Combustion and Stubble Burning Effluent Emissions: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Ishita Chanana
,
Aparajita Sharma
,
Pradeep Kumar
,
Lokender Kumar
,
Sourabh Kulshreshtha
,
Sanjay Kumar
,
Sanjay Kumar Singh Patel

Combustion is an essential process for humanity, but it has created turbulence in society due to the pollutant emissions from the partial completion of its process and its byproducts. According to the system of air quality and weather forecasting and research (SAFAR), stubble burning’s contribution to air pollution (as PM) was 25% in 2021, 32% in 2020, and 19% in 2019, while the fire count between September and November was 71,304 in 2021, and 83,002 in 2020, respectively. This has been known to directly affect Delhi’s AQI. Combustion effluents are generated in response to the behavior of the burning process and product toxicity, which further resides in the fire plot (orientation and fuel’s shape), material composition, oxygen concentration, and temperature.

  • combustion
  • fuel
  • emission

1. Introduction

The exothermic fuel combustion reactions have been regarded as the key reason for air pollution and worsening human health conditions [1]. Their consumption for global energy generation has increased 22-fold, from 5973 tWh in 1900 to 136,018 tWh [2], with the majority being produced via gas-based combustion, followed by coal and oil combustion. The USA, Russia, China, and India are among the foremost fuel-consuming countries. With an 8 million (M) annual death rate due to fossil fuel pollution (2018), s 3.2 M yearly death rate, and 237,000 infant fatalities due to household emissions (2020), the emissions from industries (e.g., iron, steel, aluminum, and coke production), household (e.g., cooking and indoor heating), traffic and roadway (vehicular exhaust from gasoline and diesel consumption), and coal, petroleum, and vegetative fuel combustion, often produce several byproducts from complete and incomplete combustion process which are being classified as a threat to human health and environment [3]. Stubble burning is a common agricultural practice that can have significant environmental air pollution concerns and impacts on human health. Conversely, the burning of chaff produces large amounts of particulate matter and causes serious respiratory impacts [4]. An increasing population leads to increases in crop production demand, thereby increasing stubble production. The effect of crop residue burning in northwest India can be directly evaluated with a study stating 149 million tonnes (Mt) of carbon dioxide (CO2), 9.0 Mt of carbon monoxide (CO), 0.25 Mt of sulfur oxide (SOX), 1.28 Mt of particulate matter (PM), and 0.07 Mt of black carbon (BC), which has found to be directly affecting Delhi’s air quality index (AQI) [5]. Smog increase had led to 84.5% of the population suffering from heart disease, 76.8% from eye irritation, 44.8% from nose irritation, and 45.5% from throat irritation. Cough increased by 41.6% and wheezing problems by 18.0% [6]. In the Delhi National Capital Region (NCR), an amount of 1.35 Mt of crop residue burning is to expected by the end of 2023 [7]. The oxides of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and sulfur (S), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), aromatic amines, heterocyclic aromatic compounds, formaldehyde, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), benzene, aldehydes and alkenes, soot, and other fine particles are byproducts of combustion. The pollutants released may enter the environment as additional constituents, unbalancing the stabilized greenhouse gasses’ (GHGs)—i.e., CO2 and methane (CH4)—concentration in the atmosphere, which keeps the heat energy from escaping into space, resulting in global warming. According to the system of air quality and weather forecasting and research (SAFAR), stubble burning’s contribution to air pollution (as PM) was 25% in 2021, 32% in 2020, and 19% in 2019, while the fire count between September and November was 71,304 in 2021, and 83,002 in 2020, respectively. This has been known to directly affect Delhi’s AQI [8]. The mitigation of GHGs is feasible by various biological approaches towards value-added products [9][10][11]. The Indian Agency for Research on Cancer has classified outdoor air pollutants under the human carcinogen category, as they have turned earth’s air unbreathable [12]. The un-stabilized atmosphere gas concentration has become an instigating factor of human health, resulting in cardiovascular (ischemic heart disease), respiratory (acute lower respiratory tract infection, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, lung cancer, tuberculosis), and genetic diseases (heart attack, asthma, coughing), as well as cancer and premature death [13][14][15].

2. Combustion and Stubble Burning Effluent Emissions

The planet has supported the production of ample oxygen and combustion fires since the time of adequate vegetation. Fire regimes are highly influenced by ecosystem composition, viz., fire frequency, spatial continuity, size, seasonality, types of fire (surface or ground fire, crown fire), fire severity, and intensity [16][17]. Industrial combustion, domestic combustion, societal combustion, agricultural combustion, and support services are the significant influencers of combustion due to human involvement with some risks and benefits [18]. The most tenacious combustion occurrence is smoldering combustion, as it is the most destructive fire process, which is a slow and low-temperature activity and a flameless burning process. Smoldering combustion is emerging as an industrial and environmental challenge; smoldering fires are a rising concern globally. During the smoldering process, sometimes, the flames’ disappearance follows a greater extension, devouring amounts of fuel and liberating toxic gases in the environment. Sturdy buoyant forces are involved in these kinds of fires, where firebrands initiated by bark and twigs are elevated and carried long distances (hundreds of meters) by the wind in downward directions, igniting several fire scenes [19]. There are research gaps in smoldering combustion, which can also be a beneficiary process for human beings. To have detailed knowledge, one can make use of recent reviews [20][21][22][23][24]. Globally 26–29% of forest loss is because of forest fires during the 2001–2019 period, which is higher compared to the 2001–2015 (21–25%) and 2003–2014 (12–18%) periods. Due to fire incidents, boreal forests have a high segment of forest loss (69–73%), following subtropical (19–22%), temperate (17–21%), tropical (6–9%), and rainforests (7–9%). Australia has an increasing trend in forest loss in the tropical, subtropical, and temperate areas, and in Eurasia, boreal forests demonstrate a high loss proportion [25][26][27]. In India, about 52,785 and 345,989 forest fires were analyzed from Nov 2020 to June 2021, i.e., the forest fire period, using a moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer sensor and Suomi National Polar Orbiting Partnership Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer suite. In Indian forests throughout the fire season, 54.4% see occasional fire, with 7.49% moderately frequent fires and 2.40% high incidence levels, and 35.71% remains non-exposed [28]. Recent fire events in Brazil, Australia, and California have again drawn full attention towards forest fires, chiefly the Amazonian fires, where whether forests or deforested areas were burning was not clear [29][30]. On the other hand, the waste and recycling industry is on the verge of providing energy, recycling, sorting, and yielding waste fires, which is an epidemic, as reviewed by Fogelman (2018). Germany, the UK, Sweden, Austria, and Italy are some of the major countries in Europe with the most incidents of waste fires [31][32]. However, major health risks were also observed with the waste fire incidents that have occurred in the cities of the USA and Thailand [33][34]. Stubble burning is the major contributor of air pollution by emissions of CH4 SOx, PM of 10 (PM10) and 2.5 (PM2.5) microns, nitrogen oxides (NOx), CO2, and CO in mostly South Asian countries such as India, Nepal, Bangladesh, and Pakistan and also in China (Figure 1). Globally, around one-fourth of biomass burning activities (household cooking, countryside communal refuse ignition, wildfires) are constituted by stubble burning regimes including forest fires comprehensively [35]. Due to changes in patterns of cropping and harvesting and water scarcity, agricultural fires are increasing in India [36]. Despite various interventions and the banning of these crop residue burning practices, this burning regime is still extensive. It has engendered about 44,000–98,000 deaths in 2003–2019, with the exposure of PM substances in the atmosphere where Haryana, Punjab, and Uttar Pradesh are the major contributors (Figure 2). India has a rich diversity of crops including rice, wheat, coarse cereals, pulses, oil seeds, sugarcane, cotton, jute and mesta, but rice and wheat, being rich producers, have a more diversified impact as their residues are burnt in large amounts for cropping processes. Sugarcane’s residues are also burnt in large amounts in India. About 6600 Mt of these crops residue were burnt during 2003–2016 [37]. There is a literature gap in studies of stubble burning and Diwali fireworks as these two events coincide with each other in India. Thus, the effect of the festival fireworks is somehow the same; stubble burning as SO2 and PM2.5 (900 μg/m3) are the major pollutants emitted during the fireworks process [38]. Combustion effluents are generated in response to the behavior of the burning process and product toxicity, which further resides in the fire plot (orientation and fuel’s shape), material composition, oxygen concentration, and temperature. These combustion effluents are gases, vapors, and liquids, and solid particles mix in varying ratios of combustion conditions to the material’s organic and elemental composition [39]. The effluents produced in the environment after burning the products are irritable and asphyxiant to humans. Asphyxiate gases, irritable gases, and complex molecules are some significant types of combustion effluents (Figure 3).
Fire 06 00079 g001 550
Figure 1. Statistics depicting the biomass burned of all crops in tonnes from the year 2016–2030.
Fire 06 00079 g002 550
Figure 2. Major states of India following stubble burning practices.
Fire 06 00079 g003
Figure 3. Reaction for combustion exhibiting effluents in the environment and different types of combustion (CO (Carbon monoxide), CO2 (Carbon-dioxide), HCN (Hydrogen cyanide), HCl (Hydrogen chloride), Secondary organic aerosol (SOA), NOX (Oxides of nitrogen), O3 (Ozone) and PAHs (Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons)).

2.1. Combustion and Stubble Burning Contribution

Combustion, on the one hand, is full of risks and, on the other hand, is equally responsible for a number of benefits. The combustion process involves generating energy, heat, light, chemical species, mechanical work, and plasma. During the reaction between diesel fuel, hydrocarbons, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and water are produced, resulting in combustion. This conversion of diesel fuel to energy is obligatory for power buses; further, it also helps in exhausting the greenhouse gases responsible for climatic change and toxic air pollutants which smudge the atmosphere [40]. A total of 25% of the world’s power is provided by internal combustion engines (ICE), which are operated by fossil fuel oils. ICEs are enhanced by the conversion of catalysis beneficial to uniting emission standards with a coating of a metal catalyst to ceramic structure in order to reduce pollutants and intensify combustion. ICEs are still the transportation industry’s future, so there should be future efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the environment, which will be discussed in the coming sections [41]. Hydrogen-fueled (HF) ICE (HF-ICE) can be a potent approach for ecological road mobility elucidations, which will also meet the neutrality objective of the EU’s 2050 CO2. These HF-ICE are advantageous over diesel engines in automobile industries as they have virtually no emissions and lofty efficiency. So, HF-ICE should be taken into consideration, noting both its advantages and its limitations [42]. Rice husk combustion (1 tonne/h) can boost an average net of 600–700 KWh electricity for any power plant with less NOx and CO effluent emission (below 250 ppm). Moreover, rice husk ash can recover bio-silica of 99.7% purity. So, rice husk combustion can be utilized for energy development [43]. Coal is the ally of the world for electricity production compared to other sources, producing 40% of the world’s supply. Abundance, affordability, standard technology, reliability, efficiency, and safety are the key benefits of coal-fired power plants [44]. The year 2021 has seen increased energy generation by coal-fired power plants by 8%, which has technically reversed the decline over the past two years. European Union (20%) > United States (16%) > India (13%) is the increasing demand trend for coal-fired stations [45].
Incorporating agricultural stalks (decomposition) into the soil can increase its fertility and level of nutrients, organic matter, microbial activity, and water-holding capacity. Bio-decomposition and vermicomposting are some of the decomposition techniques for crop residue management that are helpful in the generation of bio-compost and bio-fertilizers, respectively, which can be further used in agricultural practices. Biochar production by the conversion of biomass by thermal combustion can be used for reducing carbon footprints during rice production [46]. Crop residue waste can be used to produce biogas, bio-hydrogen, and bioethanol; 12 TWh of electricity can be generated in biomass power plants with crop residue usage [47]. In Iran, a study evaluated that 2082 Mm3 (hydrogen), 6542 Mm3 (biogas), and 2443 M liter (butanol) could be yielded by 24.3 Mt of crop residue [48]. Crop residues can be used for bioenergy production and thus will be helpful for waste and air pollution management.

2.2. Dispersal of the Combustion and Stubble Burning Effluents

During the combustion of various materials, many effluents are dispersed in the environment, which can have an affect depending on the exposure duration, receptor susceptibility, and transmission process. These combustion effluents consist of solid gases, vapors, and liquid droplets with a particular size range. After cooling fire effluents, a chemical composition still exists where vapors form in submicron fields by condensation into liquid droplets and solid particles. Inhalation hazards during a fire by the occupants in remote areas are prevented when acid gases, organic particulates, and vapors are retained on building surfaces and elevated after fire risks [49]. The effluents are emitted into the air, water, and terrestrial environments. PAHs, hydrocarbons, VOCs, metals, dioxins, suspended solids, and ammonia are key concerning effluents produced during the firing process [50]. Burning stubble, such as sugarcane, can accumulate mercury in the soil and streams. Mercury can be toxic to humans and wildlife and cause developmental problems in fetuses. Stubble burning is the source of major gaseous pollutants, i.e., GHGS, NOx, SOx, and PM (PM10 and PM2.5), causing major human and environmental health issues. Approximately 63 Mt of crop stubble can emit CO (3.4 Mt), CO2 (91 Mt), CH4 (0.6 Mt), NOx (0.1 Mt), and PM (1.2 Mt) into the environment [4]. A recent study likely reported CO2 (176 teragrams (Tg)), CO (10 Tg), CH4 (314 gigagrams (Gg)), N2O (8.1 Gg), NH3 (151 Gg), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC, 814 Gg), PM2.5 (453 Gg), and PM10 (936 Gg) emissions from crop residue burning in northwestern India [51]. These stubble burning pollutants are transported from the Indian Punjab region to Pakistan, and vice versa. According to the air’s trajectory analysis, it was found that with compact bumps from the adjacent countries, transnational dispersal of pollutants exists across Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Nepal [52][53]. According to the world bank data, USD 8.1 trillion yearly is the cost of health damages originating by air pollution, which corresponds to 6.1% of the gross domestic product (GDP) globally [54]. In India, USD 28·8 billion of economic losses were recorded in 2019, and this cumulative deprivation of USD 36·8 billion was 1.36% of India’s GDP [55].

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/fire6020079

References

  1. Patel, S.K.S.; Das, D.; Kim, S.C.; Cho, B.-K.; Lee, J.-K.; Kalia, V.C. Integrating strategies for sustainable conversion of waste biomass into dark-fermentative hydrogen and value-added products. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 150, 111491.
  2. Ritchie, H.; Roser, M.; Rosado, P. Research and Data to Make Progress against the World’s Largest Problems. 2022. Available online: OurWorldInData.org (accessed on 25 January 2023).
  3. Lewtas, J. Air pollution combustion emissions: Characterization of causative agents and mechanisms associated with cancer, reproductive, and cardiovascular effects. Mutat. Res. Rev. Mutat. Res. 2007, 636, 95–133.
  4. Abdurrahman, M.I.; Chaki, S.; Saini, G. Stubble burning: Effects on health & environment, regulations and management practices. Environ. Adv. 2020, 2, 100011.
  5. Yadav, R.S. Stubble Burning: A Problem for the Environment, Agriculture, and Humans. Down to Earth. 4 June 2019. Available online: https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/agriculture/stubble-burning-a-problem-for-the-environment-agriculture-and-humans-64912 (accessed on 25 January 2023).
  6. Stubble Burning is So Bad in Punjab, That 84% Population is Having Health Issues. Available online: https://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/stubble-burning-is-so-bad-in-punjab-that-84-of-population-is-having-health-issues-331980.html (accessed on 25 January 2023).
  7. Vishnoi, A. Magnitude of Stubble Problem Grows Larger: Govt Review. Available online: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/magnitude-of-stubble-problem-grows-larger-govt-review/articleshow/94571984.cms?from=mdr (accessed on 25 January 2023).
  8. Omar, P. Stubble Burning Share Rises to 26% in Delhi’s Pollution, AQI Points ‘Severe’. Available online: https://www.livemint.com/news/india/stubble-burning-share-rises-to-26-in-delhi-s-pollution-aqi-points-severe-11667131222272.html (accessed on 25 January 2023).
  9. Patel, S.K.S.; Shanmugam, R.; Lee, J.-K.; Kalia, V.C.; Kim, I.-W. Biomolecules production from greenhouse gases by methanotrophs. Indian J. Microbiol. 2021, 61, 449–457.
  10. Patel, S.K.S.; Gupta, R.K.; Kalia, V.C.; Lee, J.-K. Synthetic design of methanotroph co-cultures and their immobilization within polymers containing magnetic nanoparticles to enhance methanol production from wheat straw-based biogas. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 364, 128032.
  11. Patel, S.K.S.; Kalia, V.C.; Lee, J.-K. Integration of biogas derived from dark fermentation and anaerobic digestion of biowaste to enhance methanol production by methanotrophs. Bioresour. Technol. 2023, 367, 128427.
  12. Loomis, D.; Grosse, Y.; Lauby-Secretan, B.; El Ghissassi, F.; Bouvard, V.; Benbrahim-Tallaa, L.; Guha, N.; Baan, R.; Mattock, H.; Straif, K.; et al. The carcinogenicity of outdoor air pollution. Lancet Oncol. 2013, 14, 1262–1263.
  13. Kravchenko, J.; Ruhl, L.S. Coal Combustion Residuals and Health. In Practical Applications of Medical Geology; Siegel, M., Selinus, O., Finkelman, R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 429–474.
  14. Corsini, E.; Marinovich, M.; Vecchi, R. Ultrafine particles from residential biomass combustion: A review on experimental data and toxicological response. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 4992.
  15. Balmes, J.R. Household air pollution from domestic combustion of solid fuels and health. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. Pract. 2019, 143, 1979–1987.
  16. Keeley, J.E. Fire intensity, fire severity and burn severity: A brief review and suggested usage. Int. J. Wildland Fire 2009, 18, 116–126.
  17. Belcher, C.M. The influence of leaf morphology on litter flammability and its utility for interpreting palaeofire. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2016, 371, 20150163.
  18. Johnston, F.H.; Melody, S.; Bowman, D.M. The pyrohealth transition: How combustion emissions have shaped health through human history. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2016, 371, 20150173.
  19. Cardil, A.; de-Miguel, S.; Silva, C.A.; Reich, P.B.; Calkin, D.E.; Brancalion, P.H.S.; Vibrans, A.C.; Gamarra, J.G.P.; Zhou, M.; Pijanowski, B.C. Recent deforestation drove the spike in Amazonian fires. Environ. Res. Lett. 2020, 15, 121003.
  20. Rein, G. Smoldering combustion. In SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering; Hurley, M.J., Ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 581–603.
  21. Ohlemiller, T.J. Modeling of smoldering combustion propagation. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 1985, 11, 277–310.
  22. T’ien, J.S.; Shih, H.; Jiang, C.; Ross, H.D.; Miller, F.J. Mechanisms of Flame Spread 14 and Smolder Wave Propagation. In Chapter 5 in Microgravity Combustion: Fire in Free Fall; Ross, H.D., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2001; pp. 299–417.
  23. Babrauskas, V. Ignition Handbook; Fire Science Publishers: Issaquah, WA, USA, 2003.
  24. Torero, J.L.; Gerhard, J.I.; Martins, M.F.; Zanoni, M.A.; Rashwan, T.L.; Brown, J.K. Processes defining smouldering combustion: Integrated review and synthesis. Prog. Energy Combus. Sci. 2020, 81, 100869.
  25. Curtis, P.G.; Slay, C.M.; Harris, N.L.; Tyukavina, A.; Hansen, M.C. Classifying drivers of global forest loss. Science 2018, 361, 1108–1111.
  26. Liu, Z.; Ballantyne, A.P.; Cooper, L.A. Biophysical feedback of global forest fires on surface temperature. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 214.
  27. Tyukavina, A.; Potapov, P.; Hansen, M.C.; Pickens, A.H.; Stehman, S.V.; Turubanova, S.; Parker, D.; Zalles, V.; Lima, A.; Kommareddy, I.; et al. Global trends of forest loss due to fire from 2001 to 2019. Front. Remote Sens. 2022, 3, 825190.
  28. MoEFCC. Forest Fire Activities. In Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change; Government of India: New Delhi, India, 2021. Available online: https://fsi.nic.in/forest-fire-activities (accessed on 25 January 2023).
  29. Boer, M.M.; de Dios, R.V.; Bradstock, R.A. Unprecedented burn area of australian mega forest fires. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2020, 10, 170.
  30. Manzello, S.L.; Suzuki, S.; Gollner, M.J.; Fernandez-Pello, A.C. Role of firebrand combustion in large outdoor fire spread. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2020, 76, 100801.
  31. Nigl, T.; Rübenbauer, W.; Pomberger, R. Cause-oriented investigation of the fire incidents in Austrian waste management systems. Detritus 2020, 9, 213–220.
  32. Mazzucco, W.; Costantino, C.; Restivo, V.; Alba, D.; Marotta, C.; Tavormina, E.; Cernigliaro, A.; Macaluso, M.; Cusimano, R.; Grammauta, R.; et al. The management of health hazards related to municipal solid waste on fire in Europe: An environmental justice issue? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2020, 17, 6617.
  33. Fogelman, R. Is the Recycling Industry Facing a Fire Epidemic? 2018. Available online: https://www.recyclingproductnews.com/article/27240/is-the-recycling-industry-facing-a-fire-epidemic (accessed on 25 January 2023).
  34. Wiwanitkit, V. Thai waste landfill site fire crisis, particular matter 10, and risk of lung cancer. J. Cancer Res. Ther. 2016, 2, 1088–1089.
  35. Yadav, I.C.; Devi, N.L. Biomass burning, regional air quality, and climate change. In Encyclopedia of Environmental Health, 2nd ed.; Nriagu, J., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 386–391.
  36. Liu, T.; Marlier, M.E.; Karambelas, A.; Jain, M.; Singh, S.; Singh, M.K.; Gautam, R.; DeFries, R.S. Missing emissions from post-monsoon agricultural fires in northwestern India: Regional limitations of MODIS burned area and active fire products. Environ. Res. Commun. 2019, 1, 011007.
  37. Lan, R.; Eastham, S.D.; Liu, T.; Norford, L.K.; Barrett, S.R. Air quality impacts of crop residue burning in India and mitigation alternatives. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 6537.
  38. Ravindra, K.; Kumar, S.; Mor, S. Long term assessment of firework emissions and air quality during Diwali festival and impact of 2020 fireworks ban on air quality over the states of Indo Gangetic Plains airshed in India. Atmos. Environ. 2022, 285, 119223.
  39. Hull, T.R.; Stec, A.A. Generation, sampling and quantification of toxic combustion products. In Toxicology, Survival and Health Hazards of Combustion Products; Purser, D.A., Maynard, R.L., Wakefield, J., Eds.; Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, UK, 2015; Chapter 5; pp. 108–138.
  40. Abdallah, T. Sustainable Mass Transit: Challenges and Opportunities in Urban Public Transportation; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 1–218.
  41. Reitz, R.D.; Ogawa, H.; Payri, R.; Fansler, T.; Kokjohn, S.; Moriyoshi, Y.; Agarwal, A.K.; Arcoumanis, D.; Assanis, D.; Bae, C.; et al. IJER editorial: The future of the internal combustion engine. Int. J. Engine Res. 2020, 21, 3–10.
  42. Stępień, Z. A comprehensive overview of hydrogen-fueled internal combustion engines: Achievements and future challenges. Energies 2021, 14, 6504.
  43. Steven, S.; Restiawaty, E.; Bindar, Y. Routes for energy and bio-silica production from rice husk: A comprehensive review and emerging prospect. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 149, 111329.
  44. Chen, H.; Zhang, M.; Xue, K.; Xu, G.; Yang, Y.; Wang, Z.; Liu, W.; Liu, T. An innovative waste-to-energy system integrated with a coal-fired power plant. Energy 2020, 194, 116893.
  45. Greenfield, C.; Alvares, C.; Lorenczik, S.; Jorquera, J. Coal Fired Electricity; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2022; Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/coal-fired-electricity (accessed on 25 January 2023).
  46. Singh, D.; Dhiman, S.K.; Kumar, V.; Babu, R.; Shree, K.; Priyadarshani, A.; Singh, A.; Shakya, L.; Nautiyal, A.; Saluja, S. Crop residue burning and its relationship between health, agriculture value addition, and regional finance. Atmosphere 2022, 13, 1405.
  47. Ravindra, K.; Singh, T.; Mor, S. Emissions of air pollutants from primary crop residue burning in India and their mitigation strategies for cleaner emissions. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 208, 261–273.
  48. Abed, A.M.; Lafta, H.A.; Alayi, R.; Tamim, H.; Sharifpur, M.; Khalilpoor, N.; Bagheri, B. Utilization of animal solid waste for electricity generation in the Northwest of Iran 3E analysis for one-year simulation. Int. J. Chem. Eng. 2022, 2022, 4228483.
  49. Purser, D.A. Fire types and combustion products. In Toxicology, Survival and Health Hazards of Combustion Products; Purser, D.A., Maynard, R.L., Wakefield, J., Eds.; Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, UK, 2015; Chapter 2; pp. 11–52.
  50. Martin, D.; Tomida, M.; Meacham, B. Environmental impact of fire. Fire Sci. Rev. 2016, 5, 1–21.
  51. Venkatramanan, V.; Shah, S.; Rai, A.K.; Prasad, R. Nexus between crop residue burning, bioeconomy and sustainable development goals over north-western India. Front. Energy Res. 2021, 8, 614212.
  52. Ghosh, P.; Sharma, S.; Khanna, I.; Datta, A.; Suresh, R.; Kundu, S.; Goel, A.; Datt, D. Scoping Study for South Asia Air Pollution; The Energy Resource Institute: Delhi, India, 2019; Available online: https://airsouthasia.org/2019/07/06/scoping-study-for-south-asia-air-pollution (accessed on 25 January 2023).
  53. Shabbir, M.; Junaid, A.; Zahid, J. Smog: A Transboundary Issue and Its Implications in India and Pakistan; Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI): Islamabad, Pakistan, 2019.
  54. What You Need to Know About Climate Change and Air Pollution. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2022/09/01/what-you-need-to-know-about-climate-change-and-air-pollution (accessed on 27 January 2023).
  55. Pandey, A.; Brauer, M.; Cropper, M.L.; Balakrishnan, K.; Mathur, P.; Dey, S.; Turkgulu, B.; Kumar, G.A.; Khare, M.; Beig, G.; et al. Health and economic impact of air pollution in the states of India: The global burden of disease study 2019. Lancet Plan. Health 2021, 5, e25–e38.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
Video Production Service
Feedback