Beneficial air quality related health impact of avoiding prescribed burns in the Pacific Northwest.

Transcription

1 Beneficial air quality related health impact of avoiding prescribed burns in the Pacific Northwest. Indroneil Ganguly 1, Francesca Pierobon 1, Rick Bergman 2 and Ivan Eastin 1 1 Center for International Trade in Forest Products (CINTRAFOR), University of Washington 2 Forest Products Laboratory, USFS Madison

2 Goal The overall goal of the project is to develop an objective, data driven, and geo-spatially nuanced assessment of the beneficial regional environmental and health impacts associated with avoiding prescribed woody biomass burns in Pacific Northwest. Focus on air pollution related health impacts

3 Overall Research Flow Two Fold Approach

4 Background: Emissions from slash piles burn HUMAN AND ECOTOXICITY LOCAL GLOBAL LOCAL Carcinogenics Non Ecotoxicity Smog carcinogenics Global warming Acidification Eutrophication Respiratory effects Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) Methan e (CH 4 ) Nitroge n oxides (NOx) Ammonia (NH 3 ) Formaldehyde (CH 2 O) Methanol (CH 4 O) Carbon monoxide (CO) Particulates (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) Sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) Method: TRACI 2.1 Source: (NETL Life Cycle Inventory Data, 2013)

5 Regional Prescribed Burn Emissions estimation methodology US-EPA compiles the National Emission Inventory (NEI) once every 3 years, estimated emissions from prescribed fires were extracted from the NEI 2011 using AIRPACT. EPA estimates the fire emissions through the use of the BlueSky fire modelling framework. The BlueSky framework uses fire information from a variety of sources SMARTFIRE satellite reporting ground based Incident Command System (ICS-209) reports prescribed-burn reporting systems. Once the fire information is available, fuel loading maps and a fuel consumption model are used to estimate the total fuel consumed. emissions of 54 different pollutants including PM2.5, CO, CH4, NOx, SO2, NH3 and VOCs are calculated. Emissions are distributed spatially and temporally using SMOKE, which also calculates the plume rise for the fires (Herron-Thorpe et al., 2014). Source: Ravi, V. (2016) AIR QUALITY MODELING TO ASSESS IMPACTS OF PRESCRIBED FIRES AND A BIOFUEL SUPPLY CHAIN IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST

6 Burn Days Considered The emissions associated with the 37days of Oct/Nov period are considered. Source: Ravi, V. (2016) AIR QUALITY MODELING TO ASSESS IMPACTS OF PRESCRIBED FIRES AND A BIOFUEL SUPPLY CHAIN IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST

7 Calculating the Human Health Impact PM 2.5 and Air Quality Standards Short Term standards: 24 hour averages 25 microgram/cubic meter (WHO guideline) 35.5 microgram/cubic meter (US EPA guideline Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups ) 55.5 microgram/cubic meter (US EPA guideline Unhealthy ) microgram/cubic meter (US EPA guideline Very Unhealthy ) microgram/cubic meter (US EPA guideline - Hazardous) Long Term standards: Sustained exposure 10 microgram/cubic meter (WHO guideline) 12 microgram/cubic meter (US EPA guideline) NON CARCINOGENIC IMPACT associated with woody biomass burn emissions Formaldehyde (HCHO) Aldehyde (CCHO) Acetate Methanol Phenol Benzene CARCINOGENIC IMPACT associated with woody biomass burn emissions Formaldehyde (HCHO) Aldehyde (CCHO) Benzene Small Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 )

8 Prescribed Burns: Impact Assessment All prescribed burns related emissions are factored-in and carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic impacts are estimated. The impacts were geo-spatially nuanced The emissions associated with the 37days of Oct/Nov period are considered. Source: Ravi, V. (2016) AIR QUALITY MODELING TO ASSESS IMPACTS OF PRESCRIBED FIRES AND A BIOFUEL SUPPLY CHAIN IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST The impact of serious non-carcinogenic illnesses were minimal with less than 4 cases in the region over a 70 year period.

9 Target 3-state region

10 Oct/Nov Average PM 2.5 concentration (baseline 37 days average)

11 Oct/Nov Average PM 2.5 concentration (with prescribed burns: 37 days average)

12 Carcinogenic Impact as a result of prescribed burns in the PNW Assumptions: Population is exposed to 30% of the ambient pollution (staying indoors, air purification system, etc.) Population exposed to similar level of pollution for 37 days of every year for 70 years (lifetime) Number of cancer cases due to prescribed burns over a 70 years period: 1. Washington: 40 cases 2. Oregon: 55 cases 3. N. California (north of SFO): 2 cases

13 CASE STUDY: Simulation exercise of the potential beneficial role of W2W

14 Main Steps for the case study and health impact assessment Constrained by maximum delivery price at the BCT and 2 hours transportation PM2.5 carcinogenic impact incorporated from outside sources Washington State Biomass Calculator Data collection on field Bluesky Playground online tool AIRPACT USEtox Census data

15 Biomass supply - Washington State Biomass Calculator Biomass supply from 3 timbersheds in Southwest Washington where numerous facilities can be used in the scenario Comprised of 11 counties The project area includes 214 Watershed Administrative Units (WAU) Target Biomass: 800,000 BDT/yr delivered at a facility in Grays Harbor at $65/BDT

16 Piles modeling Data collection on field AIRPACT requires location coordinates for the pile burns so locations for the inputs were created in ArcMap New coordinates become burn locations for AIRPACT input Pile sizes: large (~50-60 tons/pile) (25%), medium (~20 tons/pile) (50%), small (10 tons/pile) (25%) small hand pile (~0.05 tons/pile). These shapes and sizes are later used as an input for Bluesky to estimate emissions

17 Long term exposure assessment

18 PM 2.5 concentration with slash pile burn (Average of 29 days)

19 PM 2.5 concentration with biomass collection (avoided burns) (Average of 29 days)

20 Reduced PM 2.5 concentration (avoided burns) (Average of 29 days)

21 Human Health Impact 1.2% less likely to develop cancer 0.6% less likely to develop cancer Economically utilizing 800,000 dry tons of residual biomass per year in the south western part of WA will help reduce 4 to 5 cancer incidences over a 70 years time period

22 Short term exposure assessment

23 Impacted population: 24 hours daily average

24 Impacted population: 24 hours daily average 3 of the days during the burn period contributed ~80% of the population impact

25 Concentration Results and Air Quality Standards Days when the total (baseline + prescribed burn) ambient 24 hours pm2.5 average is greater than: 25 microgram/cubic meter (WHO guideline) Exceeded 28 out of 29 days 35.5 microgram/cubic meter (US EPA guideline Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups ) Exceeded 23 out of 29 days 55.5 microgram/cubic meter (US EPA guideline Unhealthy ) Exceeded 13 out of 29 days microgram/cubic meter (US EPA guideline Very Unhealthy ) Exceeded 2 out of 29 days microgram/cubic meter (US EPA guideline - Hazardous) Exceeded 1 out of 29 days * A maximum daily average value is the highest pixel value occurring anywhere in the state during that day

26 Conclusions Results show an increase in poor air quality in the direct vicinity of the pile burns mainly caused by PM 2.5 Depending on the amount of slash burned and the weather, particulate matter also travels great distances away from the pile burns, reaching densely populated areas such as Seattle and Tacoma, in addition to impacting smaller communities. Particulate matter concentrations with the added pile burns exceed several air quality standards over the burn period, some concentrations reaching EPA very unhealthy air quality status. Additionally, results also show that 3 days of the 29-day pile burning scenario account for 80% of the daily total impacted population affected by pile burn PM 2.5 concentrations that exceeded the WHO guideline of 25µg/m³.

27 Conclusions Results suggest that emissions from slash pile burns are critical at the local level. Policies aimed at promoting alternative uses of biomass could dramatically reduce the impact on human health. In areas where slash pile burning cannot be avoided, this study can help policy makers identifying best practices in fire management based on site specific factors, e.g. meteorological conditions, air chemistry, biomass supply, number of piles, size and shape, population density and site morphology. Since these factors are site specific, the application of this method to other regions would be beneficial to know how pile burning affects populations in other parts of the country.

28 What s Next

29 Thank You