Incineration

Incineration is a method of disposing of waste by burning it.

Incineration usually functions as an
alternative to other disposal methods,
especially landfilling. Incineration reduces the
overall volume of the waste stream and,
especially for hazardous wastes, is intended to
reduce the wastes' toxicit and other hazardous
characteristics. It is particulary popular in
countries such as Japan where land is a scarce
resource. Incineration is often described as
Thermal Treatment.
Incineration and Waste Management
For the Environmental engineer today Incineration may be used as one of a variety
of tools to design and implement a waste management strategy.
The basic aim of pro-environmental waste management policies is generally to
reduce the impact on the environment by reducing the sum of energy used and
emissions to the environment. In the waste management policies of the EU,
Incineration comes in step four and five of the hierarchy of waste strategies:
1: Reduce waste at source
2: Reuse products (no or minimal processing)
3: Recyle
4: Dispose with energy recovery
5: Dispose without energy recovery
Aspects of Incineration
Incineration does not divide neatly into separate categories but rather several
factors influence the design of incinerators and how harmful they are to the
environment. These aspects are discussed in greater depth below:

Scale
The scale of incineration can vary hugely from burn barrels for individual houses
to large municipal waste incinerators catering for whole cities.
Small scale describes people burning household waste in small quantities. It is
used most in areas with regular municipal waste collection. The low temperatures,
lack of control and lack of montitoring mean that this form of incineration is
generally the most polluting per kilo of waste burned.
Medium scale incineration is usually for commercial, industrial or institutional
waste. For example large hospitals may use an on-site incinerator to dispose of
medical waste. The type of waste such incinerators burn is often highly specific.
Large scale incineration is usually for municipal waste. Such incinerators deal
with 100 to 1000 tons of waste per day. The waste they burn is mixed and its
characteristics (e.g. water content and calorific value) may vary significantly.
Waste Types
Most waste generated by human activity can be burnt in an incinerator.
Municipal Waste
Municipal Waste is the largest source of incinerator fuel. It may be sorted or
unsorted waste.
Sorted municipal waste, has as the name suggests, been sorted to remove some
forms of waste. In developed countries, particularly the EU and Japan, this usually
means that recyclable material is removed by residents or by a company before
waste is burnt.
Valuable materials, like steel, aluminum, paper and some types of plastics are
removed, materials that are not economically recyclable, such as polystyrene,
paper towels and wax-coated paper are sent for incineration.

Garden waste and compostable material is also often removed prior to

incineration. The high water content of compostable material means that it reduces
the efficiency of the incinerator.
Unsorted municipal waste on the other hand has not had potentially valuable
material removed from it.
Medical waste
Medical waste incineration entails the combustion of a waste stream with special
biological contamination risks. One of the major problems with medical waste is
that there are many relatively-small and under-regulated, under-supervised
combustion sites.
Chemical Weapons
Chemical weapons are also incinerated. For example, the U.S. has thousands of
tons of sarin stockpiled during the Cold War era, as a countermeasure against even
larger stockpiles of the Warsaw pact. Having signed the international ban, U.S.
Government has been trying to destroy that sarin by incineration, but the
destruction is hampered by the environmental concerns about incineration.
Furnace Types
An incinerator may utilise any of a number of furnace types. The selection of
furnace type will depend on the quantity and type of waste the incinerator will be
dealing with.
To select a furnace type the calorific value of the waste to be burned needs to be
ascertained. This will vary with the type of waste to be burned (medical vs
municipal)and also with the particular city and the level of sorting carried out.
Rotary Kiln
A rotary kiln, which comprises a rotating oven and a post-combustion chamber,
may be specifically used to burn chemical wastes, and is also suited for use as a
regional health-care waste incinerator. Main characteristics of rotary kilns are
summarized as follows:
Adequate for the following waste categories:

- Infectious waste (including sharps) and pathological waste.

- All chemical and pharmaceutical wastes, including cytotoxic waste.
Inadequate for the following wastes:
- Non-risk health-care wastes - incineration in rotary kilns would represent a waste
of resources.
- Radioactive waste - treatment does not affect radioactive properties and may
disperse radiation.
Wastes should not be incinerated:
- Pressurized containers - may explode during incineration and cause damage to
the equipment.
- Wastes with high-metal content incineration will cause emission of
toxic metals (e.g. leads, cadmium,
mercury) into the athmosphere
Incineration temperature: 12001600C, which allows
decomposition of very persistent
chemicals such as PCBs
(polychlorobiphenyls)
Incinerator capacity: Available
capacities range from 0.5 to 3
tonnes/hour.
Exhaust-gas cleaning and ash treatment equipment: Likely to be needed, as the
incineration of chemical waste produces exhaust gases and ashes that may be
loaded with toxic chemicals.
Additional remarks: Equipment and operation costs are high, as is energy
consumption. Wases and incineration by-products are highly corossive, and the
refractory lining of the kiln often has to be repaired or replaced. Well trained
personnel are required.

The axis of a rotary kiln is inclined at a slight angle to the vertical (3-5% slope).
The kiln rotates 2 to 5 times per minute and is charged with waste at the top. Ashes
are evacuated at the bottom end of the kiln. The gases produced in the kiln are
heated in high temperatures to burn off gaseous organic compounds in the postcombustion chamber and typically have a residence time of 2 seconds.
Rotary kilns may operate continuously and are adaptable to a wide range of
loading devices. Those designed to treat toxic wastes should preferably be
operated by specialist waste dispocal agencies and should be located in industrial
areas or "parks".
Fluidised Bed
Cement kilns
A versatile type of incinerator is the cement kiln, whose main product is Portland
cement. A cement kiln is a rotating cylinder, almost horizontal but slightly
inclined, with the upper end continuously fed with a mixture of clay and lime or
limestone, and the lower end fed with burning fuel. The temperature of thousands
of degrees causes the lime and clay react chemically, and a continuous stream of
the white-hot molten portland cement flows from the lower end of the cylinder.
Cement kilns benefit from this fact in their auxiliary role of incinerators, since by
their nature, they combine incineration with scrubbing those inorganic gases. Kilns
convert and lock those gases and ashes into mineral products. This is done by the
molten cement and lime covering the entire walls of the rotating kiln. The alkaline
properties of the hot, molten mixture neutralize those gases. A conventional
incinerator would produce sulfur dioxide, or when equipped with a scrubber,
harmless but cumbersome by-products. A cement kiln converts that sulfur dioxide
into the mineral of gypsum, later locked in the portland concrete. The chlorine
becomes less toxic calcium chloride, the phosphorus becomes the mineral of
apatite, fluorine becomes the mineral of spat, and other similar reactions occur.
The only remaining gaseous contaminants that leave a cement kiln are small
amounts of nitrogen oxide, and residues of dioxins.

Energy Recovery
A modern incinerator will nearly always encompass some form of energy
recovery. The two principle methods of energy recovery used are electricity
generation and municipal heating. One incinerator may combine the two methods
depending on the demands of the local area.
Electricity Generation
This is where the furnace of the incinerator is used to power an electricity
generation plant (power plant).
Municipal Heating
This is where the furnace of the incinerator is used to generate steam and hot water
which is pumped directly to businesses/institutions and houses in the vicinity of
the incinerator. The hot water is then used to heat the buildings.
Emissions from Incineration
Incineration generates several forms of waste itself, such as the emission of
unburned gases and metals in, the hazardous secondary products of combustion,
and leftover ash. The health hazards associated with these emissions and
incinerator wastes are the subject of intense controversy.
Solids
The volume of solids or ash left after incineration is usually from 30% to 10% of
the original quantity of waste. The ash is far more concentrated with pollutants
than the original waste. The ash is often regulated as a hazardous waste itself and
must be landfilled.
This concention of pollutants can allow otherwise unrecoverable metals to be
recycled. The portion of metals that could not be separated prior to combustion are
periodically removed from the boilers and sent to foundries for recycling.

Gases
The exhaust gases produced as by products of incineration are a major source of
concern. Among the unintended pollutants caused by incineration are dioxins and
furans, which are the subject of ongoing study and debate.
The quantity of hazardous substances in Incinerator exhaust gases is reduced by a
technique known as scrubbing

Incinerator Toxic
Emissions:
The province of Ontario, Canada has banned construction of solid waste
incinerators since 1992 (1). The Clinton administration may soon do the same (2).
Alternatives are being actively explored, including recycling, waste-reduction, and
re-use of materials (3-6). Nonetheless, some municipalities still consider waste
incineration as an option. Definitive studies on the effects of some of the
substances and amounts emitted are reported to be lacking in the relevant
scientific literature
Incinerator-specific studies of human effect are rare. A significant correlation is
reported between the purchase of bronchodilators, expectorants, and cough
medicines and closeness to a municipal incinerator (7). Winter deaths in London,
England, varied significantly with air levels of total particulate matter, SO2, and
acidic aerosol SO2 and particulate matter are common incinerator emissions (6,
7). Elevated levels of NO2 emitted from an industrial facility caused a significant
increase in bronchitis among children exposed for 2 and 3 years; illness varied
significantly with distance from the plant (9). NO2 is also found in incinerator flue
gases, and is a major problem worldwide due to its automobile and industrial
emissions (9-14). There is a report of a four-fold increase in lung ailments in
Canada since 1970 (15). Childhood asthma rates near the Toronto Western
Hospital, which imports hazardous waste from other hospitals to burn, are reported
among the highest in the world (8). A significant correlation has been shown

between car ownership and leukaemia (16), and the authors speculate that
background exposure to benzene is an explanation for the large increase in
leukaemias of recent decades. Benzene is among the most common incinerator
toxic emissions
SPECIFIC INCINERATOR POLLUTANTS
Hydrocarbon Emissions: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
reportedly done field tests of eight incinerators, nine industrial boilers, and six
industrial kilns, and showed measurable amounts of 55 hazardous chemicals from
their list (Appendix VIII) of ~400 known hazardous compounds (6). Most
common were benzene, toluene, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, methylene
chloride, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, chlorobenzene, naphthalene,
phenol, and bis(2-ethylhexy)phthalate. Concentrations ranged 5 orders of
magnitude between chemicals and between different measurements at the same
facility (6), so predictions of average or total output are problematic. Other
investigators are reported finding multiple emissions from MSW incinerators
including PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), PCBs (polychlorinated
biphenyls), PHAHs (polycyclic halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons), halogenated
organic acids, phthalates, aldehydes, ketones, organic acids, alkanes, and alkenes.
Examples noted include chlorobenzenes and chlorophenols, naphthalene,
benzo(a)pyrene, anthracene, flouranthene, pyrene, and phenanthrene, as well as
highly toxic PCDDs and PCDFs (polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and -furans)
The presence of these compounds intact would indicate the incinerators were
operated under conditions inadequate for their complete combustion (7). Many are
formed in the stack and are thus termed PIC (products of incomplete combustion)
(6). PICs include as-yet unidentified compounds with unknown toxicity. The EPA
has focused largely on identification of known, Appendix VIII compounds only
(6). Since only a small percentage of the hydrocarbon emissions have been
identified (6), this leaves a great deal unknown about PAH emission effects.

Dioxins and furans can be formed by burning PCBs (17). Dioxins are believed
formed in incinerators at a temperature of ~500 C and destroyed at a temperature
of at least 900 C (6, 7). But the incinerator must be running at maximum
efficiency; dioxin survival is favoured by low combustion temperature, wet refuse,
insufficient or excess oxygen and inadequate residence time (7). MSW
incinerators have been measured as consistently producing far more dioxin and
furans than hazardous waste incinerators; almost 1000 times as much (6).
One study is reported to have found the concentration of PAHs in stack gases of an
MSW incinerator increased more than 1000-fold during cold start-up of the plant
(7), so a large load of plastics or solvents could result in a huge surge of toxic
emissions (3). Another reported that the highest concentrations of PAHs are on the
smallest atmospheric particulates and therefore in the respirable range (7). Thus a
wide range of hazardous materials are possibly being emitted in a form ripe for
absorption by the human breathing system. Performance data on incinerator
efficiency is usually conducted at new facilities operating at peak performance (2).
More than half of the 221 hazardous waste incinerators in the United States
employ no pollution control equipment at all (6).
Hydrocarbon Effects:
Light and Noncyclic Hydrocarbons: Benzene is an established human carcinogen
(18, 19), induces DNA strand breaks (20), and may have no lower threshold of
effect (16). Chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, and many other PHAHs are
carcinogens and liver and kidney toxic (21). Methylene chloride, trichloroethylene
(TCE), and tetrachloroethylene are strongly suspected carcinogens (21). TCE
damages the fatty acid components of brain cell membranes (22). Many
halogenated alkanes, alkenes, and alkynes are cytotoxic and/or carcinogenic (21).
Toluene induces DNA strand breaks (20) and can induce CNS symptoms,
including brain damage, with chronic or acute use (23). Mixtures of solvents used
industrially often include toluene, methylene chloride and chloroform and have
been implicated in inducing fatigue, loss of appetite, loss of memory, and other

symptoms in chronic use (23, 24). Recent work shows that toluene, TCE, and
benzene may interact synergistically with ethanol, and each other, to inhibit or
amplify effects (25). A 67-fold increase in liver toxicity of carbon tetrachloride
occurs in the presence of chlordecone (26-28), and a mechanism has been
described. This raises the question: is other chemical damage similarly multiplied
by the presence of small amounts of a second chemical? We need more data on
multiple interactions (28).
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons: Many of the hundreds of congeners of
PHAHs, PCBs, dioxins, furans, and other PAHs appear to use the same
mechanism to create human cancer and toxicity (29, 30); the parent binds to a
special aromatic hydrocarbon receptor in cell membranes, and a resulting complex
interacts with cell DNA (29, 31, 32) to cause multiple gene alterations, including
genes of drug metabolism enzymes and cellular growth (29). The induction of
P450 enzymes may be important in the formation of toxic metabolites (21, 33).
Some toxic effects, particularly from PCBs, may operate through other
mechanisms (33). Effects of PAHs reported in humans include: severe
disturbances in Vitamin A metabolism (34); neurological changes including
altering dopamine concentrations in the CNS (35); retarded child cognitive and
motor development (35), lowered birth weight, growth rate, and child activity
levels (36), poorer child memory (37); cancer (38); bronchial and liver damage
(39); and immune changes (40, 41). Animal studies are reported to show dermal,
immune, and liver toxicity; cancer; and teratogenic and neurobehavioral effects
(30, 42). According to one review (42), toxic effects of TCDD, the most toxic
dioxin isomer, found to recur in four or more human studies each are: chlorachne;
liver damage; elevated liver enzymes; disorders of carbohydrate metabolism;
cardiovascular disorders; neurological damage; peripheral neuritis; sensory
impairments (sight, hearing, taste, smell); and depressive psychological
syndromes.

Although amounts of many PAHs found in incinerator emissions are very small,
many PAHs are toxic in tiny quantities; parts per billion or trillion, as opposed to
parts per million for most other toxins studied (42). A review of reproductive
animal studies on PCB effects concluded that a No Observable Adverse Effect
Level could not be formulated since effects were present at the lowest levels
studied; the background contamination of the control diets would interfere with
testing of lower amounts (43). This is especially troubling since many PAHs are
not excreted from the body; they build up in fat tissue; this is well established in
humans, other mammals, fish, and insects (44-46). Virtually all humans are now
carrying a load of TCDD at more than 3 parts per trillion; in the U.S.A. the range
is from 1.4 to 20.2 ppt for non-occupationally exposed individuals (47). Human
and animal studies show that, in PCBs, the unmetabolized body burden can be
passed in mothers milk to the infant (35-37, 48). Particularly troubling are two
independent studies showing PCB-related developmental impairment in children
at levels now encountered in the general population (35-37).
Metals and Heavy Metals: Over thirty-five metals are reported from MSW
incineration; most are found in all of bottom ash, fly ash, and suspended
particulate, and undergo enrichment in the fine ash (6, 7). Several are reported as
possible human carcinogens or toxins, including Cd (49, 50), Cr, Ni, Pb, Hg, As,
Ba, and Be (7). Aluminum, Cu, Fe, Pb, Ti and Zn are found largely in slag, while
more volatile elements such as Cd, Pb, Sb, Se and Sn are vaporized and condense
on fine particles, which are either trapped or escape to the atmosphere as
suspended particulates (7). Volatile chlorides of elements including As, Cd, Ni, Pb,
Sb, and Zn are formed, which greatly increases their presence in fly ash and
suspended particulates (7). Over 80% of inputed Hg, largely from Hg batteries, is
estimated to be released into gas phase as halides (7). Other metals are also used in
batteries and deserve attention (7). Small boilers employing hazardous waste as a
fuel, including waste oil, are a serious concern since 50 to 60% of the inputted Pb
is emitted from the stack (6).

The emissions of Cadmium and Mercury may be serious cause for concern since
Cd and Hg both preferentially displace Zinc in human metallo-enzymes (51); Cd
10,000-fold (52). Zn is increasingly known as crucial for many living processes
including enzyme DNA transcription (53), immune system activation (54, 55), and
membrane stabilization (56), and the average western diet is deficient in it (57).
Cd body burdens are rising (58) and Cd has a 30-year half-life in the human body
Data for metal emissions and for air pollution control device effectiveness for
metals are limited and incomplete (6). And more than half of the 221 hazardous
waste incinerators in the United States are reported as employing no pollution
control equipment at all (6).
Gases: Among others (HCL, CO, HF, Bromine), S02 and nitrogen oxides are
reported released from incinerators (6, 7). S02 and N02 have been studied
extensively due to their release from other sources and their toxic effects on the
human respiration system; both are now known to reduce the bodys ability to
fight lung infection (9-11, 60). Ozone, also toxic to the human lung anti-bacterial
system, is not reported released from incinerators per se but is formed in the
presence of sunlight on oxides of nitrogen (11). Mouse studies with ozone at
concentrations corresponding to the .7 ppm measured in the suburbs of Los
Angeles (11) show impairment of bacterial killing in the lung in only 3 to 4 hours
(61). No incinerator real-time monitors exist for measuring destruction and
removal efficiency of these or other stack emissions (6).
Bottom Ash and Washwater Pollutants: Cd, Pb, and Mn, among 20-odd metals,
and a variety of organics including chlorinated benzenes, alcohols, phenols,
aldehydes, ketones, esters, amines, amides, hydrocarbons, and dioxins and furans
also appear in wastewater and bottom ash (6, 7). Wastewater (7), and to an
increasing extent under EPA regulations, ash (6), are considered hazardous waste.
Storage in ordinary land-fills carries an undetermined level of threat of leaching
into the water table (6).

Effects On Fish: Data specifically incinerator-linked are scarce. The 1,2,8,9TCDD isomer has been found as a contaminant in fly ash, river water, and
sediments surrounding several MSW and industrial incinerators (62). Several
studies are reported establishing that fish retain the most toxic dioxins and furans
(2,3,7,8-TCDD and 2,3,7,8-TCDF) preferentially when exposed to them from fly
ash. Effect levels were observed as low as 38 parts per trillion (rainbow trout) for
TCDD (7). An EPA study is reported to state that TCDD is bioaccumulating in fish
and low-level contamination of fish is widespread (47). A recent study correlates
human levels of Pb and Se with fish consumption (63); both Pb and Se are
incinerator emissions (6).
Effects On Soils and Plants: A Finnish study reportedly found 11 elements on
birch leaf samples, including Pb, Ni, Pb, Zn, Ti, Cl, and Cd, showing a strong
correlation between concentration and closeness to an incinerator (7). Experiments
using incinerator fly ash as a partial soil additive report increased uptake of a
number of heavy metals, including Cd and Pb (5). Cabbage grown on 20% ashamended soil contained 146 times the concentration of Cd of controls (7). The
concentration of TCDD on fruits and vegetables consumed by humans has been
estimated to be 60% from air-to-leaf transfer, 33% deposition, and 8% root uptake
(47). The main mode of human intake of dioxin is by food (47, 64). Multiple
studies are reported showing incinerator and other acid gas contributions to acid
rain (7).
DISCUSSION
Toxic Burden: A study is reported in which human fat concentration of the most
toxic isomer of TCDD increases directly proportionally with age (7). Another
reported study shows levels of dioxins and furans higher in cows milk sampled
near an incinerator than elsewhere (7). If this pattern of body-burden increase
holds for even a fraction of the other organic contaminants such as PCBs and for
metals such as Cd and Hg emitted from incinerators, the detrimental effect of an

incinerator on human health may outweigh its benefits in energy retrieval and
waste-stream reduction. In addition, the synergistic effects of combinations of
chemicals are only beginning to be explored. Although one review calculates,
using a theoretical dispersion model, that only 4% of the total all-source emissions
of TCDD into the U.S. environment comes from MSW incinerators (47), their
total from known sources accounts for only 11% of total all-source emissions (47).
As a result, in the data they present, MSW incinerators can equally well be said to
account for 36% of the known sources of TCDD; or 45% if hospital incinerators
are included.
Regulatory Control: Even if technology can be shown to exist that could curb all
avenues of toxic effluent from incinerators (gas, particulate, water and ash) are
there sufficient political and regulatory safeguards in place to assure that such an
incinerator will operate at this level on a daily basis? Its been reported that after
recent confidential EPA tests conducted for a report to Congress, involving
samples from 15 of the 114 cement kilns in the United States eight that burn
hazardous waste and seven that do not the EPA expressed great concern over
unacceptably high levels of As, Cr, Pb, dioxins and furans, as well as a variety of
radioactive compounds, it found in the waste dust (2). Both concrete products and
kiln emissions were affected.
Although the EPA has standards in place for some emissions, and has done some
testing to see if those standards are met (6), no satisfactory explanation has been
demonstrated for the effects of the unknown products of incineration, nor for the
rationale behind a particular level being set as a standard. Risk assessment studies
have been performed, but the EPA Science Advisory Board has criticized their data
base and recommended a more complete assessment (6). Meanwhile, waste
generators, faced with the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments Act and with
possible future environmental damage settlements over contaminated
groundwater, look to incineration as a viable alternative (6). In 1981 figures,
industrial boilers and furnaces disposed of twice as much hazardous waste as

incinerators did. A principal attraction to this approach is exemption from

incineration emissions performance standards (6).
In Canada, St. Lawrence Cement, in densely populated Mississauga near Toronto,
disposes of about 3.5 million litres a year of highly chlorinated waste solvents and
plastic residues drawn from industries in Ontario and the United States, and the
plant has never been required to test for toxic residues (2). Several years ago the
Ontario Environment Ministry, responsible for control of St. Lawrence Cement,
was the target of an intense many-year struggle of a group of concerned Toronto
citizens who asked, then legally forced, the Ministry to take action concerning Pb
emissions from Toronto Pb smelters. A lawyer involved who later wrote a
description of the social and legal battles (65) observed that the common law has
traditionally favoured after-the-fact compensation of victims and has never
developed adequate concern for prevention of harm. He speculates that in
environmental health the burden of proof ought to be removed from the shoulders
of the potential victim and placed upon the alleged polluter (65).
Concluding Opinion: Incinerators take waste that is concentrated and partly toxic,
destroy some of it, produce new waste that is partly toxic, and spread the product
extremely thinly throughout the environment. That the effects are hard to measure
is understandable; perhaps that is one reason, even in some cases the most
important reason, why incineration is done. Although an efficiently-operating,
technologically-advanced incinerator is theoretically capable of destroying
complex hydrocarbons, it would still produce metals, sometimes conjugated with
other elements, in ash and gas. And to what degree such an incinerator has been
successfully built or is operating is an open question, due to our poor regulatory
policies. Until a major change in the political organization of incinerator control is
clearly established, the building of any further incinerators would seem unwise.
An appropriate course might be to begin careful monitoring of the existing units,
and combine this with continued exploration of other options of waste disposal,
such as reduction of waste generation at source and re-use of materials.

References
1. The Case Against Municipal Solid Waste Incineration. The Allergy And
Environmental Health Association Quarterly. 14(3/4):25-27 (1992).
2. Ferguson J. Toxins Linked To Waste Burning. The Globe and Mail. Toronto.
1993. (As reprinted in The AEHA Quarterly, 15(2), p.16).
3. Ministry of the Environment and Energy. The Case Against Municipal Solid
Waste Incineration. Government of Ontario. 1992. Booklet.
4. Riha CA. Energy efficient home made of recycled items. The Citizen. Ottawa.
August 21, 1993.
5. Elliott J. The Last Straw in alternative housing. The Citizen. Ottawa. September
4, 1993. p: E1.
6. Oppelt ET. Air emissions from the incineration of hazardous waste. Toxicol Ind
Health. 6(5):23-51 (1990).
7. Lisk DJ. Environmental implications of incineration of municipal solid waste
and ash disposal. Sci Total Environ. 74:39-66 (1988).
8. Ito K, Thurston GD, Hayes C, Lippmann M. Associations of London, England,
Daily Mortality with Particulate Matter, Sulfur Dioxide, and Acidic Aerosol
Pollution. Arch Environ Health. 48(4):213-220 (1993).
9. Pearlman ME, Finklea JF, Creason JP, Shy CM, Young MM, Horton JM.
Nitrogen Dioxide and Lower Respiratory Illness. Pediatrics. 47(2):391-398
(1971).