Laboratory for Earth Surface Process, College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China.
College of Environment, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310014, China.
Environ Sci Technol. 2021 Jan 5;55(1):169-178. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.0c04784. Epub 2020 Dec 9.
Residential solid fuel use is an important source of black carbon (BC) but also a main source of uncertainty in BC emission inventories, as reliable real-world emission factors (EFs) and data on consumption of noncommercial household fuels are limited. In this study, particulate BC and brown carbon (BrC) for real-world indoor coal and biomass burning were evaluated using a SootScan model OT21 optical transmissometer from a field campaign including 343 biomass/coal combustion events. The highest BC EF from the burning of coal cake (a mixed fuel locally made from coal and clay) was 1.6-6.4 higher than that of other fuels, and BC EFs were higher for coal combustion than for biomass burning. The highest particulate BrC EF was from charcoal burning and was 1.5-4.3 times higher than that from other biomass and coals. Burning fuel in iron stoves had lower BC and BrC EFs, at approximately 15-66% and 40-54%, respectively, compared with burning in other stove types. The difference between heating and cooking activities was statistically insignificant ( > 0.05). A generalized linear model coupled with dominance analysis evidenced that the EFs were significantly associated with fuel and stove types, with the fuel difference being a major influencing factor explaining 68% of the variation. This suggests that a clean fuel transition would have beneficial impacts on air pollution associated with the residential sector in China. The absorption EFs differed by 2-3 orders of magnitude across different fuel-stove combinations. The Absorption Ångström Exponent values for the particulate from residential solid fuel combustions ranged from 0.92 to 3.7.
居民固体燃料的使用是黑碳(BC)的一个重要来源,但也是 BC 排放清单不确定性的主要来源,因为可靠的实际排放因子(EF)和非商业家用燃料消耗数据有限。在这项研究中,使用 SootScan 模型 OT21 光学透射仪,从包括 343 次生物质/煤炭燃烧事件的实地考察中评估了实际室内煤炭和生物质燃烧的颗粒态 BC 和棕色碳(BrC)。煤饼(一种由煤和粘土混合制成的当地混合燃料)燃烧的 BC EF 比其他燃料高 1.6-6.4 倍,煤炭燃烧的 BC EF 高于生物质燃烧。木炭燃烧的 BrC EF 最高,比其他生物质和煤炭高 1.5-4.3 倍。与在其他类型的炉子中燃烧相比,在铁炉中燃烧燃料时,BC 和 BrC 的 EF 分别低 15-66%和 40-54%。加热和烹饪活动之间的差异在统计学上没有意义(>0.05)。广义线性模型结合优势分析表明,EFs 与燃料和炉子类型显著相关,燃料差异是解释 68%变化的主要影响因素。这表明在中国,向清洁能源燃料的转变将对与居民部门相关的空气污染产生有益影响。不同燃料-炉子组合的吸收 EF 相差 2-3 个数量级。居民固体燃料燃烧产生的颗粒物质的吸收 Ångström 指数值范围为 0.92 至 3.7。