Black carbon emissions from biomass and coal in rural China

Radiative Effects of Residential Sector Emissions in China: Sensitivity to Uncertainty in Black Carbon Emissions

“…What limited measurements of residential emissions that have been conducted show a wide range of BC:TC emission ratios (Bond et al, 2013;Coffey et al, 2017;Lacey & Henze, 2015); the range used for this study covers a valid representation given current understanding. A recent study by Zhang et al (2018) found emissions of BC from rural biomass and coal use in China to be 640 ± 245 Gt/year, a range of uncertainty that is equivalent to that tested in this study. The review by Bond et al (2013) shows that BC:TC ratios from energy sources (including both biofuel and fossil fuel use) from different emission inventories range from 0.22 to 0.36 over China.…”

“…The review by Bond et al (2013) shows that BC:TC ratios from energy sources (including both biofuel and fossil fuel use) from different emission inventories range from 0.22 to 0.36 over China. A recent study by Zhang et al (2018) found emissions of BC from rural biomass and coal use in China to be 640 ± 245 Gt/year, a range of uncertainty that is equivalent to that tested in this study. We therefore use the same range as in Lacey and Henze (2015) to enable comparability with their study.…”

“…The high BC content of residential emissions means that mitigation of this sector may also reduce short-term anthropogenic warming (Anenberg et al, 2012;Unger et al, 2010). This combination of high uncertainty and high impact is driving research into improving estimates of residential sector emissions (Klimont et al, 2017;Zhang et al, 2018) and better understanding of their impacts on climate (Butt et al, 2016;Gao et al, 2018;Lacey & Henze, 2015;Li et al, 2015). This combination of high uncertainty and high impact is driving research into improving estimates of residential sector emissions (Klimont et al, 2017;Zhang et al, 2018) and better understanding of their impacts on climate (Butt et al, 2016;Gao et al, 2018;Lacey & Henze, 2015;Li et al, 2015).…”

“…However, aerosol emissions from the residential sector are subject to large uncertainties in their magnitude and composition Carter et al, 2016;Coffey et al, 2017;Secrest et al, 2017;Stockwell et al, 2015;Zhang et al, 2009). This combination of high uncertainty and high impact is driving research into improving estimates of residential sector emissions (Klimont et al, 2017;Zhang et al, 2018) and better understanding of their impacts on climate (Butt et al, 2016;Gao et al, 2018;Lacey & Henze, 2015;Li et al, 2015).…”

Evaluation of Gasoline Evaporative Emissions from Fuel-Cap Removal after a Real-World Driving Event

“…Notably,~90% of the monitoring stations in Japan met the environmental standard for PM 2.5 while none of the monitoring stations met the environmental standard for tropospheric ozone (or photo-chemical oxidant) in 2017 [7]. While developed countries such as the United States and European Union countries have air quality levels similar to that in Japan [8,9], middle-and low-income countries including China are still suffering from extreme air pollution and carbon emission, and managing air quality based on the careful planning is still challenging [10,11]. Therefore, for both developed and developing countries, it is necessary to develop mitigation strategies for air pollutants, including ozone precursors.…”