national ambient air monitoring networks now and later pm model evaluation workshop
TRANSCRIPT
National Ambient Air Monitoring Networks
Now and Later
PM model evaluation workshop
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.
Topics
Current networks…routineAnticipated changesOverview of incommensurability and artifact issuesSupersites
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
2000-2002 3-Year Average Annual Mean PM2.5
Data from AQS 7/9/03. Sites that operated anytime 2000-2002 (n=1239)
Mean > 18 [Meets NAAQS completeness criteria]15 < mean < 18 [Meets NAAQS completeness criteria]12 < mean < 15 [Meets NAAQS completeness criteria]Mean < 12 [Meets NAAQS completeness criteria]Does not meet NAAQS completeness criteria
Urban and Rural PM2.5 Speciation NetworksActive Sites as of 1/20/04: EPA data from AQS, IMPROVE data from VIEWS
EPA Trends speciation siteEPA State/Local/Tribal speciation siteIMPROVE site
Supersites IRD Study Domain
Phase I
Phase II
Both Phases
Fresno
Los Angeles
Atlanta
Houston
St. Louis
PittsburghBaltimore
New York
Southeastern Canada
Mass Sampling
RoutineSpeciatio
n
SS
~ 1050 FRMs~ 200 cont.
~ 54 Trends~175 SIPs~150 IMPROVE
8
PM2.5 Networks
SLAMS (608)
Other (239)
NAMS (190)
Tribal (16)
Unofficial PAMS (1)
Industrial Data (69)Unknown (12)Index Site (4)
PM10 (81102) Monitors
VI
SLAMS (320)
Other (90)
NAMS (98)
Tribal (3)
Unofficial PAMS (1)
Industrial Data (5)Unknown (1)
CO Monitors
SLAMS (211)
Other (98)
PAMS / NAMS (2)
NAMS (51) PAMS / SLAMS (26)
PAMS (10)
Tribal (5)
Unofficial PAMS (10)
Industrial Data (17)
Unknown (1)
NO2 Monitors
VI
SLAMS (286)
Other (110)
NAMS (127) Tribal (6)
Unofficial PAMS (1)
Industrial Data (68)
Non-EPA Federal (4)
Unknown (3)
SO2 Monitors
SLAMS (211)
Other (98)
PAMS / NAMS (2)
NAMS (51) PAMS / SLAMS (26)
PAMS (10)
Tribal (5)
Unofficial PAMS (10)
Industrial Data (17)
Unknown (1)
NO2 Monitors
Don’t believe it
SLAMS (616)
Other (208)
PAMS / NAMS (19)
NAMS (194)
PAMS / SLAMS (14)
PAMS (5)
Tribal (4)
Unofficial PAMS (8)
Industrial Data (9)Non-EPA Federal (32)
Unknown (3)
VI
O3 Monitors
Dallas - Ft. Worth
WashingtonSan Joaquin Valley
Philadelphia
New York
Los Angeles
Houston
Greater Connecticut
Chicago
Boston
Baltimore
Sacramento
ProvidenceMilwaukee
Ventura County
Springfield
El Paso
Baton Rouge
Southeast Desert
Portsmouth
San DiegoPhoenix - Mesa
Santa Barabra
Atlanta
Areas with PAMS Networks
PAMS areas• Type #2 site• Type #1, #3, #4 site
Air Toxics Monitoring Network: Pilot sites and proposed trend sites Pilot city site
Proposed Trends site (rural)Proposed Trends site (urban)Pilot and Trends
Pilot city siteProposed Trends site (rural)Proposed Trends site (urban)Pilot and Trends
Active Tribal Monitoring Sites[AIRS extraction= 8/12/02; Monitor Type='TRIBAL MONITORS'; No Monitor End Date]
Red = Criteria Pollutant; Blue = Other, Improve Protocol
520 total monitors80 Criteria Pollutant monitors48 total active sites incl. 2 IMPROVE protocol38 Criteria Pollutant sites11 more planned IMPROVE Protocol Sites
Comments on Historical Routine Networks
Adequate ground level spatial coverage
Especially PM2.5 mass, ozone
But,
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)
Comments on Historical Routine Networks, cont.
But,
Other gases
NOy….very limitedTrue 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
Very limited multiple pollutant sites
Act of convenience rather than design
Changes expected from Implementing National Monitoring Strategy
National Core Network: NCORE Goal: Move from loosely tied single-pollutant networks to coordinated, highly
leveraged multi-pollutant networks with real time reporting capability
PAMSPM
O3
O3
PM
PM
SO2Toxics
PM
CO
IMPROVECASTNET
NADP
Instill order and communication
Principal Data Objectives of NCore
I’d like to say…………
“Characterize air quality as efficiently as possible in time, space and composition (physical and chemical properties)”
Since any data use or objective relies on a fundamental characterization and benefits by enhancement….
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?
Provide DATA for Routine Model Evaluation and Source Attribution Air Quality Trends and Program Accountability
Do measured data 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
Level 2: ~ 75 Multi-pollutant
(MP) Sites,“Core Species” Plus
Leveraging From PAMS,
Speciation Program, Air
Toxics
Level 1. 3-10 Master Sites
Comprehensive Measurements,
Advance Methods Serving Science and
Technology Transfer Needs
Level 3: Minimum Single Pollutant Sites (e.g.> 500 sites each for O3 and
PM2.5 and related spatial
Mapping Support
L2
Level 3
L1
NCore Measurements
Minimum “Core” Level 2 MeasurementsContinuous NO,NOy,SO2,CO, PM2.5, PM10/PMc,O3,Meteorology (T,RH,WS,WD);
Integrated PM2.5 FRM, HNO3, NH3,
Siting Approach – Level 2
Balance between functional design (best locations) and logistical concerns (national equity, capable agencies)
Step 1….Assume ~ 50 major U.S. cities provide variety for health scientists….long term epidemiological studies
Step 2….Identify important rural/regional gaps for model evaluation
Step 3….Leverage existing infrastructure (Speciation/IMPROVE and CASTNET networks; PAMS, air toxics NATTS)
Step 4…provide siting and implementation oversight ???
3
21
4
10
24
912
11
20
76
18
19
21
8
513
17
16
15 14
23
Proposed Siting Approach – Level 2…Health meets atmospheric sciences
Transport, Corridor,
Background and Inflow Locations
Suggested Rural Locations for Level 2 Sites
01/02
Trends (54)
Supplemental (~215 sites currently known)
Supersites
Daily Sites
IMPROVE
IMPROVE Protocol Castnet conversion Deploy in 2002 Deploy in 2003
SS
SS SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
Urban & Rural PM2.5 Speciation Networks
Current/Planned
Supplemental Information
FutureDirections
Visibility – IMPROVE &
Regional Haze
Acid Deposition – CASTNet
NADP
Inhalable Particles – PM10
Air ToxicMonitoring
Ozone – PAMS
Fine Particles – PM2.5
Chemical Speciation
Today
Core + PM spec
Core PM SpecPAMS
Core Spec Toxics
Core SpecPAMSToxics
Core
NCore: Further Integration & Optimization
NOAA/NASA Satellite Data Global/Continental transport
Other Networks: Deposition, Ecosystems Intensive/diagnostic Field Programs
Longer Term Goal: Integrated Observation-modeling Complex
Similar to Meteorological Models (FDDA) Model Adjustments Through Obs. All in Near Real Time Full Delivery of Model Dimensions
(Space, Time, Chemistry, Physical Properties)
Recent efforts fostering NCORE implementation
Air toxics NATTS (trend sites) at PM2.5 speciation locations Addition of aethalometers to NATTS Joint OAQPS-OAP (within OAR) test program at CASTNET site(s) Additional flexibility in use of STAG (e.g., PM2.5) funds to support
more precursor and indicator measurements RPO initiatives….
Issue
? Funding for Level 1 sites
Introduction to 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