the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 19 Sep 2023
Chemically Speciated Air Pollutant Emissions from Open Burning of Household Solid Waste from South Africa
Abstract. Open burning of household solid waste is a large source of air pollutants worldwide, especially in developing countries. However, waste burning emissions are either missing or have large uncertainties in local, regional, or global emission inventories due to limited emission factor (EF) and activity data. Detailed particulate matter (PM) chemical speciation data is even scarcer. This paper reports source profiles and EFs for PM2.5 species as well as acidic and alkali gases measured from laboratory combustion of ten waste categories that represent open burning in South Africa. Carbonaceous materials contributed more than 70 % of PM2.5 mass. Elemental carbon (EC) was most abundant from flaming materials (e.g., plastic bags, textile, and combined materials) and its climate forcing exceeded the corresponding CO2 emissions by a factor of 2–5. Chlorine had the highest EFs among elements measured by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) for all materials; vegetation emissions showed high abundances of potassium, consistent with its use as a marker for biomass burning. Fresh PM2.5 emitted from waste burning appeared to be acidic. Moist vegetation and food discards had the highest hydrogen fluoride (HF) and PM fluoride EFs due to fluorine accumulation in plants, while burning rubber had the highest hydrogen chloride (HCl) and PM chloride EFs due to high chlorine content in the rubber. Plastic bottles and bags, rubber, and food discards had the highest EFs for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and nitro-PAHs as well as their associated toxicities. Distinct differences between odd and even carbon preferences were found for alkanes from biological and petroleum-based materials: dry vegetation, paper, textile, and food discards show preference for the odd-numbered alkanes, while the opposite is true for plastic bottles, bags, and rubber. As phthalates are used as plasticizers, their highest EFs were found for plastic bottles and bags, rubber, and combined materials. Data from this study will be useful for health and climate impact assessments, speciated emission inventories, source-oriented dispersion models, and receptor-based source apportionment.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(6458 KB)
-
Supplement
(4804 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(6458 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(4804 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2089', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Oct 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2089/egusphere-2023-2089-RC1-supplement.pdf
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Xiaoliang Wang, 28 Oct 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2089', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Oct 2023
Re: Chemically Speciated Air Pollutant Emissions from Open Burning of Household Solid Waste from South Africa
Wang et.al.
This paper addresses a major research gap in air quality research in Africa. Use of emission factors derived from Emissions from North America for air quality modeling in Africa has been a serious handicap. The paper provides a very important and critical information for the region and can encourage similar work in other African Countries.
Main concerns that need to be addressed
- “Open burning has low burning efficiency” needs to be backed by measurements of Modified Combustion Efficiency (MCE) to determine burning conditions.
- Line 30 Important recent relevant studies are missing and my need to be included (more are added below related to calculation of emission factors and Africa relevant work
Gordon et.al “The Effects of Trash, Residential Biofuel, and Open Biomass Burning Emissions on Local and Transported PM2.5 and Its Attributed Mortality in Africa” https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GH000673
Pokhrel et al. Determination of Emission Factors of Pollutants From Biomass Burning of African Fuels in Laboratory Measurements https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD034731
Hodshire et. al. “Aging Effects on Biomass Burning Aerosol Mass and Composition: A Critical Review of Field and Laboratory Studies” https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b02588
3. Line 83: How valid is using food discards from Nevada to be used to represent food discards in Africa. The food discards in Africa are probable fresh from the farm or bakery unlike the processed food with preservative chemicals in the US. How would the preservatives contaminate the samples?
4. Line 97: More details on the burning condition is needed. If a tube furnace is used at 450 it often corresponds to smoldering combustion based on the MCE. Pokhrel et al has shown MCE dependence of emission factors.
5. Some details need to be provided on how trash burning experiments are done. The trash in trash damps in Africa are a mixture of food discards, plastics, paper products and vegetation. How is this exactly done? Furthermore, there is evidence of fuel type dependent emission factors for biomass fuel are reported. When the authors indicate vegetation, it is quite broad, and the type of vegetation needs to be described. The results from the combined waste do not quite match with the results of individual types of trash. If the combination of fuels or trash contains everything, then all the EF’s pollutants should show in proportional amounts. How do the authors explain this?
6. The major concern is a missing information on how Emission factors are calculated for each species. Table 1 is an important table, and I am sure all the authors these results are compared to have provided the methods and assumptions used in calculating emission factorsPokhrel et al
Examples are
Yokelson, R. J., J. G. Goode, D. E. Ward, R. A. Susott, R. E. Babbitt, D. D. Wade, I. Bertschi, D. W. T. Griffith, and W. M. Hao (1999), Emissions of formaldehyde, acetic acid, methanol, and other trace gases from biomass fires in North Carolina measured by airborne Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 104(D23), 30109-30125, doi:10.1029/1999jd90081
Andreae, M. O., and P. Merlet (2001), Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 15(4), 955-966, doi:10.1029/2000gb001382.
Selimovic, V., Yokelson, R. J., Warneke, C., Roberts, J. M., de Gouw, J., Reardon, J., & Griffith, D. W. T. (2018). Aerosol optical properties and trace gas emissions by PAX and OP-FTIR for laboratory-simulated western US wildfires during FIREX. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 18(4), 2929–2948. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2929-201
Weyant, C. L.; Chen, P.; Vaidya, A.; Li, C.; Zhang, Q.; Thompson, R.; Ellis, J.; Chen, Y.; Kang, S.; Shrestha, G. R.; et al. Emission measurements from traditional biomass cookstoves in south Asia and Tibet. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2019, 53 (6), 3306-3314. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.8b05199.
Stockwell, C. E., Jayarathne, T., Cochrane, M. A., Ryan, K. C., Putra, E. I., Saharjo, B. H., et al. (2016). Field measurements of trace gases and aerosols emitted by peat fires in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia, during the 2015 El Niño. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 16(18), 11711–11732. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-11711-2016
Vakkari, V.; Beukes, J. P.; Dal Maso, M.; Aurela, M.; Josipovic, M.; van Zyl, P. G. Major secondary aerosol formation in southern African open biomass burning plumes. Nat. Geosci., 2018, 11 (8), 580-583. DOI: 10.1038/s41561-018-0170-0.
Minor comments:
Line 10. Is household trash burning a large source of pollutant worldwide or Global South. Developing countries in current literature is now referred to as Global South
Line 12: what does activity data mean?
Line 13: Scarcer? Is it grammatically, correct?
Line 21: Plastic bottles, plastic bags, rubber and .. (remove “and between plastic bottles and bags)
Line 30: Global south instead of developing countries
Line 35-36: Instead of communities with low socioeconomic status better use Low-income communities
Line 42” emission factor and activity data? What is activity data?
Line 58: …highlighted a large variation instead of the
Line 60: Detailed PM chemical composition data are.. (data is missing)
Line 65: PM light scattering, and absorption properties depend on its chemical composition and associate hygroscopicity and optical properties. change to “PM optical properties depend on chemical composition and hygroscopicity” absorption and scattering are the optical properties
Line 77: Ef’s for acidic… remove including elements
Line 244: Higher combustion temperature doesn’t indicate burning condition. Need MCE
Line 385: dearth of measurements “of is missing”
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Xiaoliang Wang, 30 Oct 2023
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2089', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Oct 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-2089/egusphere-2023-2089-RC1-supplement.pdf
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Xiaoliang Wang, 28 Oct 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2089', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Oct 2023
Re: Chemically Speciated Air Pollutant Emissions from Open Burning of Household Solid Waste from South Africa
Wang et.al.
This paper addresses a major research gap in air quality research in Africa. Use of emission factors derived from Emissions from North America for air quality modeling in Africa has been a serious handicap. The paper provides a very important and critical information for the region and can encourage similar work in other African Countries.
Main concerns that need to be addressed
- “Open burning has low burning efficiency” needs to be backed by measurements of Modified Combustion Efficiency (MCE) to determine burning conditions.
- Line 30 Important recent relevant studies are missing and my need to be included (more are added below related to calculation of emission factors and Africa relevant work
Gordon et.al “The Effects of Trash, Residential Biofuel, and Open Biomass Burning Emissions on Local and Transported PM2.5 and Its Attributed Mortality in Africa” https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GH000673
Pokhrel et al. Determination of Emission Factors of Pollutants From Biomass Burning of African Fuels in Laboratory Measurements https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD034731
Hodshire et. al. “Aging Effects on Biomass Burning Aerosol Mass and Composition: A Critical Review of Field and Laboratory Studies” https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b02588
3. Line 83: How valid is using food discards from Nevada to be used to represent food discards in Africa. The food discards in Africa are probable fresh from the farm or bakery unlike the processed food with preservative chemicals in the US. How would the preservatives contaminate the samples?
4. Line 97: More details on the burning condition is needed. If a tube furnace is used at 450 it often corresponds to smoldering combustion based on the MCE. Pokhrel et al has shown MCE dependence of emission factors.
5. Some details need to be provided on how trash burning experiments are done. The trash in trash damps in Africa are a mixture of food discards, plastics, paper products and vegetation. How is this exactly done? Furthermore, there is evidence of fuel type dependent emission factors for biomass fuel are reported. When the authors indicate vegetation, it is quite broad, and the type of vegetation needs to be described. The results from the combined waste do not quite match with the results of individual types of trash. If the combination of fuels or trash contains everything, then all the EF’s pollutants should show in proportional amounts. How do the authors explain this?
6. The major concern is a missing information on how Emission factors are calculated for each species. Table 1 is an important table, and I am sure all the authors these results are compared to have provided the methods and assumptions used in calculating emission factorsPokhrel et al
Examples are
Yokelson, R. J., J. G. Goode, D. E. Ward, R. A. Susott, R. E. Babbitt, D. D. Wade, I. Bertschi, D. W. T. Griffith, and W. M. Hao (1999), Emissions of formaldehyde, acetic acid, methanol, and other trace gases from biomass fires in North Carolina measured by airborne Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres, 104(D23), 30109-30125, doi:10.1029/1999jd90081
Andreae, M. O., and P. Merlet (2001), Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 15(4), 955-966, doi:10.1029/2000gb001382.
Selimovic, V., Yokelson, R. J., Warneke, C., Roberts, J. M., de Gouw, J., Reardon, J., & Griffith, D. W. T. (2018). Aerosol optical properties and trace gas emissions by PAX and OP-FTIR for laboratory-simulated western US wildfires during FIREX. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 18(4), 2929–2948. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-2929-201
Weyant, C. L.; Chen, P.; Vaidya, A.; Li, C.; Zhang, Q.; Thompson, R.; Ellis, J.; Chen, Y.; Kang, S.; Shrestha, G. R.; et al. Emission measurements from traditional biomass cookstoves in south Asia and Tibet. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2019, 53 (6), 3306-3314. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.8b05199.
Stockwell, C. E., Jayarathne, T., Cochrane, M. A., Ryan, K. C., Putra, E. I., Saharjo, B. H., et al. (2016). Field measurements of trace gases and aerosols emitted by peat fires in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia, during the 2015 El Niño. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 16(18), 11711–11732. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-11711-2016
Vakkari, V.; Beukes, J. P.; Dal Maso, M.; Aurela, M.; Josipovic, M.; van Zyl, P. G. Major secondary aerosol formation in southern African open biomass burning plumes. Nat. Geosci., 2018, 11 (8), 580-583. DOI: 10.1038/s41561-018-0170-0.
Minor comments:
Line 10. Is household trash burning a large source of pollutant worldwide or Global South. Developing countries in current literature is now referred to as Global South
Line 12: what does activity data mean?
Line 13: Scarcer? Is it grammatically, correct?
Line 21: Plastic bottles, plastic bags, rubber and .. (remove “and between plastic bottles and bags)
Line 30: Global south instead of developing countries
Line 35-36: Instead of communities with low socioeconomic status better use Low-income communities
Line 42” emission factor and activity data? What is activity data?
Line 58: …highlighted a large variation instead of the
Line 60: Detailed PM chemical composition data are.. (data is missing)
Line 65: PM light scattering, and absorption properties depend on its chemical composition and associate hygroscopicity and optical properties. change to “PM optical properties depend on chemical composition and hygroscopicity” absorption and scattering are the optical properties
Line 77: Ef’s for acidic… remove including elements
Line 244: Higher combustion temperature doesn’t indicate burning condition. Need MCE
Line 385: dearth of measurements “of is missing”
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Xiaoliang Wang, 30 Oct 2023
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Data sets
Data for: Air Pollutant Emissions from Open Burning of Household Solid Waste from South Africa Xiaoliang Wang https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/QTV9YW
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 315 | 65 | 20 | 400 | 33 | 9 | 8 |
- HTML: 315
- PDF: 65
- XML: 20
- Total: 400
- Supplement: 33
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 8
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States of America | 1 | 183 | 46 |
| China | 2 | 54 | 13 |
| Germany | 3 | 21 | 5 |
| India | 4 | 20 | 5 |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 19 | 4 |
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
- 183
Cited
1 citations as recorded by crossref.
Hatef Firouzkouhi
Judith C. Chow
John G. Watson
Steven Sai Hang Ho
Warren Carter
Alexandra S. M. De Vos
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(6458 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(4804 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper