribute the bulk of this difference to a single facility: the Keele Valley landfill. Our atmospheric measurements serve as a metric for evaluating the discrepancies between four facility level and two high resolution gridded methane emission inventories. We find that the facility level first-order decay model maintained by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) to be the most consistent with our measured emission rates at landfills, and the self-reported emissions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program of ECCC to be the least consistent with our measurements. Implications: We present estimates of atmospheric measurement derived methane emissions for multiple waste processing facilities in Canada. We investigate six emission inventories and models. Based on our atmospheric observations of landfills, we show that the self-reported methane emissions are not well correlated with our measured emissions, and that the first order decay models used in official emissions reporting are much better correlated. One of the most critical findings in this work is that methane emissions from the Keele Valley Landfill, assumed in some inventories to be the second largest anthropogenic source of methane in the country, are significantly less than predicted.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicLandfill Environmental Impact StudiesFrench-language works237,207