Results of Ambient Air Analyses in Support of Transport Rule Presentation for RPO Workshop November 2003.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Policies for Addressing PM2.5 Precursor Emissions Rich Damberg EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards June 20, 2007.
Advertisements

Paul Wishinski VT DEC Presentation for: MARAMA-NESCAUM-OTC Regional Haze Workshop August 2-3, 2000 Gorham, New Hampshire LYE BROOK WILDERNESS CLASS I AREA.
PM 2.5 in the Upper Midwest Michael Koerber Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium.
Sources of PM 2.5 Carbon in the SE U.S. RPO National Work Group Meeting December 3-4, 2002.
Model used in « Source Apportionment of Airborne Particulate Matter in the UK » [Stedman et al., Receptor modelling of PM 10 concentrations at a UK national.
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.
Use of National PM2.5 and Speciation Network Measurements for Model Evaluation For presentation at PM Model Performance Workshop February 10-11, 2004:
PM in Sweden HC Hansson and Christer Johansson ITM, Stockholm University.
Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, CA
Prakash V. Bhave, Ph.D. Physical Scientist EMEP Workshop – PM Measurement & Modeling April 22, 2004 Measurement Needs for Evaluating Model Calculations.
Air Quality Impacts from Prescribed Burning Karsten Baumann, PhD. Polly Gustafson.
SECONDARY ORGANIC AEROSOLS WORKSHOP OVERVIEW John G. Watson Desert Research Institute, Reno, NV February 5, 2002.
Ozone transport network Guoxun Tian CS 790G Fall 2010.
WORKING GROUP I MONITORING DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION TFMM Workshop, Paris, 2006, Nov 29 –Dec 1.
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.
Southeast Nexus (SENEX) Studying the Interactions Between Natural and Anthropogenic Emissions at the Nexus of Air Quality and Climate Change A NOAA Field.
Missouri Air Quality Issues Stephen Hall Air Quality Analysis Section Air Pollution Control Program Air Quality Applied Sciences Team (AQAST) 9 th Semi-Annual.
Designations for the 2006 PM2.5 Standards: Evaluating the Nine Factors in Setting Nonattainment Area Boundaries Part 1 – Overview Rich Damberg, Tom Rosendahl.
NATURAL AND TRANSBOUNDARY INFLUENCES ON PARTICULATE MATTER IN THE UNITED STATES: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE EPA REGIONAL HAZE RULE Rokjin J. Park ACCESS VII,
The Chemical Composition of PM 2.5 To Support PM 2.5 Implementation Neil Frank AQAG/AQAD OAQPS/USEPA For Presentation at EPA State / Local / Tribal Training.
Preparation of Fine Particulate Emissions Inventories Lesson 1 Introduction to Fine Particles (PM 2.5 )
Reason for Doing Cluster Analysis Identify similar and dissimilar aerosol monitoring sites so that we can test the ability of the Causes of Haze Assessment.
Is there need to collect routine ammonia/ammonium measurements in ambient air monitoring networks? Perspectives of a Data Analyst from a Small State Air.
MODELS3 – IMPROVE – PM/FRM: Comparison of Time-Averaged Concentrations R. B. Husar S. R. Falke 1 and B. S. Schichtel 2 Center for Air Pollution Impact.
Lessons Learned: One-Atmosphere Photochemical Modeling in Southeastern U.S. Presentation from Southern Appalachian Mountains Initiative to Meeting of Regional.
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.
Chemical Composition of PM2.5 over N. America Big Bend (scale 0-15 ug/m3) G.Smoky Mtn. Yellowstone Mammuth Cave Sequoia ? ?
Jenny Hand CIRA Acadia National Park, ME Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE)
U.S.-Canada Air Quality Agreement: Transboundary PM Science Assessment Report to the Air Quality Committee June, 2004.
The Use of Source Apportionment for Air Quality Management and Health Assessments Philip K. Hopke Clarkson University Center for Air Resources Engineering.
VISTAS Data / Monitoring Overview Scott Reynolds SC DHEC- Larry Garrison KY DNREP Data Workgroup Co-Chairs RPO National Technical Workgroup Meeting – St.
Online measurements of chemical composition and size distribution of submicron aerosol particles in east Baltic region Inga Rimšelytė Institute of Physics.
Analysis Examples and Issues: Identifying Sources Policy Analysis Tools for Air Quality and Health A workshop hosted by NERAM and Pollution Probe Jeffrey.
Spatial Pattern of PM2.5 over the US PM2.5 FRM Network Analysis for the First Year: July 1999-June 2000 Prepared for EPA OAQPS Richard Scheffe by Rudolf.
Data Analysis/Monitoring Session OAQPS Updates Neil Frank RPO National Workgroup Meeting Dallas TX December 3-4, 2002.
“Quick Look” Trajectory Assessment of Phase 1 Battelle PMF Sources at Lye Brook Wilderness IMPROVE Site P. Wishinski & R. Poirot, VT DEC ° 9 PMF Sources.
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,
August 1999PM Data Analysis Workbook: Characterizing PM23 Spatial Patterns Urban spatial patterns: explore PM concentrations in urban settings. Urban/Rural.
Eric Edgerton, ARA, Inc. PM Model Performance Workshop Chapel Hill, NC February 10, 2004 SEARCH: Overview of Data for Model Performance Evaluation Photo.
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.
NATURAL AND TRANSBOUNDARY POLLUTION INFLUENCES ON AEROSOL CONCENTRATIONS AND VISIBILITY DEGRADATION IN THE UNITED STATES Rokjin J. Park, Daniel J. Jacob,
Air Quality Modeling for SAMI: July 1995 Episode Talat Odman, Ted Russell, Jim Wilkinson, Yueh-Jiun Yang, Jim Boylan, Alberto Mendoza.
Bret A. Schichtel Center for Air Pollution Impact and Trend Analysis (CAPITA) Washington University St. Louis, MO, Presented at EPA’s National Exposure.
Georgia Institute of Technology SAMI Aerosol Modeling: Performance Evaluation & Future Year Simulations Talat Odman Georgia Institute of Technology SAMI.
Springtime Airmass Transport Pathways to the US Prepared by: Rudolf B. Husar and Bret Schichtel CAPITACAPITA,Washington University, Saint Louis, Missouri.
NARSTO PM Assessment NARSTO PM Assessment Chapter 5: Spatial and Temporal Pattern TOC Introduction Data Global Pattern NAM Dust NAM Smoke NAM Haze NAM.
Template Comparison of PM Source Apportionment and Sensitivity Analysis in CAMx Bonyoung Koo, Gary Wilson, Ralph Morris, Greg Yarwood ENVIRON Alan Dunker.
Organo-Sulfur and Receptor Modeling Status/Challenges Christopher Palmer Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry.
August 1999PM Data Analysis Workbook: Characterizing PM23 Spatial Patterns Urban spatial patterns: explore PM concentrations in urban settings. Urban/Rural.
NARSTO PM Assessment NARSTO PM Assessment Chapter 5: Spatial and Temporal Pattern TOC Introduction Data Global Pattern NAM Dust NAM Smoke NAM Haze NAM.
V:\corporate\marketing\overview.ppt CRGAQS: CAMx Sensitivity Results Presentation to the Gorge Study Technical Team By ENVIRON International Corporation.
Regional Haze and Visibility in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
MANE-VU Technical Overview
National RPO Technical Meeting June 9, 2005 Gary Kleiman, NESCAUM
A Basis for Control of BART Eligible Sources
National Wildlife Refuge
CMAS Annual Conference, October 24-26, 2016, Chapel Hill, NC
Sunil Kumar TAC, COG July 9, 2007
Sulfate Attribution Methods
The average PM2.5 mass concentration based on IMPROVE data available from September 2000 to December 2002 is 3.3 mg/m3 The highest occurrence of the 20%
VISTAS Modeling Overview
PM2.5 Annual primary standard currently 15 ug/m3
ACTRIS Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor (ACSM) Network and new filter off-line techniques to measure PM chemical composition and determine organic aerosol.
A Review of Time Integrated PM2.5 Monitoring Data in the United States
Time-Integrated Particle Measurements : Status in Canada
U.S. Perspective on Particulate Matter and Ozone
Longer Term Aerosol Chemical speciation monitoring data during ACTRIS/EMEP activities ACSM Teams across Europe Many slides from Michael Bressi, JRC Italy.
Presentation transcript:

Results of Ambient Air Analyses in Support of Transport Rule Presentation for RPO Workshop November 2003

Results to be Covered What are the main constituents of PM2.5? Are these regionally or locally generated? What are the largest emission source types and where are they located? How consistent are the results based on ambient air analyses with those from modeling?

What are the main constituents of PM2.5 in Urban Areas? (1) Sulfate and Total Carbon dominate the eastern pies (2) Total Carbon dominant in the western pies, nitrate large fraction in southern CA and SLC.

What are the main constituents of PM2.5 in Rural Areas? (1) Sulfate and Total Carbon dominate the eastern pies. (2) West dominated by Total Carbon, crustal important in southwest and eastern WA.

Comparison of Urban and Rural Composition Urban Rural Comparison of annual average (March Feb 2002) PM 2.5 mass and species concentrations. Urban data from EPA’s speciation network and rural data from IMPROVE network.

Regional vs. Urban Pollutants PM2.5 Mass Sulfate Total Carbon Nitrate Ammonium Concentration (  g/m 3 ) Comparison of annual average (March Feb 2002) PM 2.5 mass and species concentrations at paired urban and rural locations. Urban data from EPA’s speciation network and rural data from IMPROVE network. Average urban concentration is sum of estimated urban and regional contributions. 8

Regional vs. Urban Pollutants Sulfate is mostly a regional problem...the urban excess is small. Total Carbon appears to be both a regional and an urban problem, due to various sources of carbon. Total carbon has three components: + Black Carbon (BC) – directly emitted, likely mostly urban + Primary Organic Aerosols (POA) – directly emitted, likely mostly urban + Secondary Organic Aerosols (SOA) from anthropogenic sources and from biogenic sources (coniferous trees) – likely both urban and regional problem. Nitrate may be both an urban and a regional problem…note that urban excess tends to be higher in the North compared to the South due to climate. Ammonium associates with Sulfate and Nitrate. Can be a regional and urban problem depending on the source of ammonia. Crustal material (not shown) may be both an urban and a regional problem; very small amounts (<1 µg/m 3 ) appear in both urban and rural areas, but may be generated from different sources. Regional pollutants are typically observed at similar concentration levels across broad geographic areas. Urban pollutants are typically highest in and near urban areas. PM2.5 Mass Sulfate Total Carbon Nitrate Ammonium Concentration (  g/m 3 ) Comparison of annual average (March Feb 2002) PM 2.5 mass and species concentrations at paired urban and rural locations. Urban data from EPA’s speciation network and rural data from IMPROVE network. Average urban concentration is sum of estimated urban and regional contributions. 8

Regional vs. Urban Pollutants Sulfate is mostly a regional problem...the urban excess is small. Total Carbon appears to be both a regional and an urban problem, due to various sources of carbon. Total carbon has three components: + Black Carbon (BC) – directly emitted, likely mostly urban + Primary Organic Aerosols (POA) – directly emitted, likely mostly urban + Secondary Organic Aerosols (SOA) from anthropogenic sources and from biogenic sources (coniferous trees) – likely both urban and regional problem. Nitrate may be both an urban and a regional problem…note that urban excess tends to be higher in the North compared to the South due to climate. Ammonium associates with Sulfate and Nitrate. Can be a regional and urban problem depending on the source of ammonia. Crustal material (not shown) may be both an urban and a regional problem; very small amounts (<1 µg/m 3 ) appear in both urban and rural areas, but may be generated from different sources. 8

What are the largest emission source types? (Based on Source Apportionment Analyses) (1)Sulfate source type is largest at all sites. Mobile and nitrate source types are second and third largest at all sites. (2)Based on EPA-sponsored SA study in 8 urban areas. (3)EPA-sponsored 8-cities work consistent with results from recent compilation of > 17 published SA works.

Bronx BirminghamCharlotteHouston Indianapolis Milwaukee St. Louis DC Regions for Largest Emission Source Type: (1) Features Unique to Each City, (2) But They Intersect

Charlotte “Sulfate” Source Regions Common to Multiple Sites 3+5+ Milwaukee St. Louis Indianapolis Birmingham DC Bronx Houston 1999 SO2 Emissions (Tons/Year) Where is the Largest Emission Source Type Located? (Based on Multiple Cities)

Charlotte “Sulfate” Source Regions Common to Multiple Sites 3+5+ Milwaukee St. Louis Indianapolis Birmingham DC Bronx Houston 1999 SO2 Emissions (Tons/Year) Locations of SO2 emissions are consistent with high- probability regions for “Sulfate” source type.

Average Mass Contributions for Main Profiles (ug/m3) EPA 8-Cities Source Apportionment Study : Source Types and How Much They Contribute

Preliminary Consistency Check with Modeling Results Comparison of Bronx Source Region for Sulfate and Zero Out Runs States with largest impact on Bronx all in High Probability Source Region. States with small impact on Bronx not in High Probability Source Region ug/m3 sulfate

Source Apportionment Compilation Review of Nearly 20 Recently Published Articles Using Source Apportionment Modeling Over 35 Eastern Locations Common Themes –Secondary Sulfate/Coal Combustion One of the Largest Sources in Almost All Studies –Secondary Sulfate/Coal Combustion Over 50% of the Mass During Some Seasons (mostly summer) in Many Studies –Secondary Organic Mass/Motor Vehicles Identified in Most Studies –Nitrate Dominated Source Identified in About Half of the Studies (In studies where back trajectories were used, origin of source often pointed to areas associated with high ammonia emissions)

Locations Included in Compilation PLUS: Seattle SLC Valley Phoenix

Recap Major species in east are sulfate, OC, and nitrate; in the west, OC and nitrate. Urban/rural comparison indicates that attainment in the East is not achievable just with local control measures. Main sources are combustion from utilities and mobile. Preliminary assessment shows consistent result from observed and predictive analyses.

Tabular Listing of Locations LabelLocation or Nearest CityLabelLocation or Nearest City 1Acadia National Park, ME18Bondville, IL 2Lye Brook Wilderness, VT19St. Louis, MO 3Underhill, VT20Boundary Waters Canoe Area, MN 4Bronx, NY21Atlanta, GA 5Connecticut Hill, NY22Yorkville, GA 6Brigantine National Wildlife Refuge, NJ23Pensacola, FL 7Arendtsville, PA24NW of Pensacola, FL 8M.K. Goddard, PA25Birmingham, AL 9Washington, DC26Centreville, AL 10Jefferson/James River Face Wilderness, VI27Gulfport, MS 11Shenandoah National Park, VI28Oak Grove, MS 12Dolly Sods/Otter Creek Wilderness, WV29Houston, TX 13Toronto, ON30Charlotte, NC 14Quaker City, OH31Fort Meade, MD 15Livonia, IN32Indianapolis, IN 16Mammoth Cave National Park, KY33Milwaukee, WI 17Great Smoky Mountains National Park, TN34Narragansett, RI