Wintertime PM in Utah (Air Quality)
•Transferir como PPT, PDF•
1 gostou•558 visualizações
Science-based presentation on wintertime particulate matter in Utah.
![Wintertime PM in Utah ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/aqbinfo9-2-092-091028083440-phpapp01/85/Wintertime-PM-in-Utah-Air-Quality-1-320.jpg)
![Background ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (10)
Semelhante a Wintertime PM in Utah (Air Quality)
Semelhante a Wintertime PM in Utah (Air Quality) (20)
Mais de State of Utah, Salt Lake City
Mais de State of Utah, Salt Lake City (20)
Último
Último (20)
Wintertime PM in Utah (Air Quality)
- 3. Particles Fine Particles lodge deeply into the lungs, and are associated with serious health problems, including heart and lung diseases, and premature death.
- 6. ug/m3 1974 – 3080 ug/m3 TSP 1987 – 487 ug/m3 TSP 1992 – 267 ug/m3 PM10 2002 – 91.6 ug/m3 PM2.5 Salt Lake Valley Maximum 2008 – 59.6 ug/m3 PM2.5 Particulate Matter Standards
- 7. Monitored levels of PM2.5
- 14. Emissions Modeled PM 2.5 Concentrations Air Quality Model NOx SO4 NH3 NO NH3 NH 3 +HNO 3 NH 4 NO 3 OH+NO 2 HNO 3 NO 2 +O 3 NO 3 83% -5 ° 250m NW 6 Meteorology Chemistry Must replicate the complex chemistry of winter-time Fine Particulate (PM 2.5 ) Formation
- 15. Speciated PM2.5 Data January 2004 Inversion
Notas do Editor
- I been asked to give a status report on the PM2.5 SIP But I understand there are some new members of the Board, so I’ve sprinkled in some remedial stuff… the rest of you all can bear with me I threw this slide up because it’s a good picture… and it frames our problem so well
- When we monitor concentrations that violate these NAAQS we address the problem with a modification to our SIP. Such is the case with PM2.5, but a little background should allow you to digest the status report a little easier
- This slide shows the relative sizes of these particles… from big to small … we’re now focusing on the very small particles (sometimes called fine particulate.) This is because most of the adverse health effects are attributable to these fine particles that lodge deeply into the lung.
- The CAA requires EPA to review the NAAQS (every 5 yrs) and revise them if necessary, and they just did this with PM (in 2006.) So this is just the latest step in dealing with particulate since 1970
- This chart shows the levels of the various PM standards we’ve had since 1970. The first point to be made is that we’ve changed our focus from TSP to smaller (PM10) and smaller (P2.5) particles. The second point is that the standard has become ever more restrictive.
- Monitored values of PM2.5 indicate that Utah was meeting the old (1997) standards for PM2.5, though not by much. These values also show there will be areas within the state that do not meet the new (2006) standards.
- The CAA lays out a 5-yr process for addressing areas that do not met the federal health standards. The first 2 involve establishing the actual areas of nonattainment. The next 3 are used to develop plans to bring these areas back into attainment with the NAAQS.
- This slide re-caps the area designation process. The map on the left represents Utah’s recommendation to EPA. …And the map on the right shows EPA’s (likely) final determination.
- Even though the designations (for the entire country) have not been published yet, we expect that EPA will take this final step in the very near future.
- This next slide outlines the process of developing a State Implementation Plan. …again, it’s 3-yr process, and this identifies the fundamental phases of the project.
- The early SIP work we’ve been doing involves the first project phase from the last slide… model validation. This is largely technical work that is done in order to develop the tool we will ultimately use to provide quantitative answers to questions concerning the effectiveness of possible control strategies and the timeliness of attainment. … Involves assembling data sets for Emissions, Met., AQ (speciated)… pairing them in space & time… and running the model ‘till the results match the monitored values.
- Here’s a map that shows the CMAQ modeling domain. It’s a grided model, meaning that inputs and outputs are generated for each grid cell on the map.
- Here’s a graphic of what we were talking about before… The model assimilates data sets for meteorology and emissions, applies some atmospheric chemistry (and other physical properties) and produces PM2.5 concentrations by the hour for each grid cell on the map. In the first phase of the SIP work these output values will be compared with measured (and speciated) PM2.5 concentrations to verify that the model is working properly. Only then can it be used to make assessments about possible control strategies.
- Here’s a slide that shows some speciated data from PM filters. It shows high concentrations of ammonium nitrate (NH4NO3) Typical Salt Lake (Hawthorne monitor) wintertime inversion build-up, January 2004
- Here’s a graphic on emissions inventories…it shows both the various source categories and the pollutants of primary concern. Similar plots for Utah County and the Cache Valley would look a bit different with respect to point sources, but the relative contribution of primary PM2.5 would also be overshadowed by the reactive pollutants.
- This diagram illustrates how the mobile source emissions model fits into the overall scheme of the SIP demonstration. We include it only to point out that EPA is in the process of releasing a new, and much different, model than has been used in the past. Given the dominance of mobile sources with respect to NOx emissions, it will be very important to understand how it works. Over the coming months, we will continue to refine our estimates for mobile source emissions using this new model. Hence, the AQ model will also be re-run.
- UDAQ has completed some preliminary draft model runs for the episodes of 2007 and 2008. Results are still preliminary… largely because of the uncertainties surrounding the mobile source emissions estimates. CMAQ Model performance looks to be good enough for SIP work
- Animation of PM2.5 modeling results for 4 days in January of ’07
- The next significant step in the process will be an assessment of control strategies. UDAQ will consider all sources of emissions for possible controls. The emission reductions must be reflected in a modeled demonstration of attainment.
- SIP development is an open process. UDAQ will be working closely with affected stakeholders during this next stage of the process.
- So what can we expect as the project moves forward? Even though the clock hasn’t started yet, UDAQ has been busy with model development. Results are still preliminary, but we’re pleased with the progress we’ve made so far.