digital.library.unt.edu/67531/metadc1090744/m2/1/high_r… · disclaimer this report was prepared...

m DO r . i i;?iCROFILhf COVER

NORTHEAST REGIONAL BIOMASS PROGRAM

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document.

"-%: 9

. . . ', " . ., i '.. .*. .'.. :< .- -

;I,

'7 '

, . LEGIBILITY NOTICE

A imajor purpose of the Technical Infor- mation Center is to provide the broadest possible dissemination of information contained in DOE'S Research and Develop- ment Reports to business, industry, the academic community, and federal, state, and local governments. Non-DOE originated information is also disseminated by the Technical lnformation Center to support ongoing DOE programs.

Although large portions of this report are not reproducible, it is being made available only in paper copy form to facilitate the availability of those parts of the document which are legible. Copies may be obtained from the National Technical Infor- mation Service. Authorized recipients may obtain a copy directly from the Department of Energy's Technical lnformation Center.

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government through the CONEG Policy Research Center, Inc. unUer Grant No. DE-FG0583QR21389. Neither the CONEO Policy Research Center, Inc., the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implled, or assumes any legal llabillty or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that Its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, proeess, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply Its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the CONEG Pollcy Research Center, Inc., the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not newsarlly state or reflect those-of the CONEG Policy Research Center, Inc., the United States Government or any agency thereof.

PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FROM

RESIDENTIAL WOOD' COMBUSTION

FINAL REPORT PREPARED BY ROY F. WESTON CO . West Chester, PA

PREPARED FOR :

Rortheas t Regional Biomass Program CONEG Policy Research Center, Inc,

Technical Coordinator: The Technical Development Comora tion

pp .- p7

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparates. product, or prooeoo dioolo3cd, or rcprcseab Lllal ils use would not InlPlage privately owned rights. Refer- ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, rewm- mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authurs expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

U~STR~SUOlOBd OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED

EX EC UT I VE SUMMARY

Roy F. .Weston, I n c . (WESTON), u n d e r a s u b c o n t r a c t t o t h e

C o a l i t i o n of N o r t h e a s t G o v e r n o r s (CONEG I P o l i c y R e s e a r c h Cen-

te r , I n c . was r e t a i n e d t o a n a l y z e t h e i m p a c t - o f r e s i d e n t i a l

wood c o m b u s t i o n on a m b i e n t a i r q u a l i t y a n d p u b l i c h e a l t h .

S t r a t e g i e s t o c o n t r o l t h e i m p a c t o f r e s i d e n t i a l wood combus-

t i o n o n a i r q u a l i t y h a v e r e c e n t l y been i m p l e m e n t e d i n Oregon

a n d o t h e r w e s t e r n states. The p r i m a r y o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s

s t u d y was t o d e t e r m i n e i f s imi la r s t r a t e g i e s n e e d be i m p l e -

m e n t e d i n N o r t h e a s t e r n s tates. The s e c o n d a r y o b j e c t i v e o f

t h i s s t u d y was t o p r o v i d e a r e s o u r c e document f o r t h e s ta tes

when p u r s u i n g t h e a n a l y s i s o f l o c a l i z e d p r o b l e m s r e s u l t i n g

f r o m r e s i d e n t i a l wood c o m b u s t i o n .

S p e c i f i c t a s k s p e r f o r m e d u n d e r t h e c o n t r a c t i n c l u d e a s s i g n -

i n g e m i s s i o n r a t e s f o r t o t a l s u s p e n d e d p a r t i c u l a t e s (TSP )

a n d b e n z o ( a I p y r e n e (BaP f rom wood b u r n i n g s t o v e s , est imat-

i n g t h e i m p a c t o n a m b i e n t a i r q u a l i t y f r o m r e s i d e n t i a l wood

c o m b u s t i o n a n d e l u c i d a t i n g che p o l i c y o p t i o n s a v a i l a b l e t o

N o r t h e a s t e r n s t a t e s i n t h e i r e f f o r t t o l i m i t a n y d e t r i m e n t a l

e f f e c t s r e s u l t i n g f rom r e s i d e n t i a l wood c o m b u s t i o n . A n c i l -

l a r y t a s k s i n c l u d e d p r o v i d i n g a c o m p r e h e n s i v e r e v i e w on t h e

r e l e v a n t h e a l t h e f f e c t s , i n d o o r a i r p o l l u t i o n a n d t o x i c a i r

p o l l u t a n t s t u d i e s .

TABLE OF CONTENTS ( C o n t i n u e d

SECTION TITLE

5 . 6 W o o d s t o v e C e r t i f i c a t i o n

PAGE

5 . 7 R e s t r i c t e d U s e 5 -11

EVALUATION OF CONTROL OPTIONS . 6-1

6 . 1 D e v e l o p i n g a C o s t - E f f e c t i v e C o n t r o l 6 - 1 S t r a t e g y

6 . 2 C o n t r o l S t r a t e g y E l e m e n t s 6-6

6 . 3 P r o j e c t e d B e n e f i t s o f U r b a n - W i d e 6 -11 C o n t r o l S t r a t e g i e s i n U s e

6 . 4 P o l y n u c l e a r O r g a n i c Material

6 . 5 C o s t

6 . 6 D e v e l o p i n g a RWC C o n t r o l S t r a t e g y i n 6-17 t h e N o r t h e a s t

RESIDENTIAL WOOD STOVE CERTIFICATION 7 - 1

7 . 1 O r e g o n C e r t i f i c a t i o n P r o c e d u r e 7 - 1

7 . 2 Wood H e a t i n g A l l i a n c e (WHA) D e v e l o p - 7-2 m e n t o f a Low C o s t T e s t ~ e c h o d

8 CONCLUSIONS 8 -1

9 REFERENCES 9-1

APPENDIX A L I S T OF ORGANIC EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS RATES FROM A RESIDENTIAL WOOD BURNING STOVE

APPENDIX B STUDY DATABASE - EMISSIONS CHARACTERIZA- TI ON

INTRODUCTION

Roy F. Weston, Inc. (WESTON), under a subcontract to the Coa-

li tion, of ~ortheas't Governors ( CONEG) ' Policy Research Cen-

t Inc., was retained to analyze the impact of residen-

. tial wood combustion on ambient air quality and public

health. The analysis was performed under a grant from the

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) No. DE-FG05-830R21389. The

analysis proceeded under the advisement of a group consist-

ing of representatives from Northeast States Coordinated Air

3se Management , (NESCAUM), the U.S. ~nvironmental Protection

Agency (U.S. EPA), state air quality offices in the eleven

state region, and the wood stove industry.

he specific tasks completed by WESTON relating to residcn-

tial wood combustion under this subcontract were as follows:

1. Compiling studies relevant to residential wood

combustion in the topical areas of emission cha-

racteristics, ambient air quality, health ef-

fects and policy options.

2. Reporting the nature and extent of the impacts

on public health and ambient air quality caused

by residential wood combustion.

3. Examining the growth of residential wood combus-

tion within the eleven (11) state region.

SECTION 1

COMPILATION OF RELEVANT STUDIES

The objective of this section is to compile air quality stud-

ies used to determine wood stove emissions. An extensive

bibliography has been compiled and placed in Section 9.0 of

this document. Wood stove emission studies are divided into

two categories:

Emission Characterization'

Impact Analysis.

Table 1-1 contains a detailed chart of the critical param-

zters studied in mission characterization projects. Total

suspended particulates (TSP) was Eound to be the most well

studied pollutant, followed by carbon monoxide (CO). Both

benzene extractables and benzo(a)pyrene wers characterized

in seven ~tudies. Other poly-nuclear aromatic compounds were

included in six projects.

A variety of short-term biological model systems are avail-

able for assessing the effects of wood smoke exposure. These

systems arc characterized by the use of end points to mea-

sure genotoxicity. In general, a battcry of tssLs are con-

ducted which allow evaluation of toxic effects, mutagenesis,

DNA damage and repair, chromosomal alteration and neoplas-

tic transformation. One such test, the Ames assay, utilizes

bacterial systems to get a measure of the mutgenic potential

TABLE 1-1

t-' I N

C P . I ' I l C A L PARAMETERS CONTAINED I N E M I S S I O N CHARACTERIZATION S T U D I E S

R E F . STOVES E M I S S I O N FACTOXS FUEL COMBUS'PION PARAMETERS --------------------------------- ------------------- --------------------------

NO. T Z S T E D --------- CE HT OE CT FR EA POM Y S P BE-.-BAPPNACOAC--MOKPMFr!OT - - - - - - - - - ---

KEY T O ABBREVIATIONS USED I N TABLE 1-1

E M I S S I O N FACTORS

T S P = T o t a l Suspended P a r t i c u l a t s . BE = B e n z e n e extractable o r g a n i c m a t t e r .

BAP = B e n z o ( a ) p y r e n e PNA = O t h e r p o l y n u c l e a r . a r o m a t i c c o m p o u n d s AM = A m e s t e s t i n g CO = C a r b o n m o n o x i d e HC = U n b u r n e d h y d r o c a r b o n s

FUEL C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S

M = % m o i s t u r e OK = O a k PN = P i n e FR = F i r OT = O t h e r w o o d f i r e d

COMBUSTION PARAMETERS

C E = C o m b u s t i o n e f f i c i e n c y HT = H e a t t r a n s f e r OE = O v e r a l l e f f i c i e n c y CT = C o m b u s t i o n c h a m b e r t e m p e r a t u r e FR = F i r i n g . R a t e EA = E x c e s s a i r

of organic compounds or compound mixtures. Ames assays were

conducted in three characterization studies.

Several experiments have been conducted on animal exposure

to wood smoke. One research group conducted animal tests on

exposure to smoke from finished home products. Other groups

performed studies which use products of combustion from fire

wood. A list' of reference numbers and study categories for

health effect studies are shown in Table 1-2.

There are two methods which exist to conduct source impact

a~ialy-sis stud~es. The clagsical method i s source-dispersion

modeling. This modeling method combines information about

emission factors and meteorological dispersion parameters to

predict the impact at a receptor. The EPA has many approved

models to determine the impact of point, line and area sour-

ces. The more recently developed method employs receptor

modeling to apportion the contribution of particulate matter

to each source category. Mathematical methods employed in

receptor modeling include chemical mass balance, factor anab-

ysis and multiple regression. Physical and chemical measure-

ments are required as a precursvr to performing receptor

analysis.

Impact Analysis studies most often couple a measurement pro-

grem with a modeling study. The Tennessee Valley Authority

used measurements to calibrate and validate dispersion ii~odel-

ing results. The "partiand Aerosol characterization Study"

employed chemical mass balance met-hods in a receptor model-

ing study to determine ehc curztribution of vcgatative burn-

ing to the total ambient particulate mass. Table 1-3 com-

TABLE 1 - 2

HEALTH EFFECTS STUDIES

REFERENCE . . .

NU MBERS DESCRIPTION

1, 1 4 , 23 Ames a s s a y c o n d u c t e d on wood s t o v e e m i s s i o n s

53-56 Animal exposure tes t s on combusted f i n i s h e d wood p r o d u c t s

5 9 , 6 0 , 6 3 E p i d e m i o l o g i c a l s u r v e y

I n d o o r a i r p o l l u t i o n and p r e v a l e n c e of l u n g d i s e a s e

6 2 P a t h e o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h

6 4 Annual i n h a l a t i o n s t u d i e s on wood smoke

TABLE 1-3 CRITICAL PARAMETERS CONTAINED IN IMPACT ANALYSIS STUDIES

REF. - MEASUREMENTS MODELING

TSP, BaP .. .

TSP, FP, C14

CEB

N.P.

CMB

29 C14 ' CMB

TSP, So4, RP, NOZ, NAA AN OV A

34 TSP, PAH N.P.

TSP, PAH, SEM

TSP, PAH, SEM

NAA

DM

DM, CMB

DM

KEY to TABLE 1-3:

MODELING CEB = Chemical Element Balance CMB = chemical Mass aaiancc E.I. = Emissions Tnventnry DM = Dispersion Modeling ANOVA = Analysis of Variance (across sites) N.P. = None performed

Measurements CH 3 ~ 1 = Methylene Chldride .F P = FCne p a r t i ~1113,te M g A t t ~ r TSP = Total Suspended Particulate C14 = Carbon 14 3aP = Benzo ( a ) pyrene

= Respirable Particulate Matter

4 = Sulfates NO N A ~

= Nitrogen Dioxide = Neutron Activation Analysis (metals)

PAH = Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons SEM = Scanning Electron Microscope (particle differentiation)

piles the parameters examined in these and other impact anal-

ysis studies.

As shown in Table 1-3, TSP is the most frequently measured

parameter of impact studies. Other common pollutants mea-

sured include PAH,. carbon monoxide and fine particles (FP).

Physical characterization techniques such as neutron activa-

tion analysis ( N A A ) and scanning electron microscopy (SEMI

are employed to measure many parameters simultaneously. X-

ray fluorescence, an important physical technique is used

frequently. Of the impact analysis studies reviewed, about

half use dispersion modeling' techniques while the other half

selected receptor modeling to characterize the ambient

aerosol .

In summary, 42 studies were compiled and analyzed in Section

1. TSP was found to be the most well studied pollutant both

in the emission characterization studies and the impact

assessment studies. Other important pollutants, such as Ben-

zo(a)pyrene were studjed to a lesser extent. Health effect

studies were conducted on three levels: human pathological

and epidemiological surveys, animal rsspiratory system and

bacterial cell line mutation. Finally, both dispersion and

receptor modeling studies have been performed by research

scientists to assess the impact of residential wood combus-

tion on ambient air &lity.

SECTION 2

ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS .ON PUBLIC HEALTH

AND .AMBIENT AIR QUALITY FROM RESIDENTIAL WOOD COMBUSTION

2.1 ASSESSMENT OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF AIRSHEDS IN THE

NORTHEAST

The existing primary standards for Total Suspended Particu-

lates (TSP) are 260 u g h 3 averaged over a 24-hour period

and 75 u g h 3 annual geometric mean. The secondary stan-

dard for TSP is 150 u g h 3 averaged over a period of 24

hours. The value of 60 u g h 3 ' annual geometric mean is

used for the, secondary standard by regulatory agencies for

planning purposes.

WESTON's National Air Quality Data System was used to det2r-

mine which counties in the study area have had exceedences

of the primary or secondary standards in the years 1980-

1982. A data base from the 11 states is created by extract-

ing annual frequency distributions and means from the Natio-

nal Air Quality Data System. Next, the 11 state data base

was examined to determine which countiss could axperience

the greatest impact on ambient air quality from incrsased re-

sidential wood combustion. The following criteria were

used :

S i t e s w i t h a n n u a l a v e r a g e means, +4 b a s e d on t h r e e

. y e a r s o f d a t a , i n e x c e e d e n c e of t h e s e c o n d a r y s t a n -

d a r d were d e f i n e d f o r u s e i n s u b s e q u e n t i m p a c t a n a l y -

ses.

S i t e s w i t h 24-hour v a l u e s g r e a t e r t h a n t h e s e c o n d a r y

s t a n d a r d were d e f i n e d f o r u s e i n s u b s e q u e n t c a s e s t u -

dies.

The r e s u l t s are shown i n T a b l e 2-1 and T a b l e 2-2. T a b l e 2-1

l i s t s t h e states and c o u n t i e s where exceedences oE t h e daau-

a1 s e c o n d a r y s t a n d a r d o c c u r . A t o t a l o f 30 c o u n t i e s i n the

11 s t a t e s t u d y a r e l i s ted i n t h i s c a t e g o r y . A s u b s e t of

t h i s l i s t i n g c o n t a i n s s i x s i tes which h a v e a n n u a l g e o m e t r i c

means g r e a t e r t h a n 7 5 ug/m3, t h e p r i m a r y s t a n d a r d . Nany

of t h e c o u n t i e s shown i n t h i s t a b l e h a v e m u l t i p l e m o n i t o r i n g l o c a t i o n s .

Data f r o m a l l t h e m o n i t o r i n g l o c a t i o n s i n a c o u n t y were g r o u p e d t o g e t h e r t o a r r i v e a t t h e a n n u a l mean c o n c e n t r a t i o n .

T h e r e f o r e , c o u n t i e s which c o n t a i n i n d i v i d u a l s i t t s showing

e x c e e d e n c e s of t h e s e c o n d a r y s t a n d a r d b u t d i d n o t a v e r a g e

g r e a t e r t h a n t h e s e c o n d a r y s t a n d a r d a c r o s s a l l s i tes were

n o t i n c l u d e d i n T a b l e 2-1. An e x a ~ ~ ~ p l e of t h i s phenomenon i s

found i n P e n o b s c o t , Maine. T h e r e a r e s e v e n m o n i t o r i n g l o c a -

f i o n a i n Ranobscot . Three S ~ ~ P S shnw a n n u a l averages g r e a t -

er t h a n 6 0 ug/m3, w h i l e f o u r s i t e s a r e be low t h a t v a l u e .

The coun ty -wide a v e r a g e f o r t h e s e v e n s i t e s d u r i n g t h e s t g d y

y e a r s is 5 5 . ' 2 u g h J . Whi le coun ty -wide a v e r a g i n g is n o t

u s e d by r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s , i t is used i n t h i s s t u d y f o r two

r e a s o n s . F i r s t , t h e TSP problem i n t h e N o r t h e a s t is p e r v a -

s i v e , and t h e r e f o r e t h i s t e c h n i q u e is u s e d . t o l i m i t t h e s i z e

TABLE 2-1

COUNTIES. WITH EXCEEDANCES OF THE ANNUAL PRIMARY ( 75 ug/m3 )

' OR SECONDARY ( 60 ug/m3) STANDARD FOR T S P

STUDY YEARS ( 1 9 8 0 , 1 9 8 1 , 1 9 8 2 )

- STATE COUNTY

ME Ox£ ord

MD B a l t i m o r e Anne A r u n d e l

N J E s s e x H u d s o n Middlesex U n i o n

E r i e Niagara O n o n d a g a

A l l e g h e n y B e a v e r B e r k s B l a i r B r a d f o r d Cambr i a C a r b o n C h e s t e r C u m b e r l a n d . D a u p h i n E r i e L a n c a s t e r Lawrence Mercer N o r t h a m p t o n P h i l a d e l p h i a W a s h i n g t o n N e s t a o r e l a n d

NO. . ANNUAL MEAN S I T E S CONCENTRATION ( ug/m2) -

W a s h i n g t o n

TABLE 2-2

COUNTIES WITH EXCEEDANCES OF THE ANNUAL PRIMARY ( 7 5 ug/m3) OR SECONDARY ( 1 5 0 ug/m3) STANDARD FOR TSP

STUDY YEARS ( 1 9 8 0 , 1 9 8 1 , 198 '2)

NO. NO.. NO. NO. STATE COUNTY SITES YEARS 1 5 0 ug/& 260 ug/&

CT ' F a i r f i e l d H a r t f o r d New Have11

DE New C a s t l e 2 1 9 0

Aroos tooK 2 Cumber l a n d 1 F r a n k l i n 1 K e n n e b e c 1 . Knox 1 O x f o r d 2 P e n o b s c o t 7 W a s h i n g t o n 2

LYD Baltimore 1 0 3 6 2 3 A l l e g a n y 1 1 3 0 CJiconiiea 1 1 1 0

MA B e r k s h i r e 1. 2 2 C e n t r a l 2 2 5 P i o n e e r ~ a l l e ' y 1 1 1

NH B e l k n a p 1 2 2 C o o s 4 3 52 H i l l s b o r o u g h 4 2 6 S t r a f o rd 1 1 4

N J E s s e x ~ u d s o n ~ i d d l e s e x Union

TABLE 2-2 (CONT'D) ,

STATE COUNTY

NY Albany Chau taugqua D u t c h e s s ~r i.e Nassau N i a g a r a Onondaga S c h e n e c t a d y Ulster

PA A l l e g h e n y ,

Beave r B e r k s Blair Braaf o r d Cambr i a Carbon C h e s t e r Cumber l a n d Dauphin .

E r i e Lackawanna L a n c a s t e r Lawrence Nercer Nor thampton ~ h i l a d e 1 p h i . a S c h u y l k i 11 w a s h i n g t o n Westnor e l a n d Yor k

RI . P r o v i d e n c e

VT C h i t t e n d e n Wash ing ton Windham

NO. SITES

3 1 1 7 1 5 4 1 1

7 6 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 5 1 2 1 2

1

1 .1 1

NO. YEARS

3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2

3 2 2 3 1 3 ,2 2 3 2 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 1

1

1 3 1

NO. 1 5 0 ug/&

NO. 2 6 0 ug/ml

. 0 . 0 0 10 0 0 2 i) 0

2 2 0 1 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 2 2

o f t h e s t u d y t o t h e c o u n t i e s w i t h t h e h i g h e s t TSP l e v e l s . J

Second , it e l i m i n a t e s u s i n g c o u n t i e s where t h e TES problem

is h i g h l y l o c a l i z e d o r o n l y m a r g i n a l .

T a b l e 2-2 l i s t s t h e s ta te a n d c o u n t i e s where e x c e e d e n c e s of

t h e 24-hour s e c o n d a r y s t a n d a r d o c c u r . Exceedences a r e shown

t o o c c u r i n e a c h o f t h e 11 sta tes i n t h e s t u d y . F i f t y - n i n e

( 59) c o u n t i e s show e x c e e d e n c e s of t h e 150 u g h 3 v a l u e w i t h -

i n the s t u d y y e a r s . T e second n u m e r i c a l column i n T a b l e 2- 2 i n d i c a t e s t h e number o f y e a r s d u r i n g t h e t h r e e y e a r s t u d y geri~d w h i c h exceeilwices of t h e p r imary or secondary SO%n-

d a r d o c c u r r e d . The m a j o r i t y o f t h e c o u n t i e s l i s t e d have had

v i o l a t i o n s i n a l l t h r e e of t h e s t u d y y e a r s . The t h i r d and

f o u r t h n u m e r i c a l columns i n d i c a t e t h e t o t a l number o f v i o l a -

t i o n s o f t h e s e c o n d a r y o r p r i m a r y s t a n d a r d , r e s p e c t i v e l y , i n

t h e c o u n t y a t a l l si tes. I t is p o s s i b l e , t h e n , t h a t coun-

t i e s w i t h m u l t i p l e si tes w i l l show v i o l a t i o n s a t more t h a n

o n e s i t e on a v i o l a t i o n d a y . T h i s would b e c o u n t e d , t h e n ,

a s m u l t i p l e o c c u r r e n c e s i n t h e c o u n t y . I

I n summary, s e v e n s ta tes c o n t a i r l counties w h i c h havc exceed-

e n c e s of t h e a n n u a l s e c o n d a r y s t a n d a r d . All 11 s t a t e s con-

t a i n c o u n t i e s which h a v e e x c e e d e n c e s of t h e s e c o n d a r y 24-

hour s t a n d a r d . The c o u n t i e s l i s t e d i n T a b l e s 2-1 a n d 2-2

are t h o s e e x h i b i t i n g p rob lems m e e t i n g t h e c u r r e n t a m b i e n t

a i r q u a l i t y s t a n d a r d s f o r TSP. The c o u n t i e s l i s t e d i n t h e s e

t a b l e s d e f i n e t h e d a t a b a s e which w i l l b e used i n s u b s e q u e n t

d a t a a n a l y s i s .

2 . 2 ESTIMATION OF IMPACT ON AMBIENT A I R QUALITY FROM

RESIDENTIAL WOOD COMBUSTION

2 . 2 . 1 D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f E m i s s i o n F a c t o r s f o r Wood B u r n i n g

S t o v e s

2 . 2 . 1 . 1 TSP E m i s s i o n s

F o u r t e e n e m i s s i o n c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s t u d i e s were a n a l y z e d t o

d e t e r m i n e t h e mean e m i s s i o n f a c t o r f o r TSP. The mean a n d

s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n f o r e a c h s t u d y are shown i n F i g u r e 2-1.

The . r e s u l t s o f S t u d y 1 show t h a t t h e mean e m i s s i o n r a t e f rom

t h e s t o v e s t e s t e d i n e x t r e m e l y l o w , t h e r e f o r e , t h e r e s u l t s

o f S t u d y 1 were t r e a t e d as a n o u t l i e r i n t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s

- f o r t h i s - s t u d y . The mean e m i s s i o n r a t e f r o m iitJC s t o v e s c a l -

c u l a t e d a c r o s s t h e t h i r t e e n s t u d i e s w i t h a t o t a l o f 1 9 8 o b -

s e r v a t i o n s i s 1 2 . 8 g /kg . The s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n f o r t h e s e

s t u d i s s i s 8 . 3 g /kg a n d t h e 9 5 % con£ i d e n c e i n t e r v a l a b o u t

t h e mean is 1 2 . 8 + 1 . 2 g /kg . A s shown i n F i g u r e 2-1, t h e

c a l c u l a t e d mean e m i s s i o n r a t e f o r t h i s s t u d y i s be low b o t h

t h e EPA a n d Orogon DEQ assumed v a l u e s . The EPA e m i s s i o n

v a l u e i s o n e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n away f rom t h e c a l c u l a t ~ d

mean. The EPA e m i s s i o n ra te is a h i g h l y c o n s e r v a t i v e

v a l u e , i . e . a h i g h e m i s s i o n ra te is u s e d when compared t o

t h e mean e m i s s i o n rate. T h i s e m i s s i o n ra te of TSP w i l l be

u s e d t o p e r f o r m t h e i m p a c t a s s e s s m e n t b e c a o s e i t is t h e e m i s -

s i o n f a c t o r p r e s e n t e d by EPA. However, f o r c o m p a r a t i v e p u r - .

p o s e s , t h e mean e m i s s i o n p l u s t h e u p p e r ,953 c o n f i d e n c e i n t e r -

v a l c a l c u l a t e d i n t h i s s t u d y w i l l a l s o be shown.

2 . 2 . 1 . 2 BaP E n l i s s i u n s

F i v e e m i s s i o n s t u d i e s were a n a l y z e d t o d e t z r m i n e t h e mean

e m i s s i o n f a c t o r f a r BaP. The mean a n d s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n

f o r e a c h s t u d y are shown i n F i g u r e 2-2. The mean e m i s s i o n

FIGURE 2-1 TGP EMISSION RATES FROM WOODBURNING STOVES

. +SD

- Mean

FIGURE 2-2 BaP EMISSION RATES FROM WOODBURNING STOVES

rate c a l c u l a t e d a c r o s s t h e s e s t u d i e s w i t h 40 o b s e r v a t i o n s is

0 . 5 6 . mg/kg. T h e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n f o r t h i s s t u d y is 1 . 2

mg/kg a n d t h e 95%. c o n f i d e n c e i n t e r v a l a b o u t t h e mean is 0.56

+ 0.37 mg/kg. Too f e w o b s e r v a t i o n s w e r e a v a i l a b l e f o r - o t h e r POM t o m e a n i n g f u l l y c a l c u l a t e mean a n d s t a n d a r d d e v i a -

t i o n s f o r e m i s s i o n rates. S i n c e t h e EPA e s t i m a t e d t h e TSP

e m i s s i o n ra te t o b e e q u a l t o t h e mean e m i s s i o n r a te p l u s o n e

s t a ~ ~ d a r d d e v i a t i o n , t h a t c r i t a . r i , o n wi . l .1 . b e app l i ed t o est i -

mate a BaP e m i s s i o n rate. T h e r e f 6 r e , a n e m i s s i o n ra te o f

1 , 7 6 mg/kq of BaP i s ir,sed t o perform t h e i m p a c t a s s e s s m e n t .

A g a i n , f o r c o m p a r a t i v e p u r p o s e s t h e r e s u l t o f u s i n g t h e mean

e m i s s i o n ra te p l u s t h e u p p e r 95% con£ i d e n c e i n t e r v a l w i l l be

shown.

In. a d d i t i o n t o POM, d i o x i n s h a v e b e e n f o u n d i n wood smoke

s t u d i e s . D i o x i n s i n samples f r o m wood- fue l ed s t o v e s a n d f r o m

t h e c h i m n e y s o f wood- fue l ed f u r n a c e s h a v e b e e n r e p o r t e d in

t h e l i t e r a t u r e . 76 The s a m p l e s were c o l l e c t e d f rom r u r a l

areas o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s w h e r e f u e l wood w a s e x p e c t e d t o

h a v e had m i n i m a l e x p o s u r e t o p e s t i c i d e s a n d h e r b i c i d e s a n d

w h c r c no i n d u s t r i a l o r rni;ln i c i p a l incinerators were l o c a t e d

n e a r b y . The wood was n o t t r e a t e d o r p r o c e s s e d . . T h e e o n c e n t r a -

t i o n o f d i o x i n i n t h e s a m p l e s f r o m t h e s t o v e s w a s 1 7 0 p p t te-

t r o c h l o r o - d i b e n z o d i o x i n (TCDD). Samples o f ch imney p a r t i c u -

lates a r o u n d t h e r e g i o n c o n t a i n e d d i o x i n c o n c e a t r a t i o n s a3

h i g h as 4 , 9 2 5 ppc for TCDD. A d d i L i u u a l data suggest t h a t t h c

g r ~ d u c t i o n o f d i o x i n s f rom t h e c o m b u s t i o n of n a t u r a l wood

may be a g e n e r a l p h ~ n o m e n o n . " ~ o o f e w data a r a a v a i l a b l e

t o g e n e r a t e a n e m i s s i o n r a te v a l u e .

2.2.2 Estimated contribution of RWC to Annual Ambient Air

. Quality

The TSP emission factor given in EPA, AP42 is 21 g/kg wood.

This emission factor is combined with annual meteorological

factors, county-wide areas and estimated wood burning rates

to estimate the impact of residential wood burning on ambi-

snt TSP levels. The procedure is described below.

Counties which showed a violation of the annual secondary

standard for TSP, listed in Table 2-1 were used for this as-

pect of the study. An annual residential. wood fuel consump-

tion rate developed for the New England states was based on

a series of studies conducted by the United Stated Depart-

ment of ~griculture~~-*~. For other states in the study,

the empirically derived formula: 37

Cords used per household = 3.087 - 0.322 log (population Per lo4 Degree Days density)

was used to determine wood fuel usage. The determination of

wood fuel usage for the subject counties is shown in Table

2-3. Also shown in Table 2-3 are population and area data.

Wood usage is shown to vary greatly over the counties stud-

ied, fr0m.a low value of 9,200 cords per year for Hudson,

New Jersey to a high value of 192,441 cords per year for Al-

legheny, Pennsylvania. Figure 2-3 shows the empirically de-

rived relationship between population density and wood fuel

usage- " Also shown in Figure 2-3b is a correlation study

on observed and estimated wood burning using this rela-

tionship. According to this study, states surveyed use fire-

wood in the same 'manner as New England, where detailed sur-

TABLE 2-3

ESTIMATED ANNUAL WOOD FUEL USE ( 1978-1979

STATE COUNTY POPULATION AREA U S AGE ( s q . m i . 1 ( c o r d s )

CT H a r t f o r d 8 0 7 , 7 6 6 7 3 9 1 2 1 , 1 9 3 New Haven 7 6 1 , 3 3 7 610 1 4 9 , 7 1 5

............................................................ I5E dew C a s t l e 399,UWZ 396 6 2 , 8 9 4

ME A r o o s t o o k 9 1 , 3 3 1 6 , 7 2 1 6 4 , 2 8 2 9 3 3 , 7 2 2 Cumber l a n d 2 1 5 , 7 8 9 8 7 6 1 0 4 , 5 6 5

K e n n e b e c 1 0 9 , 8 8 9 8 7 6 7 1 , 4 2 7 o x f o r d 4 8 , 9 6 8 2 , 0 5 3 3 8 , 8 1 5 P e n o b s c o t 1 3 7 , 0 1 5 3 , 4 3 0 7 6 , 6 1 5

MD A l l e g a n y 8 0 , 5 4 8 4 2 1 1 8 , 5 7 4 3 , 9 2 3 , 8 9 7 Ann A r u n d e l 3 7 0 , 7 7 5 4 1 8 6 6 , 3 8 0

B a l t i m o r e 6 5 5 , 6 1 5 5 9 8 1 1 2 , 5 6 5 Wicomi co 6 4 , 5 4 0 3 7 9 1 5 , 6 0 6

Hampden 4 4 3 , 0 1 8 6 1 8 6 4 , 7 3 1 Worcester 6 4 6 , 3 5 2 1 , 5 1 3 1 5 2 , 9 7 0

NH C h e s h i r e 6 2 , 1 1 5 7 1 1 3 5 , 2 4 2 737 ,G0.1 COOS 3 5 , 1 4 7 1 , 8 0 4 2 0 , 4 0 1

NJ E s s e x 8 5 0 , 4 5 1 1 2 7 1 3 , 3 2 9 7 , 1 7 1 , 1 1 2 Hudson 5 5 6 , 9 7 2 4 6 9 , 2 0 0

M i d d l e s e x 5 9 5 , 8 9 3 316 7 6 , 2 1 2 U n i o n 5 0 4 , 0 9 4 1 0 3 3 6 , 3 5 2

TABLE 2-3 ( c o n t i n u e d )

STATE COUNTY POPULATION AREA USAGE ( s q . m i . 1 ( c o r d s )

NY A 1 bany 2 8 5 , 9 0 9 524 5 8 , 5 6 5 1 8 , 2 4 1 , 5 8 4 E r i e 1 , 0 1 5 , 4 7 2 1 , 0 4 6 1 7 2 , 2 8 2

N i a g a r a 2 2 7 , 1 ? 1 526 4 9 , 5 0 6 Onondaga 4 6 3 , 3 2 4 206 3 6 , 2 9 4 S c h e n e c t a d y 1 4 9 , 9 4 6 2 0 6 , 3 0 , 2 9 4

PA A l l e g h a n y 1 1 , 8 0 0 , 7 6 6 B e a v e r

Ber k s B l a i r B r a d f o r d Cambr i a C a r b o n C h e s t e r Cumber l a n d Dauph in E r i e Lackawanna L a n c a s t e r L a w r e n c e Lycomi n g lYercer Nor thamp ton P h i l a d e l p h i a S c h u y l k i 11 W a s h i n g t o n W e s t m o r e l a n d York

R I P r o v i d e n c e 5 7 1 , 3 4 9 4 1 6 5 1 , 8 5 2

C h i t t e n d e n i 1 5 , 534 W a s h i n g t o n 5 2 , 3 9 3 Wiridham 3 6 , 9 3 3

- .

JOO

91 -

f u cn

100 -

100 1 OW] 10000

Persons Per Square Mile

FIGURE 2-3 ANNUAL WOOD FUEL USE IN THE NORTHEAST (1 978-1 979)

FlGURE 2-3b STATE LEVEL WOOD USE CORRELATION

v e y s were c o n d u c t e d , a n d no s u p p l y c o n s t r a i n t s a r e appar- .

e n t . .Note t h a t t h e c u r v e r e a c h e s a maximum a t 6 , 0 0 0 p e r s o n s

p e r s q u a r e m i l e i n d i c a t i n g t h a t wood consumpt ion peaks . i n

m o d e r a t e l y d e n s e c i t ies . Wood f u e l u s a g e i n v e r y d e n s e c i t - ies is shown t o b e e q u i v a l e n t t o consumpt ion i n more s p a r s e -

l y p o p u l a t e d r e g i o n s .

Us ing t h e a n n u a l wood f u e l u s a g e , i t is p o s s i b l e t o c a l c u -

l a t e t h e s o u r c e s t r e n g t h , Q , f o r e a c h c o u n t y . S o u r c e

s t r e n g t h is a p a r a m e t e r u s e d i n d i s p e r s i o n m e t e o t o l o g y which

is i n u n i t s of ,mass p e r area tiraes t i m e . . The s o u r c e

s t r e n g t h a n d a n n u a l a v e r a g e wind s p e e d were t h e n i n p u t t o a

box model t o t h e estimate e h e . i m p a c t uL wuod b u r n i n g on am-

b i e n t a i r q u a l i t y .

A s i m p l e b u t p h y s i c a l l y r e a l i s t i c model is a d e q u a t s f o r e s t i -

m a t i n g p o l l u t a n t c o n c e n t r a t i o n s d u e t o area s o u r c e s . Area

s o u r c e e m i s s i o n s can b e r e g a r d e d a s t h e sum of numerous

small p o i n t s o u r c e s a c r o s s a b r o a d a r e a . I n t h e c o n t e x t of

t h i s report, spat? h e a t i n g u n i t s w i l l make up t h e a r e a

s o u r c e . I n u r b a n areas, box models have been shown t o p e r -

form n e a r l y ds w e l l as more complex m o d e l s , 's NA comgari- s o n s h a v e been pe r fo rmed i n r u r a l a r e a s because, u l i k i l re-

c e n t l y , t h e r e h a s ' b e e n l i t t l e c o n c e r n o v e r e x c e e d e n c e s of- am-

b i e n t a i r q u a l i t y s t a n d a r d s o u t s i d e of m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a s .

T h e r e are s e v e r a l l i m i t a t i o n s t o u s i n g t h i s a p p r o a c h .

F i r s t , t e r r a i n e f a c t o r s a r e n o t a c c o u n t e d f o r i n t h e model.

Second, i t is o n l y p o s s i b l e t o c a l c u l a t e v a l u e s based on

l o n g a v e r a g i n g t i m e s and l a r g e s u r f a c e a r e a s . An a n n u a l av-

e r a g i n g t i m e and county-wide a r e a a r s s e l e c t e d for L h i s e s t i . -

ma t ion p r o c e d u r e . While i t migh t b e d e s i r a b l e t o mudel shor-

t e r a v e r a g i n g t i m e s ( p r o b a b l y 24-hours ) and s m a l l a r e a s

( s u c h as o n e n e i g h b o r h o o d ) , i t is n o t p o s s i b l e t o p e r f o r m

t h i s m o d e l i n g w i t h i n t h e c o n f i n e s o f t h i s p r o j e c t .

The r e s u i t s o f t h e d i s p e r s i o n m o d e l i n g are shown i n . T a b l e s

2-4A a n d 2-4B. The a s s u m p t i o n s u s e d i n t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s a re

a s f o l l o w s :

1. The e m i s s i o n f a c t o r i s 21 grams TSP p e r X i l o -

gram o f wood b u r n e d i n T a b l e 2-4A a n d 1 4 g r a m s

TSP p e r k i l o g r a m o f wood b u r n e d i n T a b l e 2-48.

2. P a r t i c u l a t e s are d i s p e r s e d u n i f o r m l y o v e r t h e

c o u n t y .

3. P o l l u t a n t is released a t a u n i f o r m r a t e . 4. A c o r d w e i g h s 5 0 0 0 pounds ( t h i s c o r r e s p o n d s t o

t h e d e n s i t y o f a s h , b i r c h , h i c k o r y , a n d

m a p l e ) .

Ysing t h e EPA AP42 e m i s s i o n f a c t o r , Coos , ~ e w Hampshi re

shows t h e minimum estimated a n n u a l i m p a c t v a l u e o f 0 . 7

u g h 3 o r 0 . 8 % o f t h e a n n u a l mean c o n c e n t r a t i o n . The

maximum e s t i m a t e d i m p a c t is 1 0 . 9 ug/m3 'in A l l e g h a n y ,

P e n n s y l v a n i a o r 1 4 . 9 % o f t h e m e a s u r e d a n n u a l mean TSP

c o n c e n t r a t i o n . U s i n g t h e a l t e r n a t i v e e m i s s i o n f a c t o r , t h e

estimated a n n u a l i m p a c t on . a m b i e n t a i r q u a l i t y r a n g e s f rom a

low o f 0 . 5 ug/m3 i n Coos , N H t o a h i g h v a l u e o f 7 . 3

. u g h 3 i n A l l e g h a n y , PA.

T h e s e r e s u l t s s e e m q u i t e r e a s o n a b l e i n l i g h t . of a r e c e n t l y

p u b l ' i s h e d a r t i c l e 2 6 . u t i l i z i n g r e c e p t o r m o d e l i n g t e c h n i -

q u e s , t h a t s t u d y f o u n d t h a t r e s i d e n t i a l wood c o m b u s t i o n c o -

n t r i b u t e d betwee11 7 % ( i n i n d u s t r i a l a reas) t o n e a r l y 4 4 % ( i n

r e s i d e n t i a l a reas ) o f t h e TSP f r a c t i o n i n P o r t l a n d , Oregon .

I n Wash ing ton s t a t e , r e s i d e n t i a l wood c o m b u s t i o n w a s f o u n d

TABLE 2-4A

ANNUAL ESTIMATED TSP IMPACT FROM RESIDENTIAL WOOD COMBUSTION EPA EMISSION FACTOR

- - - - -- - -- - - -- - ~

Annual Mean Estimated Relative Concentration Impact Impact

State 3 3 --------- G%GG&Y =----------- LngLrn-1------ ~mLn!-l----- ~ ~ e x c e n ~

IYE Oxford 60.3 0.9 1.5

MD Ann Arundel 62.9 Baltimore 69.5

.. - -.

NH Coos 97.7 0.7 0.8

NJ Essex 65.3 . 10.1 15.5 Hudson 72.9 5.2 7.1 Middlesex 68.0 8.0 11.8 Union ' 63.1 , . 10.1 16.0

NY Erie Niagara Onondaga

A l l e g hany Beaver Berks Blair Bradford Camb.r i a carbon Chester Cumber l a n d Dauphin Erie Lancaster Lawrence Mercer Northampton Philadelphia Washington Westmoreland

VT Washington 61.5 1.3 2.1

2-18

TABLE 2-48

ANNUAL ESTIMATED TSP IMPACT FROM RESIDENTIAL WOOD COMBUSTION MEAN EMISSION RATE PLUS UPPER 9 5 % CONFIDENCE INTERVAL

A n n u a l Mean . E s t i m a t e d R e l a t i v e C o n c e n t r t i o n 4 I m p a s

I m p a c t S t a t e --------- c 2 ~ 2 t y ------------ L19L!?!-1. ------ L;¶Lm-l----- LESKGSGL ............................................................

. LW O x f o r d

MD Ann A r u n d e l 6 2 . 9 4 . 0 6 .4 B a l t i m o r e 6 9 . 5 5 . 0 7 . 2

NH C o o s 9 7 . 7 0 .5 0 . 5

N J E s s e x 65 . 3 6 . 8 1 0 . 4 Hudson 7 2 . 9 5 . 5 4 . 8 M i d d l e s e x 68;O 5 . 4 7 . 9 U n i o n 6 3 . 1 6 . 8 1 0 . 7

NY E r i e N i a g a r a Onondaga

PA Alleg h a n y Beaver B e r k s B l a i r B r a d f o r d C a m b r i a . C a r b o n C h e s t e r C u m b e r l a n d D a u p h i n . E r i e L a n c a s t e r L a w r e n c e Mercer N o r t h a m p t o n

, P h i l a d e l p h i a Washing tur l W e s t m o r e l a n d

VT W a s h i n g t o n 6 1 . 5 ' . 9 2 . 1

to contribute between 61% and 93% of the fine ~ractidn ( 2.5

um) in a 24-hour period.

The estimated impact of benzo(a1pyrene ' (Sap) emission from

residential wood combustion is calculated in the same manner.

as for TSP. The results of these calculations are shown in

Table 2-5A and 2-58. 'L'he estiluciLed annual BaP i r n p a ~ t i 3

shown to range from a low value of 0.08 ng/m3 in Oxford,

M a i i ~ c ta high vallle of 0.98 ng/m3 in Alleghany;

Pennsylvania. Only four annual measurements were available

for comparison from literature sources. The alternative

projections provide estimates of 0.04 ng/m3 BaP in Oxford,

ME and 0.52 ng/rn3 Bap in Alleghan?, PA.

Table 2-6 is included for comparative purposes. 4 3 The au-

thors of that study estimate that wood fired appliances contribute 34.8% of all polycyclic organic meerial (POMI to

the ambient environment in the U.S.A. This would make such

dppliancts by far tho lar~os?. single source in the Unik.ed

States. However, in high density urban areas there is

little wood burning and therefore it is more likely that mo-

bile sources are the primary contributors to ambient air POM

in densely populated urban areas.

2.2.3 Review of Short-Term ~onitoring StudleS

Three short-term studies h a v e been conducted recently to ex-

amine the .contribution of RWC to ambient air pollution.48- 5 0

TABLE 2-5A

ESTIMATED ANNUAL B a P IMPACT FROM R E S I D E N T I A L WOOD COMBUSTION. MEAN E M I S S I O N RATE PLUS ONE STANDARD D E V I A T I O N

State C o u n t y

A n n u a l M e a n E s t i m a t e d C o n c e n t r t i o n '3 I m p a 5 t

( u g / m 1 ( i l g / m 1

ME O x f o r d

A n n A r u n d e l B a l t i m o r e

NH C o o s

E s s e x H u d s o n M i d d l e s e x U n i o n

E r i e N iagara O n o n d a g e

A l l e g h a n y B e a v e r B e r k s B l a i r B r a d f o r d C s m b r i a C a r b o n C h e s t e r C u m b e r l and D a u p h i n E r i e L a n c a s t e r L a w r e n c e Mercer N o r t h a m p t o n P h i l a d e l p h i a Washington W e s t m o r e l a n d

W a s h i n g t o n

1 . 0 ( N e w a r k )

TABLE 2-5B.

ESTIMATED ANNUAL BaP IMPACT FROM RESIDENTIAL WOOD COMBUSTION MEAN EMISSION RATE PLUS UPPER 9 5 % CONFIDENCE INTERVAL

A n n u a l Mean E s t i m a t e d C o n c e n t r t i o n ij I m p a c t

S t a t e c o u n t y ( u g h 1 (ug /m3)

0 x f ord

d n n A r u n d e l ~ a l t i m o r e

coos .

E s s e x Hudson Middlesex U n i o n

E r i e Niagara O n o n d a g e

Alley l ~ a n y Beaver B e r k s B l a i r B r a d f o r d C a m b r i a C a r b o n C h e s t e r C u m b e r l a n d D a u p h i n E r i e L a n c a s t e r Lawrence Mercer N o r t h a m p t o n P h i l a d e l p h la W a s h i n g t o n Wes t m o r e l a n d

W a s h i n g t o n

1 . 0 ( Newark

TABLE 2-6

ESTIMATES OF ANNUAL POM EMISSION BY SOU'RCE TYPE ON A NATIONAL BASIS

- ~

Estimated annual Percent of POM emissions, total POM emissions

Source type metric tons from all sources

Residential heating

o Wood-f ired total. . o primary heating - o auxiliary heating o fireplaces

o Coal-fired o Oil-fired o Gas-fired

Open burning sources

o Agricultural open burning o Prescribed burning o Forest wildfires o Coal refuse piles o Land clearing waste burning o Structural fires

Mobile sources

Coke production

Industrial boilers

o Coal o Oil o Gas o Wood/bark o Begssse

Incinerators

o Municipal , o Commercial

Utility boilers

o Coal o Oil o Gas

TABLE 2-6 ( continued

Estimated annual Percent of POM emissions, total POM emissions

Source type metric tons from all sources

Carbon Black 3.1 < 0 . 1

Charcoal manufacturing

o uncontrolled batch kilns o continuous furnace production

Asphalt production

o Saturators o Air Slowing o Hot road mix

. Barium chemicals (Black ash rotary kiln)

TOTAL

Adapted from Reference 43.

A s t u d y was c o n d u c t e d i n two N e w Hampshire towns d u r i n g t h e ,

1979-1980 h e a t i n g s e a s o n . 48 49. C o n c e n t r a t i q n s of POMS

were d e t e r m i n e d i n a m b i e n t a i r s a m p l e s i n t h e s m a l l communi-

t y of Lyme C e n t e r , N H , where wood w a s t h e d o m i n a n t h e a t i n g

s o u r c e . Al though o c c a s i o n a l a t m o s p h e r i c c o n d i t i o n s l e d t o

POM c o n c e n t r a t i o n s c o m p a r a b l e t o t h o s e r e p o r t e d i n l a r g e u r -

ban areas (BaP = 1 n g / i 3 j , t h e a m b i e n t a i r q u a l i t y most

commonly r e f l e c t e d t h e l o w e r POM v a l u e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e

s u r r o u n d i n g r u r a l area. By c o n t r a s t , POM measurements i n

. t h e l a r g e r town o f Hanover, N e w Hampshire , r e g u l a r l y a p -

p r o a c h e d t h e t y p i c a l u r b a n v a l u e s . The Hanover s a m p l e s were

a lso s u r p r i s i n g i n t h a t t h e f i n g e r p r i n t g i v e n by r e l a t i v e

c o n c e n t r a t i o n s o f v a r i o u s POMs d i d n o t d i f f e r a p p r e c i a b l y

f rom t h e Lyme C e n t e r p a t t e r n , d e s p i t e t h e $ a c t t h a t o i l i s

t h e dominan t d o m e s t i c and commerc ia l h e a t i n g f u e l i n Han-

o v e r .

not her s t u d y . w a s c o n d u c t e d d u r i n g t h e w i n t e r of 1981-1982

i n Western M a s s a c h u s e t t s . T h i s r e c e p t o r mode l ing s t u d y

w a s d e s i g n e d t o a l l o c a t e t h e f r a c t i o n o f TSP a t t r i b u t a b l e t o

RWC. The r e s u l t s i n d i d a t e d t h a t i n s u b u r b a n a r e a s of West-

e r n M a s s a c h u s e t t s r e s i d e n t i a l woodburning a c c o u n t s f o r a b o u t

36 p e r c e n t of t h e TSP and i n u r b a n areas a b o u t 15 p e r c e n t of

t h e TSP.

Exceedances o f t h e 24-hour TSP s t a n d a r d s w e r e n o t o b s e r v e d

i n e i t h e r s t u d y . I n o n l y o n e o f t h e f i v e l o c a t i o n s m o n i t o r e d

i n t h e s e s t u d i e s d i d t h e h i g h e s t o b s e r v e d TSP v a l u e a p p r o a c h

60 p e r c e n t of t h e s e c o n d a r y s t a n d a r d . T h e r e a r e no a m b i e n t

s t a n d a r d s f o r POM o r BaP. The h i g h e s t B a P v a l u e s o b s e r v e d

were c l o s e t o t h e l e v e l s measured i n major m e t r o p o l i t a n

a r e a s .

2.3 ESTIMATION OF. IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH FROM RESIDEN-

TIAL WOOD COMBUSTION

2 . 3 . 1 ~ e v i e w of P e r t i n e n t H e a l t h E f f e c t s S t u d i e s

The ' e n v i r o n m e n t is a major c o n t r i b u t o r t o t h e .development of

a v a r i e t y o f p a t h o l o g i c a l c o n d i t i o n s i n humans. I t h a s

b e e n estimated t h a t as much a s 1 3 p e r c e n t of a l l human

d e a t h s f rom c a n c e r may b e a t t r i b u t e d t o e x p o s u r e t o p o l l u t -

i n g s u b s t a n c e s i n t h e e n v i r o n m e n t . 66 T h i s s e c t i o n d e -

s c r i b e s the b i e l o g i o a l a c t i ~ r i t y O F wcs~rrl ~ m ~ k e and scvera-b of

i ts POM components . The r e v i e w i n c l u d e s t e s t s c o n d u c t e d on

c e l l l i n e s (Ames a s s a y ) , whole a n i m a l s ( r e s p i r a t o r y p h y s i o l -

o g y ) and human p o p u l a t i . o n s ( p a t h o l o g y and e p i d e m i o l o g y ) . . .

2 .3 .1 .1 C e l l - l i n e T e s t s

P r o d u c t s o f i n c o m p l e t e combus t ion c o n t a i n POM, many o f which

a re s u s p e c t e d human c a r c i n o g e n s . A r e l a t i v e l y i n e x p e n s i v e

s h o r t - t e r m b i o l o g i c a l model u s e d t o a s s e s s mutagen ic g o t e n -

t i a l of wood e x h a u s t and i t s comp6nentr.s is the m e s assay.

Ames tests u s e b a c t e r i a l s y s t e m s t o measure p a r a m e t e r s i n d i -

c a t i n g DNA damage. T h r e e A m e s a s s a y l a b o r a t o r y s t u d i e s h a v e

been c o n d u c t e d on wood smoke. .

T a b l e 2-7 is p r e s e n t e d i n o r d e r t o compare t h e m u t a g e n i c po-

t e n t i a l of wood s t o v e e m i s s i o n s t o o t h e r s o u r c e s of r e s i d e n -

t i a l heat. Al though r e c i d e n t i a l o i l , f l ~ r n a c e o r g a n i c s are

1 . 5 L 6 time9 mare m u t a y u n i c than woad stoves, t h s wood

s t o v e t e s t e d e m i t t e d 4 0 0 t i m e s more p a r t i c u l a t e o r g a n i c m a t -

A COMPAZISOX 3F ??UTAGENICIT'i ? . Z f I3Z!:TIAL HOME HEATING DEVIIX=.

*REVERTANT ~g ORGANIC * R E V . x l o - ) p s r Pe = P e r

SOURCE FUEL ug O r g a n i c J o u l e J o u l e

Woods tove P i n e 1 . 3 508 900

Woods t o v e Oak 0.9 . 1 8 7 1 6 9

R e s i d e n t i a l No. 2 2 . 0 0 . 5 F u r n a c e F u e l

R e s i d e n t i a l N o . 2 5 . 1 1 .5 7 . 6 F u r n a c e F u e l

t R e v e r t a n t s i n Ames a s s a y u s i n g b a c t e r i a l s t r a i n T98 w i t h 69 a c t i v a t i o n .

A d a p t e d f rom R e f e r e n c e 7 3 .

t e r p e r k i l o g r a m o f f u e l b u r n e d . T h e r e f o r e , when t h e

s o u r c e s are c o m p a r e d o n a f u e l h e a t i n g v a l u e b a s i s , wood

s t o v e e m i s s i o n s c o n t r i b u t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y more p o c e n c i a l l y

h a z a r d o u s o r g a n i c material i n t o a m b i e n t . a i r t h a n t h e r e s i d e n -

t i a l u s e o f No. 2 f a e l o i l .

, 2 . 3 . 1 . 2 A n i m a l s t u d i e s

~ i l a d o a n d ~ o l l a a g u e s ~ ~ - ~ ~ h a v e r e p o r t e d c o n s i d e r a b l e mor- /

b i d i t y i n ?uperiment.al an imals tha t w e r e e x p o s e d t o t h e p r o d -

u c t s o f c o ~ n b u s t i o n o f h a r d woods , s u c h as b i r c h a n d o a k , 3 r

s o f t woods, s u c h a s f i r a n d p i n e ; t h e y n o t e d no d i 2 f e r e n c z

i n t o x i c i t y b e t w e e n t h e p r o d u c t s o f t h e s e h a i d a n d soft

g o o d s . T h e g c o b l e n ' o f i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e s e r . ? s u l t s is compound-

25 b y t h e p r e s e n c e o f p r t s e r v a t ~ v e s a n d o t h e r additives i n

t h e wood. I t is o f t e n difficult t o e s t a b l i s h w h e t h e r - a n y o h -

s e r v o , d t o x i c i t y is c a u s e d b y t h e c o m b u s t i o n p r o d u c t s o? ti12

wood i tselE o r oC a c o n t a m i n a t i n g a d d i t i v e . ~ f l d i: has : l g t

b e e n es cab l i s h e d w h e t h e r t h e p a r t i c l e - b o u n d P3M g s n s r a t z a

d u r i n g r~~.I I .Ri. IJr. i ,~ln can t r i b u t? ! .~uc$ L.3 t h e absezrvl?ci t ~ ? t i u i - , : l ;

t h a n t h e g a s c o u G p r o d u c t e . ~~~=~n~i .de r : .~ i . : , l . . i . ! a ~ i d i t i n n a l :i+oC'c

w i t h s u b a c u t e a n d c h r o n i c o x p o s u r s is rsquirzd t o C R ~ ~ ~ Z C ~ C -

i z e t o x i c i t y .

A s t u d y c o m m i s s i o n e d b y t h e N o r t h e a s t S t a t g s f o r C o o r d i n a t z i !

A i r d s e Management ( NESCAUM) w a s c o n d u c t e d t o eXafii3e i n -

creaszd p o t e n t i a l . f o r r e s ? i . r a t o r y d i s . ? a a e Erom i n h a l a t i o n o f

w v v t d 5 . 1 ; j p , q ~ r ; l t i f ; l ! n a . . i c ~ G

s t m e were i m p l a n t e d i n t h e t r a c h e a o f h a m s t e r s . T 3 e r ? -

s u l i z s showed t h a t t h e r s s p o n s e t o wood c o m b u s t i a n 2 r o J u c t s

w a s less t h a n t h e r s s p o n s e t o c o a l p r o d u c t s , h u t e l e v a t s d

o v a r i n h a l a t i o n o f a n o n t o x i c d u s t . No unique, d i s c e r n a b l e

2 a t h o l o g i c a l e f f e c t s w e r e n o t e d , i . e . , t h e r e s p o n s e resem-

b l e d i n h a l a t i o n o f o t h e r s m o k e s .

2 . 3 . 1 . 3 E p i d e m i o l o g i c a l a n d P a t h o l o g i c a l S t u d i e s

Numerous , e 9 i d e m i o l o g i = 3 1 a n d p a t h o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s h a v e S e e n

c o n d u c t e d o v e r t i l e p a s t 20 y e a r s t o e x a n i n e t h e i n c i d e n c e o f

l u n g disease i n N e w G u i n e a n a t i v e ~ . ~ 9 - ~ 3 he d i s s a s e ob-

s e r v e d r e s e m b l e s c h r o n i c b r o n c h i t i s a n d emphyseina oosmnon i n

W e s t a r n n a t i o n s . I t is p o s s i b l e t h a t e n v i r o n m e n t a l f a c t o r s ,

s u c h as' e x p o s u r s t o d o m e s t i c wood s m o k e , 3r a c u t * r e p e a t 2 5

i n f e c t i o n o f l u n g s i n i n f a n c y c a u s s s t h e d i s ~ a s c . ~ ~ 4s i n -

d i c a t e d i n S e c t i o n 2 . 4 , t h e l e v e l o f a i r p o l l u t i o n i n n a t i v ?

h u t s is e x t r e m e l y h i g h ' d u e t o wood fir^. O b s e r v a t i o n oE >a-

t h o l o g i c a l s a m p l e s s u p p o r t s e p i d e m i o l o g i c a l e v i a a n c e t h a t t n -

v i r o n m e n t a l p o l l u t i o n p l a y s a m i n o r r o l e i n t h e p a t h o g e s e -

s i s , w h i l e r e p e a t e d l o w e r r z s p i r a . t o r y t r a c t i n f e c t i o n is 3

major c o n t r i b u t o r t o l u n g d i s e a s e . 62 W h i l e tile s t u d i e s

arc! i n c o n c l u s i v e t o da te , o n g o i n g i n v e s t i g a t i o n s s h o u l d 2 r a -

v i d e i n s i g h t s i n t o t h e e m p h y s e ~ n i c e f f e c t o f c h r o n i c s x ? o s i l r ?

t o h i g h c o n c e n t r a t ' i o n s o f wood smoke .

~ u a n t i t a t i v e r i s k a s s e s s m e n t is a d e v e l o p i n g , r a t h e r t h a n a

p r e c i s e s c i e n c e . T h e u s e o f d i f f e r e n t a s s u m p t i o n s o r s x c r a p -

o l a t i o n s c a u l d l e a d t 3 v e r y c i i f E 3 r e n t c o n c 1 , ~ s i o n s . Tht cal-

c u l a t e d r i s k a t a m b i e n t c o n c e n t r a t i o n i s nok a n a b s o l u t s i n -

d i c a t o r o f r i s k , b u t i s i n t e n d e d t o r e p r e s e n t a b e s t 2st-i.-

mate b e t w e e n t h e u p p e r a n d l o w e r b o u n d s o f r i s k .

A t p r e s e n t , t h e r e are o n l y two s o u r c e s o f human e x p o s u r e t o

POM o n w h i c h d a t a a r e r e l i a b l e . T h e s e s o u r c e s a re occupa- .

t i o n a l e x p o s u r e t o . . c o k e o v e n s a n d c i g a r z t t e smok ing . Ths m a -

jar known human c a n c e r a s s o c i a t e d w i t h e x p o s u r o t o c h e m i c a l

m i x t u r e s c o n t a i n i n g POM is l u n g c a n c e r . X h i l e much is known

a b o u t t h e q u a n t i t a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n c i g a r e t t e smok-

i n g a n d lun 'g c a n c e r , f a r less is known a b o u t e x p o s u r t t o o t h - *

2r PAH c o n t a i n i n g n l l x t u r e s arid l u n g c a n c e r .

S t u d i e s of t h e e f f e c t s o t e x p o s u r e t o y e ~ ~ e i a l air p o l l u t i o n

h a v e u n c o v e r z d a c o n s i s t e n t l y h i g h e r l u n g c a n c e r r a t e i n u r -

ban areas t h a n r u r a l areas. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h i s a b s e r v a -

t i o n h a s b e e n c o n f o u n d e d by t h e l a c k o f d e t a i i e d i n f o r m a t i o n . .

on smoking h i s t o r y . U r b a n - r u r a l c o m p a r i s o n s h a v e o n l y ? r o -

v i d e d a v e r y weak b a s i s f o r e v a l u a t i n g t h e e f f e c t o f g e n e r a l

a i r p o l l b t i o n on l u n g c a n c e r r a t e s .

The EPA h a s n o t a s s i g n e d a u n i t r i s k v a l u e f o r exposure t o

wood smoke. F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e r e have bee0 n e i t h e r g u i d a n a e

d o c u m e n t s n o r c r i te r ia set t o p e r f o r m a r i s k a s s e s s m e n t .

S t u d l e S a r2 p r e s e r l k l y bein4 c o n d u c t e d b y 9 P A r9 d e t ~ r m i a ? i f

t l u i ~ s i v ~ ~ u f ram wooa c o n h u l ; ~ i o n are i n i l t , ~ Lhgse F r o m

o t h e r c o m b u s t i o n s o u r c e s . Assuming t h a t t h e r e a r e no u n i q u e

h a r m f u l e f f e c t s a t t r i b u t a b l e t o wood smoke, t h e f o l l o w i n g

p r o c e d u r e is a d o p t e d i n t h i s s t u d y t o e s t i m a t e cumulative

r i s k .

T h e r e is c o n s i d e r a b l e a n i m a l a n d o c c u p a t i o n a l d a t a i n d i c a t -

i n g t h a L BOM, or some of t h e p r a v a l s n t compounds i n s PON

m i x t u r e , i s c a r c i n o g e n i c . E s t i m a t e o f c a n c e r r a t s s p e r u n i t

s x p o s u r s c a n o n l y b e made t h r o u g h t h e u s e o f c r u d e i n d i c e s .

BaP is a commonly a s e d i n a e x f o r t h i s p u r p o s e .

T h e r e a re d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h t h e u s e o f s u c h a n i n d e x : (1 )

BaP may b e a m i n o r . c o n s t i t u e n t c o m p a r e d t o o t h e r POM com-

p o u n d s , ( 2 ) t h e b i o l o g i c a l a c t i v i t y o f a POM m i x may b e p r i -

m a r i l y i n o t h e r f r a c t i o n s , ( 3 ) t h e f r a c t i o n o f BaP i n t h e

POM m i x v a r i e s f r o m . o n e s i t u a t i o n t o a n o t h e r , a n d ( 4 ) BaP

may b e less c h e m i c a l l y s t a b l e t h a n o c h e r POM c o m p o u n d s . . T h e

u s e of BaP 'as a n i n d e x may s t e m m o r e frorn f a m i l i a r i t y t h a n

s o u n d r e a s o n i n g . 68 BSF, a n o t h e r POM compound , h a s a l s o

b e e n u s e d as a n i n d i c a t o r b u t i t h a s n o t d s m o n s t r a t e d c o n s i s -

t e n t r a s u l t s w i t h b a c t e r i o l o g i c a l m u t a t i o n tes ts . 4 com-

p l e t z l i s t o f o r g a n i c compounds m e a s u r e d i n 3 n e XWC t e s t ser-

ies is e n c l o s e d i n A p p e n d i x A .

T h e r e is l i t t l e a l t e r n a t i v e f o r q u a n t i t a t i v e ' e s t i i n a t e s . a t

t h i s p o i n t . i Jse o i a r a n g e o f est imates o v e r z o m e s some p r o b -

l e m s ; Meyers ' e t . a l . s u g g e s t s a n a n n u a l r a t 2 o f 10-40 f a t a l

c a n c e r s p e r l o 6 p e r s o n - n g / m 3 aa? , a s s u n i n g e x ? o s u r o t o

t h e e n t i r e m i x o f c o m b u s t i o n p r o d u c t s i n d e x e d by i3aP.69

Lung c a n c e r r a t2s i n n o n s m o k e r s h a v e S e e n Eound t o f i t 3n sm-

2 i r i c a l l y d e r i v e d e q u a t i o n r s i a c i n q a i r 2 o l : a c i o n t o c i g -

a r e t t e I f t h e o b s e r v e d l u n g c a n c s r s n e r 2 L u s

t o t a l l y t o a a P p o l l u t i o n , t h e estimate i s :

3 2 ng/m3 BaP-U.S. = 1 U . K . c i g a r s t t e

T h i s may b e ' c o n s i d e r e d a n u p o e r l i m i t o f t h e p o t z n c y - 2 2

a a P - 3 . . p o l l u t i o n i n n o n s m o k e r s . U . K . cigarettes were

a s e d b e c a u s e t h e s t u d y was c o n d u c t e d i n Nales a n d e x t r a p o l a t -

2d l u n g c a n c e r r i s k t o U.S. a i r p o l l u t i o n l e v e l s . T h e cumu-

l a t i v e i n c i d e n c e o f l u n g c a n c e r f o r a i i f e t i m e e x p o s u r s ,

t a k e n as 70 y e a r s , w a s e s t i m a t e d t o b e 2 , 5 2 4 p e r 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 o r

2 .52% f o r i n h a l a t i o n o f o n e U.K. c i g a r e t t e p e r d a y .

I n S e c t i o n 2 . 2 , i t was e s t i m a t e a t h a t r e s i d e n t i a l wood com-

b u s t i o n , c o n t r i b u t e d 3 4 . 8 p e r c e n t o f t h e POM t o a m b i e n t a i r

o n a n a t i o n w i d e , a n n u a l a v e r a g e b a s i s .

I n t h e f o u r u r b a n areas w h e r e a n n u a l mean 3 a P c o n c e n t r a t i o n s

are a v a i l a b l e , . t h e l e v e l r a n g e s f r o m 0 . 3 ng/m3 t o L. 3

ng/m3. A s s u m i n g t h a t 34 .8 p e r c e n t is c o n t r i b u t e d b y RbC

t h e n t h e e f f e c t i v e l e v e l s f o r t h i s a n a l y s i s r a n g e s f r o m 0 . 1

ng/m3 t o 0 . 35 ng/m3 B a P . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e a b o v e e q u a -

t i o n , t h i s w o u l d b e e q u i v a l e n t t o a b u r d e n o f s m o k i n q 0 . 0 0 2

t o 0 . 0 0 8 U . K . c i g a r e t t e s p e r . d a y , o r 0 . 7 t o 2 . 8 c i g a r ~ t t e s

p e r y e a r . F o r a l i f s t i m e e x p o s u r s , t h i s t r a n s l a t e s t o a cum-

u l a t i v e i n c i d e n c e ' or' 5 t o 20 l u n g c a n c e r s p e r p o p u l a t i o n o f

1 0 0 , 0 0 0 o r 0 . 0 0 5 p e r c e n t t o 0 . 0 2 0 p e r c e n t . Due t o t h e u n c e r -

t a i n t i e s associated w i t h u s i n g BaP as a n i n d e x , t h e l e v e l o f

u n c e r t a i n t y w i t h t h e m e a s u r s m e n t t e c h n i q u e a n d w i t h t h e 2opu-

l a t i o n d i s t r i b u t i o n , t h e es t imate ? r o v i d s d i:; o n l y good w i z h -

i n a E a c t o r 02 1 d .

T h e a b o v e a n a l y s i s is g i v e n t o p r e s e n t a n o r d e r of m a g n i t s d e

f o r the RWC p r o b l e m . A more i - i g o r o u s a n a l y s i s o f canc2r

r i s k f r o m wood s m o ~ e r e q u i r e s f a r m o r e d a t a t h a n . a r e a v a i l -

a b l e t o d a t e . O t h e r w e a k f i a s s e s i n t h e a p p r o a c h t a k e n i n -

c l u d e a l a c k o f s u p p o r t i n g b i o a s s a y s t u d i e s 5 y w h i c h c o m p a r i -

s o n s c a n b e made, a t r u e e s t imate of [ iood sino<e ~ 3 n c z i b u -

L i o n ' t o a m b i e n t a i r p o l l u t i o n l e v e l s a n d a n es t imate of un-

c e r t a i n t y i n t h e e q u a t i o n u s e d t o p e r f o r m t h e r i s k assess-

n e n t . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e areas o f c o n c e r n a re t h e r u r a l o r

s e m i - r u r a l v a l l e y ar2as w h e r 2 p o l l u t a n t . t r a p p i n g o c c u r s , n o t

Tollutan t ' Jni ts S m r . X i n t e r Control wintsr Ccmbustion

Formaldehyde NO

NOx c9 a 2 TSP 1% P Volatile Organics

Source: iieference 58.

INDOORa'1DCOR RESPIRABLE SUSPENDEO PARTICULAE CONCENTRATIOrJS

NUMBER CU?DCOR INilCOR P ~ B U R N E R OF DAYS C O N ~ W ~ I S Q ~ Y C F Y T W ~ I ~ Y ~

STUDY NO. w H ~ I E ~ SA- r ug/m3? -3 ! :-lg/!ll

Y e s (W) 30 12 .5 (4 .8 -21 .0 ) 27 .5 (3 .4 -60 .3 )

Ye;j (F) 30 1 0 . 3 ( 3 .7-21.6) L7,9( 5 .6-61 .8)

Moschanllreas ( 74 ) Yes (W) 14 34.2( 22 .6-57 .6) 4 9 . 0 ( i 4 . 3 - 7 2 . 5 )

Yes ( F ) 1 3 0 . 3 159.9

a - ( W ) wcdstove, (F) f i r e p l a c e . b - The concentration range is in parentheses .

ND - not determined.

u l a t e matter is m e a s u r e d i n d o o r s when c o m p a r e d t o o u t d o o r

c o n c e n t r a t i o n .

A s t u d y of i n d o o r a i r p o l l u t i o n l e v e l s was c o n d u c t s d i n Y a -

' t i v e H u t s i n t h e h i g h l a n d s o f N e w ~ u i n e a . ' ~ N a t i v e pop-

u l a t i o n s i n New G u i n e a h a v e a h i g h p r e v a l e n c e o f c h r o n i c n o n -

t u b e r c u l o a n l u n g disease w h i c h c o u l d 5e c a u s e d b y e x p o s u r - 2

t o wood smoke . I n h u t s w i t h o p e n , u n c o n t r o i l 2 d f i r ? s , t!?e

a v e r a g e c o n c e n t r a t i o n s o f wood smotce, a l d e h y d e s and c a r b o n

m o n o x i d e a r e 6 6 6 . ug/m3, 1 . 0 8 pprn a n d 2 i . 3 ppm, r 3 k p e c t i v z -

l y . P e a k c o n c e n t r a t i o n s o f t h e s e s u b s t a n c e s , g e n e r a l l y

o c c u r r i n g s o o n a f t e r Eire s t a r t - u p , a r? a d 6 2 u3/m3, 3 . 8

ppm a n d 1 5 0 ppm, r e s p e c t i v e l y . A d i s c u s s i o n o f h e a l ~ h

e f f e c t s r e l a v e n t t o t h i s s t u d y i s ? r g v i d s d i n S e c t i o n 2 . 3 . 1 .

2 .5 REGULATORY ALERT: A NEW PARTICULATE STANDARD AND

PROMULGATION OF A POM STANDARD

P a r t i c u l a t e S t a n d a r d

T h e e x i s t i n g p r i m a r y s t a n d a r d f o r TS? a r e 25;) ug,./rn3 a ~ z r -

a g e d o v e r a 2 4 - h o u r p e r i o d a n d 75 !lg,/rn3 a n n ; l a l ; ? s o m e c c i c

mean . T h e s e c o n d a r y s t a n d a r d is 1 5 0 ug/m3 a v z r a g e d o v z r 3

p e r i o d o f 24 h o u r s ..

T h e p r o p o s e d p r i m a r y s t a n d a r d s a r e 5as2d on p a r t i c l e s i n t h e

0-10 i n i c r o n d i a m e t e r r a n g e (P!4 i ~ ) . 57 h s con=en . t r . z i t i o n

w i l l be i n t h e r a n g e o f 150-250 ug/m3 a v l r s g e d osr..r 3 2 4 -

h o u r p e r i o d a n d 50-65 ug/m3 a n n u a l a r i t h r n e c i c nean. Th?

s e c o n d a r y s t a n d a r d w i l l b e a n a n n u a l TSP v a i a e i a che rang2

o f 70-90 ug/m3 arbthmetic mean.

. t h e u r b a n areas w h e r e a n n u a l a v e r a g e BaP c o n . c e n t r a t i o n - s are

.known. N o l o n g - t e r m m o n i t o r i n g n a s b e e n c o n d u c t e d t o " d e t e r -

m i n e ' a m b i e n t a i r l e v e l s o f PAH i i l r u r a l o r s e m i - r u r a l a rpas .

T h e s i g n i f i c a n c e oE e x p o s u r e t o t h i s l e v e l o f BaP o r t h e as-

s e s s m e n t o f c u m u l a t i v e i n c i d e n c e f o r a 70 y e a r e x p o s u r s c a n -

n o t b e d e t e r m i n e d . I t c a n , h o w e v e r , b e u n e q u i v o c a l l y s t a t ed

t h a t t h e a m b i e n t c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f BaP h a s d e c r e a s e d s t z a d i l y

a n d c o n s i s t e n t d y i n u r b a n areas s i n c e 1 9 6 6 . T h i s o b s e r v a -

t i o n , shdwn i n a r e c e n t j o u r n a l a r t l c l e 1 5 ' w a s a t t r i b u t e d

t o t h e decrease i n r e s i d e n t i a l c o a l c o m b u s t i o n . heref fore, w h i l e w e h a v e d e t e r m i n e d t h a t r e s i d e n t i a l wood c o m b u s t i o n

c o n t r i b u t e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o e x i s t i n g levels o f a m b i e n t BaP,

it c a n n o t b e c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e s e l evels are c a u s e f o r c o n -

c e r n .

I n d o o r p o l l u t a n t c o n c e n t r a t i o n may b e s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r -

e n t f r o m o u t d o o r l e v e l s . T h e Oak R i d g e N a t i o n a l ~ a b o r a ~ o r ~

t o o k m e a s u r e m e n t s i n 40 homes d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d A p r i l 1 9 8 2

t h r o u g h F e b r u a r y 1 9 8 3 . ~ ~ ~ b j e c t i - ~ ~ o f t h e s t u d y was

to d e t a t m i n e i f RWC c o n t r i b u t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e l e v i i

o f i n d o o r a i r p o l l u t i o n . R e s u l t s f rorn i h e inu11 iL~)~ ' iu l . j yi6-

g r a m a r e shown i n T a b l e 2-8. The a u t h o r s c o n c l u d e t h a t com-

b u s t i o n s o u r c e s , e s p e c i a l l y u n v e n t e d s o u r c e s , s i g n i f i c a n t l y

i n c r e a s e l e v e l s o f i n d o o r CO, NOx a n d p a r t i c u l a t e s . v e r y

h i g h c o n c e n t r a t i o n s o f TSP ( 2 0 0 - 4 0 0 ug/m3) a r e o b s e r v e d i n

h o u s e s w h e r e i n c o r r e c t l y o p e r a t e d wood s c w e s a r a l o c a t o d .

T a b l e 2-9 s h o w s t h e r e s u l t s o f s e v e r a l i n d o o r - o u t d o o r s t u d -

i e s . I n g e n e r a l , a 1 . 5 - 5 f o l d i n c r e a s e i n r e s p i r a b l e p r t i c -

PMiO ineasu remen t s i n a m b i e n t a i r a re u s u a l l y 0.. 35 t o 0 . 6 5 ,

t h e c o n c e n t r a . t i o n o f TSP i n a n y g i v e n l o c a t i o n . The a v e r a g e

c o n v e r s i o n f a c t o r o f c a l c u l a t i n g PMIO f r o m TSP m e a s u r e -

men t s is b a s e d on s t u d i e s . i n U.S. c i t i e s . The v a l u e s common-

l y c i t ed are 0 . 5 a n d 0 .6 . The c u r r e n t a n n u a l TSP s t a n d a r d . .

3 ( 7 5 ug/m g e o m e t r i c mean) is r o u g h l y e q u i v a l e n t to a n a r -

i t h m e t i c mean o f 50 ug/m3 o f PMlO. Note t h a t t h e Admini-

s t r a t o r is r e q u e s t i n g a r a n g e of 50-65 ug/m3 b e c o n s i d e r -

2d a d e q u a t e , h e n c e , a s l a c k e n i n g o f t h e s t a n d a r d . The v a l u e

o f t h e 24-hour TSP s r a n d a r d , 260 ug/m3 is r o u g h l y o q u i v a -

l s n t t o 140 ug/mJ PMlO. The A d m i n i s t r a t o r h a s re-

commended a v a l u e i n t h e r a n g e o f 150-250 ug/m3 b e c o n -

s i d e r e d . A g a i n , u n l e s s t h e lowest recommended v a l u e is selec-

t e d , more a m b i e n t p a r t i c u l a t e mattsr w i l l b e a l l o w e d .

2 . 5 . 2 P r o m u l g a t i o n o f a POM S t a n d a r d '

The a t t a c h e d b r i e f f rom I n s i d e EPA, A u g u s t 1 1354 sunma-

z i z e s t h e EPA's p o s i t i o n on a POM s t a n d a r d . I n b r i e f , w h i i 2

t h e EPA b e l i e v e s "POM compounds p o s e a s i g n i f i c a n t r i s k a t

a m b i e n t c o n c e n t r s t i o n l e v e l s " a n d t h a t r s s i d e n t i a l wood a n d

coal c o m b u s t i o n c o n t r i b u t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h i s r i s k , t ho

a g e n c y i s u n l i k e l y t o r e g u l a t e wood an3 coa: b . ~ c n i t l g i n tile

n a a r - f u t u r e .'

4

-: %&ing POM Doses significant risk CANNOrJ: WOOO9URNlNG STOVES MAJOR POM SOURCE. BUT REGULAflON U N C E W N

E?X .2ir cfiiei Joseph ~ m c z this week said the agency's decision sgainst regulaung.po!vcyciic organic matter (POXI? unda h e Gcan Air Act is not based, as wns an earlies proposal, on an inability to conclude that "POM cornpaunds pose a significant risk at ambient conccatration levels." In a briefing w~tn rtrwrtm explaining rhc POM decision, Cannon said he had Secome.convinceC in recent rxonths that residcritiai qsood 2nd coal burning (which produce 44070 of POM emissions) present a major l iedth pro- bicm. but would not comrnit to a ~ I C date for an-agency decision on whether and Iiow wocdburning stoves should be ?Wkted. CSin0n svessed that the agency decisior. against regulating POt.1, which EPA admits is a earcinoEcu; 'luge part an effon to avoid having che agency placed on an overly strict

. . 5mcframe m r c e h t4Uqh rqvlhtw decisions. As EPA ponders whether and how it should rcsukte '.; woodbu.rxlkli $og/es, c h d t i sddd, PCM missions from 30hik sources (40% of total cmissionsj and

...' , . . stztioaav . .~*.e.&aS$,h decrease as a mndt of curmu regulations. ... .. !.: ?Oivkil..aae of 3 polluunts for which rbc 1977CAA amend~nsnrs required EPA to

..rrifim onc..yuz.aronr dl t twm infomudon and daermine'whetfm the enhioris into ambient air ''will ' * atux: ~ l ~ n u i ~ 5; e'pdutton mav t t l ~ ~ ~ n a b i y & ~anticipatcd 10 cmdar.iis .2uSiic heaith."

, ,

- T>: s m a h Ciretted'ZJA,. if aq tndangqreent &tm$ilation were ?&s, to regdate PCM . . . l a d s either seciion 109 (by a national ambient air. q d t y sadard), seeticn 11 1 (by scrtirig n m source pzrforumnce standards), unda =ion 112 (by swung national emissions s:aildards for hazardous

~ l l ~ r a n ~ s ) . or unda a. combination of these authontia. EPA1s recent iiecision arzinsr regulating i)O:~i mpcnW'to a U.S. District Court order that ;i final decision be re?lci,ed .hug. 2.

Gaooa sPid Lh.1 dmft mulls nf an EP.hlaPf six-moath study on h e todes probletn (summap '

r.rprinted b e l ~ w ) "1- us to oelievc that ?OM is a signifian: carcinogen. :' J u t Cannon said [hat [he ,

study w:s not ~cpared .":a a 1c;ei of jcientific credibility" nccctsary to sacpon a regularory decisi:ln. The staif study, C m o n md. was compiled to asses "the dimens~on: of .he toxics prch!m in ;he United States" and w a nc?r meat !o be used "as a r~uiatory tool." The ccatrovcrsial study i o u d rhsr ?OM emissions -aoux:; for 6i '?o ((uound 800 cancer cum) of total . -uc ai: yf~!!ut2ct- relalcd cancers. EPA, in 2 pr= reicne .anour,cing i c d--on, said that b a a ~ s e POM "is a large c!ass z l ::ilcrnicds composed af hundreds of compo~?t!;, :he release of POM. ior .the most pan. has riot been rneasurd, and ar!emDrs to estimate ;ht m o u c t f PC hf cnnpounds generstcd ilationally are unreiiaoie."

Cannon said that preYmlnary stodla show I! b cost-effective ,a cont;ai new wood burning stoves !o address :he PO?/[ problem, and hat he "is nct horrified at the prospecl GI*' drve!oping 2 s ,nurce per- iomar,ce standards r q u l a t i n ~ woodburning stovg. Yut h n c n stressed !ha: hr doesn'i know haw long ii will be before the agency decides whether m NSPC shoaid be dcvel,?pt.d, md :tat mce rhar de:erzin?.- :ion is ma<: it would stdl take the zgency "at Icart" thrrse additional vears. .wicl. a :igniCca:i: imource iomn~iimenr on the order o i S500,'300 per year, ro ,-mpose an XSPS.

Despite strong agencr inr:ra! in regulating new woodburning stoves, Cannon indicated it is vc? unlikdy the agency wiC move to regulate existing residential wood and coal burning. Following is thc !ext of ihrt summary of FP.4 staff; six months toxic study draft:

?his m summarizes h e raults of a project which wm designed to dsfms tho dimemiom of the air toxia problem in the United Staca. The andysu :hat make up this study a- amined four Sasic quations comc-ni~g tne magnimdc and nuure of the air t o n a problem:

(1:what 3 tSe a p p r o m e magnitude of the air cox- ia pmbkm, s rq i rwtcd by numerid ac imate of u n c a inciacnoc aeodatcd 'with air pollut ion?

(DWbsl b the nature of the toxiu problem in t e r n of major pollutmu and major sourca. and -what is their relative imporfanu?

(3) Daa the & toxic. aroolcm vary gcograohically. and if so, in what ways?

(4) ; t e currat air fox ia dam b s c s adequate. and what arc the significant dara -7

We Limited b study w caicer c l w d by 2i rm m u - tion, Jincc o t h a health c f f m and pn:kwayr could not k a l e - quardy quantified. Canm unit .%k ircton were obtai :~d from EPA's Carcinogen Awssment Group ( G G ) a d Cis- malt Muale.

Fcur ma;cr a d y m formed thc ~ a n t i a i i - v e core of [he

study. The Ambien~ Rlr .Mon~toring Studv uscd air :cxics am- btrnc for live ma&. 11 rjrganic sompounds. and benzo(a)pyrene (B(a!P) :o %tinate acts gnfo izcidmce and individud risks. Ambient data were avadable for approx- imately !70 site, for the met& and for about SO sr ta for W. w h ~ a s few- data were available for voiaCie orgnic corn- poundr.

h second study reviewed cpidem~ologic~i studia ka t evaluated the ussociation *.wen lir pollution and !unq Q n c a using health sm:istia. In !his ana.iysu. anbieat and cc- cupational B(a)P data were used iu an i n W r for pilutsnu associated with incomplete combustion (PIC). A d o s e response coefficient relating lung canca and 3 a ) P concenul- tions was generated from :hae nudia. C a a r iacidnce awociatcd h t h exposure !o PIC was cstimiucc by appl)mg this dose-response coefficient to current ambient B(a)P cor?cenua- ticjns.

m e two o t h a core snalysa (the NESH;\PS rtudy and the 25 County Study) l t x d exposure mod& to &me r n c i d n d a d maximum risks. Exposc~:rr mkc!inq c o r b i n a cxissiont zst iaatu. metrological dicp-rsion models. popu!afion drstribc:ion data. and car-ccr potency n~nbers to mtirnarc m- nual w c c r i?.lcidencr a d rnaurnm !!::rime individue;' mks. The N E S W P S Srucy ?rovider, nafionai estimates fcr a~out 40

SECTION 3

PROJECTED GROWTH OF RESIDENTIAL XOOD COMB US'^^^^

<Tha u s e aE wood f o r p r i m a r y a n d a u x i l i a r y h e a t i n g h a s g r 9 w n

a t a s t e a d y r a t e o v e r t h e p a s t f e w y e a r s . Wood u s 3 s u r - J - y s

were c o n d u c t e d b y t h e iJ .S. D e p a r t i n e n t o f A g r i c u l t a r e i n N e w

E n g l a n d o v e r t h e y e a r s 1 9 7 6 t h r o u g h 1 9 8 0 . A ? l o t af t h e r..?s-

i d e n c i a l wood u s e i n f i v e s t a t e s is shown i n F i g u r z 3-1. As.rb- . v . c a n b e s e e n , a. s t e a d y r a c e oC wood g r 3 w t h i s s x h i b i t t c ! L r l

a l l s t a t e s s u r v ~ y e d .

4 d e s c r i p t i o n o i t h e b e s c f i t LFae f o r e a c h s t a t 2 is r>rov i l i -

e d i n T a b l e 3-1. T h e c o r r s l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t :.3r sac5 3 ' c . l : ~

is shown t o b e q u i t s s c r s n g , i n e a c h case g r ? a t e c t i l a n o r

t q u a l t o 0 . 9 7 . T h i s , h o w e v ~ ~ , i s .3n a r c i f a c t d u e :he l:)~

numbar o f y e a r s s a m p l e d i n z a c h s t a t e . T h 2 mean a 0 5

t h e s l o p e , e x c l u d i n g Rhode I s L a n d i s 8 7 . 8 t h o u s a n 3 - o r r i s e c

y e a r . The 9 5 p e r c e n t ( 9 5 % ) c o n f i d e n c e i n t e r v a l c s n s t r ~ c t s d

a b o u t t h i s mean is 8 7 . 8 - + 2 0 . 5 . I n ~ t h e r worrl.i, t h e l o w -

e s t e x p e c t e d g r o w t h r a t e i n !New E n g l a n d is 6 7 . 3 c h o u s a n d

c o r d s p e r y e a r a n d t h e h i g h e s t e x p e c t s d g r o w t h r a t e is 1 0 8 . 3

t h o u s a n d c o r d s p e r y e a r . As i n d i c a t e d i n S e c t i o n 2 . 2 , wood

u s e i n o t h e r a r t s or' c h e c o l l n c r y duri .r ;g t h e L a t e 1 3 7 2 ' s (32-

2 e a r t o b e s i n i l a r t o t Jew Z n t ~ l a n d , 3 7 k h e r e f a r e , tllis 2x-

t r a p o l a t i o n w i l l b e a p p l i e d t o t h e p r o j e c t e d e m i s s i ~ n i.m?act

a n a l y s i s .

WESTON r e q u e s t e d CONEG member s t a t e s t o s u b m i t d a t a o n wood

TABLE 3-1

DESCRIP 'TIVE S T A T I S T I C S FOR GROWTH OF WOOD USE I N NEW ENGLAHD STATES ..

S'PATE BEST F I T L I N E CORRELATION COEFFICIENT - - - - _ _ I - - --_ ---- - - - -

ME y = 93,.9x + 3 3 4 r = 3'.97

MA y = 102x + 535 r = 3.998

m e a n s lope . = 8 7 . 8 s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n = 1 2 . 9 + 9 5 & C . I . . a b o u t mean = 3 7 . 5 2 ,:I . 5

u s e f o r t h e p r e v i o u s f o u r ( 1 ) w i n t e r s . New H a m p s h i r e re-

p l i e d w i t h da ta i n d i c a t i n g t h a t wood u s e h a d i n c r e a s e d b y a n

a v s r a g e o f e i j n t p e r c e n t ( 8 % ) p e r y e a r f r o m t h e w i n t e r o f

1980-1981 . T h i s wood-use estimate w i l l a l s o b e a p p l i e d t o

c a l c u l a t e a p r o j e c t e d TSP e m i s s i o n i m p a c t .

T a b l e .3-2 s h o w s t h e p r o j e c t e d l i n e a r a n n u a l i n c r e a s e o f r a s -

i d e n t i a l wood Ilse. The minimum a n n u a l i n c r e a s e is S a s e t l o n

6 7 . 3 t h o u s a n d c o r d s p e r s t a t e p e r y e a r as d i s c u s s e d a b o v e .

S i m i l a r l y , t h e m a x i n u n p r o j e c t e d i n c r e a s e u s e s t h e 1 0 9 . 3

t h o u s a n d cords p e r s t a t e p e r y e a r v a l u e . T h e n u m a e r a a r e

c a l c a l a t s d b y a s s u m i n g t h a t wood u s e is p r o p o r t i o n a l ta pop-

c l l a t i o n . A s shown i n F i g u r e 2 - 3 , t h i s a s s u m p t i o n . is 3 p p r o -

p r i a t e e x c e p t f o r v e r y d e n s e l y p o p u l a t e d c i t i e s .

T h e a v e r a g e a n n u a l i n c r e a s e a c r o s s t h e . f i v e N e w E n g l a n d

sza tes s u r v e y e d . is 1 9 . 5 p e r c e n t ( 1 9 . 5 % ) . Dsing e i t h e r t h e

b o x m o d e l i n g a p p r o a c h a d o p t e d E o r T a s k 2 o r a l i n e a r c.311-

b a c k s c h e m e r 2 s u l t s i n t h s same c o n c l u s i o n , that i s , 1 9 . ' 5

p e r c e n t ( 1 9 . 5 % 1 m o r e a tnls ient TSP. 'The a l k a r n a t e ,?co j e c t i o n

e s c i m a t e . 5 . a n . i n c r = a s e of s i g h t p e r c e n t ( 8 % ) p?r 1 ~ 2 3 ~ . i f 3 ' A - o t h e r X o r t h e a s t o r n s t a tes f o l l o w t h e N e w H a m 2 s h i r s p a t t z r n .

G i v e n t h e f a c t t h a t a l l o f t h e a s s u m p t i o n s u s e d i n t h e no-

d e l i n g a n d p r o j e c t i o n s are f a i r l y conservative, it is e s t i m a -

ted t h a t many c o u n t i e s p r e s e n t l y i n v i o l a t i o n o f t h e s e c o n d -

a r y s t a n d a r d w i l l b e i n v i o l a t i o n o f t h e p r i m a r y s t a n d a r d

w i t h i n f i v e y e a r s . T h i s s t a t e m e n t is o n l y v a l i d i f t h e v e r y

h i g h g r o w t h r a t e i n wood u s e p e r s i s t s . I: t he s t a t ~ s f ~ i i o w

t h e g r o w t h p a t t z r n o f N e w I~Iampshiro, t h e n , t h e p r i m a r y s t a n -

d a r d w i l l n o t b e e x c e e d e d d u e t o RWC w i t h i n t h e n e x t d e c a d e .

TABLE 3-2

PROJECTED ANNUAL INCREASE OF RESIDENTIAL WOOD USE

STATE

ME

MD

N i l

N J

USAGE 1 9 78-79 M I N I M U M ANNUAL LYAXIMUM ANNUAL COUNTY ( CORDS 1 INCREASE ( CORDS 1 INCREASE ( CORDS 1

O x f o r d 3 8 , 8 1 5 3 , 5 2 9 5 , 6 8 0

B a l t i m o r e 1 1 2 , 5 6 5 Anne A r u n d e l 6 6 , 3 8 0

2 0 , 4 0 1 3 , 2 0 7 C o o s 5 , 1 5 0

4 3 , 3 2 9 E s s e x 7 , 9 d i 1 2 , d 4 3 Hudson 9 , 2 0 0 5 , 2 2 7 8 , 4 1 2 Y i d d l e s e x 7 6 , 2 1 2 5 , 5 9 2 8 , 9 9 9 U n i o n 3 6 , 3 5 2 4 , 7 3 1 7 , 6 1 3

E r i e 1 7 2 , 2 8 2 N i a g a r a 4 9 , 5 0 6 Onondaga 9.6 , 8 4 7

A l l e g h e n y B e a v e r B e r k s B l a i r B r a d f o td Camb r i a C a r b o n C h e s t e r C u m b e r l a n d nail pa 1, n E r i e L a n c a s t s r L a w r e n c e Mercer N o r t h a m p t o n P h i l a d e l p h i a Was h i r a g t o n Wes t m o r e l a n d

W a s h i n g t o n

. .

1100

1000

- -

900-

800 - u

o r - I 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 1976-77 '77-'78 '78-'79 '79-'80 '80-'81 '81 -'82 82-'83 '83-'84 '84-'85 '35-'8636-'87

'Ninter Years

A

FIGURE 3-1 TRENDS IN RESIDENTIAL WOOD USE FOR THE NEW ENGLAND STATES

SECTION 4

TOPICS I N RESIDENTIAL WOOD COMBUSTION

REQUIRING FURTHER RESEARCS

~ h r o u ~ h ~ u t t h e c o u r s e o f t h i s p r o j e c t , d e f i c i e n c i a s i n d a t a

h a v e b e e n n o t e d i n s a n y t o p i c a l a rsas . F u r t h e r , r e s e a r c h i s

n e e d e d i n t o p i c s r a n g i n g f o r m wood u s 2 p a t t 2 r n s t~ s a m p l i n g

a n d e m i s s i o n c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n . ' he‘ d a t a seeded t o f u r t h e r

t h e a n a l y s i s WESTON h a s s t a r t ed i n t h i s 2 r o j e c t ar? l ' i s t s d

i n ' t h i s c h a p t e r .

Wood' Use P a t t e r n s

F o l l o w - u p s u r v e y s o n wood u s e i n e E n g l a n d a r2

n e e d e d t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e t r z n d s d e c e c t e d lil t h e

l a t s 1 9 7 0 ' s h a v e c o n t i n u e d .

S u r v e y s n e e d t o be i n i t i a t e d i n s t u d y s t a t e s o t h e r

t h a n New E n g l a n d t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e e m p i z i c a i c o r r 2 -

l a t i o n is.. a g o o d f i t Eor t h e s e areas.

A s t a t i s t i c a l s t u d y n e e d s t o b e c o n d u c t & on t h e s e

wood b u r n i n g d a t a t o d e t s r m i n e i f t h e 2 r o j e c t i o n s o f

f u t u r e wood u s e a r e v a l i d a n d w i t h i n what b o u n d s .

S o u r c e C o n t r i b u t i o n t o Ambient A i r Q u a l i t y

8 R e c e p t o r m o d e l i n g s t u d i e s need t o b e c o n d u c t e d i n

t h e N o r t h e a s t t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e a e r o s o l compos i -

t i o n is s imilar t o areas w h e r e s t u d i e s h a v e b e e n con-

d u c t e d , i . e . , P o r t l a n d , Oregon a n d ~ e n v e r , C o l o r a d o .

T h e s e s t u d i e s s h o u l d examine TSP, FP a n d t a r g e t s d o r -

g a n i c compounds .

An e x p a n d e d d a t a b a s e is n e e d e d on a m b i e n t a a ? a n d

t h e g r q a n i s cnmpounds i f m e a n i n g f u l r i s k a n a l y s e s

a r e t o b e c o n d u c t e d .

S a m p l i n g Methodo logy a n d ~ h a r d c t t r i o a t i o n nf E m i s s i o n s

S t a n d a r d s a m p l i n g a n d a n a l y s i s me thods need t o b e d 2 -

v e l o p e d f o r e m i s s i o n c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n . . T h e r e a re

,narly m e t h o d s wh ich h a v e b e e n r s p o r t e d i n t h e t e c h n i -

ca l l i t e r a t a re . Comparab i1 i t . y 05 r s s u l t s be tween

m e t h o d s i s q u e s t i o n a b l e .

The s a m p l i n g method f o r a m b i e n t PAH n e e d s CD i n c l u d e

a r e s i n t r a p t o c a p t u r e v o l a t i l e a n d s e m i - v o l a t i l e

compounds . T h e r e is a l a c k oE consistency i n t h e

s a m p l i n g me thods r e v i e w e d f o r t h i s s t u d y .

A c a r e f u l Look s t i u u l d b c t a k a n at . a 1 1 of t h e e n g i -

n e e r i n g and e m i s s i o n s d a t a on r z s i d e n c i a i wooJ com-

b u s + . i n n . A s t a t i s t i c a l s t u d y c o u l d i e ~ ~ r r n i n z

u n d e r l y i n g . r e l a t i o n s h i p s be tween TSP a n d o t h e r p e l -

l u t a n t s , s u c h as CO, B.aP a n d b e n z e n e e x t r a c t a b l e s .

U n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e s e r 2 l a t i o n s h i p s would Se u s e r 3 1

f o r i m p a c t a n a l y s i s , t o r p l c l ~ i ~ l i n g ~ U ~ ~ C I S P S and . f o r

d e v e l o p i n g l o w - c o s t s a m p l i n g m e t h o d s .

Risk A n a l y s i s

a A u n i t r i s k v a l u e Eor wood s t o v e PAX i a r e q u i r s d be-

fore t h e c o n c e r n r i s k a s s o c i a t e d w i t h h i g h d e n s i t y

wood s t o v e s c a n p r o p e r l y b e assessed. A f o r m a l r i s k

a n a l y s i s s h o u l d b e p r e p a r e d t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e i m p a c t

oE wood s m o k e o n p u b l i c h e a l t h .

SECTION 5

CONTROL STRATEGIES

Potential control strategies to reduce wood burning partic-

ulate emissions include the following:

1. Woodstove education.

2. Firewood seasoning.

3. Home weatherization programs.

4. Pollution control devicss.

5. Energy subsidies.

6. Woods tove certifjcation/standardization pr3-

gram.

7. Restricted use.

5.1 WOODSTOVE EDUCATION

Woodstove education has been recognized in Oregon as an im-

portant element of air pollution control. Several ~ ~ o o d s c ~ v o

publications specific to Oregon have been widely distrlbut-

ed. A series of video public service announcements were pro-

duced. Numerous presentations have been made to intsrest2d

qroups . Newspapers, television stations and radio acations

have provided extensive coverage. Many state ana local agen-

cies, especially the Oregon Department of Energy (ODOE),

ODEQ, and the Oregon State University Extension Service,

have been involved in this woodstove education effort.

T a b l e 5 -1 c o n t a i n s a l i s t o f w o o d s t o v e p u b l i c a t i o n s a v a i l -

a b l e f r o m t h e O r e g o n DEQ.

5 . 2 FIREWOOD SEASONING

T h e r e a r e t w o e f f s c t s o f b u r n i n g w e t wood as c o m p a r s d t o d r y

wood :

1. T h e h e a t i n g v a l u e of the w e t wood i,s less and

t h u s more wood m u s t b e b u r n e d t o a c h i e v e t h e

s a m e h e a t i n g .

2 . More p a r t i c u l a t e s p e r p o u n d o f wood b u r n e d a r ?

e m i t t e d f r o m t h e u n s e a s o n e d wood. 7 2

T h e h e a t i n g v a l u e o f u n s e a s o n e d or w e t wood is less becauss

m o r e e n e r g y n u s t b e u s e d t o v a p o r i z e t h e water o u t of ithe

wood. Mors p a r t i c u l a t e s p e r p o u n d S u r n s d a r a e m i t t e d b e -

causa t h e a d d i t i o n a l steam i n t h e c o m b u s t i o n ar2a z r 5 u c 3 s

t h e f i r e b o x t e m p e r a t u r e , r 2 s u l t i n g i n l ess cul.ngicto z o ~ n i u s - . t i o n 02 t h e rvood tars and h y d r o c a r 5 o n s g i v s n oEf 35 t h e WC:::.~

. . Srzaics duwn i n t h c comb)-1st i nn p r u c e s s . T a b l a 5 - 2 L i. L I J : ~ -

t r a t e s t h e s e t w o e f f s c t s .

w e l l - s ' e a s o n e d wood s t o r e d i n a v e r y d r y l o c a t i o n w i l l hav? a

n o i s t ~ . ~ . r ~ c o n t e n t o f 1 5 p e r c e n t t o 20 p a r c e n t . C o n v e r s L y

f r e s h c u t wood w i l l t y p i c a l l y h a v e a m o i s t u r e c o n t . 2 n t i n t he

4 0 t o 50 p e r c e n t r a n g e . Wood s e a s o n e d . f u r . u l ~ l y C rtlonths

\ d i l l h a v e a n o i s t u r e c o n t e n t i n a x c e s s o f 50 p e r z o n t . Toug-

l a s f i r s l d s :~ i n e h c tu r .ds t ex;)oscJ, to . 'nsa:ry n o i a t u r ? ,?ur iny

t h e r a i n y w i n t e r s e a s o n , e v e n i f downed f o r s i x [ n o n t h s and

TABLE 5-1

OREGON WOODSTOVE, PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE FROM OREGON 0 EQ

N o o d s t o v e s : E n e r g y S o l u t i o n o r A i r P o l l u t i o n ?

W o o d s t o v e B i b l i o g r a p h y

I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f W o o d s t o v e E m i s s i o n T e s t i n g R e s u l t s

O r s g o n W o o d h e a t Handbook

B u r n Wood ae t t e r

' D E Q V i e w s on . W o o d h e a t i n g

FABLE 5-2,

IMPAC'T OF MOISTURE ON dOOD NET HEAT CONTENT AND PARTICULA'I'E bY1SS IONS

. R e l a t i v e 2 e l a t i v e P a r t i c u l a c2 P a r t i c u l a t e .

E i n i s s i o n s P z r ' E n l s s i o n s P e r d o o d N o i s t u r e * R e l a t i v s E n e r g y P o u n d dood N 2 t a.FU C o n t e n t C o n t e n t ( % ) C o n t e n t B u r n e d o f Wood B u r n e d

L .. i v e t b a a i s , i . o . 1 0 % m o i s t u r e c o n t s n t =

- .... 1CJ l o . cJatsr

1 0 I - i ~ . ; i . l tzr + ~ i ) i3. N'4S2E

2 a r t i a l l y c u t u p , w o u l d t y p i c a l l y h a v e a t n o i s t u r e c o n t e n t o f

ahnut 35 p e r c e n t ur grearer .

A s a m p l e c o m p a r i s o n f r o m T a b l e 5-2 s h o w s t h e i m p a c t o f 1.nois-

t u r e c o n t e n t . Wood w i t h 40 p e r c e n t m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t h a s on-

l y 6 7 p e r c e n t o f t h e h e a t i n g v a l u e o f a n e q u a l a inount oE

wood ~ i t h 20 p e r c e n t m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t wood. T h u s , a b o u t 1-

1 / 2 t i m e s as much o f t h e 40 p e r c e n t m o i s t u r e uood n u s t be

o u r n e d t o p r o d u c e e q u i v a l e n t h e a t . I n a d d i L i o n , t h e 2 a r t i c -

u l a t s e m i s s i o n s p e r u n i t o f h e a t a u t p u k ar.5 2 . 4 times as

h i g h , b e c a u s e t h e g a s a s a n d t a r s a re b u r n e d less c o ~ n p l e t = l y .

H e n c z , o v e r a l l e m i s s i o n s a re h i g h e r t h a n d r y g o o d . T h e dif-

f e r e n c e i s s o l e l y d u e t o h i g h e r c r e o s o t ~ a n d h y 5 r o c a r b o n pac-

t i c u l a t e e m i s s i o n s . I n d i v i d u a l s s h o u l d a 2 e k t o b u r n .dr i?r

wood f o r t h r e e c e a s o n s :

1. T h e h e a t c o n t e n t is h i g h e r ;

2 . ' T h e c r e o s o t e e m i s s i o n s w o u l d b e c u t i n h a l ? ,

r e s u l t i n g i n s a f e r s t o v e o p e r a t i o n a n d r a d u c e d

c l e a n i n g r e q u i r m e n t a ; a n d

3 . ~ i r p o l l u t i o n e m i s s i o n s a r? l e s s .

A l t h o u g h i n f o r m a t i o n is n o t a v a i l a b l s is know p r ? c i s e l y t h e

a v e r a g e m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t o f wood b u r n e d i n the N o r t h e a s t , i t

is p r o b a b l y i n t h e 25 p e r c e n t t o 3 0 p e r c e n t r a n g e . ~ s s u n i n g

a n a v e r a g e m o i s t u r e c o n t a n t o f 28 p e r c e n t , s l g c i f i c a n t r 2 d u c -

t i o n s i n p a r t i c u l a t e e m i s s i o n s c o u l d .be o b t a i n e d i f t h e a v 5 r -

a g e m o i s t u r e . c o n t e n t wers r e d u c e d t o 20 p e r c e n t . The h e a t

o u t p u t f r o m b u r n i n g 20 p e r c e n t m o i s t u r e wood w o u l d b e 2 2 pec -

c e n t h i g h e r . Assuming t h a t a l l s t o v e owner s a n d o n e - f o u r t h

o f t h e f i r e p l a c e owner s would b u r n less wood w i t h h i g h e r

h e a t c o n t e n t , p a r t i c u l a t e e m i s s i o n s wou ld b e r e d u c e d . by 26

p e r c e n t , g i v e n a n e i g h t p e r c e n t ( 8 % ) r e d u c t i o n i n f u e l mo i s - . .

t u r e , b e c a u s e o f more e f f i c i e n t a n d c o m p l e t e c o m b u s t i o n .

R e g u l a t i o n s t o r e d u c e t h e a v e r a g e m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t o f wood

b u r n e d c o u l d i n c l u d e :

1. Requiring c o m m e r c i a l wood s u p p l i e r s t o s p e c i f y

t h e a v e r a g e m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t o f t h e wood t h e y

s e l l ;

2 . R e q u i r i n g s u p p l i ' e r s t o s p e c i f y t h e t i m e e l a p s -

ed s i n c e t h e wood h a s b e e n c u t a n d s p l i t a n d w h e r e i t w a s s t o r e d ;

3 . C o o p e r a t i n g w i t h t h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e t o a l l o w

N a t i o n a l F o r e s t wood c u t t i n g o n l y u n d e r d r i e r

summer - type c o n d i t i o n s ,

4. P r o h i b i t < - n g the sale of i n a d e q u a t e l y s 2 a s o n e a

waod gr good w i t h a m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t a b o v e a

c z r t a i n l e v e l , s a y 3 0 p e r c e n t .

5 . 3 HOME WEATHERIZATION PROCRAMS

Improved r e s i d e n t i a l insulation and w e a t h e r i z a t i o n c o u l d rs-

duce p a r t i c u l a t e e m i s s i o n s by r e d u c i n g t h e amount of space

h e a t i n g needed t o m a i n t a i n c o m f o r t a b l e t e m p e r a l u r e s . A t yp -

i c a l home r e q u i r e s a b o u t 1 2 1 m i l l i o n bTU's pcf y c u ~ f a r

s p a c e h e a t i n g . I f e a c h home u e r g w e a t h e r i z e d t h e amount of

e n e r g y r e q u i r e d c o u l d d r o p as low as '49 m i l l i o n BTU's , a re- d u c t i o n o f 6.0 p e r c e n t . The e f f e c t o f t h i s p r o g r a m m i g h t , b e

t o i n c r e a s e i n d o o r a i r p o l l u t i o n w h i l e r e d u c i n g o u t d o o r p o l -

l u t i o n . A s e c o n d p o i n t t o n 'o te is t h a t w e a t h e r i z a t i o n p r o -

g rams c a n cost t h e g o v e r n m e n t a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f re-

s o u r c e s . Ene rgy s u b s i d i e s a re d i s c u s s e d more f u l l y i n S e c -

t i o n 7 . 2 . F i n a l l y , i n d o o r a i r p o l l u t i o n c o u l d i n c r ' = a s e as a

r e s u l t o f w e a t h e r i z a t i o n d u e t o a r e d u c t i o n i n t h e e x c h a n g e

r a t e b e t w e e n i n d o o r and o u t d o o r a i r .

5 .4 POLLUTION CONTROL DEVICES

T h r e e d e v i c e s a re i n p r o d u c t i o n a n d , u n d e r g o i n g e v a l u a t i o n

wh ich r e d u c e e m i s s i o n a n d c o n s e r v e f u e l :

1. C a t a l y t i c a f t e r b u r n e r s .

2 . A i r s u p p l y c o n t r o l s .

3 . S t a c k g a s t e m p e r a t u r e g a u g e .

C a t a l y t i c a f t s r b u r n e r s are a v a i l a b l e on some new wood s t o v e

m o d e l s a s w e l l as s e p a r a t e l y f o r r e t r o f i t t o some p r e v i o u s l y

p u r c h a s e d s t o v e s . S t o v e s w i t h b u i l t - i n c a t a l y s t s r s d u c e emis-

s i o n s b y a b o u t 80 t o 90 p e r c e n t . R e t r o f i t d e v i c e s h a v e some-

w h a t l o w e r r s d u c t i o n e f f i c i e n c i e s ( 4 0 - 6 0 % ) . Catalysts c a n

h a v e n e t f u e l s a v i n g s o f up t o 20%. 7 2

. A i r S u p p l y C o n t r o l D e v i c e

One v a r i a b l e which can p l a y a key r o l e i n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e

amount o f e m i s s i o n s p roduced by wood b u r n i n g is t h e r a t e of

a i r s u p p l y . I f t h e a i r s u p p l y is e x c e s s i v e l y r e s t r i c t e d on

a n a i r t i g h t wood s t o v e , t h e p a r t i c u l a t e e m i s s i o n rate can

r i se s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e c a u s e n o t enough oxygen is s u p p l i e d f o r

c o m p l e t e f u e l mix ing and combus t ion t o o c c u r . Under s u c h

c o n d i t i o n s , more ' u n b u r n e d h y d r o c a r b o n s and wood tars a r e Pro- d u c e d , e i t h e r t o c o n d e n s e i n t h e s t a c k a s creosote o r t o e x -

it as p a r t i c u l a t e air p o l l u t i o n .

EPA h a s f u n d e d a two-phase r e s e a r c h c o n t r a c t t o :

1. D e t e r m i n e mire p r e c i s e l y t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p be-

tween creosote f o r m a t i o n o r p a r t i c u l a t e e m i s -

s i o n s a i r s u p p l y rates; and

2 . D e v e l o p an i n e x p e n s i v e e l e c t r o n i c f e e d b a c k d e -

v i s ? t o r e g u l a t e t h e a i r s u p p l y r a t e b a s e d on

certain c o m b u s t i o [ ~ p r o c e s s measurements .

T h i s work s h o u l d h e l p c l a r i f y t h e e f f e c t of a i r s u p p l y on

p a r t i c u l a t e e m i s s i o n s and. p r o v i d e an i n d i c a t i o n of t h e e f f e c -

t i v e n e s s and f e a s i b i l i t y o f r e d u c i n g emissions and c r e o s o t e

f o r m a t i o n i n t h i s manner. I n a d d i t i o n , s t o v e m a n u f a c t u r e r s

a r e r e d e s i g n i n g f i r e b o x e s f o r more e f f i c i e n t combus t ion .

S t a c k T e m p e r a t u r e Gauqe

T e m p e r a t u r e g a u g e s a r e c u r r e n t l y a v a i l a b l e a t a c o s t of

a b o u t $10 . Such g a u g e s can h e l p r e d u c e e m i s s i o n s b e c a u s e

t h e y p r o v i d e f e e d b a c k t o t h e s t o v e owner on t h e a p p r o x i m a t e

t e m p e r a t u r e o f t h e e x i s t i n g s t a c k g a s e s . I f t h e owner is s o

m o t i v a t e d , h e c a n t h e n r e g u l a t e t h e amount o f wood a n d a i r

s u p p l i e d t o t h e s t o v e s u c h t h a t r e a s o n a b l y good a i r - f u e l rs-

t i o s are m a i n t a i n e d . . ' Such d e v i c e s are commonly a a r k e d t o i n -

d i c a t e t h a t c r e o s o t e f o r m s a t a v e r y r a p i d r a t e a t low t e m -

p e r a t u r e s a n d t h a t t h e s t a v e is o p e r a t i n g i n e f f i c i e n t l y ( d u e

t o e x c e s s h e a t l o s s ) i f s t a c k t e m p e r a t u r e s a re ' t o o h i g h . An

owner c a n r e d u c e t h e amount o f c r e o s o t e e m i s s i o n s a n d s t o v e

d e p o s i t s by d e t e r m i n i n g w h a t t e m p e r a t u r e h i s s t o v e o p e r a t e s

a t when smoke d e n s i t y .from t h e s t a c k is n i n i m a l ( b y v i s u a l

o b s e r v a t i o n ) , a n d t h e n by g e n e r a l l y t r y i n g t o m a i n t a i n n o r -

m a l s t o v e o p e r a t i o n n e a r t h a t t e m p e r a t u r e l e v e l .

5 . 5 ENERGY SUBSIDIES

The S t a t e o f 0 r e g o n h a s a u t h o r i ' z e d t h e e x p e n d i t u r e o f $11

i n i l l i o n t o p r o v i d e r e l i e f f o r low income o r 2 l d e r l y r e a -

i d e n t s who c a n n o t a f f o r d t o pay t h e i r s p a c e h e a t i n g b i l l s

a n d h a v e n o t r e c e i v e d a s s i s t a n c e f rom a n y o t h e r p r o g r a m s .

T h e s e are d i r . s e + z n e r a y s u b s i d i e s r a t h e r t h a n l o a n s o r

l r a n c s f o r home w e a t h e r i z a t i o n . N h i l e t h e e f f e c t s o f t h i s

p r o g r a m a r e n o t q u a n k i f i a b l e , i t nay h e l p t o l e s s e n t h e r u s h

o f l o w e r income homeowners t o u t i l i z e wood s?ace h e a r i n g a s

a means f o r r e d u c i n g t h e i r s p a c e h e a t i . n g c o s t s .

The p r i m a r y d i s a d v a n t a g e s o f s u c h a p rog ram would be : (1)

i t s h igh . cost, and ( 2 ) t h e f a c t t h a t i t would t e n d t o s u p -

3 o r t h i g h l e v e l s o f e n e r g y c o n s u m p t i o n r a t h e r t h a n c o n s e r v a -

t i o n .

5.6 WOODSTOVE CERTIFICATION

Woodstove manufacturers have claimed overall efficiencies of

70% or more in recent designs which include modified combus-

tion chambers and catalysts. Independent testing has ver-

if ied some .of these claims. A high efficiency woodstove

(70% efficient) is expected to burn about 255 less wood than

the average woodstove (50-55% efficient) to produce the same

heat output. In addition, the eii~ission rates (lb/ton) from

some new woodstove designs are 70-80% lower than from the av-

erage iwad3tove. The uombincd effect oL increased ef ficien-

' cy and lower emission rate is a 50-55% rgduction in ernis-

sions per unit of heat output.

The 1983 Oregon Legislature authorized the Oregon Department

of Environmental Quality to implement a woodstove certifica-

tion program. The test m-ethod and performance standard were

adopted in July 1984. The test methods which are acceptable are the EPA Modified Methods and Oregon :4etnod 7. 4

voluntary labeling program also begun in July 1984. Another

key aspect- to thrs l~qislaturc mandar-es that only low

emission woodstoves be sold in Oregon after July 1986.

RESTRICTED USE

of More than One Stove or Fireplace Per Resi-

dence

Vail, Colorado reccnkly adopted an ordinance to prohibit

more than one stove or fireplace being installed in any new

residential construction. Regulation assumed to slow the

rate of growth of wood combustion by 10 percent in Colorado,

would also have the value of getting the message to home-

o w n e r s t h a t wood b u r n i n g is s i g n i f i c a n t a n d i n c r e a s i n g a i r

p o l l u t i o n p r o b l e m .

P r o h i b i t i o n o f F u t u r e S t o v e a n d F i r ep l . ace I n s t a l l a t i o n s

A d e c i s i o n c o u l d b e made t h a t wood b u r n i n g e m i s s i o n s a r e i n -

c r e a s i n g a t t o o r a p i d a ra te f o r p a r t i c u l a t e a i r q u a l i t y t o

b e p r o t e c t e d , a n d new s t o v e i n s t a l l a t i o n s c o u l d t h e o r ~ t i c a l -

l y b e p r o h i b i t e d . Such a p o l i c y would h a v e s i g n i f i c a n t pub-

l i c o p p o s i t i o n , a n d would p r o b a b l y r e q u i r s e x t e n s i v e documea-

t s t i o n of a v e r y s e v e r e h e a l t h p r o b l e m b e f o r e t h e n e c 2 s s a r y

s u p p o r t c o u l d b e o b t a i n e d f rom t h e l e g i s l a t u r e .

T a b l e 5-3 l i s t s c o n t r o l s t r a t e g i e s p r e s e n t l y <n u s e o r 2 r o -

p o s e d i n v a r i o u s p a r t s of t h e c o u n t r y .

TABLE 5 - 3

Element

P u b l i c E d u c a t i o n

Areas i n Use/Proposed

Alaska ; Oregon-; M i s s o u l a , ~t ; C o l o r a d o ( s k i communi t i e s & e l s e w h e r e ) ; Reno, NV

V i s i b l e e m i s s i o n l i m i t s J u n e a u , AX; M i s s o u l a , MT

Mandatory c u r t a i l m e n t of Medford , OH: M i s s o u l a , MTj use d u r i n g h i g h p o l l u t i o n B e a v e r c r e e k , CO; Reno, W ; e p i s o d e s J u n e a u , AK

V o l u n t a r y c u r t a i l m e n t of Reno, NV; A l b u q u e r q u e , NM;, u s e d u r i n g h i g h p o l l u t i o n V a i l , CO; J u n e a u , AK e p i s o d e s

Reduce w e t wood b u r n i n g J u n e a u , AK; Medford , OR

w e a t h e r i z a t i o n r e q u l r e m e n c s xed£ o r d , On! .Crestofl 31it:te. CQ f o r s t o v e u s e

3 e s t r i c t i o n on wood b u r n i n g a p p l i a n c e s :

Number of a p p l i a n c e s T e l l u r i d e , Aspen, V a i 1, C r e s t e d B u t t e , CO

Des ign s t a n d a r d s Aspen, V a i l , B e a v e r c r e e k , CO

E m i s s i o n s t a n d a r d s O r e y o n : &ligoouha, MT ( s t o v e c e r t i f i c a t i o n

R e s i d e n t i a l p e r m i t t i n g M i s s o u l a , MT; B e a v e r c r l e k , CO r e q u i r ernents

R e q u i r e a l t e r n a t e Medford , OR h e a t i n g i n new homes

SECTION 6

. . .

EVALUATION OF CONTROL OPTIONS

#The e x p e c t e d ou tcome of v a r i o u s r e s i d e n t i a l wood c o m b u s t i o n

(RWC) c o n t r o l s t r a t e g i e s v a r y w i t h s p e c i f i c p r o g r a m s , t h e i r

g o a l s , a n d a s s u m p t i o n s made r e g a r d i n g f n t u r e e v e n t s . The e f -

f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e c o n t r o l s t ra teg ies o u t l i n e d i n S e c t i o n 5

i s d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n . F i r s t , a g e n e r a l d i s c u s s i o n

is p r e s e n t e d . o n . d e v e l o p i n g c o s t - e f f e c t i v e c o n t r o l s t r a t -

2 g i e s . N e x t , t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s a r e i l l u s t r a t e d by 2 r s s e n t i n g

t h e P o r t l a n d A e r o s o l C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n S t u d y . The f o l l o w i n g

two s e c t i o n s p r e s e n t c o n t r o l s t r a t e g y e l e m e n t s r e l e v a n t t o

RWC d e v i c e s , a n d a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e s e c o n t r o l e l e m e n t s ' i n

two u r b a n areas. F i n a l l y , t h e s e s t r a t e g i e s a r s d i s c u s s a d i n

l i g h t o f t h e a i r q u a l i t y p r o b l e m s i n t h e N o r t h e a s t a r n

s t a t e s .

6 . 1 DEVELOPING A COST-EFFECTIVE CONTROL STRATEGY

Over t h e p a s t s e v e r a l years t e c h n i q u e s !lave been d e v e l o p e d

t h a t ass is t p l a n n e r s d e v i s e c o s t - e f f e c t i v e c o n t r o l s t r a t -

e g i e s . I n p a r t i c u l a r , t h e u s e o f s o u r c e a p p o r t i o n m e n t mod-

e l s i n c o m b i n a t i o n w i t h econ'omic d a t a e n h a n c e t h e d e v e l a p -

ment o f a i r p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l s t r a t s g i e s .

Figure 6-1 illustrates the relationship between various el-

ements in the air pollution control process. In the first

step, a question must be posed. Is the air quality satisfac-,

tory? If so, than a monitoring program is adequate to en-

sure continuing quality. If not, than the goal of the con-

trol program must be defined. The most likely goal as ap-

plied to this program will be to meet, primary or secondary

NAAQS for TSP or CO. Next, a detailed emission control plan

is devised. The plan might include some of tlie elements rli.s-

cussed in Section 6.2 for limiting TSP emissions from P.WC de-

vices. At this step in the process, the information obtain-

ed in a rsceptot modeling program i.; essential for devslop-

ing the most effective air p'ollution control strategy.

Finally, the control program is implemented and the effzcts

noted, returning. the planner to the beginning of the cycle.

Figure 6-2 shows the steps involved in developing a costei-

fective air pbllution control strategy. In the data gath-

ering step, information regarding emissions, air quality, me-

teorology and control technology are assembled. In the pro-

cess steps, verif iab1.e air quality models are used in con-

junction with th.e air quality objeet.tve L o arrive . ;he

least-cost optimization.

Using spatially resolved air quality models, it is 2ossible

Lo i d c n t i L y cnntrol, strategies that selectively abate those

cources responsible for hot spots in an air basin. Early

control strategy studies that attempted to accaunC Lor atino-

spheric pollutant transpurt employed Gaussian dispersion mod-

els. More recently, concrol s t~atcyi~s h t l v e been developed

for particulate matter using source apportionment methods.

Meteorology u A i r P o l l u t a n t 1 ' Rtrnos~her ic P o l l u t a n t

Emission Sources Processes Concentra t ion

a Cont ro l led Transport a t Receptor I

a Uncontrolled Chemical a L Reaction . b

I

Apply Emission 1 [Design Detai led [ 1 Define Gcal 1,

C

I H Ccn t ro l s ts ' Sn i ss ion Control % -

0 z jalectee ~ o u r c e s i Plan C o n t r a 1 Pr,z,;r~> 1

Removal Process ' a Rain Out

Economic .Analysis

F igure 6-1 -- Rela t ionsh ip between var ious elements i n t h e A i r Po l lu t i on Control Process.

Is A i r

Qaa1it.i

4

Yes Y ~ a t i s f accory 4 Xonitor ing

a Dry Deposit ion d .

F I G U R Z 6-2 Steps involved i n developing a czst- effective a i r p o l l u t i o n c a n t r o l s t r a t ezy .

The P o r t l a n d A e r o s o l . c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s t u d y Z 7 (pAcs em-

- ployed c h e m i c a l e l e m e n t b a l a n c e t e c h n i q u e s , a s o u r c e a p p o ~ -

t i o n m e n t method, to. i d e n t i f y t h e a c t u a l s o u r c e c l a s s e s . con-

t r i b u t i n g t o l o c a l p a r t i c u l a t e a i r q u a l i t y . The a i r q u a l -

i t y model w a s combined w i t h d a t a on t h e c o s t of a v a i l a b l e

aba tement t e c h n i q u e s . A s t r a t e g y was i d e n t i f i e d t h a t empha-

s i z e d t r a f f i c c o n t r o l and r o a d c l e a n i n g i n s e l e c t e d areas of

t h e c i t y t o s u p p r e s s f u g i t i v e r o a d d u s t . The o t h e r major e l -

ement of t h e program i n v o l v e d phased- in c o n t r o l on r e s i d e n -

t'i a 1 wood combus ti on.

The PACS r e p r e s e n t s a new, advanced method t o d e v i s e a c o s t -

e f f e c t i v e c o n t r o l s t r a t e g y . The 0 b j e c t i v . e o f t h e c o n t r o l

s t r a t e g y is t o l i m i t t h e c o n t r o l e l e m e n t s t o o n l y t h e major

s o u r c e s . Ia t h e case of P o r t l a n d , Oregon, t h e c o n t r o l s t r a t -

egy is d e s i g n e d t o meet c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h e . p r i m a r y NAAQS

f o r TSP. By d i r e c t i n g - t h e c o n t r o l e f f o r t toward r e d u c i n g f u -

g i t i v e r o a d d u s t s a n d RWC e m i s s i o n s , t h e Oregon DEQ h a s

e a s e d t h e i r e n f o r c e m e n t a c t i v i t i e s , w h i l e e n s u r i n g t h a t

t h e i r g o a l w i l l be m e t .

WESTON emphas izes t h a t t h e PACS a n a l y t i c a l methodology, b u t

n o t t h e s t u d y i t s e l f is recommended as an a p p r o a c h i n

d e v e l o p i n g c o n t r o l s t rategies. The s t u d y h a s been

c r i t i c i z e d on s e v e r a l c o u n t s , m o s t n o t e a b l y t h e t i m i n g o f

t h e s a m p l i n g p e r i o d . C a r e must b e t a k e n t o d e v i s e a s t u d y

t h a t a c c u r a t e l y r e f l e c t s t h e a i r q u a l i t y i n t h e s t u d y area.

The methodology f o l l o w e d by t h e Oregon DEQ i n d e v i s i n g a

c o s t - e f f e c t i v e p a r t i c u l a t e c o n t r o l s t r a t e g y is germane t o . t h e p r o j e c t u n d e r t a k e n by CONEG. U n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e s o u r c e

o f TSP problem i n t h e N o r t h e a s t e r n states is e s s e n t i a l f o r

t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of an e f f e c t i v e c o n t r o l s t r a t e g y . The n e x t

s e v e r a l s e c t i o n s w i l l d i s c u s s e l e m e n t s o f a c o n t r o l s t r a t s g y

o r i e n t e d t o w a r d RWC d e v i c e s . I n t h e f i n a l s e c t i o n , a p p l i c a -

t i o n ' o f t h e s e c o n t r o l . e l e m e n t s t o t h e TSP p r o b l e m i n t h e

N o r t h e a s t w i l l b e d i s c u s s e d .

CONTROL STRATEGY ELEMENTS

A c t u a l a i r q u a l i t y b e n e f i t s o f RWC c o n t r o l e l e m e n t s d e p e n d

o n s i t s - s p e c i f i c factors suc l l as q u a n t i t y o f woad burned, a v a i l a b i l i t y a n d c o s t o f a l t e r n a t i v e f u e l s , g r o w t h ra tes ,

p o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t y and r n e t e o r o l a g y . T h i s sect ion p r e s e n t s a

r a n g e o f c o s t s a n d b e n e f i t s e s t i m a t e d by a p p l i c a t i o n t o de-

s i g n a t e d u r b p n areas.

6 . 2 . 1 P u b l i c E d u c a t i o n .

P u b l i c e d u c a t i o n is r e c o g n i z e d as a n e s s e n t i a l component o f

RWC' c o n t r o l s t r a teq ies . p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s a r a pro-

posed or i m p l e m e n t e d i n Oregon, C o l o r a d o , A l a s k a , Montana

a n d Nevada. The b e n e f i t s f rom t h i s s t r a t e g y a r 2 d i f f i c u l t

t o ' q u a n t i f y a n d i n g e n e r a l , i t is l i l y that 13 s i q n i f -

i c a n t f r a c t i o n o f t h e p u b l i c a l t e r t h e i r 3 e h a V i o r as d re-.

s u l t o f a n e d u c a t i o n p rog ram.

Oregon UEQ estilnaLes t h a t p u b l i c e d u c a t i ~ n proggams h a v e rs- duced e m i s s i o n s by 1 3 p e r c e n t . S u r v e y d a t a i n d i c a t e t h a t

more t h a n 75 p e r c e n t o f t h e r e s i d e n t s f o l l o w t h e O D E Q ' s s u g -

g e s t i o n s on wood s e a s o n i n g ( 6 - 3 rnoriLlis of air . d r y i n q ) and

c u t t i n g p r a c t i c e s . '" ' Fi rzwood s e a s o n i n g is 2sLlmated LO

. r e d u c e e m i s s i o n s by 6 . 2 p e r c e n t . P r o p e r s i z i n g o f s t o v e s ,

i . e . , t h e u s e o f t h e c o r r e c t s i z e s t o v e s t o p r e v e n t over o r

u n d e r c h a r g i n g , r e d u c e s e m i s s i o n p r o p o r t i o n e d t o wood c h a r g e ,

s i z e .

One o t h e r o p e r a t o r c o n t r o l l e d v a r i a b l e i s t h e s i z e o f t h e

f i r e w o o d . S m a l l e r p i e c e s o f f i r e w o o d h a v e more s u r f a c e a r e a

a n d ' t h e r e f o r e release v o l a t i l e c o m p o n e n t s a t a £ a s t z r r a t e

t h a n l a r g e p i e c e s o f f i r e w o o d . The r e s u l t o f t h i s v o l a t i l -

i z a t i o n is i n c o m p l e t e c o m b u s t i o n d u e t o a n oxygen d e f i c i e n -

c y . I n c r e a s i n g a v e r a g e wood s i z e f rom t h e 2 - 6 i n c h d i a m e t e r

r a n g e t o t h e 4-6 i n c h r a n g e c a n r e d u c e e ~ n i s s i o n s by 3 3 p e r -

c e n t . ( 4 5 ) I t is e s t i m a t e d t h a t t h i s c o n t r o l e l e m e n t c a n

be 50 p e r c e n t e f f e c t i v e t h r o u g h p u ~ l i c e d u c a t i o n . 3 0 t h d i s -

t r i b u t o r s a n d wood f u e l u s e r s n e e d t o b e e d u c a t e d on o p t i o n -

a l f u e l d i m e n s i o n s .

R e t r o f i t t i n g RWC d e v i c e s w i t h t e m p e r a t u r e g a u g e s and c a t -

a l y s t s c o u l d be e n c o u r a g e d t h r o u g h a p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n p r o -

gram. T e m p e r a t u r e g a u g e s ars i n e x p e n s i v e a n d p r o v i d e u s e f u l

i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g s t o v e o p e r a t i n g c o n d i t i o n s . I a i n t a i n -

i n g opt imum o p e r a t i n g t e m p e r a t u r e is a d v a n t a g e o u s t o t h e o p e r a t o r s i n c e it r e d u c e s u s e d c o n s u a p t i o n a n d c r s o s o t s f o r n -

a t i o n . Some r e t r o f i t t e d c a t a l y s t s a r s e f f e c t i v e Ear reduc-

i n g creosote. C a t a l y s t s c o s t $ 5 0 - $ 7 0 f o r r e p l a c e m e n t sl-

e m e n t s a n d t e m p e r a t u r e g a u g e s c o s t a p p r o x i m a t e l y $ 1 0 .

6 . 2 . 2 Mandatory Emissions ~ a b e l i n q

S imi la r t o EPA's gas mileage r a t i n g of au to~nobi l s s , new

s toves could be requirad t o have l a b e l s a f f i x sd i nd i ca t i ng

t he r e s u l t s of emission t e s t s and energy r a t i n g . T h i s s t r a -

tsgy was es t imated t o reduce emissions by 2 5 percent i n

Oregon. ( 4 5 ) The program was est imated t o reduce emissions . by 11 percent i n 20 years , w i t h add i t i ona l reductions taken

when combined with the el i rLgy subsidy program for L o w .TSP

a n i t t i n g RWC devices . Examples of l abe l s fo r the proposed

Oregon program a r e shown i n Figure 6 - 3 .

6 . 2 . 3 Res t r i c t ed U s e

The iinplementation af r e s t r i c t e d u s s ordinances f a l l s i n two

c a t s g o r i e s . The f i r s t catagory is exemslif ied b y t h s a i r

po l lu t i on s t r a t e g y used in Colorado: ail, Aspen an2 other

s k i communities throughout Colorado h a v z adoptsd ardinances

t o p roh ib i t t he use of mare t h a n ulle s tavc r a m being i n -

s t a l l e d i n a new rss idence. This s t r a t e g y is designed 2 3

slow the grgwth r a t e of RWC but has no e f f e c t on reducing irn-

mediate T6 D problems.

FIGURE 6-9 EXAMPLES OF I?WC DEVICE LABELS

Labels

T? , t l LAEELS a r e required, a penr,snent one and a r e ~ c v a h l e one.

The Rf.OV.4BLE LGEL mus: be ,3;rT.:Ct!ED TO THE FRG.\T of a l l \;oodheaters beins scld.

~5~ PE+L~;E\? L ~ E L (3:. l e a s t j!;" 5)- 2 ' ' ) nus: be "I'ISTBLE :.XEI: I~~T.XL\TIJ:;", si..--,ilar t c j e t a i l e d sa fe ty l abe l s ;.not CPSC warniigs) .

Permanent label (actual size)

1Il:AT ~ ~ l l T l ' l l T . l l ' r ~ l / l l o t l l l " ,*,,- ,, I... l..,. ....- ...- _ ---.* - - ,..,.,-- -, ..., a,.- ,..a " l a I-, .,.. ...-I ..-..C..,.., ..--'*'--.

Removable label

I ulr .c fac tu=er : uodel : 3 e s i . y ~ = : 1 . . \'..-.-a" N m e %me .. -.--- i

- . ( ? s r fc ry - , r~ce nay vzry 5 ~ ~ 3 :esi - i z l . ~ e s depszclz; GR ~ c ? ~ s l . c r . e o p e r a t i n g c o n d i t i o ~ s )

. - . .=wsuu.t tu 0A-3 * ' ' , -z:,s :?as bee:-: cel-=,=:f= :s i meerl-2- c - e ~ o n Deaar;z-.e-: of LA-.vlrcna.ental Q ~ a l i r y e r i s s i o z 1

s = ~ ~ ~ = ~ s 52s '=een G F r o y e i f o r s a l e i2 t .?~ s t a t e of Oreso.-.. C - 0

i I

The second category of restricted use is exemplified by pro-

grams in Missoula, ~ontana and Medford, Oregon. In this air

controi strategy, the ,use of C devices is rs-

stricted or curtailed during pollution episodes. Compliance

based on a voluntary program is expected to 'be in the 25-50

jitrcent range, whila a mandatory program ~i th fines levied

for non-compliance is expected to makz the program 75-100

percent efeective. ( 4 6 ) In ?ledford, Oregon curtail-inent dur-

ing air pollution episades is expected to result in a 5-15%

reduction in TSP while in Missoula, Montana curtailnent is

expected to reduce TSP by 23-448 if 103 percent eEEecti~e.

Ths diZfsrence between thesa two estimates of TSP rzduction i a primarily due t~ differences in the particulate emission

inventory. Medf ord is both more urbanized and industrial-

ized than ~Ls.soula, therefore, a smaller part of its invento-

ry is attributable to RWC,

6.2.4 Certification

Programs which allow only clean burning rssidential wood-

hsatinq agpLiances tg be sold are an inteqral element of the

TSP air 2ollution contra1 strategy in Oregon and Colorado.

The objectives of the certification program are to lower

snissions, conserve resources and promote safety. Resources

will be conserved by ~urning fuel more efficiently in the

certified stoves. Firs safety will be promotsd by requiring

inspections during the time of installation of a new stove.

The Oregon DEQ estimates that a certification program will

become fully 'effective aftar - 15-20 years and will raduce

emissions by 68-753. In Missoula, Montana the proposed cer-

tification program is expected to take 15 years before it is

f u l l y i m p l e m e n t e d a n d is e x p e c t e d t o . r e d u c e e m i s s i o n s b y 9 2

p e r c e n t .

~ o l o r ' a d o h a s n o t i s s u e d n u m b e r s o n t h e p r o j e c t e d e f f e c t i v e -

n e s s o f i ts p r o g r a m . However , s i n c e t h e TSP p r o b l e m i n C o l -

o r a d o is l o c a t e d i n s k i c o m m u n i t i e s , a n 85-95 p e r c e n t re-

d u c t i o n i n TSP e m i s s i o n s c o u l d b e e x p e c t e d . T h i s r a n g e is

b a s e d o n a n e m i s s i o n i n v e n t o r y t h a t is d o m i n a t e d by RWC a n i s -

s i o n s . M o b i l e s o u r c e a n d i n d u s t r i a l . p o i n t s o u r c e a re e x -

p e c t e d t o c o n s t i t u t e m i n o r e l e m e n t s o f t h e e r n i s s i a n s p a r t i c u -

l a t e i n v e n t o r y .

6 .3 PROJECTED BENEFITS OF URBAN-WbDE CONTROL STRATEGIES I N

USE - . 6 . 3 . 1 Medford, O r e q o n

T h e wood s t o v e a n d f i r e p l a c e c o n t r o l s t r a t e g y a d o p t e d f o r

t h e M e d f o r d , O r e g o n area is p a r t o f t h e O r e g o n DEQ's o v e r a l l

s t r a t e g y t o a c h i e v e t h e p r i m a r y NAAQS f o r TSP. T h e p o r t i o n

o f t h e o v e r a l l s t r a t e g y p e r t a i n i n g t o RnC i s p r o j e c t e d t o r s -

d u c e t h e a n n u a l a m b i e n t TSP c o n c e n t r a t i o n by 1 6 ag/m3 i n

1 9 8 5 . ( 4 7 ) S p e c i f i c e l e m e n t s o f t h e XWC s t r a t e g y a r s o u t -

l i n e d i n T a b l e 6-1. W e a t h e r i z a t i o n o f homes * d i t h s t o v e s i s

p r o j e c t e d t o b e a more e f f e c t i v e a i r p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l e l -

e m e n t t h a n w e a t h e r i z a t i o n o f homes p r i o r t o i n s t a l l a t i o n o f

s t o v e s b e c a u s e many s t o v e s were i n s t a l l e d i n t h e 1 9 7 0 ' s p r i -

o r t o t h e o n s e t o f t h e w e a t h e r i z a t i o n p r o g r a m . The 2 i r z w o o d

s e a s o n i n g c o n t r o l e l e m e n t w i l l i n c r e a s e s p r i n g c u t t i n g by 4 3

p e r c e n t , t h e r e b y i n c r e a s i n g t h e a m o u n t o f t i m e t o d r y t h e 2u-

e l On a t o n n a g e b a s i s , t h e M e d f o r d s t r a t e g y i s p r o j e c t e d

Table 6-1

Control Element

Projected Effect of RWC Control Strategy on TSP Air Quality in Medford, Oregon

Implementation Effect on TSP Reduction T ime Air QU lity

( tons/year 1 ( years 1 (ug/m 4 1

Weatherization prior 133 . to new stove installation

Weatherization of homes 289 with stoves

Firewood seasoning

, Episode Curtailment

.. ~ e r t i f ication*

. Source: ~eference 4 7 .

*

to reduce RWC emissions by 40 percent from the 1979-1980

baseline of 1557 tons of TSP.

The time for these control strategies to become fully effec- . .

tive ranges from 2-10 years. Curtailment during episodes

would have an immediate effect on air quality. Improved

stove operation and spring cutting, both public education

programs, would not become fully effective for 2-3 years.

The weatherization program is expected to require 3-10 years

before it is completely effective.

The Medford strategy to attain the secondary NAAQS for TSP

by the year 2000 is based on the continuation of the afore-

mentioned control'elements and the implementation of the

wood stove certification program. The Oregon DEP estimates

the expected change in emission is a reduction of approx-

imately 70 percent by the year 2000.

6.3.2 Missoula, Montana

Missoula, Montana presently has an episode curtailment pro-

gram. This voluntary program is believed to reduce emis-

sions by 6-12 percent, based on an estimated compliance rate

of 30 percent. A mandatory curtailment program with 100 per-

cent compliance is projected to reduce emissions by 23-44

pcrccn t .

6 . 4 POLYNUCLEAR ORGANIC MATERIAL

Although POMs are the product of every combustion process,

developing a cost effective pollution control str,ategy re-

quires focusing on the quantitatively important 'sources. As

is shown i n T a b l e 2-6, t h e i m p o r t a n t s o u r c e s on a n a t i o n w i d e

b a s i s are t h e f o l l o w i n g ( i n ' d e s c e n d i n g o r d e r :

'o R e s i d e n t i a l wood combus t i o n

Mobi le s o u r c e s

Open b u r n i n g

C o a l - f i r e d i n d u s t r i a l b o i l e r s

Coke p r o d u c t i o n

I n c i n e r a t o r s

O t h e r c o m b u s t ~ o n s o u r c e s

L i q h t d u t y q a s v e h i c l e s and r e s i d e n t i a l wood omo oust ion CQn-

t r . i b u t e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 50 p e r c e n t o f t h e a n n u a l POM on t h e na-

t i o n a l l e v e l . I t is e s t i m a t e d t h a t open b u r n i n g , which i n -

c l u d e s a g r i c u l t u r a l b u r n i n g , p r e s c r i b e d b u r n i n g a n d . f o r e s t .

f i r e s c o n t r i b u t e s a n o t h e r 30 p e r c e n t t o t h e n a t i o n a l POM bud-

g e t . Coke p r o d u c t i o n and c o a l - f i r e d i n d u s t r i a l b o i l e r s con-

t r i b u t e a n o t h e r 1 2 p e r c e n t . The ' r emain ing 8 p e r c e n t a r e con-

t r i b u t e d by o t h e r m o b i l e and s t a t i o n a r y s o u r c e s .

I n A p r i l , 1 9 8 4 , t h e A d m i n i s t r a t o r o f t h e U . S . EPA announced

t h a t h e would n o t be s e e k i n g regulatory control o f POM emis-

3ions. Ona local ailtl~~i i Ly , Pl~iladelphid Ab13 hcls all a n b i e n I:

s t a n d a r d f o r B ~ P ( 0.7 ng/m3) . S e v e r a l s ta tes a r e

c o n s i d e r i n g i m p l e m e n t a t i o n of BaP o r POM s t a n d a r d s .

A s shown i n s e v e r a l r e c e n t r e s e a r c h . p a p e r s ( 4 8 , 4 9 , 5 0 ) , when

a m b i e n t l e v e l s of TSP are h i g h i n r u r a l a r e a s , t h e POM l e v e l

a p p r o a c h e s o r e x c e e d s t h a t o b s e r v e d i n many u rban a r s a s . It

s h o u l d b e n o t e d , though, t h a t ambien t l e v e l s of POM i n a l l

urban areas m o n i t o r e d have d e c r e a s e d s e v e r a l - f o l d o v e r t h e

p a s t 20 y e a r s . Background l e v e l s of TSP, e x c e p t i n a r e a s

w i t h s i g n i f i c a n t f u g i t i v e d u s t s o u r c e s , a s w e l l a s POMs a r e

usually well below that of urban areas. Recall that POM

health problems relate to long term exposure only. In gener-

al, control strategies which limit emissions of TSP also lim-

it eniissions of POMs. . .

Public education, a control strategy designed to enhance the

use of well seasoned firewood, proper stdve size and fuel

wood size, effect TSP emissions and POM emissions by improv-

ing combustion characteristics. Energy subsidies and curtail-

ment strategies effect .both TSP and POM ambient air levels

by reducing the amount of wood combusted. Catalytic devices

are designed to oxidize flue components with more complex

structures to CO2 and water. This is true of both TSP and

POM. Finally, certification programs, when fully enactsd, will improve both emission and combustion characteristics:..

which effect TSP and POMs.

.Theqe are' presently no control strategies designed to. specifically address the reduction of ambient levels of

POMs. Developing a cost-effective control strategy for POMs, requires the following elements: Emission inventories on the

local level, control technologies, modeling methods and air,

quality objectives. A comprehensive control strategy would

include limiting emissions from mobile sources, RWC devices

and other important local sources. Until ambient air quality

goals are defined for POMs, and data gathering and process-

ing techniques are improved, an effective POM control stra-

tegy cannot be developed.

6.5 COST

The c o s t o f implement ing a comprehens ive RWC a i r c o n t r o l

s t r a t e g y is d i s t r i b u t e d between i n d i v i d u a l RWC d e v i c e u s e r s ,

r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s a n d s t o v e m a n u f a c t u r e r s . strategies

which r e l y on r e d u c e d u s e of wood f o r home h e a t i n g are o n l y

e f f e c t i v e t h r o u g h a w e a t h e r i z a t i o n program. While t a x i n c e n -

t i v e c a n b e p r o v i d e d , t h e homeowner must co-pay f a r t h e c o s t

of t h e i n s u l a t i o n . A l s o , less wood u s e r e s u l t s f rom b u r n i n g

f u e l more e f f i c i e n t l y . B u r n i n g f u e l more e f f i c i e n t l y c a n re-

s u l t f rom p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n campaign, a c o s t i n c u r r e d by t h e

r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c y , and n s i n g new, more efficient s t o v c c .

The c o s t o f d e v e l o p i n g more e f f i c i e n t s t o v e s is burdened by

t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r .

. C o n t r o l s trategies u s i n g c u r t a i l m e n t d u r i n g h i g h p o l l u t i o n

e p i s o d e , , h a v e s i g n i f i c a n t c o s t s t o b o t h i n d i v i d u a l homeown-

ers a n d r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s . I n Oregon, where a v o l u n t a r y

program w a s a d o p t e d , c u r t a i l m e n t is e x p e c t e d t o i n c r e a s e av-

e r a g e home h e a t i n g c o s t s by $50 /year . ( 51) The r e g u l a t o r y

agency c o s t s i n c l u d e r e a l - t i m e ambien t a i r m o n i t o r i n g , d a t a

processing, p u b l l c announcements and e n f o r c e m e n t . E s t a b l i s h -

ing &'real-Liiire a ~ u l i e r i t a i r moni.cariag s t a t r o n i n c l u d i n g pro-

f e s s i o n a l t i m e c o u l d c o s t a s much as $50,000, and a n a d d i -

t i o n a l $10,000 a n n u a l l y f o r manning a n d m a i n t e n a n c e .

A s t r a t e g y b a s e d on new i n s t a l l a t i o n s of low e m i t t i n g RWC d e -

v i c e s w i l l h a v e costs t o r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s , t h e wood s t o v e

i n d u s t r y and t h e s t o v e p u r c h a s i n g i n d i v i d u a l . The Oregon

DEQ eskimates its c o s t s f a r t h e s t o v e c e r t i f i c a t i o n program

t o b e $6 ,000 P e r s t o v e . ( 5 2 ) The a d d i t i o n a l c o s t t o t h e p u r c h a s i n g i n d i v i d u a l c o u l d b e $300-$500 o v e r t h e c o s t of a

s t a n d a r d model. ow ever, s i n c e t h e s t o v e is more e f f i c i e n t

t h a n t h e s t a n d a r d model , t h e o p e r a t i n g c o s t w i l l o f f s e t t h e

purchase cost over a 10-year period. If a catalytic convert-

er is included,' an additional cost of $50-$70 is incurred by

the homeowner for replacement every two years. ~stimating

the cost for redesigning RWC devices is complex and no costs.

were cited in the technical literature. To encourage the

purchase of new, low po'lluting RWC devices, a tax credit '

could be offered in the $300-$500 range.

Weatherization is another RWC control measure with high ini-

tial cost. Weatherization is estimated to cost $1400-$1500

per household in . the Portland, Oregon area. ( 45 ) - These

costs will eventually be offs-et by reduced fuel usage.

The direct costs of the wood stove certification program was

estimated to be $500/ton of TSP, while the cost of the volun-

tary pollution episode curtailment program was estimated at

$1900/ton of TSP.(*~) These costs compare favorably

against those incurred by industry for particulate control.

Table 6-2 shows the comparative energy and economic impact

of control measures implemented in Medford, Oregon. Table 6-

3 shows the economic analysis for the cost of,new RWC device

technology. Table 6-4 shows which party would incur costs

for the implementation of each'control element.

6.6 DEVELOPING A RWC CONTROL STRATEGY IN THE NORTHEAST

The promulgated list of TSP non-attaining counties for 1983

is shown in Table 6-5. Several trends are evident upon exam-

ining this table. First, outside of Connecticut, only 2

whole counties, New York, New York and Hudson, New Jersey,

are not in attainment for TSP. Second, only b counties are

not in attainment with the primary standard. Only 1 of these

TABLE 6-2

MEASURE

ENERGY, ECONOMIC AND EMISSION IMPACTS OF MEDFORD CONTROL MEASURES

ENERGY REQUIREMENT

Residential Weatherization Net Savings Firewood seasoning Net Savings w86dSt6ve curtailment No change Woodstove certification Net Savings

Industrial Cyclone controls 35 0 hp/ug/m Veneer dryer controls 450 hp/ug/m3 Small boiler controls 35 0 hp/ug/m Large boiler controls No change

ANNUAL COST PER TSP REDUCTION a

per ug/m3

Net Savings Net Savings Net Savinqs Net Savlnqs $1,850 $48,000

350 18,000

PARTICUIATE EMISSION REDUCTION POTENTTAL

TIME TO ACHIEVE

'1' I M F: o~~~~ S I G ~ I X B I C . ~ N T IMPLDVENT BENEFTT

, CONTROL ( YR) (YR)

Curtailment during pol- 1/ 2 lution episodes

Improved operation and firewood seasoning

Weatherization and proper 2 stove sizinq

C e r Lilication program ( for 3 high efficiency/low emissions designs)

Overall 3

PART I CU LAT EMISSION REDUCTION POTENTIAL

( % I

SOURCE: Reference 51

6-18

03ST PER SAVINGS PAY- TIME . . YR. m A - PER YR. SAvmGs . rnR INcREmNrAL

MAFGINAL UST RE- CHIMNEY PER INVESTMENT IN NEW CASE .- a x ~ ~ - P L A ~ CLEAN& YEAR^ TECHNO^

Trade i n ex- , $500 i s t i n g s tove $900 f o r cata- l y t i c stove

Trade i n ex- $800 i s t i n g s tove f o r improved non-catalytic stove

Buy catalytic $200 $50 . $50 stove instead of conventional s tove

$500 Buy improved non-catalytic s tove instsad of convention- a l s tove

Buy c a t a l y t i c $140 . . add* fo r $200 $50 .$SO $124 ex i s t ing '

s tove

2.4- 4.4 years

4.8 years

1- 2.9 years

3 years

1- 1.6 years

a. Assunptions: Ccst of catalytic stove $700-$1100; c o s t of non-catalytic stove $1,000; trade-in-value of ex i s t ing c o n v e n t i o ~ l s tove $200; cost of add-on devices $140-$200; conventional s tove cost $500.

b. Assunptions: Only one cleaning per year instead of two will be necessary, and t h e cost per cleaning is $50. (Actual need f o r cleaning can only be determined by inspecting the f l u ; h e n e v e r t h e creosote deposi t is 1/4 inch th ick or mare, cleaning is advisable. )

c. Assunptions: 6 mrds per year burned i n conventional stoves; wed msts of $100 per cord; Average Eff ic iencies : Ca ta ly t i c s tove - 70%, Inproved Nan-catalytic Stove - 57%, Cata lyt ic add-ons - 58%, Conventional stove - 46%.

d. Assunptions : I n t e r e s t , i n f l a t i o n , etc. not included'.

TABLE 6-4

CONTROL ELEMENT , PARTY INCURRING COST

P u b l i c E d u c a t i o n

C o n t r o l D e v i c e s

Energy S u b s i d i e s

E p i s o d e C u r t a i l m e n t

C e r t i f i c a t i o n

S t a t e government f o r p l a n n i n g , i m p l e m e n t a t i o n and m a i n t e n a n c e

consumer

Cost. ~ x s l ~ a l l y shared between consumer and s t a t e government

S t a t e a n d / o r l o c a l government f o r p l a n n i n g , o p e r a t i o n , e n f o r - cement , a n d m a i n t e n a n c e .

S t a t e government t o a c c r e d i t tes t l a b o r a t o r i e s , r e v i e w i n g tes t r e s u l t s , e n f o r c e m e n t . In- d u s t r y i n c u r s t h e c o s t of per- f o r m i n g t h e tests. I n d u s t r y might pass t h e c o s t s of these tes ts on t h e consumer .

TABLE 6 - 5

COUNTIES NOT MEETIFJG THE NAAQS FOR T S P I N 1 9 8 3 .

CONNECTICUT

F a i r f i e l d C o . H a r t f o r d C o .

. L i t c h f i e l d C o . Middlesex Co . New L o n d o n C o . T o l l a n d Co . W i n d h a m Co .

Kennebec C o . Knox C o . P e n o b s c o t C o . W a s h i n g t o n C o .

B e r k s h i r e B r i s t o l E s s ex H a m p d e n Middlesex Norfolk Suf f o l k Worcester

POPULATION

MAINE

MASSACHUSETTS

T S P PRIM - SEC -

P = P a r t of t h e c o u n t y

W = The w h o l e c o u n t y

COUNTY

C o o s C o . H i l l s b o r o u g h C o .

TABLE 6-5. ( C o n t ' d )

NEW HAMPSHIRE

P r o v i d e n c e C o .

C h i t t e n d e n C o . R u t l a n d Co .

Caulden Co. E s s e x C o . H u d s o n C o . ~ i d d l e s e x C o . C u m b e r land C o . Union C o .

A l b a n y 60. . B r o n x C o . C h a u t a u q u a C o . E r i e C o . Greene C o . K i n g s Co. New York C o . Niagara C o . O n o n d a g a C o . Q u e e n s C o . R i c h m o n d C o .

POPULATION

VERMONT

NEW JERSEY

NEW YORK

T S P PRIM - SEC -

TABLE 6-5 ( C o n t ' d )

MARYLAND

COUNTY POPULATION

A n n e A r u n d e l C o . 3 7 0 , 7 7 5 B a l t i m o r e C o . 6 5 5 , 6 1 5 B a l t i m o r e 7 8 6 , 7 7 5

A l l e g h e n y .

B e a v e r C o . B e r k s C o . B l a i r C o . C a m b r i a C o . C h e s t e r C o . E r i e C o . F a y e t t e C o . L a c k a w a n n a C o . L a n c a s t e r . C o . L a w r e n c e C o . L e h i g h C o . L u z e r n e C o . L y c o m i n g C o . Mercer C o . N o n t g o m e r y C o . Nor t h a m p t o n C o . P h i l a d e l p h i a C o . d a s h i n g t o n C o . w e s t m o r e l a n d C o . Y o r k C o .

PENNSYLVANIA

P = P a r t of t h e C o u n t y

W = T h e w h o l e c o u n t y

T S P PRIM - SEC -

SOURCE: EPA-450/2-83-004 MAPS DEPICTING NON-ATTAINMENT AREAS PURSUANT TO SECTION 1 0 7 OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT - 1 9 8 3

c o u n t i e s , Coos , N e w Hampshire is l o c a t e d i n a r u r a l , non-

i n d u s t r i a l 'area. T h i r d , i n most N o r t h e a s t e r n s tates , less

t h a n 25 p e r c e n t o f t h e c o u n t i e s e x c e e d t h e s e c o n d a r y NAAQS

f o r TSP. F i n a l l y , o f t h e c o u n t i e s l i s t e d as n o t m e e t i n g t h e

NAAQS f o r TSP, a l m o s t a l l are i n h i g h l y i n d u s t r i a l i z e d ar-

eas. I n summat ion, T a b l e 6-5 shows t h e f o l l o w i n g :

TSP prob lems i n t h e N o r t h e a s t a r e l o c a l i n n a t u r e .

Only 6 c o u n t i c o i n ' 11; otakcc do not mcct t h c ptimary

NAAQS s t a n d a r d .

Fewer t h a n 25 p e r c e n t of t h e c o u n t i e s i n t h e n o r t h -

eas t e x c e e d t h e s e c o n d a r y NAAQS s t a n d a r d .

Most o f t h e s e c o u n t i e s are. h i g h l y i n d u s t r i a l i z e d .

he a n a l y s i s of T a b l e 6-5 p r e s e n t e d a b o v e , b e g s t h e q u e s t i o n

t o be a s k e d : Are w e m i s s i n g l o c a l h o t s p o t s i n ru ra l o r moun- tail1 & u w u s due .ku d l d c k uf i i ~ ~ ~ i i L u ~ i i l y ? While t l l d ~ e are few

d a t a a v a i l a b l e , t h r e e s t u d i e s have been c o n d u c t e d i n t h e

n o r t h e a s t - ( 48-50) These s t u d i e s were d e s i g n e d t o demon- s t r a t e t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n of RWC t o t h e a m b i e n t l e v e l of TSP.

The r e s u l t s . are shown i n T a b l e 6-6. I n o n l y one of t h e f i v e

l o c a t i o n s m o n i t o r e d d i d t h e h i g h e s t o b s e r v e d TSP v a l u e ap-

p r o a c h 40 p e r c e n t o f t h e s e c o n d a r y s t a n d a r d . The o n e o u t -

s t a n d i n g l o c a t i o n is S p r i n g f i e l d , a n i n d u s t r i a l i z e d c i t y i n

Wes te rn M a s s a c h u s e t t s . The h i g h e s t v a l u e i n t h i s c i t y neared

6 0 p e r c e n t of t h e s e c o n d a r y NAAQS.

A t t h e o n s e t of S e c t i o n 6 , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between e l e m e n t s

i n t h e a i r p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l s t r a t e g y a r e o u t l i n e d . The

LMEASUREMENTS OF TSP AND BaP IN RURAL AND SEYI-RURAL NEW ENGLAND TOWNS

MAXIMUM 24-HOUR MAXIMUM 24-HOUR TSP CONCENTRA- BaP CONCENTRA-

LOCATION REF TION (ug/m3) TION (ug/m3)

Lyne , NH 4 9 B r i g h a m H i l l , NH 49 Hanover, NH 4 9 E a s t h a n i p t o n , MA SO S p r i n g f i e l d , MA SO

P r i m a r y 24-Hour TSP S t a n d a r d : 260 ug/m3 . ,

S e c o n d a r y 24-Hour TSP S t a n d a r d : 1 5 0 ug/m3 .

first steps. involve determining if the air quality is accept-

able and defining the air quality objective. In the counties

where the primary NAAQS for TSP is not being met than the ob-

jective is to reach attainment. Since these counties are

highly industrialized, except Coos, NH, than probably the

large stationary and mobile sources are the major source

categories. In the many counties where the secondary NAAQS

for TSP is not being met, source inventories must be esta-

blished to determine which souce categories contribute signi-

ficantly to the ambient level of TEP.

Dcvcloping a control stratogy which i n c l u d e s res i d ~ n t . i . a 1

wood stoves will most likely result from concern over fine

particulate matter or toxic air pollutants. Some local

agencies, such as the Philadelphia AMS have air toxic

regulations which include ambient levels for BaP. Several

state agencies, for example Massachusetts, are in the

. process of promulgating air toxic regulations which will

include POM and other pollutants emitted from wood burning

stoves. As these regulations are es tablistled, control

strategies will be implemented which reducp the levels of

these toxic air pollutants. Controlling emissions from wood

programs. ,

In conclusion, the Portland Aerosol Characterization

Study, ( *') which utilized' source receptor modeling, demon-

strated how to unravel source contribution to ambient TSP

levels. No study to date in the Northeast demonstrates with

any degree of confidence that ccrrrtrol.!..i ng RWC on a region-

wide scale would significantly reduce ambient TSP levels.

Furthermore, although elevated TSP levels have been demon-

strated to exist in mountainous areas, these' levels never ap-

proach the secondary NAAQS. Finally, most counties which

exceed the secondary NAAQS are in urban, industrialized

areas. .,

The only significant change in regulatory structure over the near future is altering the primary particulate standard

from TSP to PMlO. It is not possible at this time to eva- luate the full effect of the standard shift since neither

the primary nor secondary concentration levels have been

set. Comprehensive studies will have to be conducted to

determine if areas meet the new NAAQS for particulate matter

prior to devising an inhalable . particulate control

strategy.

SECTION 7

RESIDENTIAL WOOD STOVE CERTIFICATION

C e r t i f i c a t i o n programs have been e n a c t e d i n t w o s ta tes , O r e -

gon and C o l o r a d o . I n b o t h s tates e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t e s t h a t RWC

d e v i c e s a r e p r i m a r y c o n t r i b u t o r s t o h i g h a m b i e n t l e v e l s o f

TSP. C e r t i f y i n g s t o v e s t o meet d e f i n e d e m i s s i o n c r i t e r i a

w i l l h e l p a l l e v i a t e a s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n o f t h e TSP problem

i n t h o s e two s ta tes . The oreg& DEP e s t i m a t e s t h a t t h e a n - b i e n t TSP l e v e l w i l l b e r e d u c e d by 70 p e r c e n t o v e r p r e s e n t

d a y l e v e l s w i t h i n 15-20 y e a r s . T h i s s e c t i o n a n a l y z e s t h e a t -

t e m p t s by t h e Oregon DEP and t h e ~ o o d ' ~ e a t i n g A l l i a n c e (WHA)

t o e s t a b l i s h a n e q u i t a b l e c e r t i f i c a t i o n program.

OREGON CERTIFICATION PROCEDURE

The Oregon c e r t i f i c a t i o n p r o c e d u r e is t h e r e s u l t o f o v e r 2

y e a r s of work by members o f t h e wood ,hea t ing i n d u s t r y , r e p -

r e s e n t e d by t h e WHA, and members o f t h e Oregon DEQ. The t e s t

p r o c e d u r e c o n s i s t s o f f o u r tests o v e r v a r i o u s burn r a t e s ,

s t a r t i n g from a h o t s t a r t , u s i n g d i m e n s i o n a l lumber a n d , u s -

i n g t h e c a l o r i m e t r y room o r s t a c k l o s s method t o d e t s r m i n e

e f f i c i e n c y . The WHA l o b b i e d f o r u s e o f t h e h o t s t a r t and t h e

room c a l o r i m e t r y method. Both o f t h e s e methods a r e i n c o r p o r -

a t e d i n t o t h e f i n a l t e s t p r o c e d u r e . More p r e c i s e r e s u l t s

from the certification procedure result from the use of di-

mensional lumber instead of cord wood, as well as starting

with a hot stove. Precision, r repr~duceability~is essen-

tial to provide an equitable basis for comparison between

stoves.

Support for the RWC control strategy came from the Portland

and Medord Air Quality Advisory Committees composed of nume-

rous reptesentakives of public, industrial, qovernment orga-

nizations and e l ecked officials. The Environmental Quality

Commission unanimously supports implementation of a wood-

stove certification program. The ~ssociated Oregon Indus-

tries Board of Directors has passed a unanimous ~esolution

in support of such a program and other agencies such as the Oregon Department of Energy and Bonneville Power Administra-

tion favor implementation of a woodstove certification pro-

gram.

In addition, safety testing labs and fire insurance compa-

nies should support an eii~issian ccrtificatinn program as it

would be the only type of a program that would have a signi-

ficant eLLect an crcosote fo.rmat-.inn in flues which i~ a siq-

nifieant sause ~f chimney fires.

7.2 WOOD HEATING ALLIANCE (WHA) DEVELOPMENT ' OF A LOW COST

TEST METHOD -

A study commissioned by the Oregoa DEQ showed that there is

little correlation between particulate emissions and emis-

t;ioils af hydrocarbons nr, carbon monoxide. The correlation

study was performed because it is less costly to monitor car-

bon monoxide or total hydrocarbons. Both total hydrocarbon

and.carbon monoxide analyzers are real-time monitors and

could be used as an inexpensive method to estimate the emis-

sion rate of particulate matter. Unfortunately, no statisti-

. cally valid studies have been conducted which shows a strong

correlation coefficient for these (and probably other simple

measurements) parameters. These inexpensive methods could be

used in the future if such studies were conducted and were

shown to be valid.

The Condar sampler is another inexpensive method which is

used to measure particulate emissions. The Condar sampler

did not meet the equivalency criteria established by the WHA

and th'e ODEQ. The Condar sampler, however, can be used as an

inexpensive, pre-certification screening tool. Results of

the equivalency tests indicate that the Condar sampler provi-

des results within - + 25 percent of the U. S. EPA Modified

Method 5 .

Most recently, the WHA has decided to support the efforts of

the American Society of Testing and ater rials (ASTM) to es-

tablish a consistant, accurate national test method. The pur-

poses of the ASTM standard are to, "-establish a uniform pro-

cedure for appliance operation which can be used in conjunc-

tion with a standardized test method for obtaining thermody-

namic perfurmance and emissions data, specify the types of

test equipment and establish standard performance requirs-

ments for test equipment, specify data required and calcula-

tions to be used; define terns used in testing; establish

guidelines for certifying and labeling appliances." ASTM

procedures are designed to assure full participation in the

standard-makinq process by all interested parties. The ASTM

process avoids domination or distortion by special interest

groups because it operates on a democratic principle. The

result of such procedures is the establishment of credible

standards. U .S. EPA, . as well as the WHA supports the ASTM

effort to develop a testing and certification standard.

An ASTM test protocol for testing RWC devices will not be-

come available until late in 1985. Other than the Condar sam-

pler, the Oregon Method 7 and the EPA Moditied Method 5, the ASTM will consider the use of a non-condefiGing dilulion tun-

nel as an alternative measurement technique. The ASTM t e s t

protocol will become available long before the Oregon 1988

limits for RWC device emissions become enforced.

SECTION 8

CONCLUS IONS

An analysis of the technical literature on emissions from res-

idential wood combustion (RWC) devices indicates that total

suspended particulates (TSP) and fine respirable particulates

(FP) are adequately characterized. The benzo(a)pyrene (BaP)

emission rate, a component of polycyclic organic material

(POMI, was determined in several studies. Other components .of

POM do not have well characterized. emission rates.

Similar conclusions are drawn from an examination of. the

literature regarding impacts of RWC devices on ambient

air quality, i.e., TSP and FP are adequately character-

ized, BaP to a lesser extent is characterized and other

POM components are not well characterized.

The emission rate of TSP for RWC devices published in the

U.S. EPA document AP-42 is equal to the mean emission

rate plus one standard deviation. This conservative emis-

sion value, when utilized in dishersion modeling exer-

% cises, results in an overestimate of the impact of RWC.

RWC contributes 1 to 15 percent of the existing annual

TSP levels in the Northeast, but as much as 50 ?ercent of

the annual BaP levels, in the counties studied. These im-

pact estimates are similar to those found in Northwestern

U.S. communities. The two primary contributors to ambient air. POM are mobile sources and RWC.devices. While RWC

contributes significantly to the ambient level of BaP, it cannot be concluded that the observed levels are cause for concern.

Health effects of RWC products have been studied on three

levels: cell-line'mutagenesis, animal pulmonary disfunc-

tion, and human pathology and epidemiology. On the cell-

line level, wood smoke-was compared to smoke from a No. 2

oil-fired furnace and found less mutagenic. However,

siuct? wuud stoves have a far higher emi39iorI rate tor TSP

and POM than No. 2 oil-fired furnaces, the overall effect

is to burden the environmental with more pollutant per

unit of energy consumed by using RWC devices.

Animal studies are less conclusive. An examination of - hamster lungs after tracheal instillation of wood smoke .

indicates that there is no specific pathological effects due to exposure. The pathological effects are less than

than that exhibited by coal smoke but above those shown

for exposure t w non-toxic dust.

Finally, epidemiological and pathological studies have

been conducted in New Guinea where natives are exposed to

extremely high concentrations sf woad smoke. Researchers

found that the turbercular type disease found in New Guinea is most probably caused by childhood infection

With wood smoke as only a minor contributor to the man-

ifestation of the disease.

8 Indoor air pollution levels are most often higher than

outdoor levels when RWC devices are located in the home.

Severa1,short-term'monitoring studies in New England were

examined in an effort to determine if pollutant levels

were elevated on a '24-hour basis due to RWC. None of

the studies showed TSP levels approaching the 24-hour sec-

ondary standard. Rural BaP levels were shown to approa.ch

levels' typically found in large urban areas. Since BaP,

and more generally. POM, is neither regulated nor its

healt'h effects understood, it is not clear what the sig-

nificance is of the observed levels.

Seven ( 7 ) control elements which pertain to RWC devices

are discussed in detail. These control elements are pub-

lic education, mandatory firewood seasoning, implementing

home weatherization programs, installing pollution con-

trol devices, providing energy subsidies, restricting

. wood - stove use during pollution episodes and certifying

consumption rate and wood stove emissions. Those programs

requiring government intervention are expensive to initi-

ate and maintain.

The Northeastarn states are urged to pursue further stud-

ies, in particular, source-receptor studies to debineats

the contribution of RWC on ambient air quality. To date,

inadequate data exist to determine if implementing any of

the seven ( 7 ) control strategies will substantially re-

duce ambient TSP lsvels in urban areas. Inadequate data

exist to determine if a particulate or air toxic problem

exists in rural, or semi-rural vall?y areas.

The primary impetus to implementing a control prograin on

RWC devices is not air pollution, but fire hazard. Many

f i r e s a r e caused by RWC d e v i c e s because of c r e o s o t e b u i l d -

up or improper i n s t a l l a t i o n .

I f t h e N o r t h e a s t e r n states d e t e r m i n e t h a t a c e r t i f i c a t i o n

program s h o u l d be implemented, then WESTON recommends

t h a t t h e s ta tes w a i t f o r t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of a n a t i o n a l

program. There a r e t h r e e r ea sons f o r t h i s a d v i s e .

F i r s t , t h e ambien t p o l l u t i o n problem needs f u r t h e r cha rac -

t e r i z a t i o n and t h e t h r e a t t o p u b l i c h e a l t h i s n o t i m m i - n e n t , S e v e r a l s ta tes a l r e a d y Rave r e g u l a t o r y a u t h o r i t y

o v e r r e s i d e n t i a l wood bu rn ing by e n f o r c i n g odor and - m i -

sance c t a t u C c s . 3ccsnd, nos t RWC C b n t f o l s t r a t e g i e s are c o s t l y . and d i f f i c u l t t o e n f o r c e . F i n a l l y , uneven e m i s -

s i o n l i m i t s w i l l c u r t a i l f u r t h e r expans ion of t h e c o t -

t a g e , wood s t o v e i n d u s t r y .

SECTION 9

REFERENCES

1. Rudling, L. and Ahling, B. : Chemical and Biological Characterizations of Emissions. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp 34-53, 1982.

2. Kowalczyk, J. F. et. al.: ,Particulate Emissions from New Low Emission' Wood Stoves. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp. 54-78, 1982.

3. Muhlbai.er, J. L. : Characterizations of Emissions from Wood-Burning. Fireplaces. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp. 164-187, 1982.

4. Sanborn, C. and Blanchet, M.: Particulate Emissions from Residential Wood Combustion in Vermont. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, 'pp. 188-198, 1982.

5. Hughes, T. W. and DeAngelis, D. G.: Wood Combustion at Elevated Altitudes . Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp. 199-209, 1982.

6. Harper, J. P. and Knight, C. V.: Measurement of Wood Heater Thermal and Emissions Performance. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp. 210-226, 1982.

7. Barnett, S. G. and Shea, D.: Effects of Woodstove Design and Operation on,Condensable Particulate Matter. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp. 227-266. 1982.

8. Butcher, S . S. and Ellenbecker, M. J.: Particulate Emissions from Small Wood and Coal Stoves. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp. 289-303, 1982.

9. OMNI Environmental Services: Emission Test Report on Four Wood Burning Stoves. Oregon Department of Energy, Salem, Oregon, 1981.

10. Butcher, S. S. and Buckley, D. I.: A Preliminary Study of' Particulate Emissions from Small Wood Stoves. JAPCA 27(4) ,p. 346, 1977.

11. Butcher, S. S. and Sorenson, E. M. : A. Study of Wood - Stove Particulate Emissions. - , ,mc.m, JAPCA 29(7), g . 724, 1979.

12, Cooper, J. A. : Environmental Impact uE Res ident . i . a l Wood Cmbustion Emissions. JAPCA 30(8), p. 855, 1980.

13. Deangelis, D. G. and Hall, R. E.: EPA'S Research . Program for Controlling Residential Wood Combustion Emissions. JAPCA 30(8), p. 862, 1980.

14. Del Green .Associates, Inc. : Emissions Testing of Wood Stoves. U. S. EPA Region X I .Seattle Washingtin, 1982..

15. Knight, C.V., et. al.: PAH and Associated 0rgariic Emissions for Catalytic and Non-Catalytic Wood .Heaters. 7th International PAH Symposium .on PAH, Battelle ~emorial Laboratories, Columbus, Ohio, pp. 689-710, 1983.

16. Kowalczyk, J. F. : Particulate Emissions from New Low Emissions Wood Stove Designs. Oregon Departseut of Environ~nental Quality, 1981.

17. Lao; R. C., et. al.: Lnvestigation of PAH and Polychlorinated Organic Polllutants from Wood Combustion Sources. 7th International Symposium on PAH, 0attelle Memorial Laboratories, ~olumbus: Ohio., pp. 745-754, 1983.

18, Tisgo, P. 8 Efficiency and Elnlssian 'resting for Residential Wood-Fired Appliances. OMNI Environmental Services.

13. Raii~dahi , . I et . a1 . : Chemical and Biological Characterizations of Emissions from Small Residential Stoves Burning Wood and Charcoal. Chemosphere 11(6), p. 601, 1982.

20. Allen, J., et. al.: Control of Emissions from Residential Wood Burning by . ~ombu'stion Modification. USEPA, EPA-600/7-81-091, 1981.

21. Tennessee Valley Authority: ~esidential Wood Heater Test Report: Phase 11, Volume 1. Energy Use Test Facility, Chattanooga, Tennessee, August, 1983.

22. Allen, J., et. al. : Control of Emissions from Residential Wood Burning by Combustion Modification. USEPA, EPA-600/7-81-091.

23. Tennessee Valley Authority: Residential Wood Heater Test Report: Phase 11, Volume 1, Eneregy Use Test Facility, Chattanooga, Tennessee, August, 1983.

24. Khalil, M.A.K., et. al.: A Gaseous Tracer Model for Air Pollution from Residential Wood Burning. Env. Sci. Techno1 17(a), 555, 1983.

25. Murphy, D.J., et. a : Ambient. Particulate and BaP Concentrations from Residential .Wood Combustion in a Mountain Community. 6th International Symposium on PAH, Battelle Memorial Laboratories, Columbus, OH, pp. 567-574, 1982.

26. Core, J.E., et. al.: Current and Projected Impacts of Residential Wood Combustion on Pacific Northwest Air Quality. JAPCA 31(2), 138 (1984).

27. Cooper, J. A. and Watson, J.G.: Portland Aerosol Characterization Study, Oregon Departinent of Environmental Quality, Portland, OR, 1979.

28. Cooper, J.A. : Chemical and Physical Methods of Apportioning the Contributions of ,Emissions from Residential Solid Fuels to Reductions in Air Quality Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp 349-364, 1982.

29. Currie, L. A., et. al.: Radiocarbon: Nature's Tracer for Carbonaceons Pollutants. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp 365-385, 1982.

30. Meyer , R. H. , The Contribution of . Residential Wood Combustion. Local Airshed Pollutant Concentrations. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential

, Solid Fuels, pp. 386-397, 1982.

31. Allwine, K. J. Assessment of the Long-Range Transport of Residential Wood Stove Fine Particulate Emissions for Two Future United States Energy Scenarios. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp. 398-414, 1982.

32. Lipfert, F. W.: An Assessment Methodology for the Air Quality Impact of Residential Wood Burning. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on . Residential Solid Fuels, pp 415-434, 1982.

33. Colome, 3. and.Speayle~, J. D.: Residential Indoor and Matched Outdoor Pollutant Measurements with S p e c i . a l Consideration of Wood Burning Homes. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp 435-455, 1982.

34. Horning, J. F., et. al.: Ambient Air Assessment of Rural Village and Small Town ~ocations in New Hampshire Where Wood is an Important Fuel. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp 506-519, 1982. .

35. Imhoff, R. E., et. al.: Preliminary Report on a Study .of the Ambient Impact, of Residential Wood Combustion in Petersville, Alabama. Proceedings 1981, International Conference on ~esidential Solid Fuels, pp 520-538, 1982.

36. Imhoff, R. E.: Final Report on a Study of Ambient Impact of Residential Wood Combustion in Petersville, Alabama. Proceedilrqs APCA Specialty Conference on Residential Wood and Coal Co~~~Luutiuri, pp. 161-188, 1982.

37. Lipfert, F. W.: A'National Asses=ment of the Air Quality Impacts of Residential Firewood Use. Proceedings APCA Specialty Conference on Residential Wood and Coal combustion, pp. 226-239, 1982.

38. Bailey, M. R., et. al.: Wood and Energy in Rhode Island, U.S. Dopt. of Agriaulture, 1983.

39. Bailey, M. R. , et. al. : Wood and 'Energy in New Hampshire, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1982.

40.BaileyI M. R., .et. al.: Wood and Energy in Massachusetts, U. S. Department of ~griculture, 1982.

41. Bailey, M. R., et. al.: Wood and Energy in Maine, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1982.

42. Bailey, M. R., et. al.:'Wood and Energy in Connecticut, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1983.

43. National Academy of Sciences Report: Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons: Evaluation of Sour.ces and Effects, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 198 3.

44. Doll, R. The Aue Distribution of Cancer: Implications for . Models of - ~arcinogenesis. J. Royal stat. Soc. 134, 133 (1971).

45. Kowalczyk, J.F. and Tombleson, B.J. A Potential Woodstove Certification Program. Proceedings - Pacific Northwest International Section/Air Pollution Control Association - 1982 Annual Meeting, Vancouver, British

' Columbia.

46. Gay, R.L. and Green, W.T. Residential Wood Combustion Study - Task 6 - Control Strategy Analysis, for Del Green Associates, Inc., Seattle, Washington, 1983.

47. Hough, M.T. and Kowalczyk, J.F. A Comprehensive Strategy to Reduce Residential Wood Burning Impacts in Small Communities. Proceedings - Pacific Northwest Section/~ir Pollution' Control Association, 1982 Annual Meeting, Vancouver, British Columbia.

48. Soderberg, R.H., et. al. Measurements of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Ambient ~ i r Particulates in Northern New England. Department of Chemistry, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New amps shire, 1983.'

49. Hornig, J.F., et. al. Ambient Air Assessment in a Rural New England Village Where Wood is the Dominant Fuel ., Department of Chemistry, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, 1383.

50. Howland, D . E.. and G. S. Kowalczyk. An Assessment of the ' Relative Source Impact of Residential Woodburning on the

Ambient Total Suspended Particulate Levels in Western Massachusetts. Massachusetts . Departsent o f Environmental Qua1 i ty Engineering. Springfield , Massachusetts, 1984.

51. Oreqon Department of Environmental Quality, "DEQ Views on Wood Heating, " PORTLAND, OREGON, 19 8 1.

52. Kowalczyk, J.F. and B. Tombleson. "An Open Letter to . , the Wood'Heating industry'- Oregon's Woodstove Certifica-

tion Program," Oregon Department of Environmental Quali- ty, 2 March 1984.

53. Hilado, C.J. et. al. Toxicity of Pyrolysis Gases fr.orn Natural and Synthetic ,Materials. Fire Technol., 14: 136-146, 1978.

54. Hilado, C.J. et. al. Relative Toxicity of Pyrolysis products of Some Building ~aterials. ..-. J. .,.,~,a...-.-,"...~.~.~-,v~..~.~~- Combust. Toxicol., 4: 304-313, 1977.

5 5 . Hilado, C.J. and L.A. Gall. ~elative ~ o x i ~ i t y ~f Pyrolysis Products of Some Wood Samples. J. combust. Toxicol. 4:193-194, 1977.

56. Hilado, C.J. and M-T, Lopez. Procedures for screening 'Materials for Potential Fire Toxicity and Data on Some - Materials Found in the Home. . J. Consum. Prod. Flammibility, 4:4-59, 1977.

57. Faoro, R. and Manning, J. Trends in ~enzo( a') pyrene, 1966-77. JAPCA 31: 62, 1981.

58. Hawthorne, A. R., et. a. Results of a Forty Home Indoor . Air Pollution Monitoring Study. NTIS, CONP-830617-8, 1983.

59. Anderson, H. R. Respiratory Abnormalities and ventilatory Capacity in a Papua New Guinea Island ComIunity. Ann. Rev: of'Resp. Dis. 114:537, 1976.

60. Anderson, H.R. Chronic Lung Disease in the Papua New Guinea Highlands. Thorax 24:647, 1979.

61. Cleary, G.J., et. al. Air Pollution in Native Huts in the H i y l i l a ~ i d u of New Guinea. Arch. Env. Health 17:785, 1968.

62. Cooke, R. and Toogood, I. Emphysema in Papua New Guinea - A Pathological Study. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Medicine 5:147, 1-975.

63. W O O ~ C O C ~ , A.J., et. al. Studies of Chronic (Nontuberculous) Lunq Disease in new Guinea Populations. Ann. Rev. Res. Dis. io2:575, 1970.

64. Beck, B.D. .and Brain, J.D. Prediction of Pulmonary Toxicity of Respirable combustion. Products from Residential Wood and Coal Stoves. Prepared for NESCAUM, Weston Observatory, Weston, Massachusetts.

65. Maps Depicting Nonattainment Areas Pursuant to Section 107 of the Clean Air Act - 1983. EPA-450/2-83-004, February 198 3.

66. Doll, R. and Peto, R. The Causes of Cancer: Quantitative Estimate of Avoidable Risks of Cancer in the United States Today. J. National Cancer Institute 66:1194, 1981.

67. Federal Register, Volume 44, No. 55, .Tuesday, 20 March 1984, Proposed Revisions . to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter.

68. Gammage, R.B. Preliminary Thoughts on Proxy PNA Compounds in the Vapor and Solid Phase in White, 0. ( ed) Proc. Sym. in Assessing the Industrial Hygiene : Monitoring Needs for the Coal Conversion and Oil Shale ' Industries (BNL 51802) Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, 1979.

69. '~eyers, D.K. ,. Gentner , N.E., Johnson, J.R. and Mitchel R.E.J. Carcinogenic Potential of Various Energy Sources. P~oc., WHO-UNEP-IAEA International Symposium on Health Impacts of Different Sources of,Energy. IAEA, Vienna ( in press 1 .

70. Mabble, B.R., et. al. Experimental Measurements of Emissions from Residential Wood-Burning Stoves. proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels,pp. 79-138, 1982.

71. Morris, S. C. Health Effects of REsidential Wood-Fuel Use. Proceedings Annual Meeting of the American Public Health Association, Los Angeles, California, November 3, 1981.

72. Tombleson, B.J. Oregon Wood heating pollution Control Program and Catalytic Combustion. Presented at Wood Fire 81, Canadian Wood Energy Institute, Toronto, Canada, June 1981.

73. Lewtis, J. Comparison of the Mutagenic and Potentially Carcinogenic Activity of Particle Bound Organics from Wood Stoves, Residential Oil Furances, and other

Combust.ion Sources. Proceedings 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp. 606-619, 1982.

74. ~oschandress, D.J., et. al. The Effects of Woodburning on Indoor Pollutant Concentrations. Paper No. 81-22.2, presented at the June 21-26, 1981 Air Pollution control ~ssociation Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

75. Hanna, S.R. A Simple Method of Calculating Dispersion from' urban Area 'Sources. J. Air Pollution Control Asso- ciation 21:774, 1971.

76. Nestrick, T. J. et. a& 1981. Methodology and preliminary results for the isomer-specific determination of TCDDs and higher chlorinated dibenzo( pldioxins in chim- aey particulates from weed--fueled domosfia furnaces lo= cated in eastern, central and western regions of the Uni- ted States. Human and Environmental Risks of Chlori- nated Dioxins and Related Compounds. Tucker, E.R. et. al. (Eds. 1 1983. Environmental Science Res. Vol- ume 26, Plenum Press, New York'.

77. Tiernan, T.O., et. al. - Chlorodibenzodioxins, chloro- dibenzof urans , a n d related compounds in the effluents from combustion processes. Chemosphere 12(4/5): 595-606,

' 1983.

APPENDIX A

COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF ORGANIC EMISSIONS FROM RESIDENTIAL WOOD COMBUSTION

S o u r c e : Reference Number 7 0

'C i,lllc

Col~~pc-und H.N. (nlili)d L'art l c u l a t e C r e o s o ~ c C ~ ~ l d r ~ l s l L l c 'I'o~4.1 C a n d e ~ i s i b l e - .. - - -. . - - - - - . . . .. - - -- . - - . - . . . - - .- . - . - . - . . . . . . - - . - - - - . . -. . - - - - - - - - - . - -

( : s ~ ~ , o0 ( : 5 - k ~ : ~ , l l ~ c ~ n h 0 . 0 l 1 i 7 ( : 5 1 1 1 > o c : , - i t l t : t ~ l l l ~ l H H U.Ol.31 . c:'Il, C , , - ~ ~ ~ : I ~ . I I I ~ S a 00 0 . 20t11) 0 . 29f10 b . 3 5 0

,- C:61Ilid (;6~-k&:Lt~1lC5 8 0 0 . . I I ~ - o . 7 4 0 2 Il.4b!iH () 'j: . ', I00 (;tilll diJ C : ~ - ~ C I ~ J I I ~ S ' 0.!lt)+# 0 .f199!1 I .!J(lSI

l lt~'l:ir Fr i~cLio i i - . - - -- -. - - _. - - - - - - . - - - ---- 0.06 III Logs,

7 . 7 3 k g / h r b u r i ~ Hate 0 . 1 2 ni _Lop, 0 . 3 2 k g / l ~ r Uurn Kate . -

Q Tfl'15: Ill I i!)"Jll 9:)

t, L T, i: ' I I T:ISZ'U z I (or. 1) I lll~v.~l Il!.-?:j 03 I 11~:)

/. ft ' (W. OZ I I. I l f. . ;: l.llK*?. O!. ' CK. 00 1

Oh ')UGH ' I !I l!fl R - I Ij'I - 6: Of. 1 17L(;0. T YRhA' 1 Wilf, I ' 0 I)(!. 6; 01 I

._ _i ._ . _. _. . _ . _ . --- -- -- -.

1 I : SI~I I. njr?rn~~1.11!,1 (1.11111) .f\.li 21111 ,I,

O . O h n~ I.ogs, 7 . 73 k g / l ~ r

0.12 In L-s , 0.82 kgj l r r burn RdLe . Burn K a t e

'1.1 Ill(! !:IIIII~UUIILI 1.1 . ( 2 . (111 (11) l ' i l r t rcu .Late Creosute CondenslI11.e ' I 'otal Cc~ndensib le . . .. .-. - - -. . .. -- . - .---.-- c 71160! .!-- I I~II : ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ l l l : l t ~ ~ 122 0 . 0 9 3 H

7.3 I t l ~ ! l l ~ l l < ! I: , t ~ r l : 8 a - l < ~ : ~ . 11,: I 'lli 0 . 7 3 3 9 (:;II,lO, ~ . ' - I I ~ ~ I I < t s w - . I - I I 2 'I0 . t j .! 11. 518'1 q . 5\89

t- o llll?l 11y I . :!--I,. l i ~ ~ ~ , ~ l l l . . ! l l - . cn I - e l l l c ,

( : 6 l l ~ O \I I I+*I I* I 04 '! 7 . ttri 0 . 3007 (I. 9 3 7 2 7 21 .6:!'45

0 .06 m Logs, 7 . 7 3 kg/hr

-.-__ %l~mI.i)w!-LL!*tl" .!%!!!:. .kr!l.. ~?LZL .---- burn Hate

[:!'.fJ1~ -0 oll 1 [':I1 1 ! 1ll;'I'l ION __.__ ...... .......... ............... __ .-.- -- ----

II I t!.lcr,l, :1j(11 !:II;~I~IIII:) i ti:: n~r?~n>! ~.~r?,l I~I'FIII) 'M'IJ purlntll~lnn - I! '

.'Ill! ,I,

Al)pclldlx A (Cant ' d )

- -. -. . - - .- -.-. - - -- -- -- -- P t ~ l i i ~ Fr i~( : t IOII -. - - . . --

0.06 m Logs, 7 .73 k g l l l r

0.h2 m 0 .82 k g / t ~ r burr1 Race' Burn Hate

'l'i111e 1:oncl)ound H.W. ( r n l ~ l ] ~ l Particulate Cr2osote Conlenslb le Tota l Condensible .- ..- - -.--- I: I oil I 0O i:,,-;I Ukt:.~~y 1 l /I S 0 . 5 1 7 5

pllt!ll)~ I I<l!l 4:114 :

~ : ~ ~ - l ~ ~ ~ l l z l ~ ~ l v l .lI,l1 ( 1 : I.rlllnO I I ; I ~ I I I ~ 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 .st 0 . 5 5 5 1

I > ( : I ,)I!, ,,O I:,,- I I I I ~ . I I ~ I 1 l !ill 0 . 2 6 5 3

t' .oti u1 L o g s , 7 . 7 3 k y / l ~ r

0 . 1 2 III l ,ogs l - iJ :fi!-.k-,/ lbr ~ I I C I ~ !sihz -.-, - - ---- Ii111-lh Itace

'1, 1 llle

Coulpuund M . W . ( u ~ i n ) ~ L1arr i c u l a t e Creosijca Condens ib Le 1 ' 1 C o n d c n s i b l e ---- -- --- - .-.- - - (: y l 1 6 0 , I, 146 0. :f 2 0 5

0.06 m Logs, 7 . 7 3 kg/hr

0 .12 III Logs 0.212 kl;!hr Uul-II Hate . -- Burn Rate - *r4111e

a (:UIII~I~ILII:~ bl . W . . (111 1.13) I ' a r c l c u l a t e Creosote C o ~ ~ d c n s i b l e Total Condenslble

_ ____

: I I ! I . - I I I I ~ , I I - 140 0 .6489 ~ i - t l l l G !

( 1 I ;Cl , - I N ! I I ~ ~ I ~ B I I , ~ I I I I h 0 0.082h 0 . 1 349 lll,,m~'B 1110

1 ; ( I , I 1. i lll<!l l l~lx: / -~ IOU l:l .Yo l l t~l lx~!l l~:

( : , kll 1 :,u; ~ l l ~ ~ ~ ~ l ' ~ l l ~ : I - 10~1 t : ;! . I:II:I i ; i t . ( ! I

I I U. Kmisston Factors, nig/kg

117 (A.UI_Lvt 1 c ) 6ri11:,L L1>11

0.06 m Logs, 7.73 k g l l l r

. . . - . -. . C .12 m Logo, 0.82 kt;/hr k ~ r l K a t e -- Buru Kate

T lrnc, C t r ~ ~ k u ~ m d H . W . (ml l l j " Itur t i c u l a t e Creosote Colidene.Lb LC 'I'oci.11 CondensLble - - . - . .---. - ------ - -------

'1.0 I I.II?III* 2 12. l l l 0.0431 0. 2814 7 . I . c 1.34 1.7416 NIIL ltIt*111 i i t - 1 1 0 . iC13.2 0.2032 (:8-.~ I ~;IIII! I ' l 6 ' l3 .Ul I). I101 86 0.0412 0 . rt; 26 0. 1,157 (:ll-ii I ~ ; I I \ ( * l 11, 111. 0 . 1r0352 0.02'14 0. l l ! i Y 0. %/rHH C, n N o t I I I ~ ~ I I L i f i ctl I Mi . -. 0 :z 0

V, 3

0. 1 136 n (:u-a I ~I*I I (+ 1 1 1 I ' i./1'1 0.00924 { I . Ol17'i 0. (.'..fly r" m

C. 3 (:u..a 1 k;11lt! 1111

0 . 1580 E. :

'I'(~I, :.;II.II IOI.~IIIII.~ I~.IIII 15f1 0 . I 5tIh 17 P,

mil . .I1.) 30 n i:i,-,~ l k(,nc./l,.s,g. II~III>;IIICC K/I 10. I (1 0 . QOr~sl 0. I l (I(I 0 . 270') G kl.

0.0 i1u '~ 0. L2:tO ,I) . 1 7 b 4 IT, 0 (:;..a l k1.n18 ' 1110 l tc .0~1 o.o02;7 3

n m w

o.l;?O'l i).(l?9:l ~t m ( 1 -:I I ~;IIII: 6; ;I I I..~.II~ 158 IC I-' Ll

,(I. 1jo;!c17 ( I . o:lofl 1). II(: I s 4.1. 1;112 0 0 I IH.IIH r, E

o. t i 7 2 0 d l . II)!JO Id.

(: ,-;;I k:11168 I', ;I I I. I~ I I~ . l i X lll.'.l.*~ 0.02XO 9 0 3

I : il I, I IIY I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ + I,..O I ~ ) . ' I ' ~ o .01 2... o.oVbo!~ 0 . ~ L ~ ~ 1 4 4 ) . 3 2 .J I

Appendix B (Cont 'd)

- 0 . 0 6 m L o g s , 7.73 kg/hr

0 . 1 2 ni Logs, 0 .82 k ~ / h r burn Kate , Burn Hate

T i m e I

Co~opound W . ( m ~ n ) ~ l ' a r t l c u l a t e . C r e o s o t e C o n d e n s l b l e T o t a l " ~ o n d e n s ' l b l e - -

o-xy I b i ~ e Cg-a l kcile Not l i l c ~ r ~ ' i f i e d C a l k e ~ r r 6 a l k a i i e 9-

11-propy 1 b r r i z e i ~ c Not Idel i t i f i r t l Cg-a lke i l r I s o p r o p y l b e n z e n e

R n -.n x 0 m 3 n

r m t-. 1 c. : n PI

n 0 k'. n, o P 3

l o w n m ID f-' n o 2. 0 3

1 1 . t l I 1 Ill l.ll)lll)

1 . 1 3 k ~ / l l r 0.1.2 n~ Lo&?,.. 0 .tl2 k g / l ~ r bur11 Hate - --.- Burn Hate -

'l'1111e (:CIIIIOOIIII~

n M.W. i~ir.lnj I'art Lculnte Creosote Condens l b l e . Total (:ondensible

- -- - -. - - - . . . -- . - - . .- . - - - . -- - .- -- - - -- --- - --.-.--

1). t1'55f1 (1. U%f4%

0. 11'1f1rl 0. (If~hl) l b . (lti'lfl

0. I :! !I 0. 131 H O . :?Oh I 0. 74 3 2 I ) . '17 2'4

0 . ' I f ~ t l H o . 'bflo.'l l~.:lol:b I 11. ' I I t i l l

(I . IV)/I 1 1

0 . 1 1 ~ 7 t i ~ l

0.06 ro Logs, 7 .73 k y l l ~ r

0 . 1 2 111 L ~ J ~ ~ L , %:ti;!. ~ K / I I 1. ! b l ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ c . . - . - - - - H u r u I ( a x , -

'l' i ~ n c a

t 1 . W . ( I I I ~ I I ) I ' c l r ~ l c u l i ~ t e C I - c ~ ~ s o t c : 1 1 1 1 1 s i ~ l e 1 1 Cond~os:i .blr . -. . -. . . . . . . -- - - . - -- . . - . . .. - - . - - - - - - - - . - . - - . - -. - - -- . - - . . . . . . . - - - . - - . . . - - - - - - - - . . . . . . - - - - - - . . . - - - - - -. . - -

Z:IW 09. 2 0 0 . (1 1 2 9 0. 0.'1i>O 0 . 1 . I1 . !~ '$ l11 :!10 O1). (111 0. I 1 0 I 1 4 0 .0 It)'> 0 . 9 1 2 t 1 0 . 0'1 I:!

;!!I(I 10. L ~ ! t 0. r) : lO1 11. ? I ' W , ~ L ) * ~ C ~ )? .I1> 0 . 0 0 7 H l 0 . O 1 ' 1 0 0 . 2 7 U V 0 . 3 1 2 ! 1 C;

'I . O l l I :i I . 1 3 2 3 n ::,i1 1 2 . ')!I 0 . 0 I O U 0. O!l I (1 n z G . 111 1

0. : ( l O H r*

: ! o~ '/5.(1!1 ( 1 . 0 0 7 8 9 0. oo',!tll 0 . ;)'\!I I 1.- m 0. I I ')') 0. 1J')l!4 1 . O l 2 : l

t-. 3 ~

: ! I l l ? I , ) . I l l 3 n 0. !ill ) I >

I-', - $

2. t i 0 1 / . 09 0. 00f1 ' J ~ I ( 1 . (11!tj'J 0. !+;$I)? rt IJ I . i n . , j o 1 1

:)ti! l l . l ) l ( I . I . l O I I .o:'llY G t ' . 0. .'l.'lt>li V I . CI

I Hu. 2 I 0 . ( l t l ? S 9 U . 1 1 ' ( ( # 0 0..'10/l C..

3

fi w I . i 1 5 I . l I . I 11'1 I* rC

f A O . 4 11 0. I f l l ( 8 n'. I.., i'. O

' l o t i n 2 . 1 , ' I I . o : , : ~ I 0 . f 1 ~ 1 I I ( I , ' i i1 '1 t i s 2 S: I '.

3 1 0 t l ? . t l : ' 0. O O ' l U O 0. 15 )!I 11. 'j 1'90 1 . I i / I 1:.

0. f 1 h 5 ( 1 (1. ' ~ ( l f ~ : ! :3

'j :? 2 H !I . I 1 'j ( ) . ( b i l l : ' 3 2 f 1 t i5 . 1 2 0. I O ' / I I I . 'J.lk)!l I . 5 l ) l ' )

3 , t i ] . 111 o . o.i!. \ I I . !I 'J~!I 1 l . / ~ i ~ j 1 ')'in H I . ' I t ) 0 . ( j i l ' i 1 4 ( I . ~ I I ! I ' \ I ) . 11 )().'I ( 1 . ' I j'jn

-.I----.-----.-.-.-------_-_I_. _- _. - l l 2 - I ~ \ l i PII~IC i t : 1 F r i ~ c t Ion.

0.06 m Logs, 7 . 7 3 kglhr

0 .12 111 Los LL--------- O 82 kg/llr Burn Ka :e Burn Kate

I' 111°C

. C ~ I I I I ~ J U U I I ~ r1.Y. ( 1 1 1 l r . ) ~ I'arr l zulate Creosote Corrdei~sible Total Condensible __-___ - __ - -. - . - . .

.l'irr H1 , .v7 0.O!'lf1 38 0.0720 0:07t4 0 n n 0 152 t{11.~)2 , O . ( i [ i ' ~ ~ ) l 0 .0 '15 I 11. :!I147 0.29?4 -. 1 :\h4 0:). II:? I ) . 1105 O. 1 1 (8'; 8 ; 1 '3htn 'I:!. 27 0 . ( : ~ I ' I ' J ~ 0 . 105ft 0 . I 1 10 t- P. rt n .lit! z:

n P.. 0

:.1 H I" 0 . Clil4 29 ti. oar; 29 0 3 m

w C1 ID ID I-' n o ID c I-, n P. 0 1

'l'j IIIC . M . W . (III~II)~'

-- - . - ...................... 9 H I:!. It')

- I 3 . :I!) 9 2 I (I . tl? 114 15.68 114 15.7H

11' 10. I1 84

I I:! I I I! l l l i ) I I . !lo

I). 'OI 2 6.8574 0 . 1112 0 . 0 I .'i

__.____ ----.-

1111 (A~~JI I I~ I t l c ) Frac t ion .__ ----. _ __- 0.OG m Logs,

7.73 kg/ hr 1). 1 2 In Lol;ti2 0.82 k./ l~r 11urn Kate - . - - . . - - - . Durn Hate -.---

1: bllc a

C ~ I U ~ I O I I I I ~ M.W. Q. .~r iu ) L'nr t: l cwl i~ tr Creosote Conderis i b l a T o t a l Cortdensible _. -_ ---- - - - - - - - - - -_--.

t: l . . . l ~ c - ~ ~ z t ~ f ~ ~ r : ~ ~ ~ .I 3L t: ~ - l ~ t ~ 1 1 7 . 1 ~ 1 lll-~lll 1 3.: :I I . 'I I i : : l - l ~ t : ~ ~ ; ! t ~ ~ ~ ~ - I ' 10 'I I . f i t ) (: 1 - i ll l l i l l l 1 ;I

I: 1 .. i I ~ ~ I I : I I I I I In) 11 :I . .7 7

lli&!~~!!!iLL.!d .... F.KGL.~.Q.-- 0.06 n1 Logs,

7 . 1 3 kg/ hr

- 0.12 n~ Logs,-0.82 kg / l r r ---. U l ~ r r : I t a t e B u r n K a t e

.I' 1111t: (:IIIII~CIUII~ M. W . (1ll.111)~. l ' i l ~ . t l c u l a t e C r e o s o t e Condens Lhlc 'I'c.tal C o ~ r d e n s i b l e

- . - - . - - - . - -. - . . . . - - - - -- - - . -. . - , - - - - -- - - - - 2 1 1 1 6 i : , l - i ~ ~ ~ l i ~ ~ ~ / I : ( ) - 160 5 3 . 9 2 (1.0235 0.04235 :I l ke,lv l sc~l):;~ i L I I I t:cl I I ~ I , Z ~ ! I I I ? ~

2- I I IC~ l ~ p l ~ ~ i ~ p l ~ l l ~ i ~ 11.111. 142 511.39 0. lt1J3b 0 . q!3'Jk 0 .7169

0.otJ Ill I . , I ~ S , 7 . 111 l<&/lli.

O - - 1 2 I I~ IA&S , 1) &i,-kAI!~h,!!!~!:~ l ( j ~ ~ - , . ,, . ~ L I I ' I I l<i.lL~ - - . - - . - - - . . '1'1 I I I ~

C1~11lpuunJ El. I d . (111 1 I I ) , ~ I'art lcul i l tr? (:rrosuce C 1 d 1 : 1 1 I 1 OondelrsLl~Ir . .__ .^ _ _ .._. .- -- . _ .

0 . I'iO;, I ) . 1'104 11. i ) 30 I l ) . ( l l ' i t , l l . ~ l l ~ l f l 11. 'l:!ll I 11. -l'!Il I .

0 .06 m Logs, 7 . 7 3 kg/hr

- 0.12 la Lo&s, O0tl2,,_k&/~c L;srn Hate Burn Rate

'I' i n ~ e

C~III I~OIII~L~ M.W. ( I I I L I ~ ) ~ ' I'ar t l c u l a te (;rcosote l ; o ~ ~ d o ~ ~ s . L b l e Total Condens ib le _ _ _ _ _ _ ^ _ - . _ _ I . - -

'1 7 f .

I Hti 1 'J(D

1'14 0 2 . 1 / 1 l llH 1 1 2 . :!c)

~. . (~I" IMBLLLL~;. ! ! ;~LL~!. ! .G 0.0b I l l l . oys ,

. 7 . 2 3 k g l l ~ r - 0 . 1 2 111 Lo&- 0 . 8 2 kg/lll- l iurl~ Kilt% Hurl~ Itate

'l' iue ( : O I I I I ) C J U I I ~ ~ 1 . 1 ~ . (u1iu)" I 'ar t i c u l a t e C r c ~ ~ s o t t : 0 1 1 1 : 1 l e '1 '0Ci11 Con~ lens i l ) l e

. -- _

-. . .... I~U.~~~UIUUJ~~I:~L::ICLLUU, -.,---. .-- 0.06 nl Logs,

7 . 7 3 kg/ l l r . 1 1 e -- Iiurn Kate

'I' l . 1 1 1 ~ . a

L:c~~~~l)ouncl ' E l . W .. (iii.i.11) P a r t i ( u L a ~ : r (:rcosc,te (:o~~tlc:nsible 'Fotirl ~ o n d e h s i b l e --.----------.-. . - - -. -------

.UC . . l A ~ " l l u l i ~ 1 .CL.'L.L~U ..-.. ... ..............

0 . 0 6 111 I . O ~ S , 7 . 7A k g b l ~ ~ .

0 - 1 2 IU l . i ~ ~ s , ll. ti.! k d 1 1 - I~III-11 I ( a i ' I l t r r~r I tarc ...... .......... ................................................ , . . 1 1 1 1 1 ~ :

EI.W. (Iilill)il ['it 1 .1 i c u ~ a t c (:I.L:O:;~~I c C ~ ~ I I J ~ I I S ~ ~ I I L! ' I ' o L ; ~ I ~ : t ~ l l d ~ l l : i l ~ ~ ~ , ~ .-.. -- .................. ................ ......._.__.....__._.__... I-

10~1. I l ibtJ . :'') 11'). !*.'I i # ' 9 . '11, i t ' l . lit I

10. /:I I I J . :i.,

18~1. 'J I

10. I 1 I l l . . ' I !

on. l o . ;#.'I

0.111 1 6

I ) . ll:'.'ll#

0 . 0 1 :!I1

0 . 0 6 IS Logs, 7 . 7 3 kg/hr

0.12 III l.ogs , 0 . 8 2 k g l ! ~ _ r _ , x ? t n Itate _ ---,. ----.-- Iiurn Itate '1'1 nle

Con~~ound PI. W . (111111)~~ I ' ar t i cu la t e ( :reosote Cu~ldens.II~ Ic 'I'ctal ( :ondens lb le - -.--- _ -. ...... .. -.-_ ._-

[)li f 1 L I ~ I ~ ~ I I ~ I I~.II,: 2 0 2 H Z . I A loib,4 ~'A.I Ic: 1 ~ 1 1 . t : ~ ~ 2 18 H Z . ')!I Nut i c l t - ~ ~ t i t i e t l - 1$:!./:1 NIJL iclc~bt i C i..tl - n : l . l l NIII: itlc:nl: i I ' i t : t l - t i 3 .11

I$,:IIZ iil) I. I u ~ ) I - ~ ! I I ~ ! 210 U ) . # ) I NIIL i d ~ . 1 1 1 i 1 i t ! t l .. Utl . '1 .1 ( : . J ~ ~ ~ I I I ~ . ~ I I . ~ c c I I ~ / ~ : i- ?:!(I t l . ' i . l l

IIIICII~III~I~I-C!W M L ! ~ 11y I - 11y r'c11e 2 l h t i ' , . 7n c : 1-l)y r c n c 2It.1 t3').4j!~

..- - UU .. i A u u i l ~ i ~ 1 ) .. LL~LL; L ~ U U ..

. . i l .06 m L.ogs, 7 . 1 0 kg/kir

0. 1 2 111 I . . I I ~ ~ 0. ti2 kx,/ 111' li~l1.11 l!!!hL!; . - . - ., . .-- llut-11 Hate

. 'I' i118t: b l . . ~ . (II!~ 11)" I ' a r t i c u l a t e (:rtbc)st)te : o I c ~ i I I . '10 t a l (:o~ldetls iI)le

APPENDIX B

STUDY DATABASE - EMISSIONS CHARACTERIZATION

10 I0 'Q 10 18 0 0

t $ 0 0 9 I Q y I0 10 10 14 10 4 I0 I0 19 ! 8

I0 10 a lo I0 I0 IQ 1 I0 10 !e I!! IQ 10 i 0

- ~~

17 2 B I 10.0 0 . 0 0 .00 0.0 0.000 0 .000 0 .0 0 .0 18 . 2 - C 21.4 0 . 0 ' 0 .00 0 .0 0 .000 0.~000 0 . 0 0 . 0 O I Q Q iQO-~--W-Qi000-Q~000 -- -010--4j,O

. a ~ , 3 ~ ~ 0 ' . . Q . Q 0.00 , 0 . 0 0 0 ' P.ooc! 0 .0 Q , o . ! ; , : f!.! : ,.f;o8. ;: q.oQ ::8 ':. o.ooo ' 0,000 0.0 . 0.9 .. Y ..*.I. , c . , 0 c .000----8~000--~0,0--Q~~ 3 2 a 50.6 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 0 0 .0 o;ooo 0.000 0 . 0 0 .0

0 .00 0.Q 0.000 0 .000 ' o t o 0 .0

4 4 B . 1 2 , 0 . 0 . . ' 0.00 . 0.0 .0 .000 ' . 0.000 0 . 0 0,O =8rQ9Q-+ ... B . :

p.f Sir ,!-k;i.'q;oon.,; a';, :':q 3.888 3-

19 4 G 6 . 6 0.0 0 .00 0 .Q 0 .000 . 0.000 0 . 0 0.0 i0 ' 4 19 .3 0 .0 0 .00 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 , ' 0 . 0 ' 0 . 0

i6 l N 23.9 0 . 0 . 0 .00 0 .0 0 .000 ' 0 .000 d .0 0.0

0 .400 0.0 0 .0 OOG-o-. 0-d.,a

0 .000 0 ' 0 0 .0

0 0 .000 35.6 222 5 .0 4.1. I

10 . O I O O O 16.3 311 4.0 2.5 10 .. 0,000 --.I7 , 6 --- . .-.-- . 357 - 4.0 3.0. . . I0 0.000 .19 ! ( 350 4.0 5 .0 l0,O.OOO 7 . ' " . . , 1 . 4.0 2.5 I0a~oh)o--1-43 0 4giJ--(,O ....a, 6- ---- 0 0 .000 1 4 . 0 ' 256 4.0 2 .8 I

10 0.000 . 15.0 494 4.0 3.4 I ~ - - ~ ~ O O O . . , . j ~ , g .,-- -L . . 319 4.0 3.7 -. .-. .

19 O e O O O ' . . 1 4 . q . .. ' , 450 0.Q' 0 . 0 . 10 Q,009 . ' 0.0 BbSTEPl PRWW 0 , O . O . 0 . Q .

.

~ ~ o o - ~ u n s r s R r k ~ A u s ~ - - o - - - o . 0.2 o .o-- I0 ' 0.000 0 . 0 EASTERN SPRUCE : ' 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 I

10 0 .900 0 .0 EASTERN .SPRUCB ' 0 0 . 0 0 .0 - 4 - - - O w

0 . ' 0 . 9 0 . 0 . , Q 0 . 0 0 . 0 . . . 0--0.0.-0 . o..----

I0 0.000 . . . O . O JACK PINE 0 0 .0 0 . 0 II j I0 . 0.000 0 .0 SOFT HAPLB 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 IB--Qr800-'!9-6QPT-CIA?bB . - , :I ,: , , : . . 10 .c: 6;aoa.. :.. Q;Q. @OPT . ~ A F & B :. :! 1o;?g,OQa '. .. 0.b BJpc# .: ., :... .'.+':.: : ~ e - - ~ ~ e o e ~ e u l s s . >;;.! . , . .

--Q 0.9:;- 0 . 0 ~ 11 :, ,

)O 0,000 : 0.0 RED OAR , " . . 0 0 .0 0 .0 n ) 0 0 . 0 0 . 0

394 ' 2 . 0 0 .0 19 0 .000 . 0 . 0 ,150 '4 .7 0 . 0 I ~ - - Q T B ~ O . + Q * ~ ..:, . . . -- ( 1 ~ 3 , 3 . . - 0 . 0 ----.--.-A

" !(! 3'8,900.;: ., . 0.0 '. . , ' .' .' ".

19 ;P .ooO. , . . 1.8 9;:. , ' . ' , , ,

. . . - 270 4.5 9 . 0 l&&800 . r? . 3 I 3 ' 49LlO. .d . -0 10 0.000 0.0 425 6 . 4 0 . 0

) 0 - - e 7 ~ 0 ~ . , . o 30 a 4. .-14, o )O 0:OOO 0 .0 299 2 .7 0 . 0 i0 0.000 0 .0 282 2 .2 0 . 0 '

)o... Q 000 ...-. 0 0 . -2 ' : 338. 7 .7 . 0 . 0 -. - . - :- .:-- )O, O:OOO 0 : ~ SEASONED OAK . . b0 0.000 0 . 0 SEASONED OAK, ,

4 9 1 6 - 9 1.4 , , ' ' , , , : ,i 716 7.1 8.3 v g w

)O-0.. 000-0.O-GEASODIEP-PUB . -415--,-6.%4,5 .' , . 10 0 .000 0 . 0 278 2 .0 0 . 0 ,. . . , -..- . -, a ., . I ' 1 ,

192 8 AP 1 0 ; l 0 .0 0 .00 ,O;Q ' 0.00Q 0.000 0 .0 ' .O.O

197 9 B 4 . 3 63.0 ' . 0.0'0 0 . 0 0.000 ' , . . 0.000 0 . 0 0 .0 I98 9 C . 6.4 1 0 6 . 0 0 .00 0.

.10 10 B 31 .1 0 . 0 . 0.00 a . 0 0.000 0 .000 0 . 0 . 0 .0

0 . 0 9 0:o 0 .000 0 .000 ' 0 .0 0 . 0 0;oae -- p;f)---e;e 0.wo 0.0 b.0 0.oao 0 . 0 . O,Q

o . d 0.6. ~ - ; e e - e ~ ~ ~ e e - - - e ; ~ e o - . - - 07e--e;.e . 2 1 1 2 f j 6 .8 0 . 0 . O . C t O 0 .0 0 .000 0 . ~ 0 0 0 .0 0 .0

0 . 0 0 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 0 0.C~CO 0 .0 0.0 --0;6 0. 00 o-e--e-oee.-- @;060---- e.-e--o- 0

.;.":. Q,Q.;~ a 0:oo 0:g Q:ooo 0 .000 o:o 0:o .Q!? .. 0.00 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 0.0 f)ft-O;OO.. --0;O---.O;.OOO 0 .@90 . ..- 9 . 0 . 0 .0 n'i, . n nn n n n nnn n n n n n n n n

I

' 0 0 . 0 0 .0 II

!O 0 , 0 0 0 . ' 15.9 HEMLOGS a . 0 0 . 0 0 .0 I

0 0 . 0 0 .0 I0 0 .000 23 .8 OAK 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 10-.-$;00D -- 23; 8 eAR---

:, 10 0 .000 ' a 3 . 8 OAK . . 0 0 .0 0 .0 10 O.(l00 ' 33.e OAR 0 0 . 0 0 .0 10--0: 000 .-2 3 ; e-OAK.--- .... 0. - . o . o 0 0 I0 0 .000 23.8 OAK , 0 0 . 0 0 .0

~n n nnn R 7 n n ~ n n .n n . n 1 '

. .

. u u ~ r r I L 'r 13.1 u.u u.uk . u.uUu U . ~ V ~ u.V Y.UUU u.VuU " . . . ,oh*

- 0 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 24 .4 9 . 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 0 .000 0 . 0 0 0 . 2 3 . 8 OAK 0 0 . 0 00131 1 2 R 12 .8 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 23 .8 OAK 0 0 . 0 00132 1 2 S 1 0 . 4 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 23 .8 PINE 0 0 . 0 90133 12 T 10;8 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 42 .4 PINE 0 0 . 0 00134 12 U 1 8 . 5 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 O.b 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 01000 0 .000 4 2 . 4 PINE 0 0 . 0

0 0 . 0 I 0 0 . 0

0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0

I 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0

' 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0

1 .300 . 0 . 0 0 .000 O t O O O 0 . 0 WILLOW 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 , 0 .000 0 . 0 1 1 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 . 0 . 0 ASH 0 0 . 0

0 0 . 0 , 0 - - 0 . 0

' O- - 0 . 0 00157 15 E ' 1 6 . 3 : 0 . 0 .97..00 0 . 3 .0 .000 . . 0 .000 0 . 0 .0 .000 6 .000 . 0 . 0 PINE 0 0 . 0

'. 00158 15 . BA 8 . 6 30.0 ; 25.00 . 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 0 : 0.000. 0 . 0 . 0 .000 0 .000 ' 0 . 0 OAK 0 0 . 0

295 , .2.0 361 1 . 7 290 . 2 . 1 353 2 . 6

1 . . 2 4 9 1 . 7 . 251-.- - 2 . 2

000 0 . 0 0 ,000 0 .000 23.0 244 1 . 7 000 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 21 .0 323 2 . 2 OOQ---'--0,.Q-B, QOQ--'O. 000 37 5 -- 3 ,.O 009 0 . 0 0,QOO P.OO'O . 14 .9 ' . ' 230 2 . 1 0q0 : 0 . 0 .O,OOQ 6.000 . 21.0 . . . 779 6 . 4 0 0 0 - - - - 0 ~ ~ 8 9 - - 8 ~ O O O - - ~ S ~ Q 604- 3 .9

0 .000 '0 .0 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 OAK 0 1 4 . 1 000 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 OAK , 0 7 . 1 0 0 0 - - - - 0 ; ~ - @ , - ~ o Q - - Q ~ ~ o ~ - - - ~ - 0 . 0 -OAK--.--------- . 0 . 8 . 1 000 0 . 0 0;oOo 0 .00o 0 . 0 OAK 0 4,2 000 0 . 0 - 0,OOO 0 .000 0 . 0 OAK 0 6 . 3 000---050-4;-000--0 .000 - - 0 . 0 0 -. 4 . 2 000, 0 . 0 0.000' 0 .000 0 . 0 OAK 0 7 . 1 000 0 . 0 '0.000 0 .000 0 . 0 OAK 0 1 4 . 0 000 0',0 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 O A K . . I 7 0 . 0 000 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 OAK 0 7 . 9 000 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 . 0 . 0 OAK 0 7 . 7 O O O . . O . O .... O . O O O - . O . O O O 0 . 0 0 ~ ~ . . o 5 . 2

0 .000 0 . 0 0 .000 0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 OAK 0 6 . 8 - 1 0

0 . 0 '

0 . 0 1.4 0 . 0 . . .-- .---A I . '

- ,

I 3 1 1 U O U . 9 U . U Y Y 0 . U U U . U U . U U U U . U U V u . u U .UUU u . u u u u. u vnn u L . J L . U

0 .000 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 0 .0 OAK 0 2.9 0 . 8 16 ' 17 P 1.2 0 . 0 33.00 0 . 0 0 .000 I7 47 Q 2.2 0 . 0 58 .00 0 . 0 O~.oOO 0.000 0 .0 0 .000 0.000 0 . 0 OAK 0 3 . 3 0 .6 ie , 1 7 R 1 .7 0 . 0 6 .00 0.0 0 .000 0.000 0 . 0 0.000 0.000 . o . o OAK o 2.1, 0.1 19 .17 S 6 .5 0 .0 134.00 0 .0 0.000 0 .000 0 . 0 0.000 0 .000 0 .0 OAK 0 2.4. 0 . 6 lo . , 17 T 5 .0 0 . 0 22.00 0 . 0 0 .000 0 .000 0 . 0 0.000 0.000' 0 .0 OAR 0 1 .3 0 . 9 p ~ t , ) ~ - y + T ~ - e ~ ~ + 3 ~ . , ~ o o ~ ~ ~ - o , o ~ ~ - - a . o o e - .o. o-o,ooo--.o. ooo -4. O-OAK 0.. 1.3 .. 11-9

I

, f : f 0 .0 ' 89.00 9 .0 0 .000 0 ,000 0 .0 0.000 0.000 0 . 0 'OAF , , o b ; o . . . 8 4 . 0 ~ . Q,O 0.000 g .000 O.Q o.aoo o.ooo (1.0 OAF . o 4 . 4 1.1

1 ' " " l ~ 9 7 0 0 - 4 , ~ 8 r 0 ~ ~ - 0 . , 0 0 0 4 . . U . . O O O - - 0 . . 0 0 0 ---A 4-QAK - - L . 0 - - 6.0. -1-6 15 17 Y . 28.3 0 .0 737.00 0:O 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 .000 0 . 0 0.000 0 .000 0 . 0 OAK 0 5 .0 0.7 I I

16 11 a 13 .6 0 .0 t41 .00 0 .0 0.000 0.000 0 .0 p.000 0.000 0.0 o 1 . 2 4.4 000-.- :-ow 0 -.-- , . . ,--.-.--- 0 ... 1.3 ..2.6

. . 0 2.6 2 . 5 0 4.6 0.6; .

. . O,. -3-3 .0 .5 . , 0 2 .3 1 .0 .

.2 2 0 A 4.6 26.0 0.00 2.6 0 .000 - 0 . 0 0 0 0.0 0:OOO 0.000 0 .0 ' 175 1 . 9 1 . 9

A

[ : i m 0 7 0 0 7 , )Q.)Q I 0:OOO c . . ' .P6O ; Q.0 s Q.066 - !;QI@:,, ; 4.0 l)JLC@ , '. . . , . 626 3 .5 - 3 6 3 . . . 2 . 1 1 . 3 . . '

QOQ+fOOQ--Q;Q-~rQ9Q.- ,OQO--0.4--

1 . : , .

]I !'it t : ) > s l $ , - "\ : 0 . 0 i t . , 4 . 6 0 , ;< Q,gi ! QtOOO1.y!j~jrj:SiP~~ - . ) , ~ @ ~ P Q O i . Q q Q 4 1 0.9 #?RUF# ;; ., - ' . 662 1.1 .

Bie----35~B0;--P8;, S.B@P, ! 0 , 6 0 0 4 , OAO~LOAOQ>~- . . 2 0 0 8.5- -0. I@ ' , .7 ' 22 B 0.0. 40.0 45.00 9 .0 0 .000 ,: 1.200 0 . 0 0.-000 0 .000 0 .0 P I N E 590 8 .4 1 . 3

. 950 7 . 5 0 .4 " 1

8 , ' 2 2 C 0.01 280.W.. . 1 8 . 0 0 . .32.0 ~ 0 , 0 0 0 . , ' 1.400 0 .0 0,000 0 .000 040 OAK

00001 RUDLING, L. AND AHLING, 8. CHEM. AND BIOL. CHAVAC OF EMISSIONS . * (1982) PROC. 1981 INT. CONF. ON RESIDENTIAL SOLID FUELS, PP. 34-53.

S - . . - - - - - .- - - . . . . . . -. .......... -- . ';; 4?401. ,PQtlA&C?;YC, J.P. 7 El'. AL. PART. EMISSIONS FROM N E ~ LOW EKISSION WOOD STOVES : --;;.-lly!

l ' . > . . ' . . (1.9821 ?ROC, '198~ IYT, CONF. ON RESIDENTIAL SOLID FUELS; ~p.54-78..

gGoN y ,. ' ' ' . . ---- --- - - ... . . 4'100003 MUBLBAIER, J.C. CHAVAC. OF EMISSIONS FROM WOOD-BURNING FIREPLACES i I ' (1982) PROC. 1981 INT. CONP. ON RESIDENTIAL SOLID FUELS. PP.164-.187. OR

. . . ~ - - ~ -

u EGON . l

. . - . - - - - - - - b EGON 7 4

. . . . : -, . , - . . . . I -- -- . . - . - . - - - L A ' - r 00007 pABPER,J.P. AND KNIGET,C.V. I M E A G U R ~ E N T OF WOOD HEATER TBEBHA~ AND EMISSIONS PERFORMANCE Y . (1982) P R W , 1.981 INT. CqtiP..ON RESIDENTIAL SOLID'VUEL, PP.210-226.

11

:. . MM 1. . a

I '

.................

, n ' 0000$ ~UTCHER,6.S'AND EUENBECKER,H,J. I! . .

. . . (4982) ppry, . 1981 re~...co~~. . . . .oti UBSID~CNTIAC S O ~ I D PUBLS,.PP. 289-303.. DI M LUTION TUNNEL . ......... 11 .,, pop)0. WJ, 'jDJyJaONyBNT4F fQR!lJCECJ : . : 'y..'! \;'ij;,i'$ .;; :: T.':,?;t.llif:;i ',:; .":.j :: :i

. . y .. :.: . . ' M!@@Z% TEST R$?Op?'PT ~ ~ ~ ! l ( q : ~ ~ ~ ~ WRNING STOVES , :<; , , ., ,: ,! .,. .,,.$ :.:; .:,. ,,:, , i ; : L > i.: ;>,:.t.

,' . . ... rqrr ! $%!w~! PPPN(T~~HT.R~:w PRQ:~~?,: q ~ y j ..:,':;;;;:, ,.,;:; . , , ..; %..,: , :. . . , , ,, : ! : ,, ....,.a. ? ,:.';, , . .,.;f. :.;\, :!*,J?: . . . , , , ,.\ , !,.. 4 .., .,:. ;,*>: ,,,. \"..qz,,l,l% ; . , . I < : :,? .. II>GW 'I. ' . :. . . . II

a 0001t QUTCBER,S.S. AND'BDCKCEY,D.I. . . . . - . . . '" q PRELIMINARY eTUDY OF P?RTICU&ATE EMISSIOHS FROM , . SMXLL WOOD STOVES . . . .

F . '. ' 11977) JAPCA 27(!),)'(q).:. ; . ',,.:: , . , ., 5 ' . . . . I . 8 . .. . MS i& I I . ' ! ' 1 , ,

. . 8

-- - - - - - - . . - , . -. . .-........ -- .. .- - . .... . . . iOoQo4: 5A480$fJ'!"'gf &NO BWCBHT! NF-- . I . . . I . PART, EMISSIONS PROW PESIDENTJAF WOOD COMBUSTION IN VERMONT " ( ' " . , . . . , . . . . . . . . .: . . . . . . . . . . (toeal, ~poc, p e l IHT. CONP, ON RESIDENTIAL SOLID UUELS, P P . ~ B B - ~ ~ B , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , I ' . . . . . . . . ' +.. ,, ,. . . .

MS

- . . . . .

,, , I i

00015 ..DEAN,GeLIq, D.G. 'AND HALL, ,It,&. . WOOD COMBUSTION E 41 MISSIONS :. ! 1 9 ~ 0 ~ J A P ~ A ) 0 ( 8 ) , 0 6 ~ ~ . ' , . . . . . a a ' , . I,

1' -- . . . . . . . .---- F 00005 BUGHES,T.W. AND DEANGECIG,' O.G. WOOD COMBUS'?G~'XT-KEKTED ALTITUDES II (1982) PROC. 1981' INT. CONFERENCE ON RESIDENTIAL SOLID FUEL. PP.199-209. OR 8 :

. . . . . . .... . , .I. - .I , . . - - :P. P Q I ~ ~ ~ R P ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~k;~~rs;:zro;~ : ' . ,!, 1 ~ 8 a ~ s ~ ~ y Q?. WW? ',?'FQYJv.' ! ,. tk.:i.t ,.:. ;.: :- ;;,.*:;: ; ',::;+;:.:;.: ,,, ;:.! ( p e g ! k$,,:ip* pml&,k; S E ~ ~ T ; ~ , ; F!ffdd~cy!i . , ! . . . , . . 4 . . .'; ' ... . . . . . . . :.' . ,> ,

. , u , . . , B ~ ~ . ~ . . . . . . . , . . . . . . a , . . , I . . . , . . . . . ; ! ? : ! ' , . ,., ~l

* 00017 KNI6HT, C.V., ET. AL. PAI AND ASSOCIATED ORGANIC EMESSIONS FOR CATJ~~YT~F'A~ID'-NONCATALYTIC ,

0 WOOD HEATERS . (1983) 7TH INT. PAH SYMPOSIUM ON PAW, BATTELLE MEMORIAL LABORATORIES. COLUMBUS. OHIO. PP.689-710. MM - .~ 4 l ' S ' . . . . . . . - - .__.------------ .....-............ 11 L

! a : . PSRTICULSTE-EMISSIONS' FROH MEW LOW EMISSION WOOD STOVE DEBIGNS"-" i ' * .;O,OO?e. FoYWCZYFt J T P ~ , . , ' .

i; - . . (1981) OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. , ,. ll,.' 100w 7 . . : . . . .

u '0.0019 LAO,. P.C., ET. AL. I N V E ST~~~TION"G-~~ND POLYCHLO~ATEE~OR~ANIC ~o~.iii~i,~TsTiiob WOO ,, J :D COMBUSTSON SOURCES (1983) rlTH.INT. SYMPOSIUM GN PAtI,BATT.ELLE MEMORIAL LABORATORIES,COLUMBUS, OHIO, PP.745-754. . HM

u I, .............. --... - -, .........- .- $F~~I*CIENCY AND E M I S G ~ I ~ M PESTINC'.BOR PESIDENT1AL"~OOD-FIRED APPLIANCE I I

I ENVIPONMENTAL SERVICE6 .. . . ...........

IONS FROM -SMA~,L ' R E S I D E N T ~ B T U V E .... 4 ' (

II . , . .. . . . . . . . . . ; ;. , . . , , , . . ! , . . . . . --------.----~--.----.------- . < . . . . . . .- - - -- .- '. . . ' I ' . . . , . . ' . . . . . . $..." \ : . *.' ' . . . . " . : . . . . . . . . . I , .... : ' , . . < . :' . . . . . . ( 4 . . . . . . . I.:.. . . . . i ' . . , t

, .,.,.. ;r .~:,( :;\:'i..:;'.) I..., . ,; ., ,: ' . & . . . I . , ! .; ,; ' . . . : . .'. . 0 , . . . . . : ' , ; ,, . , ' . . , . . ' . . . , . ,;, . . 3 - ,. .;.a: .... !. ,$:,2 .. ;;-;:; <,: . . . . . . . , < . . . , . < . : ! ' 0. . ....( .. . '. . I 8 .

, . , : . , , : + : . -

1'

11 I1 . . . , . . .

I1 . , . 11 . . - - -. - . . - - . . . . .: , . : . . . , s. ............. : , . i . : . : I'... . . ' : . '.'.'C . . . . . t . . - . . . , .!:;;!?,?., , 2 ,:

. . :. . *.:,! .; < ' 11 : ! - . ' .

. . 1,. . .,, ;* ;,, .:.~,~... ;, s , . : . . . . . . . . . . . -e?! !,st. : . xTi(','.,.:;.i .::.. ... i y ' l . . i . .:. ~':.~:,.,:'~ .?.,,;:?, .... ;? 8 .,!..; .. , .. , .",: , :j:,< . i ; $ ~ . . ~ ? , , . ~ ~ ~ , ! , ~ $;!.;;i !.\ic?.,; i;! .:,!;~;:;. ..~';j,.~fi~,;;;; !i;-;~,;~:~:'~ji,~~,? ~ii;::i&;:<.,!:j, :!,,I ti .""I ....*!.!...:. \;. : t i ,:Pa ',:"$.,

II

. . . ..:. .; ,. :f.j.t se.. :. , ' . ' .. .. . . I :

\> :*,? ,!> , J , . . , . . , ' I : . I 1 . . . . . . . .

n . ' ' . , . I ' I . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . I .' . * . ! . ' : ' . ., \ ,' . , ' . ; ' I l \..,, : .. "

. I # . ' ; . . . . . . . . i I ' ' . ' . '

I1 . .o ' < " .I . " ' , . . I ! II . )

-- - - - - - -- - - .... . ,

' I1

I ,II

11 . . . . . . . . .... . . .

' ' \ . . . . . . . . . ... . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . ; '. 4 , . I1 . . . I . " . . . . . . ?. , : . . . . . . . . : . 4 . ' ! . . . . . . . f l ' I ' . . , , . I . . .

a . . . . . . , . . . . . . .-'.,:,. ':. . . . . . I. ., . _ , .

- - - - . - . -. -. -

. . : ' * ... Y . . . if " , . d ' . I

. . - . . , : 5' ..:, . ' - . . . . . I I I . , 1 I S , .

:I L I \' ..;, . , ! :: . . . 1 I . . . ' ?, I

..A . , . . ' I . .' I . I . . a . I4

- 0 0 0 2 2 A L L E N , J . , ET. h i . . CONTROL 0,F E M I S S I O N S FROM R Z S I D E N T I k L WOOD BURNING BY COMBUSTION MOD , . . I F I C A T I O N 1981 USEPA, E ~ ~ - 6 0 0 / 7 - 8 1 - 0 9 1 . M " . s . . -

' 0 0 0 2 3 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL WOOD HEATER TESP REPORT:PIIASE 1 1 , VOLUME 1 ENEGGY USE T E S T F A C I L I T Y , ClfATTANOOGB, TENNESSEE, AUGUST 1 9 8 3 . . I

.... .... . .... . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . 1 . ..--- -- . , - . - - ... - - -- . - - .. - - - - -- - .- .- - - - - - .- .- - , - -

..... . . . . .:.. . -.- . . . . . I . . , . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . r . . . . . . . ,---

, ; . I,,. . ,-- - ..-- - .--- -. ... . . . . 4l ! : i.': . . . : ... . . . . . . . .. , 6 . . p : , , ; .; ?;. . .' , . . ~ : ' ;,.'Itl.., ' : , I . . . . : . . . , ,, .. . k . . *...I, .... ... : . . I . . .... e-.. . I , , ! : - , ; : . .. I . , , . . . . . . . . .., - ' . . . . . G : ' ' . , ' I ' . . . . . . . . $ . . ..'.'.... . . @ , ' . . .. % ' . . . . . . . . : . . ! (1 I .

I Y

I1

I - :*;: ' ' * . . . . . . . . . . ,! 8 . ' \ ' . . l:,..::: ! . . . I - ! I

. _ I . ' . 8 . . . . . . : . . , i ' . a - -- - . - - I i ' ' 4 I , L'. 1 :

... i . - ( , . . . # L , . . . . . . . . . . . . I ' . -. .-- , . - - . - - . - -- .. - -- . - . .- -

; ,';.'!:.''*;J.: .::*;; ;' , . ( .... -3 .:: ..:. . . , . I' . . . . ' , . . . I . . . . . . . . . .:........ . . ' :. :' . . ; :,; , . . ; : : a . I . i . . . I

2.: . 'i ' . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . _I: . . ' ,

I1

1 1 ' . I ,

- 00022 ALLEN,J., ET. AL. CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM RESIDENTIAL WOOD BURNING BY COMBUSTION MOD IPICATION 1981 USEPA, EPA-600/7-81-091. M M ' . -

$0013 ~ N N E s s E ~ VALLEY AUTHORITY RESIDENTIAL WOOD HEATER TEST REP0RT:PHASE 11, VOLUME 1 ' ENERGY USE TEST FACILITY, CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE, AUGUST 1903.

digital.library.unt.edu/67531/metadc1090744/m2/1/high_r… · disclaimer this report was prepared...

Documents