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.

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…routine
Anticipated changes
Overview of incommensurability and artifact issues
Supersites
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 Networks
Active Sites as of 1/20/04: EPA data from AQS, IMPROVE data from VIEWS
EPA Trends speciation site
EPA State/Local/Tribal speciation site
IMPROVE site
Supersites IRD Study Domain
Southeastern Canada
Pittsburgh
Baltimore
Fresno
St. Louis
Los Angeles
Atlanta
Houston
Phase I
Phase II
Both Phases
New York
PM2.5 Networks
~ 54
Trends
~175 SIPs
~150 IMPROVE
SS
8
Routine
Speciation
Mass Sampling
~ 1050
FRMs
~ 200 cont.
PM10 (81102) Monitors
VI
NAMS (190)
Unofficial PAMS (1)
SLAMS (608)
Tribal (16)
Unknown (12)
Index Site (4)
Other (239)
Industrial Data (69)
CO Monitors
NAMS (98)
Unofficial PAMS (1)
SLAMS (320)
Tribal (3)
Unknown (1)
Other (90)
Industrial Data (5)
NO2 Monitors
NAMS (51)
SLAMS (211)
Other (98)
PAMS (10)
PAMS / NAMS (2)
SO2 Monitors
VI
NAMS (127)
SLAMS (286)
Other (110)
Unofficial PAMS (1)
Tribal (6)
Unknown (3)
Industrial Data (68)
Non-EPA Federal (4)
PAMS / SLAMS (26)
Unofficial PAMS (10)
Tribal (5)
Unknown (1)
Industrial Data (17)
Don’t believe it
NO2 Monitors
NAMS (51)
SLAMS (211)
Other (98)
PAMS (10)
PAMS / NAMS (2)
PAMS / SLAMS (26)
Unofficial PAMS (10)
Tribal (5)
Unknown (1)
Industrial Data (17)
O3 Monitors
VI
NAMS (194)
Unofficial PAMS (8)
SLAMS (616)
Tribal (4)
Unknown (3)
Industrial Data (9)
Non-EPA Federal (32)
Other (208)
PAMS (5)
PAMS / NAMS (19)
PAMS / SLAMS (14)
Areas with PAMS Networks
Portsmouth
Boston
Providence
Springfield
Milwaukee
Greater Connecticut
New York
Sacramento
Philadelphia
Chicago
Baltimore
Washington
San Joaquin Valley
Santa Barabra
Ventura County
Southeast Desert
Los Angeles
San Diego
Phoenix - Mesa
Atlanta
Dallas - Ft. Worth
El Paso
Houston
Baton Rouge

•
•
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
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 monitors
80 Criteria Pollutant monitors
48 total active sites incl. 2 IMPROVE protocol
38 Criteria Pollutant sites
11 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 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
 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
NADP
PM
PM
PAMS
PM
CO
O3
O3
PM
IMPROVE
CASTNET
SO2
Toxics
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

Do measured data confirm strategies are working?

Major National Initiatives (Acid Rain, Clear Skies, NOx SIPS, FMVCP)

Including HAPS (National) and Visibility Assessments
Air Quality Trends and Program Accountability
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
NCore Measurements
Level 2: ~ 75 Multipollutant (MP)
Sites,“Core Species”
Plus Leveraging From
PAMS,
Speciation Program,
Air Toxics
L1
L2
Level 3
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,
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
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

???
Proposed Siting Approach – Level 2…
Health meets atmospheric sciences
Suggested Rural
Locations for
Level 2 Sites
23
21
15
18
14
3
1
7
Transport, Corridor,
Background and
Inflow Locations
6
16
4
19
17
8
13
5
10
9
12
11
20
24
2
Urban & Rural PM2.5 Speciation Networks
Current/Planned
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
Trends (54)
Supplemental (~215 sites currently known)
SS Supersites
Daily Sites
IMPROVE
IMPROVE Protocol
Castnet conversion
Supplemental Information
Deploy in 2002
Deploy in 2003
01/02
Today
Future
Directions
Air Toxic
Monitoring
Ozone –
PAMS
Core
Core +
PM spec
Core
Spec
Toxics
Core
PM
Spec
PAMS
Core
Spec
PAMS
Toxics
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