Cigarette vs EPA stove?

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

Cigarette vs EPA stove?

Postby Wilberforce » Sat May 09, 2009 1:19 pm

Cigarette vs EPA stove?
https://lung.healthdiary.ca/Guest/Produ ... pTYw%3D%3D
"Pollutants released from stoves are measured in “grams per hour” representing the weight of particles in the
smoke that are released up the chimney. Older uncertified wood stoves release from 40 to 80 grams per hour
of smoke, while the new EPA certified stoves produce only 2 to 5 grams of smoke per hour. This reduction in
wood smoke emissions will lead to a decrease in possible health related problems. Another wood burning
technology that is becoming a popular alternative in home heating is the wood pellet stove, which burn with
particulates as low as .02 grams per hour. Keep in mind, one gram is approximately the amount of smoke
released from the entire burn of a cigarette."


This is nonsense. They are trying to play down the emissions of EPA stove PM by stating that one cigarette
gives out one gram of smoke. The combustible portion of one cigarette has a mass of 1/2 gram. Let us assume
that the tobacco burns half completely, and half incompletely (smolders, that is, smoke) we get 1/4 gram smoke
and about 1/2g CO2 and H2O. (It is heavier due to the oxygen added) This makes the EPA wood stove PM emission
8-20 times that of a cigarette, not 2-5 times, as inferred in the essay. They must have mistakenly weighed and
calculated in the non-combustible cigarette filter.

Also, a cigarette burns in five minutes, not one hour. Since 12 cigarettes can be smoked in one hour, then being
near an EPA stove is like being near one or two chain smokers. That is the best-case scenario, because the
published "2 to 5 grams of smoke per hour" is a minimum, not a maximum. The sky's the limit for maximum.
In real-world use, operators will emit somewhere greater than this ideal laboratory-measured quantity, and
whatever maximum emission pleases them. And as we've seen, (and I've documented) that can be a lot of smoke.
User avatar
Wilberforce
 
Posts: 6020
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:36 pm
Location: USA

Re: Cigarette vs EPA stove?

Postby Dorre » Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:43 am

Woodnyet wrote:Cigarette vs EPA stove?
https://lung.healthdiary.ca/Guest/Produ ... pTYw%3D%3D
"Pollutants released from stoves are measured in “grams per hour” representing the weight of particles in the
smoke that are released up the chimney. Older uncertified wood stoves release from 40 to 80 grams per hour
of smoke, while the new EPA certified stoves produce only 2 to 5 grams of smoke per hour. This reduction in
wood smoke emissions will lead to a decrease in possible health related problems. Another wood burning
technology that is becoming a popular alternative in home heating is the wood pellet stove, which burn with
particulates as low as .02 grams per hour. Keep in mind, one gram is approximately the amount of smoke
released from the entire burn of a cigarette."

According to:Hildemann, L., G. Markowski, and G. Cass, Chemical composition of emissions from urban sources of fine organic aerosol. Environmental Science and Technology, 1991. 25(4): p. 744-959, the average cigarette produces 20 milligrams of smoke. So it takes 50 cigarettes to produce 1 gram of smoke.
It's also worth noting that I haven't seen many pellet stoves that produce .02 grams per hour - one gram per hour would be closer to the mark. Can't access the original link (invalid security certificate), but perhaps there was a mix-up between the amount of smoke from a pellet stove and a cigarette?
Dorre
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:44 am

20 mg goes to 200 mcg/m3 ?

Postby Ernest Grolimund » Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:09 am

Took 20 mg from a cigarette. Took my LR: 4 m x 8m x3 m = +/- 100m3. Divided and came up with about 200 mcg/m3. Sounds too high.

Am interested in the comparison though. Tried to make it with a state senator yesterday and did not have the numbers. Then he said people being against second hand tobacco smoke is different than wood smoke because wood smoke is a money issue. 50% burn wood in Maine for aux heat of some degree 1-3 rooms heat. That shows the odds are against you politically. I won't ake upo this issue because of that.

He also basically invited me to sue the state or him knowing full wel I do not have the money. He almost hung up on me and all but admitted that the Governor was not enforcing the law but the legislature does not enforce the law and cannot make him, and cannot force him to, or sue him. He suggested suing is the only coarse of action or getting the federal government to take action, with republicans not likely to do that nor democrats. It is the numbers, with 50% burning wood it is political suicide. Did'nt Prof Ott do this on CAR? Nanograms per m3?
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 4 guests

cron