Criteria, Greenhouse Gas, and Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions Factors from Residential Cordwood and Pellet Stoves Using an Integrated Duty Cycle Test Protocol

Nora Traviss*, George Allen and Mahdi Ahmadi, 
{"title":"Criteria, Greenhouse Gas, and Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions Factors from Residential Cordwood and Pellet Stoves Using an Integrated Duty Cycle Test Protocol","authors":"Nora Traviss*,&nbsp;George Allen and Mahdi Ahmadi,&nbsp;","doi":"10.1021/acsestair.4c0013510.1021/acsestair.4c00135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Air pollution from residential wood heating (RWH) presents challenges at the intersection of climate and public health. With a revised National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS, at 9 μg/m<sup>3</sup>) for particulate matter (PM) in the United States (U.S.), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will likely classify new non-attainment areas due primarily to emissions from RWH. Agencies will use emissions factors (EFs) to develop attainment strategies. Many will rely on EPA modeling platforms based on data from the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI uses RWH EFs based on data from mid-1990’s in-situ studies and a speciation profile from a 2001 study of fireplace emissions. The NEI does not include greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for this sector, which plays a key role when assessing climate reduction strategies for the buildings sector. Here, we tested seven wood stoves to determine EFs, representing various vintages and control technologies, using a novel test method that reflects in-use operational settings called the Integrated Duty Cycle. The study measured multiple pollutants concurrently: criteria pollutants (particulate matter [PM], CO, and NOx), nonmethane total hydrocarbons (NMTHCs), GHGs, black carbon (eBC), brown carbon (BrC), and multiple hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). We found no significant difference in PM EFs between uncertified and non-catalytic stove technologies. RWH EF results from this study exceeded 2020 NEI RWH EFs for NMTHC and multiple HAPs. Applying our study’s EFs to the 2020 NEI suggests that RWH, compared to all other sources, ranks as the 2nd largest source category of formaldehyde; the 3rd largest of benzene, 1,3-butadiene, and acrolein; and the 4th largest of Pb emissions. RWH also emits more methane compared to natural gas or oil residential heating, raising questions about substitution of wood as a climate neutral heating fuel. However, compared to uncertified stoves, pellet stove EFs (except toxic metals) were significantly lower (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). In summary, RWH appears to be an underestimated source of PM (non-catalytic technology), methane, NMTHC, toxic metals, and other HAPs, which has important implications for climate and public health policy in the U.S. and globally.</p><p >This research utilized a novel stove operation and fueling test method to update decades-old pollutant emissions factors with new data from U.S. EPA-certified woodstoves. Compared to other categories of home heating, RWH is a substantial source of particulate matter, methane, lead, and multiple hazardous air pollutants, with implications for public health and climate in the U.S. and globally.</p>","PeriodicalId":100014,"journal":{"name":"ACS ES&T Air","volume":"1 9","pages":"1190–1202 1190–1202"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acsestair.4c00135","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS ES&T Air","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsestair.4c00135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Air pollution from residential wood heating (RWH) presents challenges at the intersection of climate and public health. With a revised National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS, at 9 μg/m3) for particulate matter (PM) in the United States (U.S.), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will likely classify new non-attainment areas due primarily to emissions from RWH. Agencies will use emissions factors (EFs) to develop attainment strategies. Many will rely on EPA modeling platforms based on data from the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI uses RWH EFs based on data from mid-1990’s in-situ studies and a speciation profile from a 2001 study of fireplace emissions. The NEI does not include greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for this sector, which plays a key role when assessing climate reduction strategies for the buildings sector. Here, we tested seven wood stoves to determine EFs, representing various vintages and control technologies, using a novel test method that reflects in-use operational settings called the Integrated Duty Cycle. The study measured multiple pollutants concurrently: criteria pollutants (particulate matter [PM], CO, and NOx), nonmethane total hydrocarbons (NMTHCs), GHGs, black carbon (eBC), brown carbon (BrC), and multiple hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). We found no significant difference in PM EFs between uncertified and non-catalytic stove technologies. RWH EF results from this study exceeded 2020 NEI RWH EFs for NMTHC and multiple HAPs. Applying our study’s EFs to the 2020 NEI suggests that RWH, compared to all other sources, ranks as the 2nd largest source category of formaldehyde; the 3rd largest of benzene, 1,3-butadiene, and acrolein; and the 4th largest of Pb emissions. RWH also emits more methane compared to natural gas or oil residential heating, raising questions about substitution of wood as a climate neutral heating fuel. However, compared to uncertified stoves, pellet stove EFs (except toxic metals) were significantly lower (p < 0.01). In summary, RWH appears to be an underestimated source of PM (non-catalytic technology), methane, NMTHC, toxic metals, and other HAPs, which has important implications for climate and public health policy in the U.S. and globally.

This research utilized a novel stove operation and fueling test method to update decades-old pollutant emissions factors with new data from U.S. EPA-certified woodstoves. Compared to other categories of home heating, RWH is a substantial source of particulate matter, methane, lead, and multiple hazardous air pollutants, with implications for public health and climate in the U.S. and globally.

Abstract Image

使用综合占空比测试协议得出的住宅用帘子木柴炉和颗粒燃料炉的标准、温室气体和有害空气污染物排放系数
住宅木材取暖(RWH)产生的空气污染给气候和公共健康带来了挑战。随着美国对颗粒物(PM)的国家环境空气质量标准(NAAQS,9 μg/m3)的修订,环境保护局(EPA)可能会划分出新的非达标区域,这些区域主要是由于 RWH 的排放造成的。各机构将使用排放因子 (EF) 来制定达标战略。许多机构将依靠基于国家排放清单 (NEI) 数据的 EPA 建模平台。NEI 使用的 RWH EFs 是基于 1990 年代中期的原位研究数据和 2001 年壁炉排放研究中的规格剖面图。NEI 不包括该行业的温室气体 (GHG) 排放量,而温室气体在评估建筑行业气候减排战略时起着关键作用。在此,我们测试了七种代表不同年份和控制技术的柴炉,以确定其 EFs,使用的是一种反映使用中操作设置的新型测试方法,称为 "综合占空比"(Integrated Duty Cycle)。这项研究同时测量了多种污染物:标准污染物(颗粒物 [PM]、一氧化碳 (CO) 和氮氧化物 (NOx))、非甲烷总烃 (NMTHC)、温室气体、黑碳 (eBC)、褐碳 (BrC) 和多种有害空气污染物 (HAP)。我们发现,未经认证的炉灶技术和非催化炉灶技术在 PM EFs 方面没有明显差异。本研究得出的 RWH EF 结果超过了 2020 年 NEI RWH EFs,即 NMTHC 和多种 HAP 的 EFs。将我们研究的 EFs 应用于 2020 NEI 表明,与所有其他来源相比,RWH 是甲醛的第二大来源类别;苯、1,3-丁二烯和丙烯醛的第三大来源类别;以及铅排放的第四大来源类别。与天然气或燃油住宅取暖相比,RWH 也会排放更多的甲烷,从而引发了将木材作为气候中和取暖燃料进行替代的问题。不过,与未经认证的炉子相比,颗粒炉的 EFs(有毒金属除外)明显较低(p < 0.01)。总之,RWH 似乎是一个被低估的可吸入颗粒物(非催化技术)、甲烷、NMTHC、有毒金属和其他 HAPs 的来源,这对美国和全球的气候和公共卫生政策具有重要影响。这项研究利用一种新颖的炉灶操作和燃料测试方法,通过美国环保署认证的木质炉灶的新数据更新了几十年前的污染物排放系数。与其他类型的家庭取暖相比,RWH 是颗粒物、甲烷、铅和多种有害空气污染物的主要来源,对美国和全球的公共健康和气候都有影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信