EPA errors? Fireplace emissions, 28 or 5.6 lb/mmbtu or...

Technical questions that one would like posed to experts
(scientists) in fields related to particulate pollution.

EPA errors? Fireplace emissions, 28 or 5.6 lb/mmbtu or...

Postby Ernest Grolimund » Sun May 03, 2009 4:24 pm

Was investigating fireplace emissions and found a reference to an old EPA table used by the Maine Wood to Energy task force stating 28 lb/mmbtu. Modelled it and the computer outputted about 150 ncg/m3. It looked wrong so we called the EPA and they said the real value was 5.6 lb/mmbtu. This indicates a big error. So, I started investigating some more and found reference to another study that gave two different values. One number disregarded the emissions from the top 5% of the emission chart. The other reported the mean from all emissions and the difference was only 100%! Is this scientific dishonesty? Fudging data? Does the change in emission factor from 28 to 5.6 indicate a change from posting worst case figures to some other statistical average that ignores the top 5% of emission values and further omits emissions from dirty and improperly operated stoves? I suspect so and am studying this further but not getting a great response from the EPA so far.

People may be more interested in protecting their jobs and their reputations than protecting the environment is what I fear. Bush ordered a lot of scientists to do things they did not like is what I am fearing and it is going to take years to recover from this. I thought the EPA was reasonablt dependable like the Maine DEP but holy cow, a 500% difference in emissions factors and no explanation of the difference and no basis statement of what they are representing? Opinions?
Ernest Grolimund
 
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 1:52 pm
Location: Maine

Re: EPA errors? Fireplace emissions, 28 or 5.6 lb/mmbtu or...

Postby Ernest Grolimund » Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:35 pm

28 lb/mmbtu is reasonable and comes from a long standing EPA table accepted around the world. 5.6lb/mmbtu was never acctually proposed. The DEP and EPA took over the modelling and changed the premise or intent of it without telling me and the results indicated 5.6/mmbtu was used from what they were telling me. Further inquiry revealed they used 12 g/kg which comverts to about 13 lb/mmbtu. When they saw the 150 mcg/m3 they decreased the size of the fire and the emission factor to lower the pm from the modeling. the original intent was to model a fire used for aux heating 3 rooms bu they changed that to an ave fire for ambiance heating of 1/3 of a LR. You can use proportional estimating to get pm from larger fires.

The way all of this was done left a bad taste in my mouth, but it is typical of the abuse of these environmental depts dominated by pols who do not care about pollution at all. It is a fight for sure. Expect anything and everything and never trust the EPA or state Env Dept's. Forget about them being scientific authorities and trustworthy good organizations. Everything Mary has said abou them is true though at first it seems unbelievable to a trusting person who tries to respect the authorities. More reinforcement of the biblical adage: "There is no one good, not one". But Mary is not bad in my eye right now.
Ernest Grolimund
 
Posts: 413
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 1:52 pm
Location: Maine


Return to For the Experts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests