Combustion of wood, pollution and fine particles

Renewable energies except solar electric or thermal (seeforums dedicated below): wind turbines, energy from the sea, hydraulic and hydroelectricity, biomass, biogas, deep geothermal energy ...
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972

Combustion of wood, pollution and fine particles




by Christophe » 31/07/09, 11:30

An article which puts into perspective the "cleanliness" of combustion and wood heating.

If you are warming with wood, you have every interest in getting the most controlled combustion as possible.

That is to say, to avoid using a dilapidated apparatus, poor quality wood or wet, to maintain a good draw ... now this will not be enough to solve all the emissions ... but read rather the following, astonishing.

The wood fire, one of the main pollution factors
LEMONDE.FR with AFP | 29.07.09


Wood burning is one of the major contributors of pollutants, especially fine particles, one of the main recurring factors of air pollution with nitrogen oxides, notes Ademe in its annual report on the quality of the air.

"Globally, the air we breathe today is better than two or three years ago, except for the levels of particles and nitrogen oxides", summarized Wednesday July 29 Philippe Van de Mael, the president of the Agency for the development and control of energy (Ademe).

It turns out, however, that the growth of wood energy, encouraged in the name of the fight against climate change - wood heating emits about ten times less greenhouse gas than oil and five times less than gas - comes in the way of counter-pollution efforts. "A half-day by the fireside is as many particles as 3 km in diesel," argues Secretary of State for Ecology, Chantal Jouanno. Suddenly, the latter wonders about the objective of the Grenelle of the environment, which plans to double the use of wood by 500 to fight against global warming.

Wood combustion in all sectors (domestic, industrial and collective) represents up to 77% of national emissions of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), 27% PM10 particles and even 40% for the finest (PM2,5) which are also the most dangerous. It is also respectively 22 and 21% emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and carbon monoxide.


I knew that there were significant emissions of fine particles and not fine and CO but the huge proportion of PAHs and VOCs ... from the wood, I'm speechless! : Shock:

And NOx, no figures? I'm sure our deom, considering how it goes in T ° at the heart of flame (principle of the turbo) in product (at least a little) ...

For the fireside, I suppose, I hope it is an open fire ... but the Jouanno does not say if it is before or after "purging" in the atmosphere of the particles trapped in the FAP ... Hey yes, the theory is beautiful ... but you have to come back down to earth Madam ...

Source: http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2 ... _3244.html

Learn more about burning firewood

ps: ah y marked "until" that may be the trick ...
0 x
simseb
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 11
Registration: 06/07/09, 12:33




by simseb » 31/07/09, 14:24

It's like everything.

In the same way as old, uncatalysed, unfiltered diesels should be banned, open fireplaces should be banned, at least in town, with extremely low yields (at best 10%) and high pollutant releases. because of poorly controlled combustion.

It is now easy to find wood stoves whose performance exceeds 80% see 90% for the best.

Besides the wood must be dry ...

The best seems to be the pellet stoves, but the price of pellets will surely flare up quickly since their manufacture does not follow stove sales.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 31/07/09, 14:30

Yes seb but several things about it:

a) I had read one day that wood heating was (or had been?) prohibited in Paris intra muros. I never found the info ... and Maloche who works in the thermal region of Paris had never heard of it ... so mystery!

b) poorly controlled combustion is one thing, it emits essentially CO and particles ... but it has nothing to do (I think) with PAH (77% are from wood in France !! ' never come back!) and VOCs ...

The wood also emits dioxins (the bark is a chlorine concentrator).

c) the price of pellets I thought like you but in fact it is stable because many factories open, we have a subject top with an up-to-date curve (German price): https://www.econologie.com/forums/pellets-et ... t4682.html
0 x
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2

Re: Combustion of wood, pollution and fine particles




by Woodcutter » 31/07/09, 17:13

Christophe wrote:[...] but the Jouanno does not say if it is before or after "purging" in the atmosphere of the particles trapped in the FAP ... Hey yes, the theory is beautiful ... but it is necessary from time to time come down to earth Madame ... [...]
The "purging" of the DPF as you say is not intended to "empty" the filters of the particles which are retained there, but to burn them ...

For the products of combustion, the bad drying of the wood also has an influence on the production of complex molecules (PAHs and dioxins), it seems to me ...

I am to continue to favor wood stoves, but only pellet ones that allow better combustion.

And then anyway, the best heating, it's the one we do not need !!! (because the house is super isolated ... : Cheesy: )
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
User avatar
Capt_Maloche
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 4559
Registration: 29/07/06, 11:14
Location: Ile-de-France
x 42




by Capt_Maloche » 31/07/09, 17:21

it is very clear, I am also surprised at the low level of control and regulation on wood boilers

it is highly polluting
0 x
"Consumption is similar to a search consolation, a way to fill a growing existential void. With, the key, a lot of frustration and a little guilt, increasing the environmental awareness." (Gérard Mermet)
OUCH, OUILLE, OUCH, AAHH! ^ _ ^
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972

Re: Combustion of wood, pollution and fine particles




by Christophe » 31/07/09, 20:21

Woodcutter wrote:The "purging" of the DPF as you say is not intended to "empty" the filters of the particles which are retained there, but to burn them ...


Yes Bucheron, in theory ... in practice it can not really happen like that.

If the conditions of regeneration are never reached, example: use of a car to 90% in city for example, since it is a certain load for a certain time which allows the phase of regeneration of ...

Have you never followed a car equipped with a DPF? Some emit black clouds from black at times ... proof of a shitty "regen" ... or incomplete ...

Finally maybe it has been improved but hey ... look at the test cloth cap that Maloche has done: no problem ...

Woodcutter wrote:For the products of combustion, the bad drying of the wood also has an influence on the production of complex molecules (PAHs and dioxins), it seems to me ...


Really? I knew for dioxins (nothing to do with drying, however) but not for PAHs? I just thought that the study may include the burning by incineration of treated wood ... in this case PAH and VOC are all found ...

Woodcutter wrote:And then anyway, the best heating, it's the one we do not need !!!


Yes...

Here is a small study on the combustion of pellets: it is far, very far, to be the panacea! https://www.econologie.com/analyses-de-c ... -3544.html

ps: Bucheron, there are nice pictures here for you

Maloche, should think about a burner wood blue flame ... : Idea:
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685

Re: Combustion of wood, pollution and fine particles




by Did67 » 31/07/09, 22:45

Woodcutter wrote:
For the products of combustion, the bad drying of the wood also has an influence on the production of complex molecules (PAHs and dioxins), it seems to me ...


With regard to the burning of wood, yes, it must be clear:

1) the combustrion of a solid is more difficult than that of a liquid which is more than a gas ...

2) this gets worse the wood is wet

3) it gets worse as we regulate the combustion by the admissions of air (choking) ...

So, yes, the burning of the weight is neutral in CO², but more polluting for the rest. Alas...

Pellet boilers do better because: a) the pellets are dried artificially (generally less than 8% humidity), but also because the combustion is "controlled" (control of air admissions and extractions of fumes) ... But this remains about 3 times more polluting for particles or CO than fuel ...

Boilers with plauqettes fare much less well (because the plauqettes are wetter). AND then the logs, especially if they are wet and if the fire is not at bottom, it becomes catastrophic ...
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 31/07/09, 23:19

The quality of the wood (moisture) is not completely manageable (dryer, storage, time etc ...) and the wood heating means being what it is ...: Cry: what is the technology that can be considered for an individual to limit particle emissions, for example? Someone has an example of realization?
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 31/07/09, 23:33

Flytox wrote:... what is the technology that can be considered for an individual to limit particle emissions, for example? Someone has an example of realization?


If your concern is particles, the "best" way is solar, then gas (excluding electricity - mostly nuclear) ...

For me, the best compromise was the pellet condensing boiler. No nuclear (no waste of which we do not know what happens to, nor "risk" Chernobyl / explosion style) - that was the most important for me. Very much below the most severe standards for particles. In order to reduce my overall "particle" footprint despite everything, I switch to LPG cars (replacing old turbodiesels, which "smoked" quite a bit ....). So there, I win a lot.

Pellets are very reasonable for CO, NOx ...

It's only a compromise, not a miracle!
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 01/08/09, 09:43

Flytox wrote:what is the technology that can be considered for an individual to limit particle emissions, for example? Someone has an example of realization?


There are ... catalysts based on the principle of self (works well when it's hot) that we put at the exit of the stove.

But very little used because:
a) they only intervene on the particles (maybe on the CO?)
b) their cost should not be trivial (hypothesis)
c) they get dirty quickly enough

P.Schutz had climbed at the time I think ...
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "hydraulic, wind, geothermal, marine energy, biogas ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 276 guests