1. Particulate Matter 101 Red Deer Particulate Matter Information Session Matthew Parsons Air Quality Development – Meteorological Service of Canada, Environment Canada November 28, 2014 Outline: 1.Definitions 2.Sizes 3.Sources 4.Composition 5.Lifetime & Transport 6.Sinks 7.Effects

2. Page 2 – November 28, 2014 What is Particulate Matter? SootOrganic Material PollenMineral Dust

3. Page 3 – November 28, 2014 What is Particulate Matter? Composition Size Source Lifetime & Transport

4. Page 4 – November 28, 2014 Sizes Coarse PM 10 PM 2.5 FineUltrafineNano TSP

5. Page 5 – November 28, 2014 Sources Primary PM: –PM emitted directly to the atmosphere. Secondary PM: –PM formed in the atmosphere through chemical reactions of gases. PM and precursor gases can be from both natural and anthropogenic sources. Pollutant GasesSecondary PM

6. Page 6 – November 28, 2014 Composition Alberta’s Capital Region PM 2.5 Event: PM 2.5 concentration ≥ 20 µg m -3 Non-event: PM 2.5 concentration < 20 µg m -3 Warm Season: April – September Cold Season: October - March

7. Page 7 – November 28, 2014 Lifetime & Transport Atmospheric lifetimes for PM is in the range of hours (>10µm) to weeks (<1µm). Transport of PM is driven by meteorological conditions (e.g., wind, atmospheric stability). –PM can be transported horizontally in the atmosphere over long ranges. –Vertical transport of PM between atmospheric layers is limited. Red Deer

8. Page 8 – November 28, 2014 Wet Deposition Sinks Growth Dry Deposition

9. Page 9 – November 28, 2014 2011 International Comparison Environment Canada, Air and Climate Indicators, (2014) http://ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators

10. Page 10 – November 28, 2014 2012 Provincial Comparison Environment Canada, Air and Climate Indicators, (2014) http://ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators

11. Page 11 – November 28, 2014 Red Deer Annual Averages Environment Canada, Air and Climate Indicators, (2014) http://ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators

12. Page 12 – November 28, 2014 Why does Particulate Matter Matter? 12345678910+ Risk:Low (1 – 3) Moderate (4 – 6) High (7 – 10) Very High (Above 10) Visibility Health Air Quality Health Index (AQHI) Plant health Soil/water nutrient balance and toxicity Corrosion enhancement Climate effects

13. Monitoring of Particulate Matter in Alberta Red Deer Particulate Matter Information Session Shelley Morris shelley.morris@aemera.org

14. How PM 2.5 is measured in Alberta? Continuous monitoring – In-direct measurement of mass concentration – Short time resolution (one-hour or less) – Provide concentrations on site Filter based monitoring – Typically integrated over 24 hours – Direct measurement of mass concentration – Laboratory analysis required Mass concentration Chemical composition

15. Passive Monitoring Passive samplers – Cost effective and easy to operate – Measures H 2 S, SO 2, NO 2 and O 3 – Requires lab analysis – Can be deployed for various time periods, typically 30 days as in the PAMZ network – Pollutant concentration is reported over a longer time period than continuous monitors – Common tool for determining spatial and temporal trends ParameterDetection Limit SO 2 0.1 ppb H2SH2S0.02 ppb NO 2 /NO x 0.1 ppb O3O3

16. Speciation Monitoring Speciation monitoring –Typically integrated over 24 hours –Direct measurement of mass concentration –Laboratory analysis required Mass concentration Chemical composition PM2.5 mass and trace metals PM2.5 organic and elemental carbon PM2.5 sulfate, nitrate and other ions PM2.5 elements

17. PM 2.5 Measurement and Water Continuous analyzers –Do not distinguish between particulate matter mass and mass of particle bound water –Want to measure only particulate matter Thus sample needs to be conditioned –i.e. remove particle bound water In the past –Conditioning meant heating sample –Results in the loss of semi-volatile fraction Thus excessive heating can –Result in under reporting particle mass concentration

18. Continuous PM 2.5 Monitoring Various continuous methods – Optical analyzers – Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance – Beta-attenuation Relies on physical and optical change Sample is pre-conditioned Temperature controlled environment TEOM-FDMS TEOM-SES SHARP 5030 GRIMM BAM-1020

19. Filter Based Monitoring Direct measurement of particle mass – Based on filter mass before and after sample collection – Filter conditioned pre weighing Installed in ambient environment – Sample is drawn though Size selection inlet and through the filter Used as a reference method – Against which indirect monitors are compared

20. FRM vs FEM Federal Reference Method (FRM) – “method of sampling and analyzing the ambient air for an air pollutant”* – Typically an “Intermittent Sample” – Examples: Hi-Vol sampler, Dichot PM10/2.5 Partisol Federal Equivalency Method (FEM) – “method for measuring the concentration of an air pollutant in ambient air”* – Continuous PM2.5 monitors *from 40 CFR 53.1

21. FEM Equivalent PM 2.5 Monitors InstrumentDesignation Number Environment s.a. MP101M PM 2.5 Beta Attenuation MonitorEQPM-1013-211 Grimm Model EDM180EQPM-0311-195 Horiba APDS - 371EQPM-0308-170 Met One BAM 1020 (FEM Version)EQPM-0308-170 Met One BAM 1022 (Real Time)EQPM-1013-209 Thermo Scientific FH62C14-DHS Continuous, 5014iEQPM-0613-189 Opsis SM200EQPM-0812-203 SWAM 5a Dual Channel MonitorEQPM-0912-204 Teledyne 602 Beta Plus Particle Measurement SystemEQPM-0912-204 Thermo Scientific 5030 and 5030i SharpEQPM-0609-184 Thermo Scientific 1400a with 8500C FDMS, 1405 F TEOMEQPM-0609-181 Thermo 1405 DF Dichot with FDMSEQPM-0609-182 Tisch Environmental TE-EDM 180 PM2.5EQPM-0311-195

22. FDMS TEOM (Filter Dynamics Measurement System Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance) Near real-time averaging Available in PM 2.5 or PM 10 Measurement technology only used in Thermo TEOM products Higher operating cost More prone to negative data Large footprint Non-FDMS TEOMs do not account for semi volatile particulate.

23. FDMS TEOM Principle of Operation

24. Grimm EDM 180 Laser based measurement No heating used in RH control Moisture control using Nafion dryer Capable of PM 10, PM 2.5, and PM 1 simultaneously and in real-time. Able to determine particulate count at 31 size fractions Low maintenance and operating cost No size selective inlet required

25. Grimm Principle of Operation Optical spectrometer using 90 o light scattering All particles in sample stream measure and classified into 31 different size fractions

26. Beta Attenuation Monitors (BAM) Met One BAM 1020 Mainstay of ambient particulate monitoring Several variations by different manufacturers Reliable, low operating cost First FEM PM 2.5 monitor Minimal Heating for RH control – “smart heater” is turned on by a relative humidity sensor Only capable of 1 hr averaging – no 1 min data Beta attenuation noisy over short averaging periods

27. BAM 1020 Principle of Operation Low-level 14 C (Carbon-14) radiation source uses beta-ray attenuation and a filter tape system The mass density of particulate on the filter is calculated from the measured reduction in the number of beta particles passing through the filter. The BAM 1020 is a reference instrument for PM 10

28. Thermo Sharp 5030 & 5030i Synchronized Hybrid Ambient Real-time Particulate Monitor 5030 SHARP Combines Beta-ray Attenuation and a Nephalometer technologies Real-time values Stability and Accuracy of Beta Attenuation combined with rapid measurements of nephelometer Light scattering photometer is continuously calibrated by beta attenuation mass sensor Intelligent Moisture Reduction (IMR) System heating the inlet tube; threshold is set at 35%

29. SHARP 5030 Principle of Operation Generates a Hybrid measurement by combining Beta Attenuation with PM measurements from a Nephelometer Nephelometer senses light scattered by aerosol passing through illuminated beam

30. Operational Changes TEOM without FDMS is not a US EPA Federal Equivalent Method Over the course of 2009, many PM 2.5 TEOM monitors were upgraded with FDMS units. These units better capture volatile components that were previously lost Both monitors run side-by-side at Edmonton McIntyre. – On average, 4-5 µg/m 3 higher on hourly basis. – 98 th percentile 24-hour values approximately 10-15 µg/m 3 higher.

31. Operational Challenges A number of stations in different Airsheds have experienced difficulty maintaining reliable operation with the TEOM-FDMS. – Large hour-to-hour swings in reported concentrations – Hours lost to negative values – High Maintenance hours – High cost of replacement/consumable parts Differences were observed between units SHARP 5030 monitors have recently been deployed in the network

32. Management Action Plan – Red Deer TEOM-SES upgraded with FDMS unit in 2009 SHARP 5030 was installed at Red Deer in August 2013 – Collocated with TEOM-FDMS A combination of updated monitors and increased smog activity may have led to the sharp increase in PM 2.5 concentrations in 2010. The source apportionment of particulate matter in the Region is complex and not thoroughly understood.

33. PM 2.5 Monitors in the Province 51 Continuous PM 2.5 Monitors – 11 TEOM @ 40 o C – 13 TEOM FDMS @ 30 o C (4 Thermo 1405F models) – 1 TEOM SES @ 30 o C – 8 BAM 1020 (Beta Attenuation Monitor) – 16 SHARP (Synchronized Hybrid Ambient Real-time Particulate) – 1 GRIMM – 1 E-BAM Various methods used within the province The question is.. Are all methods reporting a comparable sample?

34. The Need For Comparable Method National Pollution Surveillance Program – Adopted the USEPA Federal Equipment Method analyzers to equip associated stations Federal Equipment Method analyzers – Compare similarity against a reference method (filter based) – More capable of accounting for the semi-volatile fraction Within the province – Not all PM 2.5 analyzers fall within this class At this time we are encouraging operators – To purchase FEM equipment when replacing analyzers

35. Thank you

36. Ambient Air Quality Management for PM 2.5 in Alberta CASA PM & O 3 / CAAQS / Assessments Red Deer Particulate Matter Information Session Maxwell Mazur Maxwell.mazur@gov.ab.ca

37. Canada-wide Standards (CWS) June 2000 – Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment established the Canada-wide Standards for fine particulate matter and ozone. –PM 2.5 : 30 ug/m 3 based on three-year average 98 th percentile 24-hour average Applies to Census Metropolitan Areas (CMAs) and Census Agglomerations (CAs) –Ex) Edmonton and Calgary CMAs (> 100 000) –Ex) Red Deer CA (< 100 000)

38. Alberta’s PM and Ozone Management Framework 2003 – Clean Air Strategic Alliance developed the Particulate Matter and Ozone Management Framework The Framework is Alberta’s implementation plan for CWS –committed to annual assessments –based on Keeping Clean Areas Clean –proactive management

39. PM 2.5 and Ozone Management Framework Management Level Ozone Daily max 8h (ppb) PM 2.5 24h (µg m -3 ) Red Mandatory Plan to Reduce Below CWS Exceedance Trigger (CWS) 6530 Orange Management Plan Action Level Planning Trigger 5820 Blue Surveillance Actions Surveillance Trigger --15 Green Baseline Monitoring and Data Gathering

40. Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) CAAQS to replace CWS in 2015 Formally agreed to on Oct 11, 2012 CAAQS Framework modeled after Alberta’s Framework –Standards and thresholds more stringent than Alberta’s Framework –Introduces a new annual PM 2.5 standard First report to be released in late 2014 –based on 2011-13 data

41. Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) Framework Modeled after the CASA PM and Ozone Framework Management Level Ozone Daily max 8h (ppb) PM 2.5 Annual (µg m -3 ) PM 2.5 24h (µg m -3 ) 201520202015202020152020 RedActions for Achieving Air Zone CAAQS Threshold (CAAQS) 636210.08.82827 OrangeActions for Preventing CAAQS Exceedance Threshold566.419 YellowActions for Preventing AQ Deterioration Threshold504.010 GreenActions for Keeping Clean Areas Clean

42. CASA Framework CAAQS Framework

43. Annual Assessments – History to Date Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development has committed to CASA to perform annual assessments of PM 2.5 and ozone to determine action levels. First assessment was for 2001 - 2003 period. –Resulted in Edmonton, some parts of West Central and Fort Saskatchewan areas; Red Deer; and Calgary being assigned to the Management Plan action level for ozone. –Subsequent assessments have shown Red Deer, Calgary to have dropped out of Management Plan action level for Ozone but “once you’re in, you’re in.” Assessments for CMAs with multiple stations based on spatial average –CMAs with some high stations may be classified into lower management levels

44. Annual Assessments – Assessment Methods Involves analysing specifics of each event over the triggers. –Ex) Back-trajectories, Forest fire activity, Source regions, Meteorology, Levels of other substances Natural, Background, and Transboundary influences are removed from final assessed values.

45. Annual Assessment Demo Step 1: Calculate 24-Hour Average Values Aug 14: 6.2 μg/m 3 Aug 15: 8.0 μg/m 3 Aug 16: 12.0 μg/m 3 Aug 17: 9.8 μg/m 3 Aug 18: 13.2 μg/m 3 Aug 19: 159.6 μg/m 3 Aug 20: 87.5 μg/m 3 Aug 21: 73.2 μg/m 3 Aug 22: 37.1 μg/m 3 Aug 23: 21.4 μg/m 3 Aug 24: 15.9 μg/m 3 Aug 25: 16.6 μg/m 3 Data from Edmonton in August 2010

46. Annual Assessment Demo Step 2: Rank Daily Values from High to Low Aug 14: 6.2 μg/m 3 Aug 15: 8.0 μg/m 3 Aug 16: 12.0 μg/m 3 Aug 17: 9.8 μg/m 3 Aug 18: 13.2 μg/m 3 Aug 19: 159.6 μg/m 3 Aug 20: 87.5 μg/m 3 Aug 21: 73.2 μg/m 3 Aug 22: 37.1 μg/m 3 Aug 23: 21.4 μg/m 3 Aug 24: 15.9 μg/m 3 Aug 25: 16.6 μg/m 3 Jan 29: 67.9 μg/m 3 Feb 24: 59.1 μg/m 3 Jan 28: 57.9 μg/m 3 Jan 19: 56.9 μg/m 3 Dec 6: 47.8 μg/m 3 Dec 7: 46.4 μg/m 3 Jan 20: 44.0 μg/m 3 Mar 1: 43.8 μg/m 3 May 18: 39.9 μg/m 3 98 th Percentile – 8 th highest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

47. Annual Assessment Demo Step 3: Analyse and Remove Events Aug 19: 159.6 μg/m 3 Aug 20: 87.5 μg/m 3 Aug 21: 73.2 μg/m 3 May 18: 39.9 μg/m 3 Jan 29: 67.9 μg/m 3 Feb 24: 59.1 μg/m 3 Jan 28: 57.9 μg/m 3 Jan 19: 56.9 μg/m 3 Dec 6: 47.8 μg/m 3 Dec 7: 46.4 μg/m 3 Jan 20: 44.0 μg/m 3 Mar 1: 43.8 μg/m 3 Forest Fire Smoke Wintertime Smog Not Analysed Aug 19: 159.6 μg/m 3 Aug 20: 87.5 μg/m 3 Aug 21: 73.2 μg/m 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

48. Annual Assessment Demo Step 4: Recalculate Annual 98 th Percentile Aug 19: 159.6 μg/m 3 Aug 20: 87.5 μg/m 3 Aug 21: 73.2 μg/m 3 May 18: 39.9 μg/m 3 Jan 29: 67.9 μg/m 3 Feb 24: 59.1 μg/m 3 Jan 28: 57.9 μg/m 3 Jan 19: 56.9 μg/m 3 Dec 6: 47.8 μg/m 3 Dec 7: 46.4 μg/m 3 Jan 20: 44.0 μg/m 3 Mar 1: 43.8 μg/m 3 98 th Percentile 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

49. Annual Assessment Results PM 2.5 – 2008-2010

50. Annual Assessment Results PM 2.5 – 2009-2011

51. Annual Assessment Results Red Deer Riverside Prior to 2008 – 2010 assessment period, PM 2.5 was below Management Plan action level. 2009 – 2011 assessment indicated that Red Deer Riverside was at the Mandatory Plan action level. –Within the Edmonton CMA, some stations exceed, however, the CWS applies to the CMA, therefore Edmonton remained in achievement. Red Deer Riverside CWS assessments (2001-2012)

52. Transition to CAAQS: Take-home Messages CAAQS Framework –modeled after AB Framework; proactive –lower thresholds –Annual PM metric added –Red Deer riverside would not meet hourly or annual average CAAQs based on 2010-2012 –If included in LUF regional plans, would have a regulatory mechanism for implementing CAAQS (previously no regulatory backstop)

53. The Parkland Airshed Management Zone and Particulate Matter Red Deer PM 2.5 Information Session November 28, 2014

54. What is PAMZ? PAMZ is a non-profit society that monitors air quality and manages air quality issues in west central Alberta Comprised of representation from all three stakeholder groups – Industry, Government, & Public/NGO Approximately 50 member organizations and a dozen public members at large Operating Guidelines: –Openness and Transparency –Inclusiveness and Collaboration –Consensus Decision-making Has a formal process for identifying and addressing air quality issues (monitoring, workshops, CASA, etc.)

55. Formed in 1997, began monitoring in 1999 3 rd of 9 Provincial Airshed Zones 42,000 km 2, 2014 pop. estimate 273,000

56. Continuous Monitoring

57. Passive Monitoring

58. Air Quality Monitoring Program 4 Continuous Stations –Each w/ SO 2, TRS, NO 2 -NO-NO X, O 3, THC-CH 4, PM 2.5 (Red Deer H 2 S & CO, NO TRS) –2 Permanent Red Deer (urban) & Caroline (rural) –2 Portables Martha Kostuch and David McCoy Respond to stakeholder issues, fills geographic (towns > 5,000) and technical data gaps 35 Station Zone-Wide Passive Monitoring Network –SO 2, NO 2 and O 3

59. PAMZ Passive Air Quality Monitoring Sites

60. PAMZ Air Quality Monitoring Sites (ALL)

61. www.pamz.org

63. PAMZ and PM 2000- Began Monitoring PM 10 and PM 2.5 at Caroline & the Martha Kostuch Portable using Automated Dichotomous Filter-Based Monitor (Partisol 2025) operated on a 6-Day NAPS Schedule 2005- Replaced Partisols at Caroline & Martha with BAM 1020 Semi-Continuous PM 2.5 Monitor (Hourly Average based on 55 minutes) The Met One Instruments Model BAM-1020 was the first instrument to obtain U.S. EPA Federal Equivalent Method (FEM)designation for continuous PM2.5 monitoring - Added BAM 1020 to David McCoy Portable - Took over Red Deer Riverside Station Operations from ESRD which included a TEOM 1400 PM 2.5 Monitor

64. PAMZ and PM 2007- ESRD replaced TEOM 1400 with TEOM SMS, no collocated monitoring period (monitor needed by ESRD elsewhere) - No discernable change in PM 2.5 levels associated with the TEOM changeover 2009- ESRD replaced TEO SMS with TEOM FDMS, no collocated monitoring period (monitor needed by ESRD elsewhere) 2010- Recommended that City of Red Deer ‘s Environmental Master Plan use the CASA PM 2.5 Framework management trigger (20 µg/M 3 ) based on 2006-08 CWS assessment and preliminary 2007-2009 estimate - Suspected we may have a step-change in PM 2.5 levels but was not confirmed until a detailed examination of wintertime PM 2.5 exceedance events was conducted in the fall of 2010

65. TEOM SMS TEOM FDMS

67. PAMZ and PM 2011- Commissioned NOVUS Study to better understand higher average PM 2.5 levels at Riverside and high PM 2.5 episodes observed in winters of 2010 and 2011 - NOVUS study focused on impact of Civic Yards relocation – bus barns and increased vehicle traffic - Recognized there was probably an impact from changeover to the TEOM FDMS, but without collocated monitoring over the winters of 2010 and 2011 could only infer from collocation studies at other sites (Edmonton South) - Began pursuing a 2 nd monitoring site for Red Deer in a primarily residential area away from the River Valley and any local influences from the Civic Yards and Riverside Industrial Park

68. Pre 2009

69. Post 2009

70. Novus Study “Overall, the impact on the Riverside Dr. monitoring station due to increased vehicular traffic attributed to the re-location of the Red Deer Civic Cards is an increase in particulate emissions of 13 to 20%. “The combined effect of buses and increase in traffic caused an increase in maximum hourly and daily PM 2.5 concentrations at the monitoring station, particularly in the wintertime.” “The modeled seasonal variation patterns of PM 2.5 levels are aligned with the FDMS PM 2.5 measurement.” The study did not look at changes in PM 2.5 levels associated with changeover from TEOM SMS to TEOM FDMS

71. PAMZ and PM 2012- Began continuous monitoring at Lancaster Site to determine site’s suitability for permanent site (David McCoy November 2012 – March 2013, Martha Kostuch July 2013 – March 2014) - Some correlation between Riverside and Lancaster winter exceedance events and monitoring at PAMZ’s Innisfail and Crossfield-Carstairs monitoring locations 2013- Replaced TEOM FDMS PM 2.5 monitor at Red Deer Riverside with Sharp 5030 (FDMS unit still operating at station for collocated monitoring study) Preliminary results - TEOM FDMS hourly average reads 2.7 µg/M 3 higher than Sharp 5030

72. Surveillance Trigger Planning Trigger Exceedance Trigger

73. PAMZ and PM 2014- Heavily involved in development of ESRD PM 2.5 Response - Replacing BAM 1020 at Caroline with Sharp 5030 (December) - Establishing 2 nd permanent station in Red Deer at Lancaster - Application approved Nov 12, decision advertised Nov. 14, appeal period ends today, tentative installation week of Dec 1 - Fencing, landscaping & permanent power installation will be accomplished in Spring 2015 Future- Implement any actions assigned to PAMZ by the PM 2.5 Response Plan -Closely monitor PM 2.5 levels at Riverside and Lancaster sites - Replace BAM1020 at Lancaster with Sharp 5030 - Speciation study of PM at Riverside and/or Lancaster?

74. Lacombe Site

76. PAMZ in 2014 Maintain operation of PAMZ continuous and passive air quality monitoring networks Establish 2 nd permanent station in Red Deer at Lancaster Assisting AESRD on development of PM 2.5 Response –PAMZ Technical Working Group, PAMZ Communications Committee, ESRD Advisory Group Continuing implementation of PAMZ Ozone Management Plan (Year 6) Maintaining its public education and outreach programs –Action Hero Awards - June 4 (Clean Air Day) –Held a Vehicle Emissions Testing Clinic in Red Deer - June 4 –Maintained Martha Kostuch Education Scholarship - Alex Johnson) –Photo Contest (Nov 30 Deadline)