Number concentration, particle size distribution and emission factors of submicron aerosols during domestic coal burning
QIN Xu-jing1, KONG Shao-fei1,2, WU Jian1,2, ZHENG Shu-rui1, YAN Qin1, QI Shi-hua2,3
1. School of Environmental Studies, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430078, China; 2. Research Centre for Complex Air Pollution of Hubei Province, Wuhan 430078, China; 3. State Key Laboratory of Biogeology and Environmental Geology, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China
Abstract：The particle number concentration and size distribution of combustion emissions from seven types of honeycomb briquettes and eleven types of lump coal were investigated using a Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS) in a laboratory-simulated combustion setup with a dilution channel sampling system. Emission factors for the number concentration of various particle size segments were calculated, yielding essential data for the construction of a number concentration inventory and the enhancement of effect simulations. The results indicated the following: A significant quantity of submicron particles was emitted during the combustion processes of both coal types. The number concentrations exhibited a decreasing trend with increasing particle size, notably in the nucleation and Aitken modes. However, this decreasing trend was less pronounced in the lower particle size section of the accumulation mode (100nm £ Dp £ 200nm), while the number concentration of larger particles (200nm £ Dp) gradually increased with increasing particle size. The total number concentration emission factors from the combustion of honeycomb briquettes and lump coal were determined to be 9.9×1014±5.3×1014 particles/kg and 1.4×1015±7.9×1014 particles/kg, respectively. For lump coal, the emission factors across the three modes of combustion emissions were calculated as 1.0×1015 ±5.9×1014 particles/kg, 2.8×1014±2.5×1014 particles/kg, and 6.4×1013±3.5×1013 particles/kg. Notably, the three-modal mean concentration emission factors for lump coal were 1.3, 1.9, and 1.5times higher than those for honeycomb briquettes. Furthermore, the ICRP computational model was employed to estimate the total respiratory deposition flux (RDF) ranges of 7.6×1012 to 4.7×1013 particles/min for honeycomb briquettes and 5.7×1012 to 3.3×1013 particles/min for lump coal. It was found that over 90% of the RDF was attributed to the nuclear mode particles when compared to Aitken mode particles in the combustion emissions of submicron particles within the respiratory tract. Additionally, the particle RDF size distribution exhibited a decreasing trend across all three regions of the respiratory tract. Overall, this study provided a comprehensive analysis of particle number concentrations, size distributions, emission factors, and inhalation exposures associated with particulate matter from civil coal combustion emissions across different particle size sections. The findings contribute valuable data and essential support for the development of numerical concentration inventories, improvements in effect simulations, and assessments of health risks.
[1] Hussein T, Dal M D, Petäjä T, et al. Evaluation of an automatic algorithm for fitting the particle number size distributions [J]. Boreal Environment Research, 2005,10(5):337-355. [2] Zheng C H, Zheng H, Shen J L, et al. Evolution of condensable fine particle size distribution in simulated flue gas by external regulation for growth enhancement [J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 2020,54(7):3840-3848. [3] Liu S, Hu M, Wu Z J, et al. Aerosol number size distribution and new particle formation at a rural/coastal site in Pearl River Delta (PRD) of China [J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2008,42(25):6275-6283. [4] Alonso-Blanco E, Gómez-Moreno F J, Núñez L, et al. Aerosol particle shrinkage event phenomenology in a South European suburban area during 2009~2015 [J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2017, 160:154-164. [5] Bond T C, Covert D S, Kramlich J C, et al. Primary particle emissions from residential coal burning: Optical properties and size distributions [J]. Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 2002,107(D21): 8347. [6] Laakso L, Hussein T, Aarnio P, et al. Diurnal and annual characteristics of particle mass and number concentrations in urban, rural and Arctic environments in Finland [J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2003,37(19):2629-2641. [7] Schwarz M, Schneider A, Cyrys J, et al. Impact of ultrafine particles and total particle number concentration on five cause-specific hospital admission endpoints in three German cities [J]. Environment International, 2023,178:108032. [8] Zhang Y H, He Q L, Zhang Y P, et al. Differential associations of particle size ranges and constituents with stroke emergency-room visits in Shanghai, China [J]. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 2022,232:113237. [9] Konduracka E, Rostoff P. Links between chronic exposure to outdoor air pollution and cardiovascular diseases: a review [J]. Environmental Chemistry Letters, 2022,20(5):2971-2988. [10] Anenberg S C, Balakrishnan K, Jetter J, et al. Cleaner cooking solutions to achieve health, climate, and economic cobenefits [J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 2013,47(9):3944-3952. [11] Forouzanfar M H, Afshin A, Alexander L T, et al. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990~2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 [J]. Lancet, 2016,388(10053):1659-1724. [12] Lin S, Ryan I, Paul S, et al. Particle surface area, ultrafine particle number concentration, and cardiovascular hospitalizations [J]. Environmental Pollution, 2022,310:119795. [13] Jiang Y X, Chen R J, Peng W H, et al. Hourly ultrafine particle exposure and acute myocardial infarction onset: An individual-level case-crossover Study in Shanghai, China, 2015~2020 [J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 2023,57:1701-1711. [14] Gysel M, Crosier J, Topping D O, et al. Closure study between chemical composition and hygroscopic growth of aerosol particles during TORCH2 [J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2007,7(24): 6131-6144. [15] Dada L, Angot H, Beck I, et al. A central arctic extreme aerosol event triggered by a warm air-mass intrusion [J]. Nature Communications, 2022,13(1):5290. [16] Bulatovic I, Igel A L, Leck C, et al. The importance of aitken mode aerosol particles for cloud sustenance in the summertime high Arctic-a simulation study supported by observational data [J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2021,21(5):3871-3897. [17] Chen J, Zhao C S, Ma N, et al. A parameterization of low visibilities for hazy days in the North China Plain [J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2012,12(11):4935-4950. [18] Zhang Z F, Shen Y, Li Y W, et al. Analysis of extinction properties as a function of relative humidity using a κ-EC-Mie model in Nanjing [J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2017,17(6):4147-4157. [19] Calderón S M, Tonttila J, Buchholz A, et al. Aerosol-stratocumulus interactions: towards a better process understanding using closures between observations and large eddy simulations [J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2022,22(18):12417-12441. [20] 国家统计局.中国统计年鉴 [M]. 北京:中国统计出版社, 2021:185-203.National Bureau of Statistics. China statistical yearbook [M]. Beijing: China Statistical Publishing House, 2021:185-203. [21] 英国石油公司.世界能源统计年鉴 [Z]. 伦敦: 2021:8-9.British Petroleum. World energy statistics yearbook [Z]. London: 2021:8-9. [22] Junninen H, Monster J, Rey M, et al. Quantifying the impact of residential heating on the urban air quality in a typical European coal combustion region [J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 2009,43(20):7964-7970. [23] Zhou W, Jiang J K, Duan L, et al. Evolution of submicrometer organic aerosols during a complete residential coal combustion process [J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 2016,50(14):7861-7869. [24] Han Y, Chen Y J, Ahmad S, et al. High time-and size-resolved measurements of PM and chemical composition from coal combustion: implications for the EC formation process [J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 2018,52(11):6676-6685. [25] Wang D B, Li Q, Shen G F, et al. Significant ultrafine particle emissions from residential solid fuel combustion [J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2020,715:136992. [26] Zhang H F, Zhu T, Wang S X, et al. Indoor emissions of carbonaceous aerosol and other air pollutants from household fuel burning in southwest China [J]. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 2014,14(6): 1779-U291. [27] Zhang H F, Wang S X, Hao J M, et al. Chemical and size characterization of particles emitted from the burning of coal and wood in rural households in Guizhou, China [J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2012,51:94-99. [28] McElroy M W, Carr R C, Ensor D S, et al. Size distribution of fine particles from coal combustion [J]. Science, 1982,215(4528):13-19. [29] Zheng S R, Kong S F, Yan Q, et al. Impact of dilution ratio and burning conditions on the number size distribution and size-dependent mixing state of primary particles from domestic solid fuel burning [J]. Environmental Science and Technology Letters, 2022,9(7):611-617. [30] 孙文在,杨文俊,谢小芳,等.煤燃烧超细微粒粒径谱演变及排放因子的实验研究 [J]. 环境科学, 2014,35(12):4495-4501.Sun Z, Yang W J, Xie X F, et al. Experimental study on the evolution of ultrafine particle size spectra and emission factors of coal combustion [J]. Environmental Science, 2014,35(12):4495-4501. [31] 王东滨,郝吉明,蒋靖坤.民用固体燃料燃烧超细颗粒物排放及其潜在健康影响 [J]. 科学通报, 2019,64(33):3429-3440.Wang D B, Hao J M, Jiang J K. Emissions of ultrafine particulate matter from residential solid fuel combustion and their potential health effects [J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2019,64(33):3429-3440. [32] Zou J A, Cao Q M, Gao W K, et al. The effects of number and mass concentration of aerosol components on scattering coefficients in Xianghe, southeast of Beijing, China-A case study [J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2022,272:118938. [33] Dentener F, Kinne S, Bond T, et al. Emissions of primary aerosol and precursor gases in the years 2000 and 1750 prescribed data-sets for AeroCom [J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2006,6:4321-4344. [34] Zhang K, Wan H, Wang B, et al. Tropospheric aerosol size distributions simulated by three online global aerosol models using the M7microphysics module [J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2010,10(13):6409-6434. [35] Xausa F, Paasonnen P, Makkonen R, et al. Advancing global aerosol simulations with size-segregated anthropogenic particle number emissions [J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2018,18(13): 10039-10054. [36] Patel S, Leavey A, He S Q, et al. Characterization of gaseous and particulate pollutants from gasification-based improved cookstoves [J]. Energy for Sustainable Development, 2016,32:130-139. [37] Yang Y B, Sharifi V N, Swithenbank J. Effect of air flow rate and fuel moisture on the burning behaviours of biomass and simulated municipal solid wastes in packed beds [J]. Fuel, 2004,83(11/12): 1553-1562. [38] Zhou H, Jensen A D, Glarborg P, et al. Numerical modeling of straw combustion in a fixed bed [J]. Fuel, 2005,84(4):389-403. [39] Lipsky E M, Robinson A L. Design and evaluation of a portable dilution sampling system for measuring fine particle emissions from combustion systems [J]. Aerosol Science and Technology, 2005,39(6): 542-553. [40] Cheng Y, Kong S F, Yan Q, et al. Size-segregated emission factors and health risks of PAHs from residential coal flaming/smoldering combustion [J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2019, 26(31):31793-31803. [41] Hinds, W C. Aerosol technology: properties, behavior, and measurement of airborne particles [J]. Journal of Aerosol Science, 1999,31:1121-1122. [42] Segalin B, Kumar P, Micadei K, et al. Size-segregated particulate matter inside residences of elderly in the Metropolitan Area of Sao Paulo, Brazil [J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2017,148:139-151. [43] Liu X, Kong S F, Yan Q, et al. Size-segregated carbonaceous aerosols emission from typical vehicles and potential depositions in the human respiratory system [J]. Environmental Pollution, 2020,264,114705. [44] Luo P, Bao L J, Wu F C, et al. Health risk characterization for resident inhalation exposure to particle-bound halogenated flame retardants in a typical E-waste recycling zone [J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 2014,48(15):8815-8822. [45] Zhang H F, Hu D W, Chen J M, et al. Particle size distribution and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons emissions from agricultural crop residue burning [J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 2011, 45(13):5477-5482. [46] Tissari J, Lyyränen J, Hytönen, K, et al. Fine particle and gaseous emissions from normal and smouldering wood combustion in a conventional masonry heater [J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2008,42 (34):7862-7873. [47] Peng Y, Sui Z F, Zhang Y S, et al. The effect of moisture on particulate matter measurements in an ultra-low emission power plant [J]. Fuel, 2019,238:430-439. [48] Paasonen P, Kupiainen K, Klimont Z, et al. Continental anthropogenic primary particle number emissions [J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2016,16(11):6823-6840. [49] Kuye A, Kumar P. A review of the physicochemical characteristics of ultrafine particle emissions from domestic solid fuel combustion during cooking and heating [J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2023,886:163747. [50] Horák, J, Laciok V, Krpec K, et al. Influence of the type and output of domestic hot-water boilers and wood moisture on the production of fine and ultrafine particulate matter [J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2020,229:117437. [51] Manigrasso M, Vitali M, Protano, C, et al. Ultrafine particles in domestic environments: regional doses deposited in the human respiratory system [J]. Environment International, 2018,118:134-145. [52] Hu X, Zhang Y, Ding Z, et al. Bioaccessibility and health risk of arsenic and heavy metals (Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, Zn and Mn) in TSP and PM2.5in Nanjing, China [J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2012, 57:146-152. [53] Stuart B O. Deposition and clearance of inhaled particles [J]. Environmental Health Perspectives, 1976,55:369-390. [54] Kumar P, Ketzel M, Vardoulakis S, et al. Dynamics and dispersion modelling of nanoparticles from road traffic in the urban atmospheric environment-A review [J]. Journal of Aerosol Science, 2011,42(9): 580-603. [55] Chan C C, Chuang K J, Shiao G M, et al. Personal exposure to submicrometer particles and heart rate variability in human subjects [J]. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2004,112(10):1063-1067. [56] Geiser M, Rothen-Rutishauser B, Kapp N, et al. Ultrafine particles cross cellular membranes by nonphagocytic mechanisms in lungs and in cultured cells [J]. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2005,113(11): 1555-1560. [57] Mehta A J, Zanobetti A, Bind M C, et al. Long-term exposure to ambient fine particulate matter and renal function in older men: The Veterans Administration normative aging study [J]. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2016,124(9):1353-1360.
