1 / 33

Ambient Measurement Programs in the United States

Explore the evolution, challenges, and future of ambient air measurement programs in the United States, including the transition to multi-pollutant networks and real-time data reporting capabilities.

marruda
Download Presentation

Ambient Measurement Programs in the United States

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ambient Measurement Programs in the United States Rich Scheffe, United States Environmental Protection Agency EMEP Workshop New Orleans, Louisiana April 20, 2004

  2. Topics • Current networks…routine • Anticipated changes • Overview of incommensurability and artifact issues

  3. National Level Routine Networks…S/L/T’s, EPA • PM2.5: FRM, cont., spec (trends (daily), SIP, IMPROVE, SS); >1000 sites • PM10 >1000 sites • O3 > 1000 sites • NOx/NO (NO2) > 400 • SO2 > 400 • CO > 400 • Pb > 400 • O3 precursors, PAMS >70 sites • S, N deposition, CASTNET, > 50 sites

  4. Current Network SO2 PAMS IMPROVE CASTNET PM O3 PM PM O3 50 mi PM 15mi O3 PM/SO2 VOC’s Toxics 25 mi CO CO Real-time CO CO 35 mi PM PM • > 3,000 “sites” • Many are single pollutant sites • Different purposes and scales • Expensive • Fixed • Redundant • Outdated

  5. 8 SS ~ 54 Trends ~175 SIPs ~150 IMPROVE Routine Speciation ~ 1050 FRMs ~ 200 cont. Mass Sampling PM2.5 Networks

  6. 2000-2002 3-Year Average Annual Mean PM2.5 Data from AQS 7/9/03. Sites that operated anytime 2000-2002 (n=1239)

  7. Urban and Rural PM2.5 Speciation Networks Active Sites as of 1/20/04: EPA data from AQS, IMPROVE data from VIEWS

  8. Annual Urban PM2.5 Speciation Patterns

  9. Annual Rural PM2.5 Speciation Patterns

  10. Annual Rural PM2.5 Speciation Patterns Annual Urban PM2.5 Speciation Patterns

  11. Annual Average Urban Excess

  12. Supersites IRD Study Domain Southeastern Canada New York Pittsburgh Baltimore Fresno St. Louis Los Angeles Atlanta Houston Phase I Phase II Both Phases

  13. Pittsburgh: Avg. Size Distribution Courtesy: Prof. Jose-Luis Jimenez et al.Dept. Chemistry & CIRESUniversity of Colorado at Boulder

  14. Strong Nucleation August 11, 2002 Pittsburgh, August 11, 2001 12x104 Number (#/cm3) 6x104 105 500 104 100 Response dN/dlogDp (cm-3) Particle Size (nm) 103 10 102 00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 24:00 Time of Day

  15. Chemistry of Growth: Particle Mass Spectra at 20-33 nm Detection of Nucleation by Particle Sizer Zhang, Stanier, Caragaratna, et. al. Insights into the Chemistry of Nucleation Bursts and New Particle Growth Events in Pittsburgh based on Aerosol Mass Spectrometry. Environ. Sci. Technol., submitted.

  16. Don’t believe it

  17. Areas with PAMS Networks • PAMS areas • Type #2 site • Type #1, #3, #4 site

  18. Air Toxics Monitoring Network: Pilot sites and proposed trend sites

  19. Comments on Historical Routine Networks • Adequate ground level spatial coverage • PM2.5 mass, ozone • But, • Very limited multiple pollutant sites • Act of convenience rather than design • Aerosols (mass and species) • too much reliance on integrated techniques providing no diurnal characterization • Criteria gases • Except for ozone and NO, many meaningless measurements • Trace levels, source oriented/microscale siting (CO, SO2) • Other gases • NOy….very limited • True NO2..? • VOCs…mostly ozone season through PAMS • Other precursors and indicators • Nitric acid and ammonia….episodic/intensive programs only • Peroxides, hydroxyl radical….intensive programs only • Artifacts/problems….later

  20. Changes expected from Implementing National Monitoring Strategy • Based on these concerns….. The United States EPA is undertaking a major modification of the national ambient air monitoring networks

  21. National Core Network: NCORE PM O3 • Goal: Move from loosely tied single-pollutant networks to coordinated, highly leveraged multi-pollutant networks with real time reporting capability PAMS SO2 PM CO PM IMPROVE CASTNET PM O3 Toxics

  22. Principal Data Objectives of NCore • Public Information • Real-time Input of Data From Across the Country Using Continuous Technologies • Spatial Mapping (E.G., AIRNOW), Health Advisories • Health/Exposure Assessment Support • Input for Periodic NAAQS Reviews • Emissions Strategy Planning (Emphasis on Initial Timeframe) • What are the best emission reduction approaches? • E.g., Provide for Routine Model Evaluation and Source Attribution • Air Quality Trends and Program Accountability • Does the monitoring confirm strategies are working? • Major National Initiatives (Acid Rain, Clear Skies, NOx SIPS, FMVCP) • Including HAPS (National) and Visibility Assessments • Science Support • Backbone for More Diagnostic Level Work (Same for Local Sips), Health Studies • NAAQS Determinations and Related Regulatory Rqmts. • Emphasis on More Pervasive Ozone and PM2.5 • Ecosystem assessment support

  23. NCore Measurements L2 Level 3 Level 1. 3-10 Master Sites Comprehensive Measurements, Advance Methods Serving Science and Technology Transfer Needs Level 2: ~ 75Multi-pollutant (MP) Sites,“Core Species” Plus Leveraging From PAMS, Speciation Program, Air Toxics L1 Level 3: Minimum Single Pollutant Sites (e.g.> 500 sites each for O3 and PM2.5 and related spatial Mapping Support Minimum “Core” Level 2 Measurements Continuous NO,NOy,SO2,CO, PM2.5, PM10/PMc,O3,Meteorology (T,RH,WS,WD); Integrated PM2.5 FRM, HNO3, NH3,

  24. Proposed Siting Approach – Level2 • “Representative locations” • 5-15 km urban scale • 50 km or more…regional scale “contrast with historical search for highest concentrations…at odds with collocation” • Start With “Reasonable” Coverage From Health/ Exposure Perspective • Population Based (Range of Sizes) With Varying Chemical Composition. • Assumes Need for Multiple Pollutants to Tease Out Confounding Factors • Add in Desired Rural Coverage • Accountability of Major National Programs Such As 3P, NOx SIP) • “Operational” Model Evaluation • Equitable Resource (and Constrained) Considerations • Determine Ability of Existing Networks to Address, Modify

  25. 23 21 18 14 15 3 1 2 7 6 16 4 19 17 8 13 5 10 9 12 11 20 24 Proposed Siting Approach – Level 2… Health meets atmospheric sciences Suggested Rural Locations for Level 2 Sites Transport, Corridor, Background and Inflow Locations

  26. Urban & Rural PM2.5 Speciation Networks Current/Planned Supplemental Information

  27. Overview of Measurement…Modeling incommensurabilities and other issues • Spatial representation • Volumetric (model) versus point representation (measurement) • Breathing level measurements….most of mass often elevated • Measurement Artifacts • Model attempts to characterize reality relative to true ambient properties, and natural removal processes (e.g., deposition to land/water/foliage) • Measurements techniques alter ambient properties (heating, dehumidification), and removal processes (changing concentration gradients) within sampler universe

  28. Also troubling is the delineated use of measurements and modeled predictions. …..Measurements are the current tool for strict regulatory applications, and models are used as a planning tool. ………The reality is that measurements really are just estimates of surrounding reality, and in one sense no different from a predictive output from a model. ……. Both these tools need to be more effectively merged to support in unity a host of regulatory and planning applications.

More Related