Castro Valley Atmospheric Deposition Monitoring Brake Pad Partnership Stakeholder Conference June 2005 Donald Yee, Amy Franz San Francisco Estuary Institute,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Exposure and Effects Pilot Study Small Fish Mercury Project Ben Greenfield 1, Letitia Grenier 1, Andrew Jahn 2, Seth Shonkoff 1, Mark Sandheinrich 3, Joy.
Advertisements

Dredge Data Evaluation TRC Meeting March Don Yee.
Contaminants at the Estuary Interface Jon Leatherbarrow 1 Rainer Hoenicke 2 Lester McKee 1 1 San Francisco Estuary Institute 2 California Resources Agency.
C OPPER AND N ICKEL TMDL D EVELOPMENT: L OWER S OUTH B AY.
Dioxin Sources, Loadings, and Inventory Data for San Francisco Bay RMP Technical Review Committee Meeting March 18 th, 2008.
Pollutant Loads to the Bay: Measuring the L in TMDL Lester McKee Sources Pathways and Loadings Workgroup and Watershed Program Manager SFEI RMP Annual.
Some General Conclusions The passive samplers are useful in the high ammonia levels found in poultry houses when deployed for less than three hours The.
N emissions and the changing landscape of air quality Rob Pinder US EPA Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
COMPARATIVE MODEL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF CMAQ-VISTAS, CMAQ-MADRID, AND CMAQ-MADRID-APT FOR A NITROGEN DEPOSITION ASSESSMENT OF THE ESCAMBIA BAY, FLORIDA.
PARTICLE EMISSIONS FROM TYRE AND BRAKE WEAR ON-GOING LITERATURE REVIEW Sustainable Transport Unit Institute for Energy and Transport Joint Research Centre.
RMP NOV 08 Improving Benthic Assessment Tools for the San Francisco Estuary Aroon Melwani, Sarah Lowe, and Bruce Thompson RMP Exposure and Effects Workgroup.
SF Bay Region Atmospheric Mercury Monitoring Funded by: RMP, USEPA w/ services by: NADP/MDN, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Jose.
An Investigation of Atmospheric Mercury Deposition to Bay Area Storm Runoff: a Pilot Study Sarah Rothenberg, Lester McKee, Don Yee, Alicia Gilbreath, Michelle.
Distribution of NO 2 concentrations over shooting (400 µg/m 3 per 1 hour) calculated with POLAIR dispersion model using (2004) NO 2 concentrations from.
RECEPTOR MODELLING OF UK ATMOSPHERIC AEROSOL Roy M. Harrison University of Birmingham and National Centre for Atmospheric Science.
Are Cars Causing Your Water Pollution Problems? Kelly Moran, Ph.D. TDC Environmental, LLC.
Brake Pad Wear Debris Characterization Mark A. Schlautman, Ph.D Christos Christoforou, Ph.D. Ashley Haselden School of the Environment Clemson University.
REFERENCES Maria Val Martin 1 C. L. Heald 1, J.-F. Lamarque 2, S. Tilmes 2 and L. Emmons 2 1 Colorado State University 2 NCAR.
Determination of Dominant Trace Metal Sequestration Processes in Two Vertical Flow Bioreactors Using Modified Tessier Extractions J.A. LaBar and R.W. Nairn.
Effects of copper on marine invertebrate larvae in surface water from San Diego Bay, CA Gunther Rosen 1, Ignacio Rivera-Duarte 1, Lora Kear-Padilla 2,
Heavy metals (Pb, Cd and Zn) levels in roadside soils in Nairobi County.
BACTERIAL CONCENTRATIONS IN BULL CREEK AUSTIN, TEXAS Patrick Sejkora.
OTAG Air Quality Analysis Workgroup Volume I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Dave Guinnup and Bob Collom, Workgroup co-chair “Telling the ozone story with data”
Arifa Lodhi and Badar Ghauri Pakistan Space And Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPPARCO), P. O. Box 8402, University Road, Karachi-75270, Pakistan.
6/22/05 BPP Stakeholder MeetingProcess Profiles1 Copper Source Loading Estimates (Process Profiles) Physical & Chemical Characterization of Wear Debris.
Castro Valley Creek Stormwater Quality Monitoring Brake Pad Partnership Meeting June 22, 2005.
Brake Pad Partnership Stakeholder Conference  Wednesday, June 22, :00 a.m. to 4:45 p.m.
Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) Program Philip Martien, Ph.D. Senior Advanced Projects Advisor Bay Area Air Quality Management District CAPCOA Conference.
Exposure and Effects Pilot Study Small Fish Mercury Project Ben Greenfield 1, Letitia Grenier 1, Andrew Jahn 2, Seth Shonkoff 1, Mark Sandheinrich 3, Jay.
Watershed Monitoring and Modeling in Switzer, Chollas, and Paleta Creek Watersheds Kenneth Schiff Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
Modeling Copper Runoff in San Francisco Bay Area Watersheds Jim Carleton US EPA.
Climate, Air Quality and Noise Graham Latonas Gartner Lee Limited RWDI Air Inc.
Ramifications of Charlotte Regional Growth and Weekday Activities on Primary and Secondary Emissions Jenny L. Perry and Patrick M. Owens Department of.
Benefits of the Redesigned RMP to Regional Board Decision Making Karen Taberski Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region.
Are Local, Near-Ground Emissions of Mercury and Copper Significant Sources of Water Pollution? Geoff Brosseau, BASMAA Doug Steding/Christopher Conaway,
1 Comparison of CAMx and CMAQ PM2.5 Source Apportionment Estimates Kirk Baker and Brian Timin U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
SCIENCE Test 1: Passage 2.
Atmospheric Deposition Strategy Straw Proposal. What Pollutants Matter? Highest priority – known impairment AND air sources: Hg, dioxins Moderate priority.
Modeling the Atmospheric Deposition of Mercury to Lake Champlain (from Anthropogenic Sources in the U.S. and Canada) Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources.
A Watershed Year for RMP & CEP: Sources Pathways & Loadings 2002/03 Lester McKee & Jon Leatherbarrow May 2003.
Effects of Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) on Nesting Tree Swallows.
Public Meeting to Discuss “Weekend Effect” Research June 23, 1999.
Regional Modeling of The Atmospheric Fate and Transport of Benzene and Diesel Particles with CMAQ Christian Seigneur, Betty Pun Kristen Lohman, and Shiang-Yuh.
Watershed Monitoring and Modeling in Switzer, Chollas, and Paleta Creek Watersheds Kenneth Schiff Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
OTAG Air Quality Analysis Workgroup Volume I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Dave Guinnup and Bob Collom, Workgroup co-chair Telling the OTAG Ozone Story with Data.
1 Regional Data Review : What have we learned in eight years? Lester McKee Sources Pathways and Loadings Workgroup Monday December 8 th 2008 San Francisco.
1 Modeling the Atmospheric Transport and Deposition of Mercury Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland Mercury Workshop, Great.
Transport of Agricultural Chemicals: Atmosphere to Land Surface Michael S. Majewski Jason R. Vogel Paul D. Capel National Water Quality Monitoring Conference,
Point Source Loads and Decision Criteria for Toxics Modeling Baltimore Harbor TMDL Stakeholder Advisory Group September 10, 2002.
Monitoring Metals in San Francisco Bay: Quantification of Temporal Variations from Hours to Decades.
Variations of Elemental Concentration in PM 10 and PM June 2007,Colombo. M.C. Shirani Seneviratne Head, Nulear Analytical Services Sec. Atomic.
Findings Is the City of Oberlin a source or a sink for pollutants? Water quality in Plum Creek as a function of urban land cover Jonathan Cummings, Tami.
Biomonitoring of Heavy Metals in the Ambient Air Around International Bridges of El Paso TX/Juarez, Mex., Using Tumbleweed and Chelating Agents Jason G.
Landscape Change in the Napa River Watershed, 1800–2002: Implications for the Restoration of In-Stream, Floodplain, and Valley Floor Habitat Grossinger,
San Francisco Estuary Institute Small Tributaries Loading Study Zone 4 Line A Sources Pathways and Loadings Workgroup May 6 th 2010 Rand Eads RiverMetrics.
Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland
JATAP Joint Air Toxics Assessment Project 2011 National Tribal Forum for Air Quality Spokane, WA June 14-16, 2011 A Successful Multi-Jurisdictional Research.
New Emphasis on Sediment Quality Objectives Water Board, SCCWRP, SFEI RMP Annual Meeting 2007.
CCOS TC Kickoff Meeting Cluster Analysis for CCOS Domain Ahmet Palazoglu (P.I.) Scott Beaver Swathi Pakalapati University of California, Davis Department.
Watershed Monitoring and Modeling in Switzer, Chollas, and Paleta Creek Watersheds Kenneth Schiff Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
Copper Source Loading Estimates (Process Profiles) Physical & Chemical Characterization of Wear Debris (Clemson University) Water Quality Monitoring (ACCWP)
Willow Lake Cobb Gauge site Sample site Mesonet site For more information: We gratefully acknowledge.
HAMPTON ROADS REGIONAL WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Presentation John M. Carlock, AICP Deputy Executive Director, Physical Planning Hampton Roads.
Copper Source Loading Estimates (Process Profiles) Physical & Chemical Characterization of Wear Debris (Clemson University) Water Quality Monitoring (ACCWP)
Presented by: Rich Baldauf, EPA National Air Monitoring Conference Denver, CO May 15,
Sources, Pathways, and Loadings Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances Annual Meeting, March 23 rd 2002 Lester McKee Watershed Program Manager.
A Look Back at Groundwater Geochemistry as an Exploration Tool for Lead and Zinc Deposits in Sinking Valley 82 Field Conference of Pennsylvania Geologists.
Long Term Precipitation Chemistry Monitoring on Vancouver Island
10th TFMM meeting, June, 2009, France, Paris
Low-Power Annular Denuder System for Measurement of HNO3, NH3 and PM2
Presentation transcript:

Castro Valley Atmospheric Deposition Monitoring Brake Pad Partnership Stakeholder Conference June 2005 Donald Yee, Amy Franz San Francisco Estuary Institute, Oakland, CA

Copper Source Loading Estimates (Process Profiles) Physical & Chemical Characterization of Wear Debris (Clemson University) Water Quality Monitoring (ACCWP) Steering Committee, Scientific Advisory Team, and Stakeholder Involvement Process (Sustainable Conservation) Air Deposition Modeling (AER) Watershed Modeling (U.S. EPA) Bay Modeling (URS) Final Report Data Assessment Conclusions Air Deposition Monitoring (SFEI) Representative Sample of Brake Pad Wear Debris (BMC/Link Test Labs) BPP Technical Studies

Study Objectives Measure copper atmospheric deposition rates at monitoring sites in Castro Valley Creek watershed Determine if there are significant spatial and temporal differences in deposition at the monitored sites. Measure other trace elements and benzene to allow potential evaluation of the contributions of vehicle and other sources to copper emissions and deposition to the watershed.

Deposition Sampling Locations  wet dry  wet dry gas  bulk dry gas

CV Aerial Photo  Madison  CVCC  CVE  Redwood

CV Community Center 

CV Elementary 

Redwood Professional Building 

Redwood

Madison Reservoir 

Sampling Methods  Wet (only) deposition (2 week duration)  Modified Aerochem Metrics automatic precipitation collector (110VAC required)  Bulk (=wet+dry) deposition (2 week)  Similar to wet, continuous (no power, funnel+bottle)  Dry deposition (2 day)  Greased plate collector (no power),  Benzene Gas (added Nov 2004, 2 day)  6L Summa stainless canister under vacuum, 48 hr flow controller

Aerochem Metrics Collector

Greased Surrogate Surface Plate

Summa Canister & Flow Controller

Conceptual Focus  Maximum spatial difference in deposition  High traffic vs low traffic areas  Temporal differences  Wet vs dry season  Weekday vs weekend (dry only)

Wet & Bulk Samples Collected NR = no rain MF = malfunction

Dry & Gaseous Samples Collected

Previous Wet & Dry Cu Deposition RMP air deposition pilot study Sites intentionally away from roads in North (Martinez), Central (Treasure Island), & South Bay (NASA Ames) Dry deposition 3.0 ± 2.0 µg/m 2 day Treasure Island) Wet deposition 1.7 ± 1.6 µg/m 2 day Treasure Island) Total (not measured) = sum of wet+dry = 4.7 µg/m 2 day

CV Dry Deposition Cu dry deposition average 18 µg/m 2 day (all sites & events)

Dry Deposition Copper Cu dry deposition > previous SF Bay measurements (average ~6x higher) Spatial differences significant (p < 0.05) Redwood > CVCC~CVE (most elements) Madison < CVCC~CVE (most elements) Redwood > Madison (nearly all elements) Temporal differences not significant Weekday & weekend not significantly different Wet & dry season not significantly different

Wet Deposition (CVCC & CVE) Cu wet deposition average 2.3 µg/m 2 day

Wet Deposition Copper deposition Cu wet deposition slightly > previous SF Bay measurements (average +30% but not statistically) Spatial differences not significant (p > 0.05) CVCC~CVE similar deposition rates (most elements)

CV Bulk Deposition Cu bulk avg 7.2 µg/m 2 day (all sites & events) & CVE = 8.2 < total (wet+dry) = 18.1 µg/m 2 day

Bulk Deposition Wet < Bulk < Wet+Dry Generally dry deposition (alone) > bulk for any site Spatial differences often significant Madison < another site (Al Si Fe Cu Zn Sr Sb Ba Pb) Redwood > Madison (Fe Cu Zn Sr Sb Ba Pb)

Benzene Concentrations  Madison  Redwood  CVE

Benzene Redwood > Madison (significant ~2x difference) Weekday (Wed to Fri~5pm) vs weekend (Fri to Sun~5pm) not significantly different Moderate correlation to Cu deposition (R )

Issues for Interpretation Comparability wet vs bulk deposition sites Bulk vs total (wet+dry) deposition Differences in site geometry Relationship of benzene and copper

Wet vs Bulk Deposition Sites Wet < bulk for any given site & event (CVCC & CVE) Redwood (bulk) vs CVE & CVCC (wet) significance unclear, maybe be methodology driven, but Redwood bulk > Madison bulk Same collection method, thus real intersite differences

Bulk vs Wet + Dry Bulk < Wet+Dry Bulk = Wet + “Net” Dry Net dry = + deposition – resuspension Greased plate resuspension = 0 Any air deposition models need resuspension term Likely to differ among surfaces – funnel vs road vs rooftop vs tree vs lawn

Site Geometry Issues Lateral distance from road CVCC, Madison ~35m from nearest roadway, Redwood ~25m from Redwood Road, ~45m from Hwy 580 CVE slightly closer (~25m) Elevation relative to road CVCC +5m, CVE +12m, Madison +10m, Redwood +8m over Redwood Rd but –5m from 580 Influence of elevation can be modeled Orientation relative to road Madison, CVE west of nearest road

Benzene & Copper Vehicle sources, but different processes Benzene generation & emissions during vehicle operation Copper particle generation from braking Copper resuspension from many surfaces Different phases & transport Copper on large particles drops rapidly Only gaseous benzene measured Useful for evaluating different aspects of air model

Conclusions Cu CV sites > SF Bay sites (wet & dry) Redwood > CVCC~CVE > Madison Cu and other elements, benzene Sampler position vs roadway may be important Wet+dry vs bulk indicates resuspension Different monitoring elements (e.g. benzene & Cu) will be useful for evaluating different modeling components

Acknowledgements Support : BPP via ABAG for SWRCB Prop. 13 grant Sites : CV Unified School District, Alameda County, Hayward RPD, EBMUD Sampling : Amy Franz, Sarah Pearce, Seth Schonkoff, Chuck Striplen, Jennifer Lin Labs : Clarkson Univ (Holsen group), Caltest, Air Toxics Ltd. Review : BPP SAT, SC, and external reviewers