Continuous Carbon and NHy Measurements

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PM 2.5 Carbon Measurements in EPA Region 10 Robert Kotchenruther, Ph.D. NW-AIRQUEST June, 2011.
Advertisements

What are the important parameters that need to be defined for a carbonaceous aerosol analysis ? Hélène CACHIER Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de.
Tekran ® Automated Mercury Speciation F.H. Schaedlich 1, Robert K. Stevens 2, D.R. Schneeberger 2, Eric Prestbo 3, Steve Lindberg 4, Gerald Keeler 5 F.H.
Chemical Composition of Organic Carbon Fractions Barbara Zielinska.
Example Conceptual Models for Organic Sampling Artifacts on Quartz Fiber Filter Prepared by Marc Pitchford for the IMPROVE/CSN Carbon Monitoring Workshop.
Carbon artifact adjustments for the IMPROVE and CSN speciated particulate networks Mark Green, Judith Chow, John Watson Desert Research Institute Ann Dillner.
Atmospheric Aerosol From the Source to the Receptor Insights from the Pittsburgh Supersite Spyros Pandis, Allen Robinson, and Cliff Davidson Department.
EPA Precursor Gas Training Workshop PM 2.5 Chemical Speciation Network (CSN) Carbon Conversion Joann Rice.
Overview of CSN Data Relevant to OC/EC Artifact Adjustments presented by James Flanagan RTI International Davis, CA January 22-23, 2008.
Future emissions of carbonaceous aerosols David G. Streets Argonne National Laboratory ICAP Workshop Research Triangle Park, NC October , 2004.
Sources of PM 2.5 Carbon in the SE U.S. RPO National Work Group Meeting December 3-4, 2002.
AOSC 634 Air Sampling and Analysis Lecture 1 Measurement Theory Performance Characteristics of instruments Nomenclature and static response Copyright Brock.
Using field campaigns results to reduce uncertainties in inventories Wenche Aas, Knut Breivik and Karl Espen Yttri And material from: Eiko Nemitz (CEH,
Carbon Measurements and Adjustments Measurement of organics by IMPROVE & STN networks, Use of blank data to correct carbon concentration measurements,
Nolwenn PERRON Göteborg, OC and EC separation for 14 C analyses N. Perron 1, L. Besnier 1, S. Szidat 2, A. S. H. Prévôt.
Source apportionment of Swiss carbonaceous aerosols using radiocarbon analyses of different fractions References: S. Szidat et al., 2007: Dominant impact.
Fossil and modern sources of aerosol carbon in the Netherlands – A year-long radiocarbon study Fossil and modern sources of aerosol carbon in the Netherlands.
Organic Carbon and Elemental Carbon in Atlanta Area Chao Wu.
Evaluation of Secondary Organic Aerosols in Atlanta
Source apportionment of the carbonaceous aerosol – Quantitative estimates based on 14 C- and organic tracer analysis 1.Norwegian Institute for Air Research.
IMPROVE Corrects OC and EC for a Positive Artifact The positive artifact correction causes the organic and elemental carbon to approach zero as fine mass.
Carbon Artifact Adjustment in IMPROVE Lowell Ashbaugh Crocker Nuclear Lab University of California, Davis January 22, 2008.
Working Together for Clean Air PM 2.5 Continuous Methods Lynnwood, Washington Site.
Diurnal cycle of fossil and non-fossil total carbon using 14 C analyses during CalNex P. Zotter 1, A.S.H. Prévôt 1, Y. Zhang 2, S. Szidat 2, X. Zhang 3,
25/05/20071 About comparability of measured and modeled metrics Jean-Philippe Putaud Fabrizia Cavalli DG JRC Institute for Environment and Sustainability.
Particulate matter measurements from the Canadian Forest fires S. Sharma, B. Wiens, D. Lavoué D. Toom-Sauntry, D. Halpin, J. Brook, L. Huang, S. Gong and.
Estimating the Contribution of Smoke and Its Fuel Types to Fine Particulate Carbon using a Hybrid- CMB Model Bret A. Schichtel and William C. Malm - NPS.
Model Evaluation Comparing Model Output to Ambient Data Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, California.
Regional Air Quality Modeling Results for Elemental and Organic Carbon John Vimont, National Park Service WRAP Fire, Carbon, and Dust Workshop Sacramento,
Eric Edgerton, ARA, Inc. PM Model Performance Workshop Chapel Hill, NC February 10, 2004 SEARCH: Overview of Data for Model Performance Evaluation Photo.
SEARCH & VISTAS Special Studies RPO National Technical Meeting St. Louis, MO November 5, 2003.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division 16 October 2012 Integrating source.
Organo-Sulfur and Receptor Modeling Status/Challenges Christopher Palmer Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry.
Using Aethalometer Data to Examine Ambient Particulate Matter Sources: Fairbanks, AK Jay Turner Washington University in St. Louis June 15, 2010 Photo.
Fairbanks PM 2.5 Source Apportionment Using the Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) Model Tony Ward, Ph.D. The University of Montana Center for Environmental Health.
Measurements of light absorption spectra of fine particle aqueous extracts during CalNex at the Pasadena ground site X. Zhang and R. J. Weber Georgia Institute.
CHARACTERIZING IMPACTS OF WILD AND PRESCRIBED FIRES ON AMBIENT FINE PARTICLE CONCENTRATIONS CSU Atmospheric Science Department National Park Service/CIRA.
Fairbanks PM 2.5 Source Apportionment Using the Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) Model Tony Ward, Ph.D. The University of Montana Center for Environmental Health.
Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division Photo image area measures.
IMPROVE/STN Comparison & Implications for Visibility and PM2.5
Ann M. Dillner, Mark C. Green
National Wildlife Refuge
Background to Atmospheric Pollution
Sources of the PM10 aerosol in Flanders, Belgium, and re-evaluation of the contribution from wood burning Willy Maenhaut1,2, Reinhilde Vermeylen2, Magda.
Bob Cary and David Smith
Cross-cutting WG TFMM-TFEIP on SVOC emissions
Aerosol chemistry studies at the SMEARIII station in Kumpula
Svetlana Tsyro, David Simpson, Leonor Tarrason
Introduction to Tisch Instruments
Preliminary Results: HONO and HNO3 from the MC/IC.
Continuous measurement of airborne particles and gases
Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
K. Baumann, M.E. Chang, V. Dookwah, S. Lee, A.G. Russell
Wenche Aas and Karl Espen Yttri (EMEP/CCC)
with EUSAAR NA2 Partners
A Review of Time Integrated PM2.5 Monitoring Data in the United States
About comparability of measured and modeled metrics
Rationalizing the differences between thermo-optical OC/EC methods.
New Approaches to Air Measurements in AOSR
TFMM PM Assessment Report
Time-Integrated Particle Measurements : Status in Canada
MEASUREMENT OF PM2.5 SEMI-VOLATILE MATERIAL WITH THE FDMS TEOM MONITOR
Michael Moran Air Quality Research Branch
Challenges with Integrated Measurements of OC and BC (or EC)
Title Why do we underestimate Elemental Carbon in PM?
Jean-Philippe Putaud, Fabrizia Cavalli
UK (CEH) and ACTRIS WP3: In-situ chemical, physical and optical properties of aerosols WP4: Trace gases networking: Volatile organic carbon and nitrogen.
EMEP-Intensive-Measuring-Campaigns Summer 06 and Winter 07
EC/OC – monitoring within EMEP
Svetlana Tsyro, David Simpson, Leonor Tarrason
Presentation transcript:

Continuous Carbon and NHy Measurements Eric S. Edgerton, ARA, Inc. EMEP PM Measurement and Modeling Workshop New Orleans, LA, USA 4/20-23/04 EMEP 042104

Outline Continuous Carbon Continuous NHy (NH3) R&P 5400 (SEARCH) Aethelometer (SEARCH) Sunset Labs Particulate Carbon Analyzer (Turner, Robinson) Continuous NHy (NH3) An idea for constraining secondary OC EMEP 042104

5400 Schematic EMEP 042104

5400 Principle of Operation Collect particles in metal impactor (0.12 µM Dp50) for 60 minutes, or longer Measure ambient CO2 in analytical loop Heat impactor in 1-4 temperature plateaus, volatilize carbon (final T 600-750C) Heat afterburner to 750C, complete combustion to CO2 Quantify ΔCO2 via NDIR (Li-Cor) Repeat (w/o collection step) for artifact (residual) correction Note: For a 1-hour sample, the system produces 19 ppm of CO2 per ug-C/m3 EMEP 042104

5400 Precision Jefferson Street – July 2001 TC (ug/m3) EMEP 042104

5400i TC vs. TOR TC Jefferson Street, GA - 2001 SEARCH 5400i tends to under predict in winter, but over predict in summer EMEP 042104

5400f TC vs. TOR TC Jefferson Street, GA – 2003/4 EMEP 042104

Aethelometer Operation Collect particles on quartz filter tape at controlled flow Monitor absorbance continuously with reference ands sensor beam Advance tape at pre-set time interval or preset absorbance Wavelength-specific conversion to BC (1-minute + time resolution) Nafion drier (SEARCH sites) Activated carbon monolith EMEP 042104

Comparison of AETH-BC and TOR-EC at Jefferson Street (Atlanta), GA We see a consistent relationship across SEARCH sites, with regression slopes between 0.5 and 0.7 EMEP 042104

Time Series of 1-minute AETH-BC Jefferson Street (Atlanta), GA (nafion drier and carbon monolith) Dislocations observed virtually always at virtually all SEARCH sites, noise is instrument specific EMEP 042104

Sunset Labs Carbon Analyzer slide courtesy of Jay Turner, STLU EMEP 042104

Sunset Labs Temperature Program slide courtesy of Jay Turner, STLU EMEP 042104

EMEP 042104

Pittsburgh Air Quality Study: Carbonaceous Aerosol Samplers CMU Denuder Sunset in situ Denuder PM2.5 Sunset in-situ OC/EC Analyzer Teflon All Quartz filters analyzed using Sunset Instruments and NIOSH protocol Denuder PM2.5 Quartz CIF Denuder Dynamic Blank Sample PM2.5 Quartz CIF Schematic of different samplers. Definitions of OC & EC shown are the values used in subsequent slides. Rutgers & Carnegie Mellon OC = Sample (Q+CIF) – Dynamic Blank (Q+CIF) EC = Sample Q – Dynamic Blank Q Source: Allen Robinson, Carnegie Mellon University; Barb Turpin Rutgers University EMEP 042104

Comparison of Sunset Labs In Situ with Integrated Samples Excellent agreement except for EC. Note that good agreement with CMU denuder sampler indicates that negative artifact from a denuded in situ not a problem presumably because of short sampling time of in situ? Problems with EC due to refractory build up on in situ filter. This causes premature evolution of EC and biases in split. We changed in situ filter a lot (every few days) during Pittsburgh Supersite. Paper in preparation on this issue. Source: Allen Robinson, Carnegie Mellon University; Barb Turpin Rutgers University EMEP 042104

Emissions from Biomass Burning HMS Fire and Smoke Summary for 2345 10/21/03 Oak Grove http://www.firedetect.ssd.nesdis.noaa.gov/index.htm EMEP 042104

CO and NOy at Oak Grove – 10/21/03 EMEP 042104

Comparison of ERs with Literature Values FUEL NOy (as NO) SO2 PM2.5 TC BC Savannah/Grassland 60 5.4 83 57 3.1 Trop. Forest 15 5.5 88 64 6.4 non-Trop. Forest 28 9 121 78 5.2 Biofuels 27 3.5 92 51 7.6 Ag. Residues 4.3 42 36 7.5 This Study (Fires) 28+/-14 5.0 +/-2/7 195 +/- 54 63 +/- 14 10 +/- 6.1 This Study (Urban)# 147 +/-10 n.d. 33 +/- 8 9.6 +/- 2.1 Andreae and Merlet. Global Geochem Cyclec 15(4):955-966. 2001. (A&M) # Based on Jefferson Street, Atlanta, GA SEARCH data ER (g/kg CO) EMEP 042104

Continuous Measurements of NHy in SEARCH EMEP 042104

SEARCH NH3 and %NHy 4th Quarter 2003 rural- agricultural urban-industrial % NHy urban-res./ind. urban- residential urban- residential NH3 (ppb) % NHy rural- forested rural- forested suburban 0.32 +/- 0.12 0.49 +/- 0.22 2.54 +/- 2.27 EMEP 042104

Total Reduced Nitrogen (NHy) Diagram Hot Pt converts NHy to NO. Hot Mo converts NOy to NO, but is blind to NHy. SEARCH EMEP 042104

NO3/NH4 Diagram SEARCH

Continuous NH3 vs Denuder NH3 24 Hour Samples Gaseous NH3 is deduced by subtracting particulate NH4 from NHy SEARCH EMEP 042104

Hourly NH3 and particulate-NH4+ Yorkville, GA – November 2003 EMEP 042104

Continuous NH3 vs. Wind Direction Yorkville, GA – November 2003 EMEP 042104

1.8 km 2.3 km 4.5 km The Smoking Chicken EMEP 042104

Continuous NH4+ and NO3- vs Continuous NH4+ and NO3- vs. Wind Direction Yorkville, GA - November 2003 Wind Direction EMEP 042104

WS and WD Yorkville, GA 11/6-8/01 Transport from Atlanta Low Wind Speed EMEP 042104

Particulate NO3- and NH4+ Yorkville, 11/6-8/01 EMEP 042104

An Idea for Constraining Secondary OC Primary Secondary Modern OC OC Fossil OC EMEP 042104

Simplified OC Source Matrix Primary Secondary Total Modern Speciation/CMB S peciation , Models, D ifference 14C Fossil Difference Combination of CMB and C-14 data allows calculation of secondary OC by difference. EMEP 042104

OC Source Matrix Atlanta, GA – January Primary * Secondary Total # Modern 64 +/- 15 <5 61 +/ - 5 Fossil 36 39 * 2000 Data: Zheng et al., ES&T, 2002. # from 14Cdata EMEP 042104

OC Source Matrix Atlanta, GA – July 2001 Primary* Secondary Total # Modern <5 +/- 10 >50 59 +/ - 6 Fossil 40 * +/- 18 41 * Zheng et al. Source Apportionment of Fine Particles at Atlanta, GA, AAAR 2002 # from 14C data EMEP 042104

Summary For TC, R&P 5400f (with modifications) can reproduce filter-based measurements(+/- 15%), but maintenance (data capture) can be problematic. Log cell pressure. For BC, aethelometer provides reliable, high time resolution information, but AETH-BC = 0.6(+/- 0.1) TOR-TC. Dislocations and high resolution noise are annoyances that require further investigation. Log fast data. For OC, TC and possibly EC, early results from Sunset Labs analyzer are promising. Longer term experience necessary. Continuous carbon and NHy data provide valuable insights into sources, processes, etc.