mercury minnesota presentation
TRANSCRIPT
• USEPA describes mercury as “naturally occurring element that can be found throughout the environment”
• Different human activities can increase or decrease
• Over exposure for humans is not a good thing
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
What About Mercury …. In Minnesota?
• Goal is to reduce mercury emissions from human activities by 75%
• Cremation is one area of review • “calculated estimates” are 2.63 grams
released per cremation • Cremation issue is self correcting
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
• Mercury enters cremation cycle through silver amalgam tooth fillings
• Dentistry use of silver amalgam has been steadily declining since 1985
• Fillings per person have also been declining • Average life of SA fillings are 8-10 years • Many are replaced with non mercury alternatives
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
• Is “verified data” better than “calculated estimates” ?
• Data is based on standard accepted protocols and procedures
• Data is subject to careful review and verification of all sampling and lab work
• So why guess when facts are available?
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• United Kingdom mercury testing • Most extensive study ever conducted • Protocols developed by scientists with
Glasgow Occupational Health Royal Infirmary
• Protocols, procedures and results reviewed and approved by DEFRA and SEPA
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• British testing standards BSEN13211-2001 • Test equipment was NEM-5 continuous • Test company Pelican Scientific Ltd. • 54 human remains tested @ 2 sites • DEFRA and SEPA accepted results as being
in compliance with protocols
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• UK Test 1- Craigton Crematorium • October 2006 • 23 cremations under normal conditions • 10 remains suspected no silver amalgam • Average mercury release for 23 was 0.128 grams
per body • Average mercury release for 13 was 0.227 grams
per body
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• UK Test 2- Linn Crematorium • September 2007 • 31 cremations under normal conditions • 21 remains suspected no silver amalgam • Average mercury release for 31 was 0.323 grams
per body • Average mercury release for 10 was 1.001 grams
per body
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• Japan mercury testing • Very extensive emissions study • Protocols and testing conducted by Department of Urban and Environmental Eng.
Kyoto University Japan Eco-Technology Research Center Ristumeikan
University Japan
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• Japan testing using both Continuous Emissions Monitoring (Nippon Instruments) and standards JIS K0222 for the sampling
• 92 human remains tested • Results accepted as being in compliance with
protocols
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• Japan 7 crematories tested • Results published September 2009 • Report revised and published April 2010 • 92 cremations under normal conditions • Average mercury release for 92 was 0.032 grams
per body
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• United States mercury testing • Most extensive complete emissions study ever
conducted • Protocols developed by Midwest Research an
approved USEPA contractor • Protocols, procedures and results reviewed and
approved by USEPA
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• USEPA testing standards Method 29 for the metals sampling
• Test company Midwest Research • 9 human remains tested • USEPA accepted results as being in compliance
with protocols • USEPA used results as their NEI National
Emissions Inventory data
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• USA Test - Woodlawn Crematorium • June 1999 • 9 cremations under normal conditions • 2 remains suspected no silver amalgam • Average mercury release for 9 was 0.456 grams
per body • Average mercury release for 7 was 0.584 grams
per body
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• Combining all 3 test results from UK and USA • Using only 30 results suspected of having silver
amalgam fillings • Worst case scenario that 100% of all bodies
cremated have silver amalgam • Average mercury release would be 0.568 grams
emitted per body
Mercury Emissions Testing Results
• Adding Japan data and combining all 4 test results
• Using all results from UK and USA plus all 92 results from Japan testing
• Average mercury release would be 0. 13grams emitted per body
Mercury Emissions Testing Results – Independent Review
• Independent review of UK and USEPA test data - Barr Engineering Company
• Report dated March 2008 • “Calculated” mercury emissions subject to
uncertainties in population • Emissions from actual cremations are preferred
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results – Independent Review
• USEPA identified Woodlawn as a “representative” facility and the basis of their NEI database
• Bodies cremated for the testing were representative of the overall population
• Samples were actually weighted to overestimate mercury emissions
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results – Independent Review
• Increasing USEPA’s g/hr rate to include any emissions during warm up and cool down
• Increased to 0.664 g HG/cremation • To account for any variables in testing (age,
weight, temperature, etc..) • Increase from 0.664 to1.185 g HG/cremation • Gives a 95% confidence rating
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Mercury Emissions Testing Results Independent Review Summary
• USEPA considers Woodlawn to be representative
• Woodlawn report is a reliable data source • Even using higher adjusted data provided
by Barr, HG emissions from crematoria are relatively small as compared to other sources
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
• UK crematoria location, 5 soil samples • 112,000 cremations performed • All samples within acceptable limits • Worst sample is 5 x below safe level for food
production • Site tested considered not contaminated
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
• NZ crematoria location, 6 soil samples • 4,400 cremations performed • All samples within acceptable limits • Worst sample is 10 x below safe level for food
production • Site tested was compared to a reference site
(botanical garden) 40km away and HG levels were almost identical
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
• CA crematoria location, 6 soil samples • Over 3000 cremations performed • All samples well below acceptable limits • Worst sample is 400 x below safe level for
residential land use in California • Soil samples were compared to an unrelated
reference site and were very similar
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
• How does it now control emissions? • Why are some emissions reduced and others
not? • How do other countries deal with HG? • What are the pros and cons of filtering
emissions?
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Typical Flame Cremation Process
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Typical Matthews Filtration System
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
Funeral / Burial
Flame Based
Flame Based w/ Abatement
Container Production and Provision 28 28 28
Fuel Production/Consumption 201 201
Electrical Consumption 10 10
NOX Emissions 3 3
Other Emissions 1 1
Mercury Abatement System 18
KOH Production/Transport
CH4/NOX from Water Processing
Energy at Processing Plant
Delivery of Typical Funeral 189
Burial Process At Grave 100
Grave Maintenance (100yrs) 103
CO2 Reduction Due To Turf Absorption -39
Total kg CO2 Equivalents 381 243 261
HCL (kg/hr) 0.07 0.0001
Hg (kg/hr) 0.0003 0.0000002
Data Sources: Sustain Environmental Accounting UK/ Green Burial Council
Lower particulate emissions
Lower carbon monoxide emissions
Lower carbon dioxide emissions
Lower mercury emissions
Lower nitrogen oxide emissions
Less fuel consumed
Less natural resources consumed
Improved environmental signature
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
©2012, Matthews Cremation Division
?
? ?
? ?
?