1. Poking into How Much CMAQ Chemistry Will Matter in Fairbanks: Very Preliminary Source: Javier Fochesatto

2. Analysis of “Secondary” Sulfate and Organics Used Sierra’s D3 1.33km CMAQ inventory for big point sources and all area sources –D3 domain, not NAA, so it includes Eielson AFB –Sierra’s files are a work-in-progress Looked at sulfur gas=> particle –H 2 SO 4(g) => SO 4(aq) –S IV => S VI, sulfur oxidation for SO 2(g) => SO 4(aq) Looked at VOC (g) => OC (s) Does not incorporate other critical parts of the model –Spatial mixing –Vertical mixing

3. Primary Sulfate Emissions for Point/Area Sources

4. Primary Sulfate + H 2 SO 4(g) Emissions for Point/Area Sources

5. Primary Sulfate + H 2 SO 4(g) + SO 2 =>SO 4 Emissions for Point/Area Sources

6. Sulfur Point sources represent majority of primary PM 2.5 sulfate Portion from home oil heating increases as add secondary pathways –Because home oil has high SO 2 /[primary SO 4 ] emission ratio relative to point sources –Controls on home oil heating appear more effective with secondary pathways included –Controls on point sources appear less effective with secondary pathways included These are UPPER BOUNDS on the pathways, if these pathways are even viable in the model and in reality Again, this analysis does not account for vertical/horizontal mixing or other chemical processes

7. Primary OC Emissions for Point/Area Sources

9. Primary OC Emissions + Condensable Alkanes for Point/Area Sources

10. Organic Carbon Wood burning dominates primary PM2.5 emissions Wood burning proportion increases when estimate upper bound of condensable organics –Controls on wood burning appear more effective with condensed VOC pathways included –Controls on point sources appear less effective with condensed VOC pathways included These are UPPER BOUNDS on the pathways, if these pathways are even viable in the model and in reality Again, this analysis does not account for vertical/horizontal mixing or other chemical processes