Wood Burning

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY

TO:

City Council Members

FROM: Sean Murphy DATE: December 6, 2013 RE:

Wood Burning Ban

PROJECT TIMELINE: Briefing: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 Public Hearing: TBD Potential Action: TBD

Council Sponsor: Council Members Soren Simonson and Luke Garrott

ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE Council Members Simonson and Garrott have requested that staff research potential public awareness measures and regulatory actions that would end the practice of wood burning for home heating and recreation purposes, either wholly or in part, in Salt Lake City. Particular emphasis has been placed on the effects of wood burning during seasonal temperature inversions. Staff members have begun to research several issues related to the health and environmental impacts of wood burning and the practicalities of instituting both a ban and a public awareness campaign. Staff members now seek additional guidance from the Council on key elements of this issue.

POLICY QUESTIONS To set staff priorities around the issue of wood burning, the Council may wish to consider the following questions: 1.

Does the Council wish to commit additional staff resources researching a partial or outright ban of wood burning in the city?

2. Does the Council wish to implement either a seasonal wood burning ban during the inversion season and/or a ban on recreational wood burning? 3. Does the Council wish to commit additional staff resources to research the following issues: a.

Conducting a best practices search to compare the success of local wood burning bans and ordinances around the country?

CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY

451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476

COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651

KYLE LAMALFA | DISTRICT 2 | COUNCIL CHAIR || JILL REMINGTON LOVE | DISTRICT 5 | COUNCIL VICE CHAIR || CARLTON CHRISTENSEN | DISTRICT 1 || STAN PENFOLD | DISTRICT 3 || LUKE GARROTT | DISTRICT 4 || CHARLIE LUKE | DISTRICT 6 || SØREN SIMONSEN | DISTRICT 7

b. Researching public awareness strategies to educate residents about the environmental and health impacts of wood smoke? c.

Conducting outreach to individuals and organizations for potential partnerships in enforcing or promoting a ban and/or a public awareness program at the: i. City level? ii. County level? iii. Regional level?

d. Researching the availability of retrofitting grants and programs for those households dependant on wood burning for heat?

ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION General Background The fine particulate matter (PM2.5) emitted from burning wood is considered to be one of the most dangerous pollutants to the air we breathe.1 2 In geographic regions defined by valleys, and in regions that experience seasonal temperature inversions, the effect is dramatically increased. 3 California’s Central Valley is one such example. The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, which monitors air quality in the Central Valley, has reported that wood smoke from residencies is the primary source of particulate pollution in the region during winter months. Since implementing a curtailment program, Sacramento has experienced 40% fewer days above the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM 2.5.4 The effects of one smoking fire can impact an entire neighborhood. While the health risks are greatest for those individuals living in the home with a smoking fire, particularly for children, elderly and those with respiratory complications, neighboring homes will absorb at least 50 to 70% of the smoke found outdoors. Wood smoke particles are so fine that there is no way to prevent them from entering neighboring homes.5 6 A variety of regulatory programs, either banning wood smoke completely or partially, have been implemented in localities around the country with varying degrees of success. In its advisory literature, the EPA suggests that “a public awareness program, along with a voluntary wood smoke curtailments program” may be a good place to start when developing regulatory action.7 Similarly, the Hearth, Patio and Barbeque Association supports “Wood Stove Changeout” programs and emphasizes that “strong public awareness is critical to the success” of such efforts.8

1

“Strategies for Reducing Residential Wood Smoke.” US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Outreach and Information Division, Innovative Programs and Outreach Group, Research Triangle Park, NC, March 2013. 2 Naeher, L. P. “Critical Review of the Health Effects of Woodsmoke.” White paper, Air Health Effects Division, Health Canada, Ottawa. March 31, 2005. 3 “Strategies for Reducing Residential Wood Smoke.” 4 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality District website, http://www.airquality.org/. Referenced December 4, 2013. 5 Kamens, R. M., et al. “Mutagenic changes in dilute wood smoke as it ages and reacts with ozone and nitrogen dioxide: An outdoor chamber study.” Environmental Science and Technology, Vol.18, No.7, 1984. 6 Lewtas, J., et al. “Mutagenicity, Tumorigenicity and Estimation of Cancer Risk from Aerosol and Source Emissions from Woodsmoke and Motor Vehicles.” Paper 91-131.06, 84th Annual Meeting Air and Waste Management Association, Vancouver, B.C., June 16-18, 1991. 7 “Strategies for Reducing Residential Wood Smoke.” US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Outreach and Information Division, Innovative Programs and Outreach Group, Research Triangle Park, NC, March 2013. 8 “Wood Stove Changeout.” The Hearth, Patio and Barbeque Association website, http://woodstovechangeout.org/index.php?id=34. Referenced December 4, 2013.

Page | 2

Wood Burn Particulates Airborne particles less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10) pose a health concern because they can be inhaled into and accumulate in the respiratory system. Particles less than 2.5 micrometers (PM 2.5) are referred to as “fine” particles and are believed to pose the largest health risks. Because of their small size (less than one seventh the average width of a human hair), fine particles can lodge deeply into the lungs. 9 Residential wood smoke contains PM2.5, carbon monoxide (CO), toxic air pollutants (e.g. benzene and formaldehyde), and climate gases (e.g. methane and black carbon).10 Health Impact Wood smoke exposure causes a decrease in lung function and an increase in the severity of existing lung disease with increases in smoke concentration or exposure time. 11 Exposure increases the chance of respiratory illness in children, such as acute pneumonia, or bronchitis, which are major causes of disease and death in young children.12 Long term exposure may lead to emphysema, chronic bronchitis, arteriosclerosis, and nasal, throat, lung blood, and lymph system cancers.13 Valleys & Inversions A variety of localities around the nation have enforced wood burning restrictions in residential areas. Those regions that experience temperature inversions similar to Salt Lake’s have identified wood smoke as a primary polluter during winter months.14 Davis, California, just west of Sacramento in the Central Valley, has experimented with both voluntary and mandatory “no burn days” in the past years. After finding that these restrictions have been largely ineffective in reducing the number of reported incidents of residential smoke violations, and after hearing testimony from community members that report continued suffering from wood smoke pollution in their neighborhoods, Davis has decided to implement a nuisance-based ordinance.15 Salt Lake City The American Community Survey estimated that for 2012, 105 households in Salt Lake City were dependent on wood fuel as a sole source of heating.16 Both the EPA and the California Air Resources Board have reported that the inhalable particle pollution from one wood stove is equivalent to the particle pollution emitted from 3,000 gas furnaces that produce the same amount of heat per unit. The Utah Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Air Quality issues mandatory “No Burn Days” from November 1 to March 1. Enforcement is largely by phone, prompted by complaints emanating from neighborhoods. During the 2012-13 season, 68 complaints were reported throughout the Salt Lake Valley. 17 DAQ also maintains a registry for all sole source households throughout the state. Additional information, including that full registry, has been requested.

9

“PM2.5 NAAQS Implementation.” US EPA Technology Transfer Network, National Ambient Air Quality Standards website, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pm/pm25_index.html. Referenced 12/4/13. 10 Ibid. 11 Ammann, H. M. “Summary Overview of Health Effects Associated with Residential Wood Combustion: Health Effects Issue Assessment.” Internal report, US EPA, Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1986. 12 Larson, T. V. et al. “Urban Air Toxics Mitigation Study: Phase I.” University of Washington report, submitted to Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Authority, 1988. 13 “Health Effects of Wood Smoke.” Washington State Department of Ecology, Air Quality Program, August 2004. 14 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality District website. 15 Pryor, A. “Council to consider new wood smoke nuisance ordinance.” The People’s Vanguard of Davis, September 20, 2013, http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7649:council-to-consider-new-wood-smoke-nuisanceordinance&Itemid=205. Referenced 12/4/13. 16 “Selected Housing Characteristics: Salt Lake City, UT.” American Fact Finder, US Census Bureau website, http://www. http://factfinder2.census.gov/. Referenced 12/4/13. 17 “Smoke Patrol 2012-2013 Memo.” Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality memo.

Page | 3

Residential Impact Wood smoke does not rise and disperse during winter temperature inversions. At these times, wood smoke hangs close to the ground and enters neighbors’ yards and houses, schools and hospitals. Regions that experience winter atmospheric inversions and valley locations with poor air circulation are the most affected.18 Particles are so tiny that they remain suspended for long periods of time and readily penetrate into buildings. Indoor levels of wood smoke PM2.5 in homes that lie adjacent to wood burning neighbors reach at least 50% to 70% of outdoor concentrations. 19 Utah Code The Utah Code allows for localities to regulate open burning. “R307-202-6. Open Burning - Without Permit” states as follows: “The following types of open burning do not require a permit when not prohibited by other local, state or federal laws and regulations, when it does not create a nuisance, as defined in Section 76-10-803, and does not impact the health and welfare of the public. (1) Devices for the primary purpose of preparing food such as outdoor grills and fireplaces; (2) Campfires and fires used solely for recreational purposes where such fires are under control of a responsible person and the combustible material is clean, dry wood or charcoal; and (3) Indoor fireplaces and residential solid fuel burning devices except as provided in R307-302- 2.”

ATTACHMENTS: 1. U.S. EPA Burn Wise Strategies factsheet. The EPA’s quick reference about the determents of residential wood smoke. http://www.epa.gov/burnwise/pdfs/strategies-document-factsheet.pdf 2. U.S. EPA Burn Wise advice to consumers about the impact of wood smoke on health. http://epa.gov/burnwise/healtheffects.html 3. Listing of sample ordinances and regulations from around the United States that the EPA has chosen to highlight. Taken from the US EPA website. 4. Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality’s Smoke Patrol 2012-2013 Memo. 5. A letter to the Council from a Salt Lake City constituent, Dr. Brian Moench.

18 19

“Health Effects of Wood Smoke.” Kamens, R. M., et al.

Page | 4

[Year] 

   

T

he U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Burn Wise program supports States, Tribes and communities with a variety of educational, regulatory and voluntary approaches to reduce particle pollution from residential wood-burning.

Learn more in EPA’s resource document Strategies for Reducing Residential

Wood Smoke: http://epa.gov/burnwise/pdfs/strategies.pdf.

Why Care About Residential Wood Smoke? Smoke?

R

esidential wood smoke causes many counties throughout the U.S. to either exceed the national health-based standards for fine particle pollution or places them at the cusp of exceeding the standards. People with heart disease are at risk of increased heart attacks, heart failure and stroke from exposure to particle pollution in wood smoke. Smoke can also trigger asthma attacks and aggravate other lung diseases.

What Educational and Outreach Tools Are Available? Smoke? 

E

PA supports educational and outreach activities by States, Tribes and communities to reduce residential wood smoke. Outreach tools include multimedia and print products, which are available on the Burn Wise website at: www.epa.gov/burnwise. Copies are available upon request.

 

For More Information:

Larry Brockman at [email protected] www.epa.gov/burnwise www.facebook.com/EPABurnWise

[Year] 

   

 What Regulatory Approaches Are Available?

E

PA’s Residential Wood Heater New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) requires wood stoves and fireplace inserts to be certified by EPA for lower emissions. Other regulatory options available to communities include:       

Burn bans Opacity and visible emission limits Wood moisture limits Removal of old wood stoves upon resale of homes Bans on non-EPA certified wood stoves Bans on wood-burning devices in new construction Hydronic heater (wood boiler) emission rules

What Voluntary Programs Are Available?

E

PA encourages the use of incentives to replace or retrofit old, high-polluting wood-burning appliances with cleaner models such as a wood-stove changeout program. Benefits can be significant. For example changing out one old, dirty wood stove is equivalent to eliminating particle emissions from five dirty diesel buses.

 

For More Information:

Larry Brockman at [email protected] www.epa.gov/burnwise www.facebook.com/EPABurnWise

12/6/13

epa.gov/burnwise/images/infographic_square.jpg

infographic_square.jpg (1700×1700)

1/1

Attachment C: U.S. EPA listing of local laws and ordinances from around the country

US EPA website “Burn Wise” “Agencies – Ordinances and Regulations” Community Action - Laws and Ordinances Certain jurisdictions have established legal requirements to reduce wood smoke. For example, some communities have restrictions on installing wood-burning appliances in new construction. The most common and least restrictive action is to limit use at those times when air quality is threatened. The appropriate agency issues an alert, similar to the widespread Ozone Action Day alerts. Bay Area Air Quality Management District Bans during “Spare the Air Tonight” advisories. Proposed new requirements for new construction (only pellet stoves, gas stoves, and EPA-certified wood stoves can be sold). Labeling required for firewood, firelogs, and wood pellets sold. http://www.baaqmd.gov/enf/woodsmoke/woodsmoke_portal.htm Bernalillo County (Albuquerque), NM Winter Advisory/No Burn Program from October through February restricting use of non-EPA certified fireplaces or stoves. http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/noburn.html Denver, CO Mandatory bans on "red" advisory days during the annual high air pollution season, with some exceptions. http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ap/woodhome.html Lagrande, OR Voluntary curtailment of wood stove use for heat based on daily advisories. http://www.deq.state.or.us/aq/burning/woodstoves/index.htm Puget Sound, WA Air-quality burn bans temporarily restrict some or all indoor and outdoor burning, usually called when weather conditions are cold and still. http://www.pscleanair.org/ San Joaquin County, CA Existing wood stoves must be replaced with an EPA certified wood stove when a home is sold. Only pellet stoves, gas stoves, and EPA-certified wood stoves can be sold. Wood-burning limited on days when air pollution approaches unhealthy levels. Limits on the number of wood stoves or fireplaces that can be installed in new residential units. http://www.valleyair.org/BurnPrograms/wood_burning.htm Santa Clara County and The City of Palo Alto, CA Burn bans: Stage 1, use only certified stoves; Stage 2, use wood stove only if it's the primary heat source. Have banned the installation of new wood-burning stoves or fireplaces. http://www.sparetheair.org/

Attachment C: U.S. EPA listing of local laws and ordinances from around the country Yolo-Solano AQMD has initiated "Don't Light Tonight" - a voluntary program to encourage residents not to use wood stoves and fireplaces when air pollution approaches unhealthy levels. The district also encourages cleaner burning techniques and switching to cleaner burning technology. http://ysaqmd.omsoft.com/burn-DLT.php

Attachment D: Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality’s Smoke Patrol 2012-2013 Memo DAQC - 2013 MEMORANDUM FILE – SMOKE PATROL 2012-2013

TO: THROUGH:

Jay Morris, Minor Source Compliance Section Manager

FROM:

Anthony DeArcos, Environmental Scientist

DATE:

March 1 , 2013

SUBJECT:

SMOKE PATROL 2012-2013 SUMMARY

Smoke Patrol was successfully conducted from November 1, 2012 to February 28,2013. There were 86 complaints received at DAQ . 86 complaints were inspected by various assigned inspectors. There were 0 Red Burn days in Box Elder county, 0 Red Burn days in Cache county, 2 Red Burn days in Salt Lake county, 0 Red Burn days in Tooele County, 0 Red Burn days in Uintah county, 1 Red Burn day in Utah County and 2 Red Burn days in Weber county. DAQ’s Smoke Patrol SOP is that patrol will be sent when the second consecutive Red Burn call is made. There were 16 compliance advisories and 8 warning letters issued during the time period. During the Smoke Patrol period, 5 DAQ personnel were placed on the Smoke Patrol roster. ATTACHMENTS:

A summary of the November 2012 – February 2013 Smoke Patrol “Yellow” and “Red” burn days for all participating counties.

Attachment E: A letter to the Council from a Salt Lake City constituent, Dr. Brian Moench

To Members of the Salt Lake City Council: Smoke from wood burning stoves and fireplaces has become increasingly recognized as a huge part of our Wasatch Front air pollution problem. The Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment (UPHE) made a recent presentation to the Utah Air Quality Board giving the details of why this issue is so important. The text of that presentation is attached. The over 300 members of UPHE urge you to take action in the form of a SL City ordinance that would ban wood and coal burning during our inversion season, and restrict nuisance burning all year round. Temporary exemptions and/or subsidy for natural gas furnaces could be offered to the few hundred residents who burn wood out of economic necessity. The reasons for this request is summarized below. 1. Studies have shown that wood and cooking grill smoke are responsible for as much direct particulate pollution as all the cars in the Salt Lake Valley. A wood burning device can produce between 3,000 and 90,000 times as much pollution as a natural gas furnace per BTU created. 2. Wood smoke is even more toxic to health and dangerous to your neighbors than second hand cigarette smoke. The particles are extremely small, penetrating easily into nearby homes. Their uniquely small size allows deeper penetration into the lungs and eventually the blood stream. Toxicity of pollution particles is inversely proportional to size. 3. Wood smoke has hundreds of chemicals attached to the particles, including the very worst—dioxins and formaldehyde. For an equal amount of exposure, the EPA has calculated that wood smoke is 12 times more potent in causing cancer than second hand cigarette smoke. 4. Studies prove that current green, yellow, and red burn guidelines are an utter failure in controlling wood smoke. Furthermore, for an equal volume of pollution, a fireplace burning wood during a “green burn” day, has just as much effect on community health as the same fireplace burning on a “red burn” day. Just like there is no safe number of cigarettes a person can smoke, there is no safe amount of air pollution a person can breathe, and there is no such thing as a safe time to burn wood. 5. EPA certified wood stoves are only a small improvement over older versions and represent to real solution to the problem.

In sum, banning wood burning is the easiest and cheapest way (even if subsidies are provided for those needing financial assistance to change to natural gas) to make significant progress in cleaning up our air and reducing the harmful effects to public health.

Sincerely, Dr. Brian Moench President, UPHE on behalf of the entire UPHE Board