2 ms·
Looking at the report that that was based on (page xiv on https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/112473
by ericd 3y ago
Looking at the report that that was based on (page xiv on https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1124738/chief-medical-officers-annual-report-air-pollution-dec-2022.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... ), it looks like the efficient stoves are at about 1/15-1/10 the open fire amount. Those “450x” numbers are compared to methane, which is close to zero particulate, so it’s a little misleading. But burning methane means you’re adding prehistoric carbon to the atmosphere.
I’m guessing that if all the open fires were instead “low particulate” stoves, then it wouldn’t be a concern compared to PM2.5 generation from vehicles.
I don’t see a perfect here until we all have heat pumps driven by nuclear.
- ericd 3y agoThis is kind of interesting: https://www.bts.gov/content/estimated-national-average-vehicle-emissions-rates-vehicle-vehicle-type-using-gasoline-and https://www.bts.gov/content/estimated-national-average-vehic... Exhaust particulate per mile has plummeted over the past couple of decades! By comparison, EPA stoves put out a couple grams of particulate per hour. But, it seems like it's not apples to apples, because brake dust is metal dust, whereas wood smoke tends to be mostly organic compounds. Maybe the body is better at dealing with organic wood smoke compounds? We've certainly been heavily exposed over many generations. Also, seems like there are some efforts to make electrostatic filters for fine particulate in flue gas: https://enervex.com/systems/particle-filter-system-for-stoves-and-fireplaces https://enervex.com/systems/particle-filter-system-for-stove...