EIO-LCA Web Forum

Why has PM2.5 not been incorporated into the model? I see it available both in AIRData Net SIC 1999 Report and 2003 NAQETR. These seem to be where the PM10 emissions factors were derived from based on "Documentation of energy and environmental data used on EIO-LCA".

If the answer is simply that the team has not yet had the chance to include PM2.5 (rather than flaws in the data), then I would like to know how exactly the PM10 factors are estimated, so that I may follow the same procedure to estimate PM2.5 factors for a few sectors. The documentation I reference above indicates that the AIRData Net SIC 1999 Report provides the starting point for emissions factors estimation, but then the document is not entirely clear on how factors are computed. That is, what exactly is the data used to estimate the sectoral economic output in dollars to estimate the factors. And how exactly are the are the emissions factors augmented, since it is stated that the AIRData Net SIC 1999 emissions are only stationary point sources, and can differ greatly from NAQETR data.

I am hoping to estimate pm2.5 for the primary sectors contributing to pm10 for 'sand, gravel, clay and refractory mining' and 'petroleum refining' sectors.

All comments are greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Nakul,

PM 2.5 data have not been included as a matter of time and money to this point. We will be including data for PM 2.5 for the 2002 update if available.

As for how the PM10 numbers were estimated, all I have to go on is the documentation you also have. The appendices of the documentation do have the sectoral outputs used, since that seems to be one piece of data you are looking for.

A brief reading of the documentation indicates that the NAQETR was only used to augment sectors with emissions from mobile sources. Otherwise, the AIRData was used.

Hope this helps, but please post again with further questsions.

Deanna

In the attachment I have made an attempt at following the suggested procedure to estimate pm10 emissions factors for two sectors. The pm10 emission factors I have estimated seem to be higher than what EIOLCA is using. This seems to be the case, since if I input $1000000 and look up pm10 at from EIOLCA (1997 benchmark model), it provides a much lower value for pm10 emissions associated with that sector alone.

In the attachment the bridges used can be seen in rows where sector codes correspond. I have included the data from AirData Facility SIC Report - Criteria Pollutant 1999. Then the total pm10 is divided by the sector output taken from Appendix 3 of the document referenced in my first posting.

Please let me know where my estimation has followed a different procedure from EIOLCA.

Thank you.