1 / 24

Acknowledgments Funding: EPA Supersites Program and DOE-NETL

Air Quality in Western Pennsylvania: The Pittsburgh Supersite Program Cliff Davidson Carnegie Mellon University May 11, 2007 Society of Toxicology Meeting. Acknowledgments Funding: EPA Supersites Program and DOE-NETL Faculty: Spyros Pandis, Allen Robinson, and Cliff Davidson

ondrea
Télécharger la présentation

Acknowledgments Funding: EPA Supersites Program and DOE-NETL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Air Quality in Western Pennsylvania: The Pittsburgh Supersite ProgramCliff DavidsonCarnegie Mellon UniversityMay 11, 2007Society of Toxicology Meeting

  2. Acknowledgments Funding: EPA Supersites Program and DOE-NETL Faculty: Spyros Pandis, Allen Robinson, and Cliff Davidson Research Scientists: Andrey Khlystov and Beth Wittig Graduate StudentsUndergraduates CEEChem EKizzy Dilts Natalie Anderson Juan Cabada Emma Goodson Satoshi Takahama Tim Raymond Naima Hall Wei Tang Charlie Stanier Emily Laufer CEE/EPPMech ELenny Lucas Sarah Rees R. Subramaniam Laura Sperduto Eric Lipsky

  3. 1. Background of the Pittsburgh Air Quality Study 2. Instrumentation 3. Examples of Findings 4. Conclusions

  4. The Pittsburgh Air Quality Study (PAQS) EPA Supersite Locations New York Pittsburgh Baltimore St Louis Fresno Los Angeles Atlanta Houston

  5. Objectives of the Supersite Program 1. Characterize detailed physics and chemistry of airborne particles 2. Develop and test new instrumentation for measuring particles 3. Identify sources of the particles 4. Develop a database that can be used to determine which characteristics of particles are responsible for health effects

  6. Spherical Fe-rich Particle 7500X 1 µm Carbon Chain Agglomerate

  7. Examples of Findings • 1. Origin of PM2.5 in Pittsburgh area • local vs. long-range transport • 2. Improved instrumentation • virtually all chemical data are from time-integrated samplers • what can we learn from real-time samplers? • 3. Chemical Composition and PM Control Strategies • sulfate accounts for >1/3 of PM2.5 • if we reduce sulfur emissions, how much does PM2.5 reduce?

  8. Satellite Sites Lawrenceville CMU site Hazelwood Florence Greensburg

  9. PM2.5 Mass at Main Site and Satellite Sites

  10. Sulfate Mass at Main Site and Satellite Sites

  11. Nitrate Mass at Main Site and Satellite Sites

  12. Elemental Carbon at Main Site and Satellite Sites

  13. July 25, 2001 Mixing height: 7 am 822 m 7 pm 1123 m

  14. July 18, 2001 Mixing height: 7 am 1370 m 7 pm 811 m

  15. SELENIUM FACTOR PSCF 6

  16. LEAD FACTOR PSCF 8

  17. Examples of Findings • 1. Origin of PM2.5 in Pittsburgh area • local vs. long-range transport • 2. Improved instrumentation • virtually all chemical data are from time-integrated samplers • what can we learn from real-time samplers? • 3. Chemical Composition and PM Control Strategies • sulfate accounts for >1/3 of PM2.5 • if we reduce sulfur emissions, how much does PM2.5 reduce?

  18. Examples of Findings • 1. Origin of PM2.5 in Pittsburgh area • local vs. long-range transport • 2. Improved instrumentation • virtually all chemical data are from time-integrated samplers • what can we learn from real-time samplers? • 3. Chemical Composition and PM Control Strategies • sulfate accounts for >1/3 of PM2.5 • if we reduce sulfur emissions, how much does PM2.5 reduce?

  19. How can reducing sulfur emissions cause an increase in PM2.5? NH4+ Decrease SO42- SO42- NH4+ Ammonium sulfate NH4NO3 Ammonium nitrate NO3 (as HNO3) 2 NH4NO3 (NH4)2SO4

  20. Conclusions • PM2.5 is mainly regional -- most is not generated locally. Source regions are identifiable. • Continuous monitors show some chemical species have large diurnal variations: nitrate varies greatly, sulfate varies very little. • Sum of the chemical constituents may be different than the total mass using the FRM, partially due to water uptake. • 4. Chemistry involving airborne particles can be complex -- reducing emissions of sulfur does not guarantee reduction in PM2.5.

More Related