### Dr . James Conner Fa irbanks North Star Bor ough

November 8, 2012 Dr . James Conner Fa irbanks North Star Bor ough

November 8, 2012

# Backgr **ound**

 

### Fa irbank s designat ed nonat ta inmen t for PM 2.5 

### in Dec. 2009
 

### Design v alue is 44.7 μg /m 3


###  

### High PM 2.5 

### da ys occur at te mper atures fr om +10 ° F t o - 40 ° F
 

### Space heating is the dominan t emissions sour ce  

### Public is very c oncerned about the co st of home heating
 

### High heating c os ts ignit ed co ntroversy about wood heating co ntro ls 2

# Home Hea **ting Fuel Comparison**

**Heating Sour**  **ce PM**  **2.5**

**Emission Fa**  **ctor (lb/mil.**  **BT U)**  **Fuel Cost** 

**($/mil. BT**  **U) Infr** **astructur e** 

**Cost ($ millions)**  **Homes Modeled**  **PM 2.5**  **Benefit (**  **μg /m**  **3 )**  Existing Fuels Natur al Gas 0.0023 25.8 0 1,120 0

District Heat 0.0027 10.8 – 27.7 0 137 0 Fuel Oil (#2) 0.0043 35.3 0 32,259 0 Wo od 0.68 – 0.71 14.0 - 15.0 0 11,934 0 Coal 1.214 13.8 0 502 0 Alt ernative Energy Solutions Natur al Gas

Expanded 0.0023 19.0 – 23.0 309 – 662 24,986 1.1 District Heat Expanded 0.0027 10.8 – 27.7 238 2,258 ~0.1 Economic Incentive 0.0043 35.3 0 7,744 5.5

# Local Concerns R **es trict**  **Con tr**  **ol Options**

 

### Fa irbanks home heating costs using fuel oil ar e v ery high  

### Wo od and c oal ec onomic al for primary/ supplemen ta l heating


###  

### Local ballot initiativ e r es tricts Bor ough fr om implemen ting an y solid fuel or home heating contr ols
 

### Due t o home heating costs, Bor ough Assembly has concerns about an y measur es that incr ease costs
 

### Or dinance implemen ting Community Hea ting Incentiv e Pr ogr am to be consider ed by Bor ough Assembly  

### Pr ogr am w ould est ablish incen tive t o shift fr om w ood t o cleaner fuel on poor air quality da ys 4

# Ext **ensiv e T** 

**echnic al Studies Conduct**  **ed Mo**  **nit oring**  **, Mo**  **deling , Sur** **ve ys,**  **Studies**  PM2.5 Filter

s ampling at

4 fixe d sites, 1 mobile(RAMS)  ContinuousP M 2.5 sampling at 4 fixe d sites, 1 mobile(RAMS)  Speciationsampling at 3 f ixed sites (R TI analysis), 1 mobile(RAMS)  Chemical Massb alanc e  C
- 14 analysis  Lev ogluc osan  Organo
- sulfur/Markers  CMAQ  PCA  Te lephones urvey o f spac e heating by z ipco de  La boratory measurementso f ve hicle emissions  PI LS  Denuder Study  Spac e He ating EmissionFactorsa nd Sourc e Prof

iles  Mu ltiple Inversion layers  WRF/ Chem  winter hourly e missionsfrom each point sourc e located in theFairbanks area  Transport

(wildf ires)  Residential H eating Devic e a nd Fuel Surveys  Wo od storage d rying time(winter & Summer)  Retrof its(catalysts, ESPs)  Sniffer
- DataRam surveys via instrumented ve hicle

# Fa **irbank s**  **Modeling Re**  **sults –**  **Ke y Findings** 

 

### Wo od burning is the dominan t sour ce of PM 2.5 

### in F airbank s  

### It is not possible t **o demonstr ate**  **attainment of the PM**  **sta ndard without limiting wood burning emissions on high**  **concen tr** **ation da ys**   

### Modeling shows mobile sour ces and sulfur emit ting sour ces as the ne xt large st contributor s to PM in F airbank s

# Benefits of P **ot en**  **tial Con tr**  **ol Pr ogr** **ams**

**2014, Down to**  **wn F airbank**  **s Re**  **lative R eductions**  **( μg/m** **3 )**  **Contr ol**  **Pr ogr** **am Augus** **t Update** Expanded W ood Stove Change Out 0.8 Existing St ate Measur es 0.1 Dry Wo od 2.0 Re duce Wo od Use on High PM Da ys (Community Heating Incentive Pr ogr am) 4.7 Vo luntary Measur es 0.6 **Cumulative T**

**otal 8.1**  **Re duction**  **Goal f or A** 

**ttainment in 2014**  **~10** Note: Estimate of benefits at downtown site as of August, plan must demonstrate in all areas. Emission sources in each grid cell can change relative benefits.

# At**ta inmen**  **t Outlook**

 

### Under the best of cir cumstances, a va ilable co ntro ls will pr oduce design v alues that e xc eed the st andard  

### Due t o loc al restrictions, c on tr ol options a va ilable are more limit ed and resulting design v alue is lik ely t o be higher  

### Re sult is Bor ough and St ate need t o pur sue all possible sour ces of emission reductions  

### St ate currently assessing options t o implemen t co ntro ls pr e empted by loc al ordinance

8

## State **& Local**  **Pr ogr** **ams Ta**  **rget ing W** **ood Emissions**

 

### St ate and loc al e ffo rts t o r educe wood st ove/OWB emissions:  Fa irbanks city or dinance bans ins tallation of hyd ro nic hea ter s  Bor ough or dinance r es tricts new hyd ro nic hea ter s to EP A Phase II qualified units  Pr ogr am to remove, replace, repair stoves/OWBs with EP A certified units  ~$4 million changing out or r emoving 1,000+ stoves  Pilot pr ogr am to install catalysts on OWB’ s (limited success) 

###  

### Po litic ally accept able options t o pr ovide meaningful reductions fr om w ood burning are limit ed  Public demands lower cos t hea ting alternativ es  Cos t of living is primary concern, not air quality or public health  Benefits fr om change - outs substantially greater if tighter standards  Alask a/F airbanks needs help r educing w ood burning emissions! 9

## Fa **irbank s**  **Re commenda**  **tions Tight**  **er Wo**  **od Burning Emission Standar**  **ds**

 

### EP A should implemen t stringent emission st andards fo r w ood burning devices  Consider s tandards that for ce the dev elopment of new technology in coor dina tion with States and Indus try 

###  

### Given r ang e of certified st ove emission r ates, signific an t additional reductions are a va ilable if EP A adopts a BACM type appr oach when setting st andards  

### Alt ernatively

, a phase - in schedule for new st andards using a tr ansition fr om e xisting t o W ashingto n St ate levels t o B ACM levels c ould be est ablished

10