meta data for this page
  •  

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
sector:waste:cremation:start [2021/04/15 13:17] – [Trends in emissions] kludtsector:waste:cremation:start [2022/09/20 12:42] (current) – Fix link tarakji
Line 13: Line 13:
 ====Activity data==== ====Activity data====
  
-Activity data for this category are based on data from the statistics of the "Bundesverband Deutscher Bestatter e.V."[(annual personal message from Stephan Neuser (contact URL: https://www.bestatter.de/verband/ansprechpartner/))]. For purposes of GHG reporting we specify cremations as masses, too. The cremation is a growing trend in funerals.+Activity data for this category are based on data from the statistics of the "Bundesverband Deutscher Bestatter e.V."[(annual personal message from Stephan Neuser (contact URL: https://www.bestatter.de/verband/allgemeines-ueber-den-bdb/))]. For purposes of GHG reporting we specify cremations as masses, too. The cremation is a growing trend in funerals.
  
 ====Emission factors==== ====Emission factors====
Line 21: Line 21:
 In 2018 the TERT noted that the German Hg EF is 100 times smaller than the default value proposed in the 2016 EMEP/EEA Guidebook and the Cd and Pb EF are 1000 times smaller than the default values proposed in the 2016 EMEP/EEA Guidebook. However, the EF for Pb and Cd are based on national expert judgement: assumption that a) the emissions behave similarly to dust and b) the dust limit value of the air pollution control specification (27th BImSchV) is complied with (to be confirmed on the basis of the new measurement data from 5 crematoria with different exhaust gas cleaning systems). The Hg EF was calculated on the basis of the German report on “OSPAR Recommendation 2003/4 on controlling the dispersal of mercury from crematoria", but is under evaluation. In 2018 the TERT noted that the German Hg EF is 100 times smaller than the default value proposed in the 2016 EMEP/EEA Guidebook and the Cd and Pb EF are 1000 times smaller than the default values proposed in the 2016 EMEP/EEA Guidebook. However, the EF for Pb and Cd are based on national expert judgement: assumption that a) the emissions behave similarly to dust and b) the dust limit value of the air pollution control specification (27th BImSchV) is complied with (to be confirmed on the basis of the new measurement data from 5 crematoria with different exhaust gas cleaning systems). The Hg EF was calculated on the basis of the German report on “OSPAR Recommendation 2003/4 on controlling the dispersal of mercury from crematoria", but is under evaluation.
  
-Nevertheless a current analysis of measured data could decrease the country specific EF for POP further. After the done finalization of a research Project [FKZ 3716 53 3021 „Umweltrelevanz und Stand der Technik bei Einäscherungsanlagen“ (Environmental relevance and state of the art for cremation plants); URL: https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/umweltrelevanz-stand-technik-einaescherungsanlagen] the transparent explanation of this is still outstanding.+After the finalization of a research Project [(FKZ 3716 53 3021 „Umweltrelevanz und Stand der Technik bei Einäscherungsanlagen“ (Environmental relevance and state of the art for cremation plants); URL: https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/umweltrelevanz-stand-technik-einaescherungsanlagen)] the Hg EF is revised. As part of the project, emission measurements were carried out at six cremation routes. According to OSPAR reporting 2010/2014, approx. 90% of the plants have effective Hg mitigation technology, whereas approx. 10% are not equipped with effective Hg mitigation technology. This ratio is roughly reflected in the 2020 project report, too. 
 +This results in the following weighted mean value:  
 +0.9*0.0225 g/h + 0.1*0.2468 g/h = 0.0449588207 g/h.   
 +Since the cremation duration is approximately one hour, the mean value per hour corresponds to the Hg load per cremation and is used accordingly in the inventory calculation. Values are interpolated between the two endpoints 2010 and 2018.
  
 EF for TSP, PM10, and PM2.5 derive from the research study "Studie zur Korngrößenverteilung (PM10 und PM2.5) von Staubemissionen" [(Dreiseidler, A.; Baumbach, G.; Pregger, T.; Obermeier, A. (1999): Studie zur Korngrößenverteilung (< PM10 und < PM2,5) von Staubemissionen. UBA-Forschungsbericht 297 44 853, Umweltbundesamt Berlin (Study on particle size distribution (< PM10 and < PM2,5) of dust emissions))]. EF for TSP, PM10, and PM2.5 derive from the research study "Studie zur Korngrößenverteilung (PM10 und PM2.5) von Staubemissionen" [(Dreiseidler, A.; Baumbach, G.; Pregger, T.; Obermeier, A. (1999): Studie zur Korngrößenverteilung (< PM10 und < PM2,5) von Staubemissionen. UBA-Forschungsbericht 297 44 853, Umweltbundesamt Berlin (Study on particle size distribution (< PM10 and < PM2,5) of dust emissions))].