# Proposed New**Source Performance Standards**

**for New Residential W** **ood Heaters, Residential Hy**  **dronic Heaters,**  **Forced -** **Air Furnaces, and Residential Masonry H**  **eaters**

**Benefits Assessment**  EO 12866 Review Briefing for OMB August 1 st 

## , 2013

# Outline • Bene fits Methodology k eyImpr ovements • Bene fits Assessmen t Over view • Summary of Sector Modeling of PM 2.5 

# • Re siden tial W ood Combus tion Dis tribution • Health Bene fits • Appendix

– Corr ected input dat a in Figur e 7 - 2

– Sector vs. National Benefit per T on (BPT)

– Health dat a consider ed in PM RIA RWH - Pr oposal 2

# Benefits Methodology **Ke y Impr**  **ove men**  **ts**

**1. Sour ce**  **Apportionment Modeling used pr eviously** 

– RICE NESHAP r econsider ations

– Pet ro leum R efineries NSPS

– Ferroalloys RTR Pr oposal

– EG U GHG NSPS r econsider ation pr oposal 

## 2. Health **Benefits Studies and the popula**  **tion Data ha**  **ve been updated and ar**  **e consis tent with the PM NAAQS RIA** 

– Harv ar d Six Cities cohort – Re placed Laden et al. (2006) with Lepeule et al. (2012) and P ope Study (2002) re placed with Krewski (2009)

– Morbidity Studies update – Added 1 new r espir atory hospitalization study and 1 new asthma ER visit study

– Non - fatal heart attacks – Updated survival r ates

– Po pulation Data updated using 2010 Census data 

## 3. Inf**ormation documented in the**  **curr ent TSD** 

– This rule’ s estimates using BPT in 2020 (closest to 2022) in $2010

– Estimates r eflecting only dir ectly emitted particulate matter RWH - Pr oposal 3

# Bene fits Assessmen t Ov er view
• Pr eliminary re sults use benefit - per - ton appr oach, as used in other r ecen t NSPS RIAs and include PM NAAQS RIA

– Human health benefits monetiz ed for Direct PM 2.5 

## emissions

– PM 2.5 

## pr ecur sor VOCs were not monetiz ed

– Monetiz ed benefits wer e a ve ra ged yearly fr om 2014 to 2022

– **Proposed Option**  : $1.8 to $4.2 billion, 210 to 470 premature deaths

– **Alterna tiv**  **e** : $1.9 to $4.2 billion, 210 to 480 pr emature deaths 

# • Re sults for RIA we re updated to include

– New health functions dev eloped for PM NAAQS RIA,

– New ver sion of BenMAP , and

– Sour ce - apportioned air quality modeling. 

# • Un - quan tified benefits addr essed qualit atively

– VO Cs, Black Carbon, HAP s and CO benefits

– Oz one and Visibility co - benefits 4 RWH - Pr oposal

# Summar y of Sector Modeling of PM 2.5 • 12km CA Mx with 2005 model platform • 2005 and 2016 model years (includes NOx SIP call, boiler MACT proposal,

R ICE, CSAPR proposal,

final cement kilns rule) • Annual mean PM 2.5 

## • 25 sectors modeled in total. 12 sectors most relevant to SPPD rule support 12 Sectors most relevant to future SPPD rules 13 Other sectors Cement kilns Refineries Agricultural ammonia Non - ro ad Cok e o ve ns Residential wood

combustion Airport/loco/marine On - ro ad Electric arc furnaces Ta conite mining Biogenic Other area Fe rroalloy production Canada and Mexico Other non - EGU Integrated iron and steel Commercial marine Iron and steel foundries Dust Oil and gas production Electrical generating units Oil and gas storage/transfer Fires Pulp and paper Lateral boundar y inflow 5

# Conceptual **over view**  **of the s te**  **ps f or calcula**  **ting**

**bene fit**  **per -**  **ton es**  **tima te**  **s**

RWH - Pr oposal 6RWH - Pr oposal 7



### Modeled	annual	mean	PM **2.5** 

### lev**els	( ug/m**  **3** 

### ) **attributable	to	R WH**  **Sector	in	2016**

# Calculating Health Impacts in BenMAP Ln(y) = Ln(B) + **ß** (PM) Incidence (log scale) PM concentration Ln(B) 

## ∆ Y = Y o 

## (1 - e - **ß** ∆ PM 

## ) * Pop 

# ß **- Effect estimate**  

# Yo **– Baseline Incidence**  

# Po **p –**  **Exposed population**  

## Health impact function **Epidemiolo gy** 

**Study**

8



# ∆PM **– Air quality change** Baseline Air Quality Post - Policy Scenario Air Quality

Incremental Air Quality Improvement PM 2.5 Reduction Population Ages 18 - 65 Background Incidence Rate Effect

Estimate Mortality

Reduction 

## ∆ Y = Yo (1 - e - **ß** ∆ PM 

## ) * Pop

910 

# Health Bene **fits of Pr oposed**  **Wo od Heater**  **s NSPS (2014**  **- 2022)**  **Reductions in Health Incidences per year (2014 -**  **2022)*** **Proposed Option**  **Alternative Avoided Premature Mortality**  Krewski et al. 210 210 Lepeule et al. 470 480 **Avoided Morbidity** Emergency department visits for asthma (all ages) 110 100 Acute bronchitis (age 8 – 12) 320 320 Lower respiratory symptoms (age 7 – 14) 4100 4200 Upper respiratory symptoms (asthmatics age 9 – 11) 5900 6000 Minor restricted - activity days (age 18 – 65) 170000 170000 Lost work days (age 18 – 65) 28000 28000 Asthma exacerbation (age 6 – 18) 15000 15000 Hospital admissions—

respiratory (all ages) 54 54 Hospital admissions—cardiovascular (age > 18) 66 66 Non -Fatal Heart Attacks (age >18) Peters et al. (2001) 230 230 Pooled estimate of 4 studies 25 25 * All estimates are for the full implementation year ( 2022), and are rounded to two significant figures so numbers may not sum across columns. All fine particles are assumed to have equivalent health effects , but the benefit per ton estimates vary because each ton of precursor reduced has a different propensity to become PM 2.5 . These benefits incorporate the conversion from precursor emissions to ambient fine particles. **To tal**  **Monetized Benefits**  **per year (2014**  **- 2022)** 

**(billions of 2010$)*** **3% discount rate**  **7% discount**

**rate Non**  **- Monetized Benefits**  **Proposed Option**  $1.8 to $4.2 $1.7 to $3.8 3,200 tpy VOC **Alternative** $1.9 to $4.2 $1.7 to $3.8 3,200 tpy VOC 

### Monetized **Benefits by Category for**  **the Proposed Option**  **- Krewski**  **at 3%** Wood Stoves Single Burn Rate Stoves Pellet Stoves Furnace: indoor, cordwood Hydronic Heating Systems RWH - Pr oposal

# APPENDIX

RWH - Pr oposal 11**Pollutant Em** **issions Reductions (tons)**  **Benefit per ton** 

**( Krewsk**  **i , 3%)**  **Benefit per ton**  **( Lepeule**  **, 3%)**  **Benefit per ton** 

**(Krewsk i, 7%)**  **Benefit per ton**  **(Lepeule, 7%)**  **Total Monetized**  **Benefits**

**(millions 2010$ at 3%)**  **Total Monetized**  **Benefits (millions 2010$**  **at 7%)**Proposed Direct PM 2.5 4,825 $ 380,000 $ 860,000 $ 350,000 $ 780,000 $1,800 to $4,200 $1,700 to $ 3,800 PM 2.5 Precursors VOC xxxx
_ _ _ _ _ to

_ _ to

_ **Total $1,800**  **to $4,200**  **$1,700 to**  **$3,800**Alternative Direct PM 2.5 4,878 $ 380,000 $ 860,000 $ 350,000 $ 780,000 $1,900 to $4,200 $1,700 to $3,800 PM 2.5 Precursors VOC xxxx
_ _ _ _ _ to

_ _ to

_ **Total $1,900**  **to $4,200**  **$1,700 to**  **$ 3,800 Corrected**  **T**

**able 7 -**  **2 (page 7. -**  **9) :**  **Summary of Monetized PM**  **2.5 -**  **Related Health Benefits Estimates**  **for the Proposed Residential Wood Heaters NSPS in the 2014**  **- 2022**  **Ti meframe**  **(2010$)** *****

12 RWH - Pr oposal

# PM 2.5 

# S tudies used PM NAA QS RIA (in 2006 RIA, added at PM pr oposal , added at PM final ) • Mortality

– Krewski et al.

(2009) AC S cohort 30+

– Lepeule et al.

(2012) H6C cohort 25+ 

## • AMI

– Pe ters et al.

(2001) Boston,

M A 18+

– Sullivan et al.

(2005) King County

, WA 18+

– Po pe et al.

(2006) Wa satch Front,

Utah 18+

– Zanobetti & Schwartz (2006) Boston, M A 18+

– Zanobetti et al.

(2009) 26 communities 18+ 

## • Respiratory Hospitalizations

– Moolga

vkar (2000) Los Angeles,

C A 18 - 64

– Shephard (2003) Seattle, W A <18

– Babin et al.

(2007) Wa shington,

D.C . <18

– Zanobetti et al.

(2009) 26 communities 65+

– Kloog et al.

(2012) New England 65+ 

## • Car diovascular H ospitalizations

– Moolga

vkar (2000) Los Angeles,

C A 20 - 64

– Bell et al.

(2008) 202 counties 65+

– Pe ng et al.

(2008) 108 counties 65+

– Pe ng et al.

(2009) 119 urban counties 65+

– Zanobetti et al.

(2009) 26 communities 65+ 

## • Respiratory ED Visits

– Slaughter et al.

(2005) Spokane,

W A 0 - 99

– Mar et al.

(2010) Ta coma,

W A 0 - 99

– Glad et al.

(2011) Pittsburgh,

P A 0 - 99 

## • Asthma Exacerbation

– Ostro et al.

(2001) LA/Pasadena,

C A 6 - 18

– Mar et al.

(2004) Spokane,

W A 6 - 18 

## • Minor Restricted Activity Da ys

– Ostro and Rothschild (1989) Nationwide 18 - 65

– Patel et al.

(2010) NYC 18 - 65 

## • Acute Bronchitis

– Dock ery et al. (1996) 24 communities 8 - 12 

## • Wo rk Loss da

ys

– Ostro (1987) Nationwide 18 - 65 

## • Upper Respiratory Symptoms

– Po pe et al.

(1991) Utah Va lley 9 - 11 

## • Lower Respiratory S ymptoms

– Schwartz and Neas (2000) 6 cities 7 - 14 13

# Comparing the Strengths of Sector Modeling and Response Surface - Based Modeling **Sector modeling** • Refined characterization of air quality changes for k

ey sectors • More cur re nt modeling platform • Better spatial re presentation of air quality impacts • Models PM 2.5 

# and ozone • Ad dresses interagency fe edback on benefit per ton metrics 

# Response Surface Model • Accounts for non - linearities and interactions in PM 2.5 

# air quality • Ability to estimate air quality changes from a broad class of precursors and source categ ories • Can estimate air quality changes nationally and within 9 urban areas 14