Overview of CSN Data Relevant to OC/EC Artifact Adjustments presented by James Flanagan RTI International Davis, CA January 22-23, 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Report of the IMPROVE/CSN Organic Carbon Artifact Adjustment Committee Ann M. Dillner, Mark Green Marc Pitchford, Bret Schichtel, Bill Malm, Warren White,
Advertisements

STN Carbon Field Blank Analysis, Derived Organic Carbon Analysis and IMPROVE blank corrected artifact analysis Bret Schichtel.
PM 2.5 Carbon Measurements in EPA Region 10 Robert Kotchenruther, Ph.D. NW-AIRQUEST June, 2011.
ORD PM Methods Research Proposed Plans Paul Solomon ORD/NERL OC/EC Meeting Durango, CO March 4-5, 2003 This presentation has been subject to.
Causes of Haze Assessment Mark Green Desert Research Institute Marc Pitchford, Chair Ambient Monitoring & Reporting Forum.
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.
EPA Precursor Gas Training Workshop PM 2.5 Chemical Speciation Network (CSN) Carbon Conversion Joann Rice.
STN/IMPROVE Comparison Study Preliminary Results Paul Solomon, ORD Tracy Klamser-Williams, ORIA Peter Egeghy, ORD Dennis Crumpler, OAQPS Joann Rice, OAQPS.
U.S. EPA Office of Research & Development October 30, 2013 Prakash V. Bhave, Mary K. McCabe, Valerie C. Garcia Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
Carbon Measurements and Adjustments Measurement of organics by IMPROVE & STN networks, Use of blank data to correct carbon concentration measurements,
Use of National PM2.5 and Speciation Network Measurements for Model Evaluation For presentation at PM Model Performance Workshop February 10-11, 2004:
Predicting TOR OC and EC from FT-IR Spectra of IMPROVE samples Ann M. Dillner Assoc. Research Scientist University of California, Davis Satoshi Takahama.
Fossil vs Contemporary Carbon at 12 Rural and Urban Sites in the United States Bret A. Schichtel (NPS) William C. Malm (NPS) Graham Bench (LLNL) Graham.
Carbon Meeting Joann Rice Sacramento, CA January 22-23, 2008.
6 City CSN/IMPROVE Comparison. IMPROVE/CSN Organic Carbon URG MASS – 16.7 LPM; IMPROVE ~22 LPM; Other STN 6-7 LPM IMPROVE OC un-adjusted for blank IMP.
IMPROVE Report 2006 L. Debell, K. Gebhart, B. Schichtel and W. Malm.
Carbon Artifact Adjustment in IMPROVE Lowell Ashbaugh Crocker Nuclear Lab University of California, Davis January 22, 2008.
1 Collocated STN-CSN and IMPROVE carbon measurements WHW, UCD 1/22/08.
Comparison of the STN and IMPROVE Networks for Mass and Selected Chemical Components (Preliminary Results) Paul Solomon, ORD Tracy Klamser-Williams, ORIA.
Overview and Status of Lead NAAQS Review and Overview of Agency Technical Documents on Lead NAAQS Monitoring Issues Kevin Cavender and Joann Rice Presented.
Effects of Pollution on Visibility and the Earth’s Radiation Balance John G. Watson Judith C. Chow Desert Research Institute Reno,
Size-segregated analysis of PM10 at a tandem urban – rural site combination J. K. Gietl 1*, T. Tritscher 1,2, and O. Klemm 1 1 University of Münster, Institute.
IMPROVE Ion Study Plan Presented by Marc Pitchford to the RPO Technical Groups Dallas, TX 12/3/02.
1 Guest Speaker: Brandy Toft Leech Lake Ojibwe.  Overview of FRM/FEM/ARM status, requirements, and reporting  QC (routine checks, audits, and method-
CAMD PROGRAM UPDATE NACAA/EPA Ambient Air Monitoring Steering Committee Clean Air Markets Division, OAP June
Did the recession impact recent decreases in observed sulfate concentrations? Shao-Hang Chu, US EPA/OAQPS/AQAD October, 2011.
PM2.5 Model Performance Evaluation- Purpose and Goals PM Model Evaluation Workshop February 10, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS.
Measuring OM/OC on individual IMPROVE Teflon filters using FT-IR analysis Ann M. Dillner, Travis C. Ruthenburg Lake Tahoe IMPROVE Steering Committee Meeting,
1 β Attenuation Method PM10/2.5 Automated Dichotomous Monitor SPM-613D β Attenuation Method PM10/2.5 Automated Dichotomous Monitor Model SPM-613D ■SPM.
Quality Control – Part II Tim Hanley EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
CMAS special session Oct 13, 2010 Air pollution exposure estimation: 1.what’s been done? 2.what’s wrong with that? 3.what can be done? 4.how and what to.
VISTAS Data / Monitoring Overview Scott Reynolds SC DHEC- Larry Garrison KY DNREP Data Workgroup Co-Chairs RPO National Technical Workgroup Meeting – St.
Causes of Haze Assessment Dave DuBois Desert Research Institute.
PM Model Performance in Southern California Using UAMAERO-LT Joseph Cassmassi Senior Meteorologist SCAQMD February 11, 2004.
Data Analysis/Monitoring Session OAQPS Updates Neil Frank RPO National Workgroup Meeting Dallas TX December 3-4, 2002.
Model Evaluation Comparing Model Output to Ambient Data Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, California.
Welcome to the First International SPARTAN Meeting Thank You! Yinon Rudich, Michael Brauer, Aaron Cohen, Vanderlei Martins & AirPhoton, Yang Liu, Mark.
GENERAL SPARTAN ACTIVITIES Crystal Weagle & Graydon Snider June 9, 2015 First International SPARTAN Meeting Dalhousie University.
AoH/MF Meeting, San Diego, CA, Jan 25, 2006 WRAP 2002 Visibility Modeling: Summary of 2005 Modeling Results Gail Tonnesen, Zion Wang, Mohammad Omary, Chao-Jung.
1 Preliminary evaluation of the 2002 Base B1 CMAQ simulation: Temporal Analysis A more complete statistical evaluation, including diurnal variations, of.
LECTURE 13 QUALITY ASSURANCE METHOD VALIDATION
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.
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.
Ambient Monitoring Data Summary: Dust WRAP Workshop on Fire, Carbon, and Dust May 24, 2006 Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
Continuous Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) Monitoring Tom Dann Luc White, Alain Biron Luc White, Alain Biron Environment Canada, Ottawa Tom Dann Luc White,
Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division Photo image area measures.
Quality is a Lousy Idea-
IMPROVE/STN Comparison & Implications for Visibility and PM2.5
Ann M. Dillner, Mark C. Green
Matteo Reggente Giulia Ruggeri Gözde Ergin Christophe Delval
National Wildlife Refuge
Speciation Update: URG 3000N Carbon Sampler
Organics Analyses and Results
Matteo Reggente Giulia Ruggeri Adele Kuzmiakova Satoshi Takahama
Preliminary evaluation of the 2002 Base B1 CMAQ simulation: Spatial Analysis A more complete statistical evaluation, including diurnal variations, of the.
Sources of the PM10 aerosol in Flanders, Belgium, and re-evaluation of the contribution from wood burning Willy Maenhaut1,2, Reinhilde Vermeylen2, Magda.
Quality is a Lousy Idea-
Back To Basics: PM2.5 NESCAUM MAC Meeting Newport, RI May 16-17, 2006
IMPROVE – CSN Carbon Monitoring Workshop: Overview
Introduction to Tisch Instruments
Joe Adlhoch - Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
A Review of Time Integrated PM2.5 Monitoring Data in the United States
Rationalizing the differences between thermo-optical OC/EC methods.
Jean-Philippe Putaud, Fabrizia Cavalli
DETERMINATION OF CARBONATE CARBON
Low-cost methods for gas/particle distribution of nitrogen species
EC/OC – monitoring within EMEP
The UC Davis Semi-Annual Report on Quality Assurance IMPROVE Steering Committee Meeting October 16, 2018 | Fort Collins, Colorado Xiaolu Zhang*, Katrine.
Presentation transcript:

Overview of CSN Data Relevant to OC/EC Artifact Adjustments presented by James Flanagan RTI International Davis, CA January 22-23, 2008

Assignment: “Review of current artifact adjustment approach for CSN, including sampler-specific variations” There is no artifact adjusted data currently being posted to AQS for any CSN species, therefore this presentation will focus on: –Blank data available that could be used for artifact adjustments: Original CSN samplers and analysis New 3000N samplers and analysis –CSN program timeline –CSN sampler types –Blank level differences between sampler types –Lab blanks and other QC data

CSN Timeline 2/9/2000 – 7/7/2003 –OC, EC analyses done by RTI International Laboratory using Sunset Labs Instruments –No OC or EC fractions (“peaks”) reported –“OCX” or “OCX2” were reported during this period 7/8/2003 – present –OC, EC analyses for CSN samplers done by RTI International Laboratory. –4 OC fractions (plus Pyrolysis C) are reported; no OCX or OCX2. –no EC fractions reported. -- Initial Set of N Samplers Added to CSN in May, /2007 – present –3000N filters are being analyzed by Desert Research Inst. (DRI). –3000N samplers are collocated with the existing CSN samplers at each site, and are run collocated for 2 months –4 OC, Pyrolysis C, and 3 EC fractions, plus OC and EC by TOT and TOR are being uploaded to AQS without artifact correction.

CSN: “STN” TOT Analysis Method Filter: 47mm Whatman quartz w/ 5% borosilicate binder Filters pre-fired at 900 o C in air Sunset Lab Carbon Aerosol Analyzers Protocol: NIOSH 5040, optimized for PM 2.5 Time-driven analysis (12 min total) Thermal-Optical Transmittance (TOT)

CSN Sampler Types URG MASS – Wins Impactor; Teflon module Andersen RAAS - cyclone; Teflon coated module MetOne SASS – mini-cyclone; alloy module other types: –R&P 2300 – internal greased impactor; alloy module –R&P sequential FRM

CSN Sampler Module Types Andersen RAAS URG MASS MetOne SASS R&P 2300 Cassette used for IMPROVE and 3000N Samplers

CSN: Field and Trip Blanks (reported to AQS) Field Blanks are collected at 10% of routine frequency (monthly or bimonthly at each site) – filter modules mounted for a short period of time and removed. Trip Blanks are collected at 3% of rout. freq. – filter modules not removed from shipping bag. Field and Trip Blank results are very similar. Field/Trip Blank levels differ significantly between sampler types.

CSN: Field/Trip Blank Averages (Original OC/EC Analyses) Source: Max R. Peterson, James B. Flanagan, Larry C. Michael, and R.K.M. Jayanty Analysis of PM2.5 Speciation Network Carbon Blank Data. AAAR 26th Annual Conference, Reno, NV, September Trip and Field Blank averages 2000 – 2006, ug/filter 47 mm Whatman filter with borosilicate binder. CSN (STN) analysis protocol. Each number is 100’s or 1000’s of measurements. * R&P module contains silicone impactor grease, which may appear as EC. *

CSN: Laboratory QC Data for Original OC/EC Analyses (not reported to AQS) Analyses are performed by RTI International’s OC/EC Laboratory in North Carolina using Sunset Labs Instruments. Acceptance Blanks — full STN analysis of the larger of 2 or 2% of pre-fired filters. Instrument Blanks — full STN analysis using a clean filter punch, usually from the preceding analysis. Duplicate Analyses —10% of filter samples reanalyzed on the same analyzer to test uniformity of filter deposit. Replicate Analyses — a group of filters analyzed on 3 or more analyzers to assess between-analyzer variability and to establish measurement uncertainties.

CSN: Laboratory QC Data Received for OC/EC 3000N (not reported to AQS) Analyses are being done by Desert Research Institute (DRI) in Reno, NV. System Blanks — Full IMPROVE_A analysis without a filter punch. Replicate Analyses — Analysis of a second punch from 10% of filter samples on a randomly-chosen (different or same) analyzer used to evaluate between-analyzer variability. DRI performs additional QC not reported to RTI.

CSN: Available Blank Types with 3000N Sampler Protocol (blank data reported to AQS) Afterfilters – identical to IMPROVE NEW to CSN IMPROVE-type “field blanks” (passive blank in 4 th position of cassette) NEW to CSN Field Blanks (like existing CSN Trip and Field Blanks)

Afterfilters – Frequency and Availability of Data for Statistics Since May, 2007, CSN runs afterfilters at all sites equipped with 3000N at a rate of 10% Sufficient afterfilter data are available to calculate reliable statistics on a monthly basis –Median –Standard Deviation –other?

TOT Afterfilter vs. Ambient Levels with 3000N Module Original CSN field and trip blanks are generally poorly correlated to season or site location; however, afterfilters from 3000N show some correlation with ambient levels. Data from 3000N: X-axis = front filter Y-axis = afterfilter N = 820, R 2 = sites nationwide 5/2007 – 12/2007

 Between 2002 and 2005, STN field and trip blank annual averages for Met One (SASS) and Anderson (RAAS) samplers decreased 33% and averages for URG (MASS) samplers increased 25%. Average Total Carbon Blank by Year, ug/m3 (subset of sites with long-term data) From “Carbon Measurements and Adjustments “, presented by Neil Frank at Air Quality Data in Health Effects Research conference, Nov 30 – Dec 1, 2006 CSN: Temporal Variability in Trip and Field Blank Levels

From “Carbon Measurements and Adjustments “, presented by Neil Frank at Air Quality Data in Health Effects Research conference, Nov 30 – Dec 1, 2006

Total Carbon Field and Trip Blanks, μg/m 3 CSN: Temporal Variability in Trip and Field Blank Levels MetOne Sampler From “Carbon Measurements and Adjustments “, presented by Neil Frank at Air Quality Data in Health Effects Research conference, Nov 30 – Dec 1, 2006

Lab Blank Variability Instrument blanks are typically less than 10% of trip and field blanks when expressed in the same units Between-instrument variability and the effect of a software upgrade are visible One of the lab analyzers appears to be more sensitive to the software change than the other. Source: Max R. Peterson, James B. Flanagan, Larry C. Michael, and R.K.M. Jayanty Analysis of PM2.5 Speciation Network Carbon Blank Data. AAAR 26th Annual Conference, Reno, NV, September “Second”“Third”

Notable Differences Between Original CSN Method and IMPROVE/3000N Face velocity and deposit density are potentially up to 10x greater for IMPROVE/3000N relative to MetOne due to flow rate and filter size. Different filter materials. Different flow control technology (IMPROVE) Different analysis protocols: –temperature steps –timebase –TOT vs. TOR

Summary Slide: Pros and Cons for the use of existing field and trip blank data for artifact correction of original CSN data Pro: Lots of existing data present Pro: Probably closer to truth than lab blanks Con: May not represent “true” artifact Con: Questionable relevance to IMPROVE data Con: Unlike afterfilters, the existing CSN trip and field blanks are not sensitive to seasonal or geographic variations