Abstract

 
 
 We present experimental results of emission factors from a suite of domestic coal-burning braziers (lab fabricated and field collected) that span the possible range of real-world uses in the Highveld region of South Africa. The conventional bottom-lit updraft (BLUD) method and the top-lit updraft (TLUD) method were evaluated using coal particle sizes between 20 mm and 40 mm. Emission factors of CO2, CO and NOx were in the range of 98–102 g/MJ, 4.1–6.4 g/MJ and 75–195 mg/MJ, respectively. Particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) emissions were in the range 1.3–3.3 g/MJ for the BLUD method and 0.2–0.7 g/MJ for the TLUD method, for both field and lab-designed stoves. When employing the TLUD method, emission factors of PM2.5/PM10 reduced by up to 80% compared with those when using the BLUD method. Results showed the influence of ventilation rates on emission factors, which reduced by ~50% from low to high ventilation rates. For energy-specific emission rates, the combined (3-h) PM10 emission rates were in the range of 0.0028–0.0120 g/s, while the combined average CO emission rates were in the range of 0.20– 0.26 g/s, with CO2 emission rates in the range of 0.54–0.64 g/s. The reported emission factors from coal braziers provide the first comprehensive, systematic set of emission factors for this source category, and fill a major gap in previous efforts to conduct dispersion modelling of South African Highveld air quality.
 
 
 
 
 Significance: 
 
 
 
 The study provides the first comprehensive, systematic set of emission factors from coal braziers.
 The study fills a major gap in previous efforts to conduct dispersion modelling of South African Highveld air quality.
 Results have implications for stove design and lay the groundwork for improvements in the design of existing coal braziers.
 Results have implications for understanding the potential health impacts of condensed matter emissions from coal braziers.
 
 
 
Highlights
Exposure to fine particulate matter (PM) from solid fuel combustion is associated with morbidity[1,2,3] and mortality[4,5], especially in the developing world[6]
We present experimental results of emission factors from a suite of domestic coal-burning braziers that span the possible range of real-world uses in the Highveld region of South Africa
When the kindling was lit for the bottom-lit updraft (BLUD) method, the coal immediately began to give off sulfurous odours and dense whitish/yellowish smoke – a consequence of devolatilised organic matter that had not reached combustion temperature or had insufficient oxygen to oxidise fully
Summary
Exposure to fine particulate matter (PM) from solid fuel combustion is associated with morbidity[1,2,3] and mortality[4,5], especially in the developing world[6]. About three billion people worldwide are exposed daily to harmful emissions from the combustion of solid fuels. Combustion of these fuels releases products of incomplete combustion such as carbon monoxide, PM and volatile organic compounds.[7] The WHO Global Health Observatory has reported that household air pollution caused the premature deaths of ~4.3 million people globally in 2012, while a further 3.7 million premature deaths were attributable to ambient air pollution.[8] Household air pollution is associated with many health effects such as acute and chronic respiratory disorders, and pulmonary and systemic diseases.[7]. There is currently a lack of sufficient and reliable data, especially for emission factors, which leads to uncertainties and bias in many emission inventories due to influences of a variety of parameters.[6,9] For example, combustion technology and operational practice of appliances have a major influence on the physicochemical properties of the emitted particles.[6,10,11,12,13] Reported emission factors from domestic burning vary as a result of differences in (1) fuel properties (e.g. moisture and volatile matter content); (2) stove design; (3) fire ignition methods (top-lit versus bottom-lit); (4) fire management and ventilation (e.g. air supply amount and fuel-air mixing condition); and (5) experimental methods (e.g. laboratory chamber, simulated stove/open burning and field measurement).[6,9,14,15,16,17]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
