1

Dust Definition Implementation

Gerard Mansell, Julia Lester, Jason Conder

ENVIRON International

WRAP Carbon/Dust Conference

May 24, 2006

2

Background: Dust Definition• Visibility standard references the “natural baseline”• How do you identify/quantify natural and anthropogenic

dust sources/emissions? What mitigations are possible?– DEJF developed draft dust definition

3

Feasibility Assessment Approach• Feasibility Report

– related approaches, data/methodology resource assessment, Feasibility Assessment Protocol

• Established 3 categories

Mixed:Land impacted by native and non-native animals, dry lake shores / beds

Category 1 Category 2 Category 3

Emissions due to anthropogenic

influence

Emissions under healthy, natural

conditions

Pure Anthro:construction, agriculture, roadways, etc.

Pure Natural:Erupting volcanoes, sea spray, etc.

To

tal

Du

stE

mis

sio

ns

4

Partitioning of Category 3 Sources• Category 3 Partitioning, “Direct-Comparison” Approach

- Compare Category 3 dust emissions at sites with actual or created “natural” reference sites (on site/source basis)

• Reference areas, reference time periods- Ecosystem health as opposed to disturbance ranges- Modeling

• Data information resources (Report, Appendix A)– Web location, cost, “owner,” description, spatial extent

(location), user interface, user input, data format, spatial resolution, data export, user requirements, information need check-off, WRAP dust definition applicability score, and notes

5

Feasibility Assessment Protocol

1. Identify the purpose and goals of the analysis

2. Conceptual Model and initial source rank order

3. Identify major Category 3 sources

4. Identify controls/mitigations, if desired

5. For major Category 3 sources, are existing methods/databases available to characterize, estimate, and/or partition the emissions?

6. If not, can the necessary methods/databases be developed and at what cost?

If the answers to 5 and/or 6 are yes, definition can be implemented

6

Case Studies

• Several potential case studies identified• 2 case studies identified through discussion with WRAP

staff and the DEJF:– Saguaro West (SAWE) in Pima County Arizona

• CoD / CoHA: 123 dust days of soil / coarse mass major contributors to 20% worst visibility days

– Salt Creek Wilderness in New Mexico• CoD / CoHA• DRI CoD Backward Trajectory Analysis• Near Emissions Inventory

• Interaction with the New Mexico SIP Pilot Project

7

Step 1: Purpose and Goals

Item Full-scale Study Saguaro West Case Study

Salt Creek Wilderness Study

Analysis area All contributing source areas

135 to 225 quadrant, 20-km radius

100 km radius circle

Resource identification

All As in full study As in full study

Dust source identification

Comprehensive, GIS, long-range sources assessed

Limited Comprehensive for short-range sources, GIS spatially-resolved where available

Dust source characterization

Identify models / data for all significant sources

Identify models / data for most significant source

Identify models / data for all significant sources

Ems Inventory All significant sources Most significant All significant sources

Inv. partitioning All significant Cat. 3 sources

Most significant with available data

All significant Cat. 3 sources

8

Step 2: Conceptual Model

CM

Geographic, geological, topographical, ecological, climatological and land use setting

PM and Visibility setting

Initial source ranking

Major Category 3 Sources

WRAP Products/Tools: AoH, CoHA, CoD, In and Near Class 1 Areas, Near Emission Inventories

State/Local Information

9

Salt Creek CM Building Blocks

10

Step 2 (cont): Initial Ranking of Sources

• Saguaro West– Most significant: Windblown from shrub land (Cat. 3)– Major: Other windblown (Cat. 3), agriculture (Cat. 1)– Unknown: Emissions and/or the natural “disturbance”

due to burrowing animals• Salt Creek Wilderness

– Most significant: Windblown from shrub/grass lands (Cat. 3)

– Major: Other windblown (Cat 3.); agriculture, construction, road dust (Cat. 1)

– Other: Emissions and/or the natural “disturbance” due to burrowing animals

11

Step 3: Major Category 3 Sources

• Saguaro West: Windblown (shrubland)

• Salt Creek (with current inventory)– Windblown (shrubland & grasslands)– Others: to be determined

12

Step 4: Mitigations / Control

• Identify possible mitigations and controls that may be applied to Category 1 and specific Category 3 sources– Impact of controls/mitigations on Category 3

sources related to emission partitioning• Saguaro West – Not part of case study• Salt Creek Wilderness

– Controls/ mitigations identified through the NM SIP Pilot Project

13

Step 5: Resource Availability for Category 3 Sources

• For major Category 3 contributors, are resources available to characterize, estimate, and/or partition the emissions?– Data and Model Resource Identification– Dust source characterization– Site-specific dust emission estimates– Emission partitioning

14

Step 5: Emission Estimates

• Saguaro: Rough, based on 12x12km estimates from windblown dust model

• Salt Creek Wilderness: Refined inventory, based on WRAP modeling data, revised spatial allocation, local data, Causes of Haze (CoH) analyses (DRI), etc.

15

Step 5: Emission Estimates

CountyWindblown Dust

Fugitive Dust

Road Dust

Windblown Dust

Fugitive Dust

Road Dust

De Baca 3,690 51 22 3,690 323 30Guadalupe 30 0 1 30 2 2Roosevelt 1,940 787 61 1,940 1,101 81Lincoln 1,405 8 42 1,405 296 55Curry 18 3 0 18 3 1Chaves 5,103 638 226 5,103 2,225 301Lea 1,158 120 46 1,158 237 61Otero 21 1 4 21 36 5Eddy 849 309 64 849 753 90Total 14,214 1,916 467 14,214 4,976 626

2002 Planning 2018 Base

WRAP modeling PM10 dust emission inventory data (includes TFs); spatially allocated to 100-km analysis area; reflects spatial allocation based on 1992 NLCD

16

Step 5: Emission Estimates

WRAP county-level PM10 dust emission inventory data (tpy)

CountyPaved Roads

Unpaved Roads Construction Mining Agricultural Total

De Baca 19.9 8.5 0.0 54.7 44.4 127.4Guadalupe 156.8 105.9 34.9 55.3 69.4 422.4Roosevelt 66.9 154.8 56.5 54.7 3181.7 3514.6Lincoln 90.6 65.9 218.9 54.7 0.0 430.0Curry 105.6 1171.1 178.6 54.7 4070.9 5580.9Chaves 171.4 159.6 93.2 54.7 735.7 1214.5Lea 159.4 402.9 91.4 54.7 918.5 1626.8Otero 169.3 449.7 164.1 54.7 118.2 955.9Eddy 148.2 164.2 116.7 54.7 1001.3 1485.1Total 1088.1 2682.5 954.2 492.5 10140.1 15357.5

PM10 Dust Emissions - WRAP 2002 Planning

17

Refined Emission Estimates

• Refine emission estimates through spatial allocation using updated LULC data

• Incorporate local available data • Work is on-going• Utilize CoH analysis from DRI

18

Current LULC for spatial allocation (1992 NLCD)

19

Updated LULC for spatial allocation (2000 NALC)

20

• Spatial allocation to 100-km analysis area

Source Category

Spatial Surrogate w/ 1992 NLCD

Spatial Surrogate w/ 2000 NALC

Paved Roads All road miles Primary roads (??)Unpaved Roads Rural population Secondary roads (??)Agricultural Cropland Cropland

ConstructionHousing change & population Population (??)

Mining Strip Mines & Quarries Rural Area (??)

Spatial Allocation of County-level Emissions

County PopulationPrimary Roads

Secondary Roads Cropland

Rural Land

De Baca 0.9546 0.7453 0.6994 0.0000 0.7564Guadalupe 0.0061 0.0175 0.0000 0.0000 0.0133Roosevelt 0.0807 0.4983 0.3194 0.0000 0.5279Lincoln 0.1604 0.6166 0.0000 0.0000 0.5356Curry 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0053Chaves 0.9920 0.9204 0.8975 1.0000 0.8757Lea 0.0117 0.1927 0.0001 0.0000 0.2377Otero 0.0032 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0158Eddy 0.2873 0.1831 0.3652 1.0000 0.2650

Spatial Allocation Factors

21

• Spatial allocation to 100-km analysis area

PM10 Dust emissions allocated to 100-km analysis area using 2000 NALC-based surrogates

CountyPaved Roads

Unpaved Roads Construction Mining Agricultural Total

De Baca 11.1 4.4 0.0 30.9 0.0 46.4Guadalupe 2.0 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.0 2.7Roosevelt 25.0 37.0 3.4 21.6 0.0 87.0Lincoln 35.8 0.0 22.5 18.8 0.0 77.1Curry 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2Chaves 121.4 110.3 71.1 36.9 566.5 906.2Lea 23.2 0.0 0.8 9.8 0.0 33.9Otero 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.9Eddy 21.6 47.9 26.8 11.6 799.0 906.9Total 240.2 199.6 125.2 130.9 1365.5 2061.4

PM10 Dust Emissions - WRAP 2002 Planning

22

23

• DRI Back-trajectory Analysis

Consider dust emissionsource areas basedon back-trajectories for SACR

24

Step 5: Category 3 Partitioning

• Saguaro West: Information available to generally identify impacted areas (e.g. unpaved road and grazing areas) and to identify a “natural” reference area, but no current analysis performed

• Salt Creek Wilderness:– Results pending

25

Dust Emissions from Burrowing Animals

• Excavate as much as 5,100 tons soil/mi2•year

• If fully entrained, may generate as much as 6 metric tons PM10 /mi2•year (Saguaro West)

• Burrowing activity affects vegetation cover at landscape scales

• In certain areas, there may be no additional emissions even if anthropogenic disturbances are present Botta’s pocket gopher

Thomomys bottae

26

CONCLUSIONS• Dust definition implementation feasible

– No “one-size-fits all” approach– Wide variety of information resources available– Key challenges

• Reconciling different emission estimates• Partitioning Category 3 sources

– Identifying reference areas / time periods• Quantifying impact of natural disturbances

– Assessment Report and draft Saguaro Study available

• Provides a process (and a tool – Conceptual Model) for integrating WRAP tools/projects during SIP development – NM SIP Pilot Project

• Feedback to emissions models