kansas city air quality, emissions, and strategies douglas watson kansas department of health and...
TRANSCRIPT
Kansas City Air Quality, Emissions, and Strategies
Douglas WatsonKansas Department of Health and EnvironmentBureau of Air and RadiationJanuary 10, 2006
Ground-Level Ozone
Chemically identical to ozone in upper atmosphere
Ground level ozone primarily result of man’s activities
Ground level Ozone formed by chemical reaction of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx)
More Ground level Ozone
VOCs and NOX come from cars, trucks, small businesses, utilities & large industry
Ozone concentrations typically high on hot, sunny days with light winds
Can trigger breathing problems, esp. in those who have asthma, emphysema, or other respiratory conditions
Even More Ground-Level Ozone
Chemical formula – O3
VOCs + NOx + heat + sunlight → O3
Ambient ozone concentration results from background, transported in, and homegrown
8-Hour Ozone Standard Health-based standard issued in 1997 Court challenge delayed
implementation Better accounts for prolonged
exposures 8-Hour standard = 0.084 ppm (84 ppb) Form of the standard:
4th high 8-hour daily maximum for each year Values are averaged over three years Each year, oldest year value is dropped and new
year added
8-Hour Ozone Standard
Design Value for a MSA (Metropolitan Statistical Area) is the highest value from all sites.
Violation occurs if three-year average of fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone exceeds 84 ppb
Kansas City would have violated standard in 1999, 2000 & 2002
KC Region Ozone History
From mid-1970s through early 1990s, KC metro area did not meet EPA standard
In 1992, area was redesignated attainment for 1-hr ozone standard
Area violated 1-hr standard in mid-1990s Area has met the 1-hour standard in 2000s
8-Hour Ozone Design Values - Kansas City MSA
0.086
0.090
0.092
0.0940.093
0.091
0.089
0.084
0.085
0.083
0.089
0.084
0.0820.082 0.0820.082
0.084
0.094
0.088 0.088
0.096
0.076
0.078
0.080
0.082
0.084
0.086
0.088
0.090
0.092
0.094
0.096
0.098
0.100
82-84
83-85
84-86
85-87
86-88
87-89
88-90
89-91
90-92
91-93
92-94
93-95
94-96
95-97
96-98
97-99
98-00
99-01
00-02
01-03
02-04
Period
PP
M
2005 Ozone 8-Hour Daily Maximum - KC Metro Area
0.000
0.010
0.020
0.030
0.040
0.050
0.060
0.070
0.080
0.090
0.100
0.110
0.120
4/1/
2005
4/8/
2005
4/15
/200
5
4/22
/200
5
4/29
/200
5
5/6/
2005
5/13
/200
5
5/20
/200
5
5/27
/200
5
6/3/
2005
6/10
/200
5
6/17
/200
5
6/24
/200
5
7/1/
2005
7/8/
2005
7/15
/200
5
7/22
/200
5
7/29
/200
5
8/5/
2005
8/12
/200
5
8/19
/200
5
8/26
/200
5
9/2/
2005
9/9/
2005
9/16
/200
5
9/23
/200
5
9/30
/200
5
10/7
/200
5
10/1
4/20
05
10/2
1/20
05
10/2
8/20
05
DATE
PP
M
JFK Johnson Co. Heritage Park Leavenworth US Penitentiary Liberty Rocky Creek
8-Hour Standard = .084 PPM
Variables in the KC Ozone Equation
Weather Emission Reductions/Increases
Clean Air Interstate Rule Tier 2 Vehicle and fuels rule Heavy Duty Diesel rule Regional Haze rule Voluntary programs Flint Hills burning emissions
Weather
Temperature and Ozone (Rocky Cr. 8-hr. Ozone - 2004)
0.010
0.030
0.050
0.070
0.090
0.110
0.130
DATE
8-h
r. O
zo
ne
(p
pm
)
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110
-100
-90
-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
Rocky Cr. 8-hr. Ozone (ppm) Dep. From Normal Max.
8-hr. Standard = .084 ppm
Temperatureabove normal
Temperaturebelow normal
* - Meteorology data from KC International
Comparison between Daily Max. Temp. departure from normal and Rocky Cr. 8-hr. Ozone - 2005
0.010
0.030
0.050
0.070
0.090
0.110
0.130
4/1
4/8
4/15
4/22
4/29 5/6
5/13
5/20
5/27 6/3
6/10
6/17
6/24 7/1
7/8
7/15
7/22
7/29 8/5
8/12
8/19
8/26 9/2
9/9
9/16
9/23
9/30
10/7
10/1
4
10/2
1
10/2
8
DATE
8-h
r. O
zon
e (p
pm
)
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110
-100
-90
-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
Rocky Cr. 8-hr. Ozone (ppm) Dep. From Normal Max.
8-hr. Standard = .084 ppm
Temperatureabove normal
Temperaturebelow normal
* - Meteorology data from KC International Airport
Emissions Source Categories
Point: Permitted sources of pollutant emissions.
Area: Sources below the permit cutoffs: dry cleaners, auto body painting, house painting and solvent use.
Mobile On-road and Off-road: autos, trucks, planes, trains, construction, farm equipment & lawn and garden equip.
Point Source14%
Area Source47%
On-road Mobile26%
Non-road Mobile13%
190,859 tons
2002 Kansas VOC Emissions
On-road Mobile35%
Non-road Mobile13%
Area Source42%
Point Source10%
85,540 tons
2002 Kansas City Area VOC Emissions
2002 Johnson Co VOC Emissions
Point Source3%
Area Source49%
Non-road Mobile16%
On-road Mobile32%
25,749 tons
Non-road Mobile24%
On-road Mobile24%
Area Source4%
Point Source48%
344,730 Tons
2002 Kansas NOx Emissions
2002 Kansas City Area NOx Emissions
On-road Mobile40%
Area Source8%
Point Source32%
Non-road Mobile20%
105,330 tons
Current Status
EPA designated region attainment in May 2005
Largely a fluke of the weather – record cool summer in 2004
History and modeling suggests likelihood of violation in future if no action taken
Voluntary effort underway
Clean Air Action Plan
Coordinated by MARC Developed in 2004 Comprehensive voluntary plan for
reducing emissions Targets both stationary and mobile
sources Short-, intermediate- and long-term
measures
Emission Reduction Possibilities
Point source NOx emissions Reduce automobile miles traveled On-road Heavy Duty Diesel retrofits
Idle reduction for diesel engines Construction Equipment Railroad alternative power units Lawn and Garden VOC solvent emissions
Public Education
MARC’s annual regional public awareness campaign
Local government ozone reduction programs
AirQ Workplace Initiative Pollution prevention workshops for
small businesses
Future Activities
Another episode of photochemical modeling
Modify 1-hour State Implementation Plan (SIP) to include 8-hour provisions
Implement voluntary strategies Prepare 8-hour maintenance plan
Inventory growth and comparison Contingency measures and triggers
Economic impacts
+ In nonattainment areas, new or expanding businesses that release air pollution must apply the most stringent and costly controls available.
In addition, they must offset any increased pollution by reducing equivalent pollution from other sources in the nonattainment area. These requirements mean increased costs, less likelihood of investment in new facilities, and a compromised economic climate for business growth.
If a source wishes to locate or expand in a nonattainment area, federal law requires that large projects go through what is known as nonattainment new source review (NSR).
Nonattainment area new source review sometimes requires more strict emission controls than permits in attainment areas and also requires the applicant to obtain reductions in emissions from other sources within the same nonattainment area.
This is known as the “emission offset” requirement. Sources may choose to accept lower limits on allowable emissions in order to avoid these requirements.
Unless a source wishes to expand its operation and/or requests a revised emission limit, there is no impact on existing permits when a county goes from attainment to nonattainment.
How does nonattainment designation affect permitting?
Transportation conformity requires a nonattainment area to demonstrate that the estimated emissions from long range transportation plans do not exceed the estimated emissions level needed to attain and maintain the NAAQS.
Economic Impacts (con’t.)
A recent Minnesota Chamber of Commerce study estimated that nonattainment would cost the St. Paul-Minneapolis metropolitan area $189million to $266 million annually, and one could expect costs in the Kansas City region to be of comparable magnitude.