Residential Wood Combustion Emissions Inventory Project for the MANE-VU Region

1. Residential Wood Combustion Emissions Inventory Project for the MANE-VU Region Megan Schuster, MARAMA Annual RPO Meeting, St. Louis, MO November 4-6, 2003

2. RWC • Background Information • Survey methodology and sample frame • Survey results • Two approaches to analyze data • Issues/ Problems

3. Residential Wood Combustion Project Background • Origin of RWC project: Assessment of Emissions Inventory Needs for Regional Haze Plans • RWC Emissions • High contribution to regional haze • Contribute approx. 8% of PM fine in MANE-VU region • Large uncertainty • Important local source to Class I areas • States have the potential to improve the activity data

4. RWC • EIIP suggested methodology: Survey • Project Intent: To estimate activity data and an emissions inventory from residential wood combustion in the MANE-VU Region through survey methodology • Contract: E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc.

5. Survey • Telephone approach (CATI) • Survey questionnaire based on previous studies (esp. CARB study) • Intended to obtain information on wood burning equipment type and wood type

6. Survey Sample Frame • Sample frame • Includes important variables that affect activity (i.e., annual wood consumption) • Urban, suburban, or rural locations • Type of housing (single versus multi-family homes) • Forested versus non-forested areas • Latitude • Minimum sample size per cell = 61 completed surveys • Based on level of precision +/- 13.3%

7. RWC Sample Frame and (Number of Respondents) 1Number of responses ended up being less than the target value of 61 due to either: changes in the Disposition of one or more responses (i.e., change of address from the original sample); or dropping a response out of the final database (i.e., following QA of that response)

8. HDD Zones for MANE-VU Region

9. Survey Results - Activity Data

10. Respondents Reporting Usage of Indoor Burning Equipment

11. Pechan’s Analysis • User Fraction: fraction of households that actually burn wood • Wood consumers = 1 • Respondents that do not burn wood = 2 • Significant Difference b/w UF • Single vs Multi unit households • Geographic locations (U/S/RF/RNF) • No Significant Difference b/w HDD level • Annual Consumption: Amount of wood burned per household (cords/yr, or BTUs/yr) -- Normalized by HDD level • Significant Difference b/w HDD level • Low response rate in certain cells prompted Pechan to try to combine cells that were not significantly different

12. UF Cell by Cell Comparison

13. AC Cell by Cell Comparison

14. Indoor Burning Equipment Reported (% burned)

15. Collapsed Sample Frame for Indoor Equipment Use

16. Issues/ Problems Collapsing data cells should only be based on statistical analysis Subdividing cells by equipment type necessitates a larger sample size

17. Alternative Analysis Approach • Calculate emissions per survey response (based on equipment and wood type) • Analysis of Variance

18. Analysis of Variance Corrected Mean Household Emissions for a cell = M + Ai + Bj + Ck + Dij + Ejk + Fik M = Overall mean of household emissions Ai = Mean of each applicable housing type for that cell – M Bj = Mean of each applicable geographic location (U/S/RF/RNF) – M Ck = Mean of each applicable HDD level – M Dij = mean of ith house type /jth geo location – mean ith house type – mean of j geo location + M Eik = mean of ith house type/ kth HDD level – mean ith house type – mean kth HDD + M F jk = mean of jth geo location/kth HDD level - mean of jth geo location – mean of kth HDD level + M

19. Future Implications • Sample frame and minimum response rate requirement critical in obtaining useful information • Survey questionnaire should not be too specific • Improve EIIP to include suggested data analysis for survey methodology

20. Additional MANE-VU EI Projects • Calculation sheets – Develop calculation sheets using the preferred calculation method for the top area source categories and three non-road categories • Final Sheets – January 2004 • Open Burning Project – Improve emission estimates from open burning sources (Yard Waste – Household Brush and Leaf Burning; MSW or Household Waste Burning; and Municipal Yard Waste Burning) through survey methods – completed • Final Revised Report – November 2003 • NIF 3.0 – January 2004

21. Additional MANE-VU EI Projects • Ammonia EI Project – Pechan is creating an emissions inventory for the MANE-VU region for industrial refrigeration, cement plants, POTWs and composting • Final EI and Report – January 2004 • Mobile Inventory - Pechan is creating a mobile emissions inventory for onroad and nonroad mobile sources • Default data based on 2002 NEI – January 2004 • Onroad MOBILE6 input files, 2002 VMT database and Nonroad input files – April 2004 • Draft Final Inventory – December 2004

22. Additional MANE-VU EI Projects • Compilation of 2002 Area and Point Modeling Inventories • Basis : State CERR submittals (June 2004) • Augmented with other data gathered from EI Projects (Ammonia, RWC, Open Burning), and CEM data • Absent data will be supplemented with 1999 NEI grown to 2002 (from EPA) • Final Inventory will be used for modeling PM fine and regional haze – Fall 2004

23. DraftStrawmanTimeline 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 1.0 PM - 2.5 Designations 2.0 Estimate Natural & Baseline Conditions 3.0 Develop SIP Template 4.0 Ongoing Technical Support Activities 5.0 Prepare Final Technical Support Documents 6.0 Identify & Analyze Alternatives for Goals & Strategies 7.0 Develop Model Rules for Selected Sources and Adopt Rules 8.0 Develop Reasonable Progress Goals 9.0 Develop Long - term Strategy Agreement, Rules, & SIP 10.0 Submit SIP Key Preparation / Follow Up Core Activity