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