down and bottom up source studies to evaluate and co benefits · gurgaon faridabad greater noida...

@ www.urbanemissions.info

Using Top‐down and Bottom‐up Source Apportionment Studies to Evaluate

Benefits and Co‐Benefits

Dr. Sarath Guttikunda

Founder @ UrbanEmissions.Info, New Delhi, IndiaAffiliate Assistant Research Professor, Desert Research Institute, Reno, USA

Workshop on Vehicular Air Pollution and Its Impact on Human HealthJointly Organized by MOEF / CPCB / EPCA / ICCT

New Delhi, IndiaSeptember 2nd, 2011


• the sources of air pollution

• the source apportionment methods

• using results for evaluations and decisions

Let’s talk about..


Sources?

….. what we need to know for better

evaluations and efficient decision making

Impacts


Sources and their Contributions

industries

vehicle exhaust

power plants

road dust

domestic fuels

garbage burning

construction


CO2 H2O CH4 CO CO2 SO2

Hydrosphere Human Activity

N2OCFCs

Stratosphere

H2SO4H2SO4

BCBC

OHO(1D)

OH

HNO3HNO3

O3

HO2

OH

NO2

NOUV O2

O2

O2

UV

OH

Greenhouse GasesPrimary PollutantsAbsorbing Aerosols (BC)

Reactive Free RadicalsLess Reactive RadicalsReflective Aerosols

Courtesy : John Reilly, MIT

VOC

Lightning

PM


NOx

Ammonia

VOCs

Primary Particles(directly emitted)

Secondary Particles(from precursor gases)

Other(sea salt)

Other(sea salt)

Crustal(soil,dust)

Crustal(soil,dust)

OrganicCarbonOrganicCarbonCarbon(Soot)

Carbon(Soot)

SO2

AmmoniumSulfate

AmmoniumSulfate

AmmoniumNitrate

AmmoniumNitrate

MetalsMetals

Chemical composition gives an indication of the sources

Gas

ParticleParticle

PM

Source: J. Chow, DRI


Results, using..Monitoring dataChemistry of the pollutantsGeographical knowledgeMeteorology Modeling

industries

vehicle exhaust

power plants

road dust

domestic fuels

garbage burning

construction

%

%%

%

%%

%

Consolidated decisions


60 km

% Emissions ≠ % Ambient Pollution

A simulation of sulfur dioxide emissions from power plant stacks

monitorcarpower plant

more

less

more


Source Apportionment

• Top‐down approach• Bottom‐up approach

Reference:

Johnson TM, Guttikunda SK, Wells G, Artaxo P, Bond T, Russell T, Watson J, and West J (2011)

“Tools for Improving Air Quality Management – A Review of Top‐Down Source Apportionment Techniques and their Applications in the Developing World”

ESMAP publications, The World Bank, Washington DC, USAhttp://www.esmap.org/esmap/node/1159


MonitoringConcentrations

Receptor Modeling

Contributions

Source Profiles

Impacts

Evaluation

Decisions

EconomicTechnicalPolicy

Costs & BenefitsPollution

Control

Top‐Down Approach


Emissions

Dispersion Modeling

Concentrations

PM, SO2, NOx, CO,

Ozone, VOC

Monitoring

Impacts

Evaluation

Decisions

EconomicTechnicalPolicy

Costs & BenefitsPollution

Control

Contributions

Bottom‐Up Approach


PM2.5 Delhi 2001D

18%

G4%

RD21%

CB3%

BB20%

O19%

SA15%

PM2.5 Mumbai 2001D

19%

G4%

RD22%

C B4%

BB21%

O14%

SA16%

PM2.5 Ko lkata 2001

D20%

G5%

RD21%

CB4%

BB21%

O12%

SA17%

PM2.5 Beijing 2002

BB11%

SA31%

CB19%

MV6%

RD9%

I6%

O18%

PM10 Sao Paulo 1998

T26%

RD28%

O L20%

I6%

SA20%

PM10 Santiago 2000

SD42% SA

11%

BC9%

T36%

O2%

PM2.5 Mex ico C ity 2000

O L2%

Cu6%

SD39%

BB8%

SA33%

I9%

H3%

PM2.5 Qalabotjha 1997

RS61%

BB14%

SD1%

SA9%

I1%

O14%

PM2.5 Xian Winter 2003

G44%

D3%

CB44%

BB9%

PM2.5 Hanoi 1999- 01

LRT45%

CB28%

SD4%

T5%SA

10%

MA8%

PM2.5 Cairo Summer 2002SD8%

I12%

T31%

O B29%

MA2%

SA18%

PM2.5 Shanghai 2000-01

I32%

PP22%

RD3%

T16%

FD1%

MA26%

2002 PM2.5 Dhaka (Univ ersity)

MA1%

2StE9%

MV39%

BB/BK12% I

10%

SD10%

RD19%

PM2.5 Bangkok 2002

T35%BB

29%

OL2%

SD7%

SA25%

C2%

PM2.5 Manila 2001-02

T32%

I22%

COM20%

MIX16%

LRT10%

Top‐down Case Studies

Johnson & Guttikunda et al., 2011


Top‐down vs. Bottom‐up

Rohini

Gurgaon

Faridabad

GreaterNoida

NOIDA

Ghaziabad

Outer Ring Road

Inner ring road

SouthDelhi

An example over Delhi, India

Top‐down results are limited to sampling locations

B20%

D20%

E20%A

20%

C20%

B25%

D10%

E25%A

10%

C30%E

45%

D10%

B5%

A30%

C10%

E5%

D30%

B45%

A10%

C10%

50 km


0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 500

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

PM2.5 Emissionsper grid

0.00 to 0.06 0.06 to 0.28 0.28 to 1.47 1.47 to 10.88 10.88 to 104.10

BK3%IND

11%

VEH57%

DOM6%

WST5%

GS8%

CON0.5%

DST10%

IND = industries; PP = power plants; DOM = domestic; VEH = transport; DST = road dust; WST = waste burning; CON = construction activities; BK = brick kilns; GS = generator sets

gridded transport emissions only % PM2.5 ground emissionsin the box


Bottom‐up results for all areas


0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 500

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


0.00 to 0.06 0.06 to 0.28 0.28 to 1.47 1.47 to 10.88 10.88 to 104.10

BK1%

IND23%

DST8%

CON3.6%

GS8%

WST7%

DOM4%

VEH45%






0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 500

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


0.00 to 0.06 0.06 to 0.28 0.28 to 1.47 1.47 to 10.88 10.88 to 104.10

BK46%

IND8%

DST6%

CON1.5%

GS2%

WST4%DOM

3%

VEH30%






0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 500

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


0.00 to 0.06 0.06 to 0.28 0.28 to 1.47 1.47 to 10.88 10.88 to 104.10

BK3%

VEH45%

DOM5%

WST8%

GS4%

CON1.3%

DST9%

IND25%






Information

monitoring

data collection

Analysis

hot spots

apportionment

emissions

dispersion

impacts

Options

institutional

policy

technical

economic

impacts

Dialogue

stakeholders

options

cost & benefits

prioritization

Evaluating Benefits & Co‐Benefits


August 31st 2008, API = 24

Photo Diary of Air Pollution in Beijing

August 24th 2009, API = 97

August 13th 2010, API = 83

50% drop in the NOx concentrations, during the 2 months of Olympic interventions.

Beijing’s Olympic Effort, 2008


- PM

- C

+ PM

+ C

Public transportNon‐motorized transportEnergy efficiencyRenewables

Natural gas buses (leaks)

Increased motorizationIncreased fuel use

Generator sets

Using biomass

Co‐benefits approach

Cornie Huizenga, CAI‐Asia


Coal Unloading onto Conveyor BeltNorth Chennai PP

Freight activity

Brick Kilns

Landfill

DOM4%

BK6%

IND2%

CON6%

WB5%

RD36%

GS2%

TR18%

PP21%

DOM6%

BK8%

GS5%

TR61%

IND20%

2010 ‐ PM10~56,000 tons/yr

2010 ‐ CO2~25 mil tons/yr

Chennai, India, 2010


80 80.05 80.1 80.15 80.2 80.25 80.3 80.35 80.4

12.9

12.95

13

13.05

13.1

13.15

13.2

13.25 g/m3Brick Kilns

Brick Kilns

Bay

of B

enga

l

Chennai Port

Power Plant

IITAirport

Industries

Industries

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

100

80 80.05 80.1 80.15 80.2 80.25 80.3 80.35 80.4

12.9

12.95

13

13.05

13.1

13.15

13.2

13.25

2010 Annual Average PM10 Concentrations

VEH9%

DST15%

DOM4%

WST3%

GEN1%

IND3%

BK60%

CON4%

OTH0%PP1%

VEH9%

DST14%

DOM6%

WST4%

GEN1%

IND19%

BK4%

CON8%

OTH1%

PP34%

VEH10%

DST16%

DOM5%

WST3%

GEN1%

IND7%

BK54%

CON4%

OTH0%PP0%

VEH14%

DST19%

DOM9%

WST7% GEN

5%

IND22%

BK13%CON

4%OTH1%

PP6%

VEH16%

DST24%

DOM11%

WST8%

GEN11%

IND12%

BK6%

CON5%

OTH2%

PP5%

VEH18%

DST27%

DOM10%

WST7%

GEN6%

IND8%

BK15%CON

5%

OTH4%

PP0%

56 g/m3

73 g/m3

89 g/m3

37 g/m3

76 g/m3

40 g/m3

Chennai, India, 2010


Health Impacts in 6 Cities


• What is the role of domestic and construction sectors?

• What is the role of sustainable transport interventions?

• How can we improve monitoring?• Where are the co‐benefits?

• Urban vs. Rural• Outdoor vs. Indoor• Sector by Sector

• How to raise public awareness?

Questions to ask?


Co‐Benefits in 6 Cities


Reconciling Approaches

• Validating emission factors with measurements during source profiling

• Identifying missing sources using top‐down results

• Identifying hot‐spots for monitoring via dispersion modeling

• Using monitoring data for validating dispersion modeling results

• Establishing an pollution control strategy


October 10th, 2010Mobile lidar monitoring provided spatial and temporal evolution of pollution during the games.

Pollution due to high congestion is reflected in the results

Emissions

Concentrations

Delhi, India, 2010


Thank you

Questions?Dr. Sarath Guttikunda

@ www.urbanemissions.infoNew Delhi, India

September, 2011

down and bottom up source studies to evaluate and co benefits · gurgaon faridabad greater noida...

Documents