Atmospheric Deposition Strategy Straw Proposal. What Pollutants Matter? Highest priority – known impairment AND air sources: Hg, dioxins Moderate priority.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
4.26 CEP/RMP Sediment Core Plan Draft & Comments CFWG Sept 2005.
Advertisements

Contaminant Fate WG 5 Year Plan RMP CFWG Meeting January 15, 2008.
RMP Dioxin Strategy Susan Klosterhaus Sources Pathways and Loadings Workgroup Item #9.
Dredge Data Evaluation TRC Meeting March Don Yee.
Developing Water Quality Solutions for SF Bay
Contaminants at the Estuary Interface Jon Leatherbarrow 1 Rainer Hoenicke 2 Lester McKee 1 1 San Francisco Estuary Institute 2 California Resources Agency.
1 PCBs and PBDEs on the Guadalupe River WYs 2003 – 2006 John Oram, Jon Leatherbarrow, and Lester McKee Sources Pathways and Loadings Workgroup November.
Measurements of Mercury Concentrations and Loads in a Large River System Tributary to San Francisco Bay, California, USA Nicole David, SFEI Lester McKee,
Dioxin Sources, Loadings, and Inventory Data for San Francisco Bay RMP Technical Review Committee Meeting March 18 th, 2008.
PCBs Total Maximum Daily Loads San Francisco Bay Fred Hetzel SFB-RWQCB May 13, 2003.
In Pursuit of Urban Runoff in an Urbanized Estuary: Losing sleep over troubled water In Pursuit of Urban Runoff in an Urbanized Estuary:Losing sleep over.
Advances in Understanding Pollutant Mass Loadings Lester McKee Jon Konnan, Richard Looker, Nicole David, Jay Davis Article on Page 77 of the Pulse.
SF Bay Region Atmospheric Mercury Monitoring Funded by: RMP, USEPA w/ services by: NADP/MDN, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Jose.
Brake Pad Wear Debris Characterization Mark A. Schlautman, Ph.D Christos Christoforou, Ph.D. Ashley Haselden School of the Environment Clemson University.
Incorporating Climate Change Adaptation in EPA Region 10 Programs: An example based on a newly initiated pilot in the Office of Water and Watershed’s Total.
Observational Approaches for Climate Treaty Verification: Atmospheric observations provide the only source of independent information through which treaty.
Distribution Function Estimation in Small Areas for Aquatic Resources Spatial Ensemble Estimates of Temporal Trends in Acid Neutralizing Capacity Mark.
The situation in Norway concerning sediments/dredging Tore Lundestad, Port of Borg, Norway.
(work funded through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative)
WATERSHED MODELING IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
1 Small Tributaries Loading Study #2: Zone 4 Line A, Cabot Blvd. Hayward Year 1 – Draft FINAL report Lester McKee and Alicia Gilbreath Sources Pathways.
SRRTTF Technical Activities Where We’ve Been, Where We’re Going Dave Dilks Spokane River Regional Toxics Task Force Workshop January 13,
BACKRIVER TMDL PROJECT Technical Outreach Prepared by MDE/TARSA Prepared for the Baltimore Harbor Stakeholder Advisory Group September 10, 2002.
Lake and Stream Hydrology 2009 UJ,UH, &TPU Timo Huttula JY/BYTL& SYKE/VTO
Implementation of the Particle & Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) for the CMAQ Modeling System: Mercury Tagging 5 th Annual CMAS Conference Research.
Watershed Monitoring and Modeling in Switzer, Chollas, and Paleta Creek Watersheds Kenneth Schiff Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
Dataset Development within the Surface Processes Group David I. Berry and Elizabeth C. Kent.
1 Questions Addressed What are the options for reducing pollutant inputs to Lake Tahoe? Pollutant Reduction Opportunities.
Modeling Copper Runoff in San Francisco Bay Area Watersheds Jim Carleton US EPA.
Are Local, Near-Ground Emissions of Mercury and Copper Significant Sources of Water Pollution? Geoff Brosseau, BASMAA Doug Steding/Christopher Conaway,
Modeling the Atmospheric Deposition of Mercury to Lake Champlain (from Anthropogenic Sources in the U.S. and Canada) Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources.
Intercontinental and Hemispheric Scale Transport and the LRTAP Convention Terry J. Keating, Ph.D. Office of Air and Radiation U.S. Environmental Protection.
Watershed Monitoring and Modeling in Switzer, Chollas, and Paleta Creek Watersheds Kenneth Schiff Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
Item 3b Guadalupe River Monitoring WY 2010 Jen Hunt, Ben Greenfield, Sarah Lowe, Lester McKee Sources, Pathway, and Loading Work Group May 6th, 2010.
Application of the CMAQ Particle and Precursor Tagging Methodology (PPTM) to Support Water Quality Planning for the Virginia Mercury Study 6 th Annual.
Trend analysis of HMs and POPs on the basis of measurements and modelling data Victor Shatalov and Oleg Travnikov, MSC-E.
Wastewater Workgroup Conference Call December 6, 2011.
1 Modeling the Atmospheric Transport and Deposition of Mercury Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland Mercury Workshop, Great.
 Great Lakes Areas of Concern  U.S. urban areas (pink shading)  Large U.S./Canadian 2005 point sources of mercury Type of Emissions Source coal-fired.
May 22, UNDERSTANDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PRECURSOR REDUCTIONS IN LOWERING 8-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS Steve Reynolds Charles Blanchard Envair 12.
Health Outcomes in Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties Issue:  Higher health risks found in: Infants Infants Elderly (age >65) Elderly (age >65) Blacks Blacks.
Methylmercury Production in Groundwater Watershed Hg Research Program at SERC Deposition Transport Watershed retention Methylation MDN site MD00 Stream.
Dr. Mark Cohen NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Silver Spring, Maryland
Water Quality in San Francisco Bay J.A. Davis San Francisco Estuary Institute.
Organization of Course INTRODUCTION 1.Course overview 2.Air Toxics overview 3.HYSPLIT overview HYSPLIT Theory and Practice 4.Meteorology 5.Back Trajectories.
Watershed Monitoring and Modeling in Switzer, Chollas, and Paleta Creek Watersheds Kenneth Schiff Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
NPS Source Attribution Modeling Deterministic Models Dispersion or deterministic models Receptor Models Analysis of Spatial & Temporal Patterns Back Trajectory.
Assessment Methods for Ammonia Hot-Spots (Working Group 3) Expert Workshop under the UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution 4-6 Dec.
Copper Source Loading Estimates (Process Profiles) Physical & Chemical Characterization of Wear Debris (Clemson University) Water Quality Monitoring (ACCWP)
Source-apportionment for atmospheric mercury deposition: Where does the mercury in mercury deposition come from? Mark Cohen, Roland Draxler, and Richard.
UNECE/CLRTAP Task Force on Hemispheric Transport of Air Pollution Policy-Relevant Science Questions André Zuber European Commission.
TF HTAP Workshop, Potsdam, 2016 GMOS: Multi-model assessment of mercury pollution and processes Environment Canada Oleg Travnikov, Johannes Bieser, Ashu.
17 th TFMM Meeting, May, 2016 EMEP Case study: Assessment of HM pollution levels with fine spatial resolution in Belarus, Poland and UK Ilia Ilyin,
TTWG Report & Technical Topics SRRTTF Meeting Dave Dilks March 16, 2016.
Paragraph 29 Study: Study on the various types of mercury- emitting sources, current and future trends of mercury emissions, including analyzing and assessing.
Sources, Pathways, and Loadings Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances Annual Meeting, March 23 rd 2002 Lester McKee Watershed Program Manager.
Comparison between Aasim and Calibob
Assessment of POP pollution in EMEP region
Joint thematic session on B(a)P pollution: main activities and results
Brian Haggard Arkansas Water Resources Center University of Arkansas
Improved Forecasting for PCBs in San Francisco Bay
Estimation of Loadings for Nonpoint Sources and Stormwater
Adjusting the Regional Haze Glide path using Monitoring and Modeling Data Trends Natural Conditions International Anthropogenic Contributions.
POPs and HMs Summary , EMEP TFMM.
Alexey Gusev, Victor Shatalov, Olga Rozovskaya, Nadejda Vulyh
Priority Substances Emissions Inventory
10th TFMM meeting, June, 2009, France, Paris
EMEP Case study: Assessment of HM pollution levels with fine spatial resolution in Belarus, Poland and UK Ilia Ilyin, Olga Rozovskaya, Oleg Travnikov.
Model uncertainties because of inconsistencies of emissions
Comparison of model results with measurements
Presentation transcript:

Atmospheric Deposition Strategy Straw Proposal

What Pollutants Matter? Highest priority – known impairment AND air sources: Hg, dioxins Moderate priority – impairment OR air sources/pathways unknown or minor(?): PCBs, PAHs Low priority – Impairment AND air sources low or likely minor: Cu, PBDEs, Se, organochlorine pesticides

Air Deposition Estimates Deposition ≠ Load Pervious surfaces have low yield –30% impervious average? – Separate lower vs upper watershed Semi-quantitative scaling –Which contaminants might matter –Using regional direct dep to Bay estimates local dep may be higher or lower

Watershed Loads vs AirDep LoadADminADmaxAvg% Copper74, % Dioxins % Mercury % PAH % PBDE % PCB % Selenium %

Local Variation Unknown for most pollutants Variation near/far from sources –Castro Valley Cu 4x higher near 580 Hwy –Cupertino Hg ~6x higher near cement plant –Other work in literature e.g. SoCal, TX, etc. Higher impermeability + higher source density = High leverage locations?

How Much Is Local Sources? BAAQMD emissions inventories Coastal/inland comparisons (e.g. Hg TOT ) –Long Marine Lab ~6 ng/L wet, 1.8 ng/m3 dry –Moffett Field ~9-12 ng/L wet, 2.2 ng/m3 dry Even w/o distinct local pollutant source, other pollutants may affect process (speciation/deposition) – NOx, SOx, TSP…

Application to Monitoring Why not just measure stormwater loads –Highly episodic esp. in small watersheds –Need very high sample frequency / flow weighted integrations through events –One (more) step removed from source Captures transport process too +/-

Application to Modeling Air dep might account for a large % of some (sub)watershed scale –Need to use some assumptions, e.g. uniform vs max variation sensitivity testing –If it makes a difference, more local data may be needed e.g. Zone 4 Hayward watershed, Hg loads (2007-8) = g, airdep using Tsai regional estimate = 100 g

Application to Management Can we manage at <regional scale? –Need data at that scale to evaluate –Larger scale = decreased signal Do we accept ongoing inputs? –Mopping the floor while faucet(s) run

Confirm What Pollutants? Highest priority – known impairment AND air sources: dioxins, Hg Moderate (?) priority – impairment OR air sources/pathways unknown or minor(?): PAHs, Se, PCBs, Low priority – Impairment AND air sources low or likely minor: Cu, PBDEs (move up if impairment), organochlorine pesticides

General Approach Ballpark estimates Does this affect management choice? Followup if uncertainty affects assessment –Find more data in the literature Can we extrapolate to here? –Devise methods to obtain needed data Studies and/or modeling

Near-term Needs “No regret” data needs? –Redo estimate of dioxin deposition w/ CARB data Less certain refinement needs –Se seems a pretty high proportion of local loads (still small % of Delta though) –Hg also high (but any plan for smaller local or nonpoint source actions?) Group suggested (re)allocation of $25k for dioxin estimate to more general airdep review

Management Actions / Data Needs List here … e.g. Emission control – nearfield effectiveness measurement Natural attenuation –Model scenarios