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:open_burning:start [2021/04/27 14:09] – [5.C.2 - Open Burning of Waste] kludtsector:waste:open_burning:start [2024/11/06 15:10] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 9: Line 9:
 Within NFR sub-category 5.C.2 - Open Burning of Waste, the German emissions inventory provides emissions from registered bonfires and other wooden materials burnt outdoors. Emissions from bonfires are key source for PM2.5 and PM10, but in principle of minor priority due to discontinuous appearance. Within NFR sub-category 5.C.2 - Open Burning of Waste, the German emissions inventory provides emissions from registered bonfires and other wooden materials burnt outdoors. Emissions from bonfires are key source for PM2.5 and PM10, but in principle of minor priority due to discontinuous appearance.
  
-Please see chapter regarding farming/plantation waste: https://thg.thuenen.de/iir-de/sector/agriculture/field_burning/start - this is banned by law in Germany. So there is no gap of reporting.+Please see chapter regarding farming/plantation waste: [[sector:agriculture:field_burning:start|3.F - Field burning of agricultural residues]] - this is banned by law in Germany. So there is no gap of reporting.
  
 Emissions from open burning of wood and green waste for traditional purposes, so-called bonfires such as Easter fires, are reported model-based. In addition to biogenic carbon dioxide, emissions of NOx, SO2, CO, NMVOC, particulate matter (PM2.5, PM10 and TSP) and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) are covered so far. Emissions from open burning of wood and green waste for traditional purposes, so-called bonfires such as Easter fires, are reported model-based. In addition to biogenic carbon dioxide, emissions of NOx, SO2, CO, NMVOC, particulate matter (PM2.5, PM10 and TSP) and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) are covered so far.
Line 18: Line 18:
 For developing of a estimation frame a survey regarding the number of such bonfires was carried out by an expert work ((Wagner & Steinmetzer, 2018: Jörg Wagner, Sonja Steinmetzer, INTECUS GmbH Abfallwirtschaft und umweltintegratives Management: Erhebung der Größen und Zusammensetzung von Brauchtums- und Lagerfeuern durch kommunale Befragungen; URL: https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/1410/publikationen/2018-02-19_texte_11-2018_lager-brauchtumsfeuer.pdf; UBA-Texte 11/2018)). As the result, questionnaires from municipalities and statistical projections for Germany for the year 2016 were checked. The project has shown a declining trend since 1990. On the basis of expert judgement, a further reduction of emissions in the future is expected. For developing of a estimation frame a survey regarding the number of such bonfires was carried out by an expert work ((Wagner & Steinmetzer, 2018: Jörg Wagner, Sonja Steinmetzer, INTECUS GmbH Abfallwirtschaft und umweltintegratives Management: Erhebung der Größen und Zusammensetzung von Brauchtums- und Lagerfeuern durch kommunale Befragungen; URL: https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/1410/publikationen/2018-02-19_texte_11-2018_lager-brauchtumsfeuer.pdf; UBA-Texte 11/2018)). As the result, questionnaires from municipalities and statistical projections for Germany for the year 2016 were checked. The project has shown a declining trend since 1990. On the basis of expert judgement, a further reduction of emissions in the future is expected.
  
 +As discussed on Review 2020 regarding all relevant sources: A comparison shows that the volume of bonfires is significantly higher than the volume of campfires. In terms of number, however, the two types of fires are similar. Due to the large fluctuations of the minimum/maximum values, the median was proposed in study.
 +In our view the estimation of bonfires emissions is conservative and completly.
 ====Activity data==== ====Activity data====
  
Line 26: Line 28:
  
 ====Emission factors==== ====Emission factors====
 +
 +As discussed on Review 2020 regarding EF used and referenced: We use different EF from different references instead the EF of Table 3-1 Tier 1 emission factors for source category 5.C.2 Small-scale waste burning, because the Tier 1 EF seem not suitable for the burning of wooden wastes. We consider both fresh wood (garden and park waste) and dry wood (without coatings etc.). We have tried to find relevant parallels, especially because of the burning of fresh wood with regard to forest fires.
  
 Emission factors used were taken from different sources: Emission factors used were taken from different sources:
 ^ pollutant  ^ figure      ^ reference                                                                                                   ^ ^ pollutant  ^ figure      ^ reference                                                                                                   ^
 | CO         | 58.0        | GB 2016 small combustion Table 3-6: Tier 1 emission factors for NFR source category 1.A.4.b, using biomass  | | CO         | 58.0        | GB 2016 small combustion Table 3-6: Tier 1 emission factors for NFR source category 1.A.4.b, using biomass  |
-| NOx        | 0.9         | Research results for charcoal                                                                               | +| NOx        | 0.9         | Research results from literature: wood burning as it was documented in Ireland's IIR                                                                               | 
-| SO2        | 0.2         | Research results for charcoal                                                                               |+| SO2        | 0.2         | Research results from literature: wood burning as it was documented in Ireland's IIR                                                                              |
 | NMVOC      | 47.0        | GB 2016 Forest fires, table 3-1, according 'wood burned'                                                    | | NMVOC      | 47.0        | GB 2016 Forest fires, table 3-1, according 'wood burned'                                                    |
 | TSP        | 17.0        | GB 2016 Forest fires, table 3-1, according 'wood burned'                                                    | | TSP        | 17.0        | GB 2016 Forest fires, table 3-1, according 'wood burned'                                                    |
Line 43: Line 47:
 | BkF        | 0.0005      | Research results for charcoal                                                                               | | BkF        | 0.0005      | Research results for charcoal                                                                               |
 | IxP        | 0.00009     | Research results for charcoal                                                                               | | IxP        | 0.00009     | Research results for charcoal                                                                               |
-| Pb         | 0.32 g/ t   | GB 2016 Forest fires, table 3-2                                                                             | +| Pb         | 0.32 g/ t   | GB 2016 Forest fires, table 3-2   ((Used EF for forest fires are provided in “g/kg wood burned” unit. Wether the EF is regarding living (fresh) wood or for a likely dry forest is unknown.))                                                                          | 
-| Cd         | 0.13 g/ t   | GB 2016 Forest fires, table 3-2                                                                             |+| Cd         | 0.13 g/ t   | GB 2016 Forest fires, table 3-2  ((Used EF for forest fires are provided in “g/kg wood burned” unit. Wether the EF is regarding living (fresh) wood or for a likely dry forest is unknown.))                                                                           |
  
 \\ \\