Particulate Matte r Scienc e fo r Particulate Matter Science for - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Particulate Matte r Scienc e fo r Particulate Matter Science for Poli cy ker s: Poli cyMa Make rs: A NA RSTO Asse ssm ent A N ARSTO A sse ssment Assess sessm ent Co Co- -Chairs: As ment Chairs: Peter H. McMurry , University of Minnesota Marjorie Shepherd , Meteorological Service of Canada Ja Jam me s Vi ck cker ery y , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency es Vi Assessment Authors: More than 30 leading authorities from academic, governmental, and private sector organizations

www.cgenv.com/Narsto/

NA NARSTO RSTO yxvutsrponmlkjihgfedcaXUTSRPONMLIHGFEDCBA ƒ A multi-stakeholder entity: government, private sector, academia zyvutsrponmlkihgfedcbaWUTSRPONMICA ƒ A multi-national entity: Canada, Mexico, U.S. ƒ Carries out periodic policy-relevant science as sessments on air pollutants including particulate matter (PM) and ozone

NA NARSTO, RSTO, who e are and w and wh hat w e do do whow we are at we NRC 20 2003 03

Purposes of this PM Purposes of this PM As Asses sessme smen nt t ƒ To interpret complex and new atmospheric science so that it is useful for the management of particulate air pollutants ƒ To inform exposure and health scientists as they continue to investigate causal hypotheses

Approa Approac ch h ƒ Survey science needs of policy makers ƒ Prepare PM Assessment ¾ Executive Summary (4 pages) ¾ Synthesis for Policy Makers (50 pages) ¾ 11 science chapters: implications for policy makers (600 pages) 9 Effects context; human health, visibility, and climate 9 Factors that influence atmospheric concentrations 9 Modeling tools to manage PM 9 Conceptual models of 9 regions 9 Recommended research to fill key information gaps ƒ Peer review by NARSTO community ƒ External tri-national relevancy review ¾ NAS (US), Royal Society (Canada), FUMEC (Mexico)

F Fr ram amewor ework r Info Informin rming k fo for g Ma Mana nage geme nt of PM ment of PM Analysis and The Atmospheric Exposure and Impacts Public Policy Environment Societal Atmospheric Health Factors Processing Visibility Atmospheric Environmental Environmental And Emissions Concentration s Goals Management Climate Ecological Meteorology Atmospheric Science Analyses

Cha Chap ters and Lea and Lead d Au uthor thors s pters A y 1. Perspectives M. Shepherd y 2. Health Context R. McClellan, B. Jessiman y 3. Atmospheric Processes S. Pandis y 4. Emissions G. Hidy, D. Niemi, T. Pace y 5. Measurements F. Fehsenfeld, D. Hastie, P. Solomon, J. Chow yxwvutsrponmlihgedcbaVTSRQPONMLIHGFECA y 6. Spatial & Temporal PM C. Blanchard y 7. Receptor Methods J. Brook, E. Vega, J. Watson y 8. Chemical Transport Models C. Seigneur, M.Moran y 9. Visibility I. Tombach, K. McDonald y 10. Conceptual Models J. Vickery y 11. Recommended Research P. McMurry

Contribu Contributin ting gAuthors Authors yxwvutsrponmlihgedcbaVTSRQPONMLIHGFECA y Chap. 1. H. Saldago, T Keating y Chap. 3. L. Barrie y Chap. 4. Jason West y Chap. 6. R. Husar, R. Vet, T. Dann, G. Raga, W. White, J. Chow y Chap. 8. P. Amar, Jason West, R. Villasenor y Chap. 10. B. Pun, C. Seigneur, M. Moran, J. Brook, S. Edgerton, Jason West, H. Saldago, E. Vega, M. Kleeman, M. Hannigan, B. Thomson, B. Taylor, M. Leidner, K. McDonald, R. Dennis, T. Russell

Conceptual models for nine Conceptual models for nine representative areas representative areas Canadian Southern Prairies / US Northern Plains Lower Fraser Valley Windsor -Quebec City corridor Northeastern United States Upper Mid West - San Joaquin Valley Great Lakes Southeastern United States Los Angeles Mexico City

Co Con ncep ceptu tual m al mo od de els nd the thei ir ls a and r p po olicy re licy rele levan vance ce S Sy yn nops opses esof the of thebes best un t under ders st tand andin ing of the g of thein influ fluenc ence e of em of e mi is ss si ions ons, mete , meteor orol ology and atm d atmo os sphe pher ri c ogyan ic pr proc oces ess se es on am mbi bien t P PM co on nc ce en ntr trati ons son a ent Mc ations

Simplified Conceptual Model for the Northeast United States The Analysis & Atmospheric Policy Implications Environment Atmospheric Processing Policy Implications for PM 2.5 Atmospheric Concentration of PM 2. 5 (Simple Summary Insights) (Of typical peak PM) (Key drivers of peak PM) • Summer sulfate driven by gas-phase PM 2. 5 PM 10 • Median SO 4 continues to drop from 1990 levels due to production acid rain controls, but peaks remain. Concentration Concentration • Aqueous production of sulfate is • Summer sulfate not neutralized, but is in winter so yvutsrponmlihgfedcaUTSPNMIECA oxidant limited and non-linear Annual: Annual greater nitrate response to winter sulfate drop. zyvutsrponmlkihgfedcbaWUTSRPONMICA • Rural 5-10 µ g/m 3 • 30-50 µ g/m 3 at • The small level of NO 3 is ammonia • Regional transport in summer from Ohio River Valley limited and controlled by SO 4 availability. • Corridors of Ohio River large urban important. Reduction in regional and local SO 2 beneficial. Lots of HNO 3 available Valley and Coastal Ozone areas • Local SO 4 , OC and NO 3 in coastal urban areas Plain near and just over 15 • Little information, but majority of OC is 24 hr: important in winter. Need to consider how to reduce OC. µ g/m 3 . NYC >15 µ g/m 3 estimated to be secondary in origin • 80-150 µ g/m 3 • Winter nitrate increase will partially offset sulfate 24hr at large urban decreases, and is ammonia limited. • Seldom above 65 µ g/m 3 areas Emissions except for Pittsburgh area. Manmade/ Seasonality Downward trend Natural • Summer > winter by factor 1999 15-18% Sources (Estimates of contribution from Gas/Particle of ≈ 1.5-2.5 across region, lower than 1990l but reverse for Phil. & NYC source apportionment) (Summer = 0.9 Winter) Meteorology PM 2. 5 (% mass) Composition (Conditions common to peak PM) Peak • Coastal Urban Corridor ≈ 60-80% SO 4 ≈ 10% Local SO 4 Average. PM 2. 5 ≈ 50% Regional SO 4 ≈ 55-65% SO 4 ≈ 25-30% Motor Vehicles ≈ 25-30% OC Residual oil burning 4-8% • Strong seasonal (rural to urban) gradient Rural (Summer) Soil 6-7% noted ≈ 60-75% SO 4 Biogenic OC’s (included in Motor Vehicles) ≈ 20-30% • Gas phase SO 4 favored by stagnant summer OC • Rural ≈ 10% NO 3 +BC+Soil periods with high oxidant production Summer SO 4 = 2-4 times Winter SO 4 Urban (Winter) • Year-to-year variability in wet deposition Summer OC = 2 times Winter OC ≈ 30-35% OC cleansing. • Urban ≈ 25-35% SO 4 Summer SO 4 ≈ Regional SO 4 ≈ 15-25% NO 3 Winter SO 4 = 2 times regional SO 4 ≈ 5-15% BC+Soil Winter OC = 4-5 times regional OC

Atmospheric Conc entration zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaYWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA Atmospheric Conc entration (Of typical peak PM) (Of typical peak PM) PM 2. 5 PM 2. 5 PM 10 PM 10 Concentration Concentration Concentration Concentration Annual: Annual: Annual Annual • Rural 5-10 µ g/m 3 • Rural 5-10 µ g/m 3 • 30-50 µ g/m 3 at • 30-50 µ g/m 3 at • Corridors of Ohio River • Corridors of Ohio River large urban large urban Valley and Coastal Ozone Valley and Coastal Ozone areas areas Plain near and just over 15 Plain near and just over 15 24 hr: 24 hr: µ g/m 3 . NYC >15 µ g/m 3 µ g/m 3 . NYC >15 µ g/m 3 • 80-150 µ g/m 3 • 80-150 µ g/m 3 24hr 24hr at large urban at large urban • Seldom above 65 µ g/m 3 • Seldom above 65 µ g/m 3 areas areas except for Pittsburgh area. except for Pittsburgh area. Seasonality Seasonality Downward trend Downward trend • Summer > winter by factor • Summer > winter by factor 1999 15-18% 1999 15-18% of ≈ 1.5-2.5 across region, of ≈ 1.5-2.5 across region, lower than 1990l lower than 1990l but reverse for Phil. & NYC but reverse for Phil. & NYC (Summer = 0.9 Winter) (Summer = 0.9 Winter) Composition Composition Peak Peak SO 4 ≈ 60-80% ≈ 60-80% SO 4 Average. Average. SO 4 ≈ 55-65% ≈ 55-65% SO 4 OC ≈ 25-30% ≈ 25-30% OC Rural (Summer) Rural (Summer) SO 4 ≈ 60-75% ≈ 60-75% SO 4 OC ≈ 20-30% ≈ 20-30% OC NO 3 +BC+Soil ≈ 10% NO 3 +BC+Soil ≈ 10% Urban (Winter) Urban (Winter) OC ≈ 30-35% ≈ 30-35% OC SO 4 ≈ 25-35% ≈ 25-35% SO 4 NO 3 ≈ 15-25% ≈ 15-25% NO 3 BC+Soil ≈ 5-15% ≈ 5-15% BC+Soil