1. Particle Measurements Understanding and Reducing Residential Wood Combustion Emissions November 30, Albany, NY Track 2A - Test Methods for Residential Wood Heating Technologies Methods (Stoves and Boilers)
Brian P. Frank, Ph.D., P.E.
Emissions Measurement Research Group
Bureau of Mobile Sources and Technology Development
Division of Air Resources
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Pat Mason Fritz, M. Eng.
Exposure Characterization and Response Section
Bureau of Toxic Substance Assessment
Division of Environmental Health
New York State Department of Health
April 20, 2016
DRAFT

2. Project Partners NYSDEC Emissions Measurement Research Group
Division of Air Resources, Bureau of Mobile Sources and Technology Development
NYSDOH Exposure Characterization & Response Section
Division of Environmental Health Assessment, Bureau of Toxic Substance Assessment
Brookhaven National Laboratories
Sustainable Energy Technology System
NYSERDA
Contract 63033
DRAFT

3. Why a Mobile Source Group?
Relative contributions of mobile sources vs. other sources
Source apportionment
Focus on emissions which are currently unregulated
Ultrafines
Elemental Carbon/Organic Carbon
Particle morphology
Toxics (PAHs, carbonyls)
Adapt source measurement methodology from mobile source to biomass
Sampling and dilution
Real-time instrumentation
DRAFT

4. Ultrafines Sampling Mobile Source
DRAFT

5. Proposed BNL Ultrafines Sampling
Stack
View from Mezzanine
Start of BNL Sampling
Biomass
Appliance
DRAFT

6. Source Measurement for Ultrafines
Ultrafines are emitted from combustion sources at high
Particle concentration
Temperature
Humidity
Co-pollutant(s) concentration
Source conditions
Are unmanageable for instrumentation
Lead to complex formation processes
Need to address
Sampling
Isokinetic
Dilution
High
Variable
DRAFT

7. Isokinetic Sampling Exhaust flow velocity = Sampling inlet velocity
Exhaust flow velocity measurement always nontrivial
Sampling inlet velocity range ~ 0.4 to 1.48 fps
DRAFT

8. Source Measurement Dilution Effects
< 30: 1 dilution – particle size distribution is altered and unsteady-state
> 30:1 dilution – particle size distribution is unaltered and stable
Investigations into Diesel Particulate Morphology: Part 1, DEC Internal Report, 9/10/04, Frank.
DRAFT

9. Source Sampling Dilution System
Differential pressure transducer
Dilution air mass flow meter
Primary dilution pressure regulator
Secondary
dilution pressure regulator
Overflow
port
Secondary dilution manifold
Dilution chamber
Sampling
chamber
Inlet flow control orifice
Primary dilution manifold
DRAFT

10. Dilution System Variability
Dilution as a function of primary and secondary pressure.
Inlet flow as a function of primary and secondary pressure.
Standard deviation (sigma value) of dilution.
Standard deviation (sigma value) of inlet flow
DRAFT

11. Why a Mobile Source Group?
Relative contributions of mobile sources vs. other sources
Source apportionment
Focus on emissions which are currently unregulated
Ultrafines
Elemental Carbon/Organic Carbon
Particle morphology
Toxics (PAHs, carbonyls)
Adapt source measurement methodology from mobile source to biomass
Sampling and dilution
Real-time instrumentation
DRAFT

12. Real-Time (1 Hz) Instrumentation + Sampling
Dilution
air
Overflow
DRAFT

13. Electrical Low Pressure Impactor (ELPI+)
Multistage impactor
Aerodynamic size range from ultrafine to PM10
6, 16, 30, 54, 94, 150, 250, 380, 600, 940 nm; 1.6, 2.5, 3.6, 5.3, 10 microns
1 Hz time resolution
Buffer for obtaining steady-state measurements
Ability to measure transients
Size-resolved sample capture for analysis
DRAFT

14. Mobile Source Cold Starts ELPI Data
A. Engine Out
B. Diesel Oxidation Catalyst A B C D
C. Continuously Regenerating Diesel Particulate Filter
D. Exhaust Gas Recirculation – Diesel Particulate Filter
Brian P. Frank, Shida Tang, Thomas Lanni, Jillian Grygas, Greg Rideout, Norman Meyer, Chris Beregszaszy, “The Effect of Fuel Type and Aftertreatment Method on Ultrafine Particle Emissions from a Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine”, Aerosol Science and Technology, 41: , 2007.
DRAFT

15. Size-Resolved Sampling
ELPI (left) and SMPS (above) Display of Particle Distribution Centered on ELPI Stage 1, D50 = 30 nm, SMPS Geometric Mean = 37.1 nm
Particle deposition centered on various stages; bottom left is stage1, upper right is stage 12; heaviest loading on stage 5.
ELPI (left) and SMPS (above) Display of Particle Distribution Centered on ELPI Stage 3, D50 = 109 nm SMPS Geometric Mean = 90.1 nm
Patricia M. Fritz, Brian P. Frank, David Guerrieri, Shida Tang, and Daniel Hershey, Poster: “Determination of Chemical and Morphological Properties of Size-Segregated Aerosol Particles Using the Electrical Low Pressure Impactor”, 2013 American Association for Aerosol Research 32nd Annual Conference, Portland, OR, September 30 - October 4, 2013.
DRAFT

16. Size-Resolved Sampling: OC/EC
Two similar Combustion Aerosol Standard (CAST) particle size distributions:
Rich
Lean
OC/EC ratios are not uniform across the entire distribution and do not correlate to the overall rich or lean condition.
Smaller particles have higher OC/EC ratios
Surface area (size)
Surface area (morphology)
Affinities
Varying OC/EC ratios may also have a direct effect on particle density
Has potential implications for both health and climate change.
Patricia M. Fritz, Shida D. Tang, David Guerrieri, Brian P. Frank, Marilyn Wurth, William Chien, Gerald T. Willson, and Malissa Kramer, Poster: “Evaluating Elemental and Organic Carbon Composition of Size-Segregated Combustion Particles Using the Electrical Low Pressure Impactor”, 2014 American Association for Aerosol Research 33rd Annual Conference, Orlando, FL, October 20 – 24, 2014.
DRAFT

17. Basic Particle Information for Monitoring and Health Consideration
Particle transport behavior in air differs, depending on
physical size, shape, density, and surface characteristics
For Fine and Coarse PM fractions, gravitational forces
Settling
Impaction & interception
For UFP it is diffusion and agglomeration
(concentration, electrostatic, thermal and radiometric forces)
Sampling equipment exploits particle characteristics, but we need multiple instruments, using multiple technologies to explore the particle size distribution from UFP to Coarse.
Health considerations probably hinge on particle characteristics, but we are a long way from completely understanding which characteristics matter most, much less which characteristics matter most for a specific health endpoint.
DRAFT

18. surface characteristics solubility particle numbers
Factors influencing how it gets there, versus factors for behavior, hence biological effects, once there.
Getting there:
aerodynamic size
geometric size,
shape
hydrophobicity
surface charge
Behavior once there:
where deposited
geometric size
shape
surface characteristics
solubility
particle numbers
Sampling equipment exploits particle characteristics, but we need multiple instruments, using multiple technologies to explore the particle size distribution from UFP to Coarse.
DRAFT

19. Human Respiratory Tract and Particle Exposure Implications
DRAFT

20. DRAFT
How likely are particles, based on aerodynamic diameter, likely to enter and be retained in the human respiratory tract
The EPA and OSHA have balanced the info in this illustration along with the sampling tools the had, to develop standards.
As far as deposition probability there isn’t much difference for particles that are 2.5 vs 4 micrometers in diameter- above 10 deposition is almost entirely upper airways- with deflection downward somewhere around maybe 20 micrometers.
Using this curve and assuming that deposition matters, the least interesting portion of the curve with respect to health appears to be for particles in the nanometer size range.
My personal bias, is to include measurement of particles at this end of the particle size distribution and to begin to consider health endpoints beyond respiratory and cardiovascular. If you are small enough, and deposit in the head airways there is a pathway directly to the brain without interference from the blood/brain barrier.
DRAFT
DRAFT

21. Research on the Role and Effects of Particulates in Exposure and Disease is Unfolding Quickly (and may not be keeping up with technologies that generate UFP)
Toxicological cell culture and animals studies and epidemiological studies of fine particulates and ultrafine particulates in humans find unique and overlapping effects, including cardiovascular, pulmonary, and central nervous system effects, and mortality.
Previous mass based potency differences for different particle sizes may be due to how dose is expressed.
UFP particles may appear less or more potent on a mass basis, but have equivalent potency with larger PM fractions, if the dose metric is surface area or number concentration.
Particle concentrations, characteristics and ultimate deposition location all are likely to influence exposure and health outcomes.
DRAFT

22. DRAFT
EPA: 2009 PM ISA for 2012 NAAQS
24-Hr NAAQS
The Integrated Science Assessment (ISA) did not find enough evidence to determine that UFPs (in isolation) were Causal: (proven to cause a negative health outcome)
Annual NAAQS
The strength of the associations vary with particle size- and to date without being able to attribute observed health effects to a specific PM component.
Inflammatory effects may be a common feature though.
Source: Integrated Science Assessment for Particulate Mat (US EPA 2009)
DRAFT
DRAFT

23. Collecting Emissions Data to Inform Industry and Policy makers
Characterization of the particle size distribution, carbon emissions profile and gaseous composition of biomass smoke emissions across different technologies, operation conditions, and stack configurations can inform:
Policies that consider energy efficiency and low emissions when selecting biomass-fueled heating appliances
Environmentally responsible operation that minimizes environmental impacts and fuel costs.
Selection of mitigation approaches to comprehensively address exposure concerns
DRAFT

24. Thank You Pat Mason Fritz, M. Eng.
Brian P. Frank, Ph.D., P.E. Section Chief, Emissions Measurement Research Group Bureau of Mobile Sources and Technology Development Division of Air Resources
Pat Mason Fritz, M. Eng.
Exposure Characterization and Response Section
Bureau of Toxic Substance Assessment
Division of Environmental Health Assessment
DRAFT