Arno GraffSusan KloseUBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Some Aspects on Air Quality in Germanyrelated to SOER
14th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05 - 06 October 2009
214th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Last Year‘s Messages about Air Quality in Germany
Though Emissions have decreased during the last two decades significantly, exeedances of limit values for PM10, NO2 and target values for O3 still occur.- Summer smog has become history in Germany …
at least for the time being sincerural background: ozone peak values have decreased significantly but …
- urban background: ozone values are increasing from low level to a medium high level.
Air quality trends seem to be hidden behind inter-annual variations during the period 2000 – 2006
314th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
State of Ambient Air Quality in Germany 2008
Exceedances of air quality standards for human health:– PM10
daily mean: 18 out of 417 stations,17 traffic + 1 near industry
– NO2annual mean: 89 of 426 stations,
all traffic – O3– max. 8-h mean: 93 of 274 stations,
85 background + 8 near industry Overall observation:
– one of the best years with respect to exceedances of air quality standards
– air quality is worst in agglomerations with respect to PM10 and NO2, most hot spots are found at monitoring sites near traffic
– Ozone is highest in rural areas and is increasing from low levels to higher low levels
414th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Geographical Characteristics of Air Pollution
514th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Geographical Characteristics of Air Pollution
614th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
State of Ambient Air Quality in Germany 2008
Exceedances of air quality standards:– PM10
daily mean: 18 out of 417 stations,17 traffic + 1 near industry
– NO2annual mean: 89 of 426 stations,
all traffic – O3– max. 8-h mean: 93 of 274 stations,
85 background + 8 near industry Overall observation:
– one of the best years with respect to exceedances of air quality standards– air quality is worst in agglomerations with respect to PM10 and NO2 – most hot
spots found at monitoring sites near trafficOzone is highest in rural areas and is increasing from low levels to higher low levels agglomerations
– seemingly, no clear improvement in the air quality situation since the beginning of this decade
714th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Emission vs. Air Quality normalized to 1995
emissions
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
PM10
NOx
SOx
NMVOC
NH3
NO2
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
urban, near traffic
urban background
rural background
PM10
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
urban, near traffic
urban background
rural background
O3
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
urban, near traffic
urban backgroundrural background
814th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
PM10 annual mean, 2001 -2008
914th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
NO2 annual mean, 2001 -2008
1014th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Mann Kendall significance test
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
conc
entra
tion
in µ
g/m
3
urban, near traffic
urban background
rural background10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
conc
entra
tion
in µ
g/m
3
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
conc
entr
atio
n in
µg/
m3
NO2 PM10
O3
1114th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Mann-Kendall Test for Significance in Trends
Developed originally for quantifying trends of meteorological time series
Suitable for time series – that are expected to have a monotonic trend– without seasonal or cyclic fluctuations
OUTPUT: – levels of significance (error probability)
– mean slope (median of all inter annual changes)
-1,5
-1,0
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5 städtisch verkehrsnah
städtischer Hintergrund
ländlicherHintergrund
Irrtumswahrscheinlichkeit Kollektiv
NO2 NO2 NO2PM10 PM10
PM10O3 O3 O3
P>10%P<5%P<1% P<10%P<0,1%
1214th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Mann-Kendall Test for NO2
• 84% with falling trend, thereof 36% with significant trend, 15% rising but uncertain trend
no unique trend
• 82%with falling trend, thereof 60% with significant
mostly decreasing concentrationrural background: all stations have falling or stagnating trend
Evaluation of individual stations 1995 -2007
00 00 0 0000 00 0000 0
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
Ans
tieg
in µ
g/m
³/a
P<5%
P<1%
P<0,1%
P<10%
P>10%
städtischer Hintergrundstädtisch verkehrsnahurban traffic urban background
52 stations 51 stations
1314th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Mann-Kendall Test for PM10
Evaluation of individual stations 1995 -2007
• 56%: significant falling trend
•significant decrease of concentrations
• 44%: significant falling trend
significant decrease of concentrations
rural background: no clear trend
000000000000000
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
Ans
tieg
in µ
g/m
³/a
P<5%
P<1%
P<0,1%
P<10%
P>10%
städtischer Hintergrundstädtisch verkehrsnahurban, traffic urban background
41 stations 48 stations
1414th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Mann-Kendall Test for O3
Evaluation of individual stations 1995 -2007
• 57%: significant trend, 70% thereof rising
significant increase of concentrations
• 58%: rising trend, most of them significant
significant increase of concentrations
rural background: no clear trend
00 000 0000000000 00 0
-2
-1
0
1
2
Ans
tieg
in µ
g/m
³/a
P<5%
P<1%
P<0,1%
P<10%
P>10%
städtischer Hintergrundstädtisch verkehrsnahurban traffic urban background
23 stations 57 stations
1514th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Mann-Kendall Test
-1,5
-1,0
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
annu
al c
hang
e in
µg/
m³/a
urban, near traffic
urban background
ruralbackground
Level of significance
NO2 NO2 NO2PM10 PM10
PM10O3 O3 O3
P>10%P<5%P<1% P<10%P<0,1%
urban traffic urban background rural background
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
conc
entra
tion
in µ
g/m3
urban, near traffic
urban background
rural background
NO2
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
conc
entra
tion
in µ
g/m3
PM10
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
conc
entra
tion
in µ
g/m3
O3
1614th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
EOR
1714th EIONET Meeting, Warsaw, 05-06 October 2009 UBA-II 4.2 – Air Quality Assessment
Mann-Kendall Test
-1,5
-1,0
-0,5
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
annu
al c
hang
e in
µg/
m³/a
urban, near traffic
urban background
ruralbackground
Level of significance
NO2 NO2 NO2PM10 PM10
PM10O3 O3 O3
P>10%P<5%P<1% P<10%P<0,1%
urban traffic urban background rural background
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
conc
entra
tion
in µ
g/m3
urban, near traffic
urban background
rural background
NO2
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
conc
entra
tion
in µ
g/m3
PM10
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
conc
entra
tion
in µ
g/m3
O3