Monitoring Needs & Issues Bill Malm National Park Service May 15, 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Nitrogen Deposition at Rocky Mountain National Park: the RoMANS Study Mike Barna Bill Malm Bret Schichtel Kristi Gebhart Air Resources Division National.
Advertisements

E1-Air Pollution! Heather Yin Period 3. Why Should I Care?! As humans populate the planet, we produce waste that is absorbed by our atmosphere which directly.
Air Pollution and Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
1 Policies for Addressing PM2.5 Precursor Emissions Rich Damberg EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards June 20, 2007.
Inventory Issues and Modeling- Some Examples Brian Timin USEPA/OAQPS October 21, 2002.
N emissions and the changing landscape of air quality Rob Pinder US EPA Office of Research and Development Atmospheric Modeling & Analysis Division.
ROMANS Nitrogen Source Sensitivity Analysis Mike Barna 1 Marco Rodriguez 2 Kristi Gebhart 1 Bill Malm 1 Bret Schichtel 1 Jenny Hand 2 1 ARD-NPS, Fort Collins,
Modification of Network Sampling Systems for Measurement of NH 3 Derek Day, Misha Schurman, Katie Beam, Jeff Collett, William Malm MOTIVATION Ammonia (NH.
Photochemical Model Performance for PM2.5 Sulfate, Nitrate, Ammonium, and pre-cursor species SO2, HNO3, and NH3 at Background Monitor Locations in the.
Tonnie Cummings National Park Service, Pacific West Region National Tribal Forum on Air Quality May 14, 2014.
Modeled Ammonia Nitrogen Deposition Source Apportionment at Rocky Mountain National Park for RoMANS2 Mike Barna 1 Marco Rodriguez 2 Kristi Gebhart 1 Bret.
Perspectives in Designing and Operating a Regional Ammonia Monitoring Network Gary Lear USEPA Clean Air Markets Division.
P. D. Hien, V. T. Bac, N. T. H. Thinh Vietnam Atomic Energy Commission.
FIRE AND BIOFUEL CONTRIBUTIONS TO ANNUAL MEAN AEROSOL MASS CONCENTRATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES ROKJIN J. PARK, DANIEL J. JACOB, JENNIFER A. LOGAN AGU FALL.
Evaluation of Secondary Organic Aerosols in Atlanta
Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA
Air Quality Impacts from Prescribed Burning Karsten Baumann, PhD. Polly Gustafson.
BRAVO - Results Big Bend Regional Aerosol & Visibility Observational Study Bret Schichtel National Park Service,
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.
What is Particulate Matter and How does it Vary? What is Particulate Matter? How Does PM Vary? The Influence of Emissions, Dilution and Transformations.
Eladio M. Knipping, Ph.D. January 16, 2014 Air Quality Applied Science Team (AQAST) Meeting Rice University, Houston, TX Air Quality Research from the.
Air Pollution.
WRAP Status + Fire Emissions Inventory Protocol for Regional Air Quality Analysis and Planning Support in the WRAP regionWRAP Tom Moore WRAP/Western Governors’
Trends in the Wet and Dry Deposition of Nitrogen and Sulfur Species
NATURAL AND TRANSBOUNDARY INFLUENCES ON PARTICULATE MATTER IN THE UNITED STATES: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE EPA REGIONAL HAZE RULE Rokjin J. Park ACCESS VII,
NPS/CIRA POLICY RELEVANT SCIENCE IN SUPPORT OF NPS- ARD AIR QUALITY ISSUES AND ACTIVITIES.
Pacific 2001 – Synthesis of Findings and Policy Implications Roxanne Vingarzan Pacific and Yukon Region.
Air Quality Impact Analysis 1.Establish a relationship between emissions and air quality. AQ past = a EM past + b 2.A change in emissions results in an.
APES Get out lab – keep at table. SMOG Ch. 18 Smog Localized air pollution in urban areas, mixture of pollutants that form with interaction with sunlight.
Air Quality, Atmospheric Deposition, and Lake Tahoe October 15, 2003 Western Regional Pollution Prevention Network Grannlibakken, Lake Tahoe Jim Pederson.
QUESTIONS 1.Is the rate of reaction of S(IV) more likely to be slower than calculated for a cloud droplet or a rain droplet? Why? 2.If you wanted to determine.
Results of Ambient Air Analyses in Support of Transport Rule Presentation for RPO Workshop November 2003.
AoH Report Update Joint DEJF & AoH Meeting, Las Vegas November , 2004 Air Resource Specialists, Inc.
FROM AIR POLLUTION TO GLOBAL CHANGE AND BACK: Towards an integrated international policy for air pollution and climate change Daniel J. Jacob Harvard University.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. The Atmosphere: An Introduction to Meteorology, 12 th Lutgens Tarbuck Lectures by: Heather Gallacher, Cleveland.
Clinton MacDonald 1, Kenneth Craig 1, Jennifer DeWinter 1, Adam Pasch 1, Brigette Tollstrup 2, and Aleta Kennard 2 1 Sonoma Technology, Inc., Petaluma,
PM2.5 Model Performance Evaluation- Purpose and Goals PM Model Evaluation Workshop February 10, 2004 Chapel Hill, NC Brian Timin EPA/OAQPS.
WRAP COHA Update Seattle, WA May 25, 2006 Jin Xu.
Properties of Particulate Matter Physical, Chemical and Optical Properties Size Range of Particulate Matter Mass Distribution of PM vs. Size: PM10, PM2.5.
MRPO Nitrate and Organic Speciation Special Studies Donna Kenski National RPO Technical Meeting Dallas, Dec. 3-4, 2002.
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.
PM Model Performance & Grid Resolution Kirk Baker Midwest Regional Planning Organization November 2003.
1.
Model Evaluation Comparing Model Output to Ambient Data Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, California.
Operational Evaluation and Comparison of CMAQ and REMSAD- An Annual Simulation Brian Timin, Carey Jang, Pat Dolwick, Norm Possiel, Tom Braverman USEPA/OAQPS.
Regional Air Quality Modeling Results for Elemental and Organic Carbon John Vimont, National Park Service WRAP Fire, Carbon, and Dust Workshop Sacramento,
Section 2-2 Review: “Composition of Air and Air Pollution”
Source Attribution Modeling to Identify Sources of Regional Haze in Western U.S. Class I Areas Gail Tonnesen, EPA Region 8 Pat Brewer, National Park Service.
Technical Projects Update WRAP Board Meeting Salt Lake City, UT November 10, 2004.
NATURAL AND TRANSBOUNDARY POLLUTION INFLUENCES ON AEROSOL CONCENTRATIONS AND VISIBILITY DEGRADATION IN THE UNITED STATES Rokjin J. Park, Daniel J. Jacob,
 QUIZ…how well are we reading.  “Pollution is nothing but the resources we are not harvesting. We allow them to disperse because we’ve been ignorant.
GEOS-CHEM Modeling for Boundary Conditions and Natural Background James W. Boylan Georgia Department of Natural Resources - VISTAS National RPO Modeling.
Ecological Perspectives on Critical Loads - Linkages between Emissions, Deposition and Biogeochemical Cycles J. N. Galloway Multi-Agency Critical Loads.
Estimating PM 2.5 from MODIS and MISR AOD Aaron van Donkelaar and Randall Martin March 2009.
GEOS-CHEM Activities at NIA Hongyu Liu National Institute of Aerospace (NIA) at NASA LaRC June 2, 2003.
June 15, 2011 Bob Dulla Sierra Research. Fairbanks PM 2.5 Design Values* ( ) * 98 th Percentile Concentrations 2.
Western Air Quality Study (WAQS) Intermountain Data Warehouse (IWDW) Model Performance Evaluation CAMx and CMAQ 2011b University of North Carolina (UNC-IE)
BACKGROUND AEROSOL IN THE UNITED STATES: NATURAL SOURCES AND TRANSBOUNDARY POLLUTION Daniel J. Jacob and Rokjin J. Park with support from EPRI, EPA/OAQPS.
Principal Investigators: William C. Malm 1 Jeffrey L. Collett, Jr. 2 Authors: Michael G. Barna 1 Kristi A. Gebhart 1 Bret A. Schichtel 1 Contributors:
Properties of Particulate Matter
Atmospheric Deposition Unit 4451 Research on Air Pollution Distribution and Effects in California Mountains Andrzej Bytnerowicz, Michael Arbaugh, Nancy.
Informed NPS Air Quality Management Decisions in Response to a Changing Climate.
Mobile Source Contributions to Ambient PM2.5 and Ozone in 2025
CMAS Annual Conference, October 24-26, 2016, Chapel Hill, NC
Sunil Kumar TAC, COG July 9, 2007
Dr. Tanveer Iqbal Associate Professor,
Nitrogen Deposition: Measurement Techniques and Field Studies
Continuous measurement of airborne particles and gases
WRAP Modeling Forum, San Diego
U.S. Perspective on Particulate Matter and Ozone
Presentation transcript:

Monitoring Needs & Issues Bill Malm National Park Service May 15, 2008

What modifications in the national monitoring networks are required to assess effects and apportion the many and varied chemical species to their many and varied emission sources?

NEEDS Assessments –Ecosystem health Total deposition estimates (wet and dry) of all sulfur and reactive nitrogen species – Critical loads –Visibility –Health (other) Attribution of each species to its emission source (control measures)

Issues Time scale of sample collection. –1 week deposition monitoring –Every third day for IMPROVE/STN –Semi-continuous? Accuracy with which some species are measured Some key species are not measured at all

What is reactive nitrogen? The term reactive nitrogen includes all biologically active, photochemically reactive, and radiatively active nitrogen compounds in the atmosphere and biosphere of the earth. (both reduced and oxidized forms)

Wet deposition patterns and trends N deposition “hot spot” in northern Colorado Rockies –Current N deposition ~ 20x natural levels Nitrogen deposition increasing at high elevation sites –Ammonium deposition increasing faster than nitrate NADP 2004 Annual Summary Burns (2003) Niwot Saddle NADP site

Are Fires Contributing to the Increasing Wet Nitrogen Deposition? Wet nitrate concentration deposition trends Wet ammonium concentration deposition trends

Rocky Mountain National Park (ROMO) is experiencing a number of deleterious effects due to atmospheric nitrogen and sulfur compounds. These effects include visibility degradation, changes in ecosystem function and surface water chemistry from atmospheric deposition, and human health concerns due to elevated ozone concentrations. The nitrogen compounds include both oxidized and reduced nitrogen. Emissions of nitrogen compounds need to be reduced to alleviate these deleterious effects. Various regulatory programs are underway to address emission reductions, many of which will be achieved from the most easily identified contributors to oxidized nitrogen related effects at the park. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ROcky Mountain Atmospheric Nitrogen and Sulfur study (ROMANS)

Increased haze reducing visibility Low capacity to sequester atmospheric N deposition N enrichment and shifts in diatom communities in alpine lakes N enrichment in organic soil layer and Engelmann spruce needles on eastern slope Concerns about increasing reactive nitrogen in Rocky Mountain National Park (Typical of all high mountainous regions)

Why Ammonia? Direct ecosystem effects Response of a basic gas neutralizing acidity in particles and gases. (neutralization of acidic sulfate aerosols – reaction with nitric acid vapor – reactions with organic salts) Response of PM formation can be dislocated from where ammonia reduction first took place. Ammonia deposition via cloud uptake and subsequent rain, dry deposition in the gas vs particle phase have vastly different time scales that leads to different lifetimes and particle response.

The urban/industrial- agricultural interface NO x HNO 3 + NH 3  NH 4 NO 3 (p) +hv Organic nitrogen? ??? VOC

Characterize the atmospheric concentrations of sulfur and nitrogen species in gaseous, particulate and aqueous phases (precipitation and clouds) along the east and west sides of the Continental Divide (Organic Nitrogen?) – GAS: NH 3, R-NH 2, NO X (NO+NO 2 ), NO Y (HNO 3, PAN, etc) – PARTICLE: NH 4, NO 3, ORGANICS (reduced and oxidized)? – WET (rain and clouds): NH 4, NO 3, ORGANICS (reduced and oxidized)? Identify the relative contributions to atmospheric sulfur and nitrogen species in RMNP from within and outside of the state of Colorado. Identify the relative contributions to atmospheric sulfur and nitrogen species in RMNP from emission sources along the Colorado Front Range versus other areas within Colorado. Identify the relative contributions to atmospheric sulfur and nitrogen species from mobile sources, agricultural activities, large and small point sources within the state of Colorado. Characterize the atmospheric concentrations of sulfur and nitrogen species in gaseous, particulate and aqueous phases (precipitation and clouds) along the east and west sides of the Continental Divide (Organic Nitrogen?) – GAS: NH 3, R-NH 2, NO X (NO+NO 2 ), NO Y (HNO 3, PAN, etc) – PARTICLE: NH 4, NO 3, ORGANICS (reduced and oxidized)? – WET (rain and clouds): NH 4, NO 3, ORGANICS (reduced and oxidized)? Identify the relative contributions to atmospheric sulfur and nitrogen species in RMNP from within and outside of the state of Colorado. Identify the relative contributions to atmospheric sulfur and nitrogen species in RMNP from emission sources along the Colorado Front Range versus other areas within Colorado. Identify the relative contributions to atmospheric sulfur and nitrogen species from mobile sources, agricultural activities, large and small point sources within the state of Colorado. ROMANS OBJECTIVES

RoMANS measurement network Two measurement campaigns –Mar/Apr 2006 –July/Aug 2006 Spring and summer historically have highest deposition fluxes 4 site types –Continuous to weekly monitoring

Spring overview Concentrations lower in mountains Gases dominate at eastern and western sites –Highest ammonia at Brush in NE Colorado Particles dominate in mountains

Summer overview Concentrations higher than in spring Highest concentrations again east of RMNP Increasing N gas importance in mountains

Total N deposition was about twice (2) as high during the summer vs spring. About 45% of N deposition is not being measured in the current monitoring programs (NAPD & CASTNET). Deposition of N is about 2/3 wet (rain and snow) and 1/3 dry (particles and gases). Organic N may be about 30% of total deposition and is not currently being measured. SOME PRELIMINARY RESULTS

MONITORING NETWORKS IMPROVE STN CASTNET NADP/AIRMON MERCURY NAAQS Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Others?

IMPROVE (24 hr every third day) Dry Species (Current) –SO 4 –NO 3 –Total POM –Metals (soil and attribution) Dry Species (Missing) –NH 3 /NH 4 –Reduced and oxidized organic nitrogen containing particulates –NO x (NO and NO 2 ) –Oxidized organic gases (PAN - alkyl nitrates …) –Reduced organic gases (Aliphatic amines …..)

CASTNET (weekly) Dry Species (Current) –SO 2 /SO 4 –HNO 3 /NO 3 –NH 4 Dry Species (Missing) –NH 3 –NO x (NO and NO 2 ) –Oxidized organic gases (PAN - alkyl nitrates …) –Reduced organic gases (Aliphatic amines …..) –Reduced and oxidized organic nitrogen containing particulates.

Continued Wet Species (Current) –SO 4 –NO 3 –NH 4 Wet Species (Missing) –Organic nitrogen Reduced Oxidized Biological/terrestrial

Accuracy/Uncertainty (IMPROVE) The species that are measured are done so with reasonable accuracy and precision

Accuracy/Uncertainty (CASTNET/NADP) SO 2 /SO 4 measured reasonable well for both wet and dry Nitrogen is problematic across the board –Cut point is ill defined (coarse vs fine) –HNO 3 /NO 3 split has large error –NH 4 error (underestimated) may be on order of 20-50% –NH 4 and NO 3 may be biological converted over the course of a week.

What isn’t measured? NH 3 Organic nitrogen either in wet or dry (gas and particle phase) or its reduced, oxidized or biological forms –NO 2, peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN) and related alkyl nitrates –Aliphatic amines –Proteins, amino acids, etc

How important is AON? 51 studies in North America have DON at 38±19% of TON (Wet) As much as 30% of particulate OC is nitrogen containing Gas % of TON ?

Wet DON Can measure TON Can’t directly measure reduced, oxidized, or biological ON – important to make these distinctions from an apportionment perspective because sources are distinctive Can use receptor type models to apportion wet DON if one has reliable chemical markers –Measure reduced OC markers such as amines and urea for reduced DOC – Measure oxidized OC markers such as alkyl nitrates, nitrophenols, and other nitroaromatic –Measure biological markers such as amino acids and peptides – Apply simple regression models or more sophisticated models such as PMF and UNMIX.

Dry gas and particle ON Can measure both oxidized and reduced ON both in gas and particle phase using catalytic converters and collect in near real time.

Recommendations from EPA NAAQS review: deposition index from NOX/SOX review We recommend monitoring a suite of reactive nitrogen species the sum of which is “Total Chemically Reactive Nitrogen” defined as the sum of all oxidized species except N 2 O and the sum of ammonia and ammonium. Total Chemically Reactive Nitrogen = NOy + NHx + ? Species Method NOy (total oxidized nitrogen) Reduction to NO followed by chemiluminescence NO 3 - (particulate nitrate) Denuder/filter sampling followed by ion chromatography HNO3 (nitric acid vapor) Filter/denuder and followed by ion chromatography. NH3 (ammonia) Filter/denuder followed by colorimetry or ion chromatography NH4+ (ammonium) Denuder/filter followed by colorimetry or ion chromatography

Questions Is split between various species important –SO 2 /SO 4, HNO 3 /NO 3, NH 3 /NH 4, etc or is total sulfur, or total gas/particle phase reactive nitrogen adequate? For ecosystem response may not be so important? For attribution and model assessment it is critical! Can defensible critical loads be set without a knowledge of total nitrogen? What sampling frequency/duration is acceptable – both in time and space?

Temporal Considerations Critical for source apportionment

Time series of PILS and IMPROVE sulfate and nitrate

Time series of PILS data

APPORTIONMENT QUESTIONS Many issues here but will focus on smoke

Increasing Information Needs

Contribution of Fires to Particulate Carbon Wildfire Prescribed FireResidential Wood Burning Agricultural Fire

Contributions from Biomass Burning Biomass burning can have significant primary and secondary particulate carbon contributions Smoke Impacting Yosemite NP Summer 2002 SOA from smoke and other sources Primary Smoke

Aging Rapidly Creates Lots of SOA Wall-loss Corrected (  g/m 3 )

Jeameen Baek et al., - Georgia Institute of Technology Hybrid Source Apportionment Model Meteorology Air Quality Source-compositions (F) Source-oriented Model (3D Air-quality Model) (CMAQ, CAMx) Receptor (monitor) Receptor Model (CMB, PMF) Source Impacts Chemistry Receptor model C=f(F,S)

Smoke Management Needs for Air Quality Regulations Develop an unambiguous routine and cost effective methodology for apportioning primary and secondary carbonaceous compounds in PM2.5 RETROSPECTIVELY to prescribed, wildfire, agricultural fire, and residential wood burning activities –Daily contributions needed for Haze Rule to properly estimate natural contribution and contribution to worst 20% haze days –Annual and daily contributions needed for PM2.5 and PM10 NAAQS –Long term data needed to assess successes of smoke management policies Similar needs for ozone and reactive nitrogen deposition issues

Smoke Apportion: Receptor Modeling PMF type models with IMPROVE data retrieves a smoke/SOA factor – dominate contributor to contemporary carbon in rural areas IMPROVE Data Receptor Model Primary + Secondary Smoke + Vegetation SOC Mobile Source Source Factors Source Profiles Other Sources

Smoke Apportion: Receptor Modeling Addition of primary smoke marker species allows the separation of primary smoke from SOC IMPROVE Data PMF/other Mobile Source Source Factors Source Profiles Other Sources Primary Smoke Marker Species Primary Smoke Secondary Smoke + Vegetation SOC Receptor Model

Smoke Apportion: Hybrid Receptor Modeling Addition and incorporation of prior source attribution results in a hybrid receptor model can separate both primary and secondary smoke from other sources IMPROVE Data Hybrid PMF Mobile Source Source Factors Source Profiles Other Sources Primary Smoke Marker Species Primary & Secondary Smoke Vegetation SOC Source Oriented Transport Model (All fires) Receptor Model

Smoke Apportion: Hybrid Receptor Modeling By tagging the prior source attributions by the fire type and the fire location, the contributions of fire can be apportioned to specific fire types and locations IMPROVE Data Hybrid Receptor Model Mobile Source Source Factors Source Profiles Other Sources Primary Smoke Marker Species Primary & Sec Smoke Other SOC sources Source Oriented Transport Model + Fire Types Secondary Smoke Marker Species Agricultural Fire Prescribed Fire Wild Fire

Fraction Biogenic - Summer The summer (June-August) IMPROVE carbon data were partitioned into fossil and biogenic carbon using the derived fossil and biogenic EC/TC ratios

Fraction Biogenic - Winter The summer (December - February) IMPROVE carbon data were partitioned into fossil and biogenic carbon using the derived fossil and biogenic EC/TC ratios

Contribution of Secondary Organic Carbon during the Summer Assumes all winter organic carbon is primary –Underestimates the summer secondary particulate carbon Assumes that a similar mix of sources contribute to the particulate carbon in the summer and winter. –Impact on estimate is unknown Secondary TC Secondary OC Biogenic36% (6.4)41% (7.3) Fossil23% (10)36% (15)

Sources of Carbon PrimarySecondary Biogenic Smoke - Wildfire, Agriculture and residential wood & open burning Pollen Soil Cooking Smoke - Wildfire, Agriculture and residential wood & open burning Vegetation Fossil Combustion – Mobile (Automobile, Diesel) – Off Road Mobil – Oil/gas – Coal (power generation, industry) Combustion –Mobile (Automobile, Diesel) – Off Road Mobil – Oil/gas – Coal (power generation, industry) Evaporative loss of

SMOKE MARKER NEEDS Minimally need to measure laevoglucose + other primary smoke markers Identify secondary makers Modeled markers? (various options)

***** Measure with high degree of accuracy **** Measure with reasonable accuracy *** Measure with low accuracy ** Research monitoring * Currently cannot do Note: measurements should be event based for wet deposition and gases and particles measured at least on a 24 hr schedule. WETGASPARTICLE Temporal scale (gas/particle) SO 2 /SO 4 -2 ************** Min/hr/day/week NO 2 /HNO 3 - /NO 3 - ********(***CASTNET) Min/hr/day/week NH 3 /NH 4 - *** Min/hr/day/week Total ON***** Integrated sample/event based ON r * (markers) *** (markers) Min/hr/day/week (gas/part) Event for markers ON o * (markers) *** Min/hr/day/week (gas/part) Event for markers ON b * (markers) ** Integrated WHAT DO WE NEED TO MEASURE ?

Monitoring NHx at a number of regionally representative sites NO y /NO r at a number regionally representative sites Wet ON at a number of regionally representative sites Smoke markers at a few sites

Meteorology Air Quality Source-compositions (F) Source-oriented Model (3D Air-quality Model) (CMAQ, CAMx) Receptor (monitor) Receptor Model (CMB, PMF) Source Impacts Chemistry Receptor model C=f(F,S) Need a data base of ground based measurements, satellite data, and model runs for a integrated analysis

Next Steps? Develop denuders to do NH 3, NH 4, and HNO 3 /NO 3 split (within 6 months – year) Establish/examine need for ON measurements at x number of sites? Test filter based measurements for gas/particle phase oxidized ON measurements (1+ years) Develop marker technology/methodology for apportioning ON in wet deposition (2+ years ?) Do the same for reduced gas/particles (time ?) Implementation schedule (Funding??)

SpeciesMethod NOy (total oxidized nitrogen)Reduction to NO followed by chemiluminescence NO 3 - (particulate nitrate)Denuder/filter sampling followed by ion chromatography HNO 3 (nitric acid vapor)Filter/denuder and followed by ion chromatography. NH 3 (ammonia)Filter/denuder followed by colorimetry or ion chromatography NH 4 + (ammonium)Denuder/filter followed by colorimetry or ion chromatography Tabular summary WHAT’S MISSING: ORGANIC NITROGEN

Northern Rockies Wildfire Impacts

2005 Agricultural Fires

Southern California Fires Husar et al., 2007

NOTE NOy ≡ NO + NO2 + NO3 + 2xN2O5 + HNO3 + HONO + HO2NO2 + RONO2 (organic nitrates such as PAN and alkyl nitrates) + RONO (organic nitrites) + NO3- (particulate nitrate). The ecology community defines “Total Reactive Nitrogen” to include N2O which is not reactive in the sense considered here, thus we define “Total Chemically Reactive Nitrogen” to exclude N2O and N2.

Emissions from Different Fire Types Wildfire and wildland fire use, “Natural fires”, are the largest sources of smoke, especially in the western United States.