Particulate Matter 101 Red Deer Particulate Matter Information Session Matthew Parsons Air Quality...

Particulate Matter 101

Red Deer Particulate Matter Information Session

Matthew Parsons

Air Quality Development – Meteorological Service of Canada, Environment Canada

November 28, 2014

Outline:

1. Definitions

2. Sizes

3. Sources

4. Composition

5. Lifetime & Transport

6. Sinks

7. Effects

– November 28, 2014

What is Particulate Matter?

• Particulate Matter (PM)– Microscopic solid or

liquid particles suspended in the atmosphere

– Often expressed in terms of mass per unit volume (e.g., ).

Soot Organic Material

Pollen Mineral Dust


What is Particulate Matter?

CompositionSize

Source

Lifetime & Transport


Sizes

Coarse

PM10

PM2.5

FineUltrafineNano

TSP


Sources• Primary PM:

– PM emitted directly tothe atmosphere.

• Secondary PM:– PM formed in the atmosphere through chemical reactions of

gases.

• PM and precursor gases can be from both natural and anthropogenic sources.

Pollutant Gases Secondary PM


Composition

Cold Season Non-event Cold Season Event Warm Season Non-event

Warm Season Event0

5

10

15

20

25

30 Ammonium Sulphate

Ammonium Nitrate

Organic Material

Elemental Carbon

Soil & Trace Elements

Sodium Chloride

Particle Bound Water

PM

2.5

Co

nc

en

tra

tio

n /

µg

m-3

Alberta’s Capital Region PM2.5

Event: PM2.5 concentration ≥ 20 µg m-3

Non-event: PM2.5 concentration < 20 µg m-3

Warm Season: April – SeptemberCold Season: October - March

maxwell.mazur

Matt - I am going to be discussing with the audience later in the day, the connection between NO2 emissions and secondary PM. This figure is instrumental, especially the abundance of ANO3 and how Edmonton has some similar sources to Red Deer, like for example traffic. Could you make sure that you go over what speciation is, what it means and what some of the different secondary species are? This doesn't have to be a new slide, just that you cover it in your speaking notes.


Lifetime & Transport• Atmospheric lifetimes for PM is in the range of hours

(>10µm) to weeks (<1µm).• Transport of PM is driven

by meteorologicalconditions (e.g., wind,atmospheric stability).

– PM can be transportedhorizontally in theatmosphere over longranges.

– Vertical transport of PMbetween atmosphericlayers is limited.

Red Deer


Wet D

eposition

Sinks

Growth

Dry D

eposition


0 5 10 15 20 25 30

VANCOUVERSydney

OTTAWA/GATINEAUTORONTO

DenverStockholm

SeattleEDMONTON

MONTRÉALBoston

CALGARYWashingtonMilwaukee

HoustonPhoenixMadrid

RED DEERChicagoPittsburgh

LondonPrague

HamburgParis

AmsterdamBarcelona

BerlinLyon

BrusselsRome

WarsawSofia

Annual Average PM2.5 Concentration / µg m-3

2011 International Comparison

Environment Canada, Air and Climate Indicators, (2014)http://ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators

http://ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators




2012 Provincial Comparison


0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Tomahawk

Genesee

Powers

Edson

Caroline

Smoky Heights

Patricia McInnes

Redwater

Evergreen Park

Anzac

Fort McKay South

Lamont

Drayton Valley

Edmonton - Centre

Calgary - Northwest

Edmonton - McIntyre

Hinton

Albian Mine Site

Edmonton - East

Crescent Heights

Red Deer - Riverside

Annual Average PM2.5 Concentration / µg m-3





2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20120

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18Red Deer - RiversideNational Average2015 Standard (CAAQS)

Year

An

nu

al A

ve

rag

e P

M2

.5 C

on

ce

ntr

ati

on

/ µ

g

m-3

Red Deer Annual Averages






Why does Particulate Matter Matter?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 +Risk: Low

(1 – 3)Moderate

(4 – 6)High

(7 – 10)Very High

(Above 10)

Visibility Health

Air Quality Health Index (AQHI)

• Plant health• Soil/water nutrient balance and toxicity

• Corrosion enhancement• Climate effects

Monitoring of Particulate Matter in Alberta


Shelley [email protected]

How PM2.5 is measured in Alberta?

• Continuous monitoring – In-direct measurement of mass concentration– Short time resolution (one-hour or less)– Provide concentrations on site

• Filter based monitoring– Typically integrated over 24 hours– Direct measurement of mass concentration– Laboratory analysis required

• Mass concentration• Chemical composition

Passive Monitoring

• Passive samplers– Cost effective and easy to operate – Measures H2S, SO2, NO2 and O3

– Requires lab analysis– Can be deployed for various time

periods, typically 30 days as in the PAMZ network

– Pollutant concentration is reported over a longer time period than continuous monitors

– Common tool for determining spatial and temporal trends

Parameter Detection Limit

SO2 0.1 ppbH2S 0.02 ppbNO2/NOx 0.1 ppbO3 0.1 ppb

Speciation Monitoring

• Speciation monitoring– Typically integrated over 24

hours– Direct measurement of mass

concentration– Laboratory analysis required

• Mass concentration• Chemical composition

PM2.5 mass and trace metalsPM2.5 organic and elemental carbonPM2.5 sulfate, nitrate and other ionsPM2.5 elements

PM2.5 Measurement and Water

• Continuous analyzers – Do not distinguish between

• particulate matter mass and • mass of particle bound water

– Want to measure only particulate matter• Thus sample needs to be conditioned

– i.e. remove particle bound water• In the past

– Conditioning meant heating sample– Results in the loss of semi-volatile fraction

• Thus excessive heating can– Result in under reporting particle mass concentration

Continuous PM2.5 Monitoring

• Various continuous methods– Optical analyzers– Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance– Beta-attenuation

• Relies on physical and optical change• Sample is pre-conditioned• Temperature controlled environment

TEOM-FDMS

TEOM-SES

SHARP 5030

GRIMMBAM-1020

Filter Based Monitoring

• Direct measurement of particle mass– Based on filter mass before and after

sample collection– Filter conditioned pre weighing

• Installed in ambient environment– Sample is drawn though Size selection

inlet and through the filter

• Used as a reference method – Against which indirect monitors are

compared

FRM vs FEM

• Federal Reference Method (FRM)– “method of sampling and analyzing the ambient air for an air

pollutant”*– Typically an “Intermittent Sample”– Examples: Hi-Vol sampler, Dichot PM10/2.5 Partisol

• Federal Equivalency Method (FEM)– “method for measuring the concentration of an air pollutant in

ambient air”*– Continuous PM2.5 monitors

*from 40 CFR 53.1

FEM Equivalent PM 2.5 Monitors

Instrument Designation NumberEnvironment s.a. MP101M PM2.5 Beta Attenuation Monitor EQPM-1013-211

Grimm Model EDM180 EQPM-0311-195

Horiba APDS - 371 EQPM-0308-170

Met One BAM 1020 (FEM Version) EQPM-0308-170

Met One BAM 1022 (Real Time) EQPM-1013-209

Thermo Scientific FH62C14-DHS Continuous, 5014i EQPM-0613-189

Opsis SM200 EQPM-0812-203

SWAM 5a Dual Channel Monitor EQPM-0912-204

Teledyne 602 Beta Plus Particle Measurement System EQPM-0912-204

Thermo Scientific 5030 and 5030i Sharp EQPM-0609-184

Thermo Scientific 1400a with 8500C FDMS, 1405 F TEOM EQPM-0609-181

Thermo 1405 DF Dichot with FDMS EQPM-0609-182

Tisch Environmental TE-EDM 180 PM2.5 EQPM-0311-195

FDMS TEOM (Filter Dynamics Measurement System Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance)

• Near real-time averaging• Available in PM2.5 or PM10

• Measurement technology only used in Thermo TEOM products

• Higher operating cost• More prone to negative data• Large footprint• Non-FDMS TEOMs do not account for semi

volatile particulate.

FDMS TEOM Principle of Operation

Grimm EDM 180

Grimm EDM 180

• Laser based measurement• No heating used in RH control• Moisture control using Nafion dryer• Capable of PM10, PM2.5, and PM1

simultaneously and in real-time.• Able to determine particulate count

at 31 size fractions• Low maintenance and operating cost• No size selective inlet required

Grimm Principle of Operation

• Optical spectrometer using 90o light scattering• All particles in sample stream measure and classified into 31 different size

fractions

Beta Attenuation Monitors (BAM)

Met One BAM 1020

• Mainstay of ambient particulate monitoring • Several variations by different manufacturers• Reliable, low operating cost• First FEM PM2.5 monitor• Minimal Heating for RH control

– “smart heater” is turned on by a relative humidity sensor

• Only capable of 1 hr averaging – no 1 min data• Beta attenuation noisy over short averaging periods

BAM 1020 Principle of Operation

• Low-level 14C (Carbon-14) radiation source uses beta-ray attenuation and a filter tape system

• The mass density of particulate on the filter is calculated from the measured reduction in the number of beta particles passing through the filter.

• The BAM 1020 is a reference instrument for PM10

Thermo Sharp 5030 & 5030iSynchronized Hybrid Ambient Real-time Particulate Monitor

5030 SHARP

• Combines Beta-ray Attenuation and a Nephalometer technologies

• Real-time values• Stability and Accuracy of Beta

Attenuation combined with rapid measurements of nephelometer

• Light scattering photometer is continuously calibrated by beta attenuation mass sensor

• Intelligent Moisture Reduction (IMR) System heating the inlet tube; threshold is set at 35%

SHARP 5030 Principle of Operation

• Generates a Hybrid measurement by combining Beta Attenuation with PM measurements from a Nephelometer

• Nephelometer senses light scattered by aerosol passing through illuminated beam

Operational Changes

• TEOM without FDMS is not a US EPA Federal Equivalent Method

• Over the course of 2009, many PM2.5 TEOM monitors were upgraded with FDMS units.

• These units better capture volatile components that were previously lost

• Both monitors run side-by-side at Edmonton McIntyre.– On average, 4-5 µg/m3 higher on hourly basis.– 98th percentile 24-hour values approximately 10-15 µg/m3 higher.

Operational Challenges

• A number of stations in different Airsheds have experienced difficulty maintaining reliable operation with the TEOM-FDMS .– Large hour-to-hour swings in reported concentrations – Hours lost to negative values – High Maintenance hours– High cost of replacement/consumable parts

• Differences were observed between units• SHARP 5030 monitors have recently been deployed in

the network

Management Action Plan – Red Deer

• TEOM-SES upgraded with FDMS unit in 2009• SHARP 5030 was installed at Red Deer in August 2013

– Collocated with TEOM-FDMS• A combination of updated monitors and increased smog

activity may have led to the sharp increase in PM2.5 concentrations in 2010.

• The source apportionment of particulate matter in the Region is complex and not thoroughly understood.

PM2.5 Monitors in the Province

• 51 Continuous PM2.5 Monitors – 11 TEOM @ 40oC– 13 TEOM FDMS @ 30oC (4 Thermo 1405F models)– 1 TEOM SES @ 30oC– 8 BAM 1020 (Beta Attenuation Monitor) – 16 SHARP (Synchronized Hybrid Ambient Real-time Particulate)– 1 GRIMM– 1 E-BAM

• Various methods used within the province

• The question is ..Are all methods reporting a comparable sample?

The Need For Comparable Method

• National Pollution Surveillance Program– Adopted the USEPA Federal Equipment Method analyzers to equip

associated stations

• Federal Equipment Method analyzers– Compare similarity against a reference method (filter based)

– More capable of accounting for the semi-volatile fraction

• Within the province

– Not all PM2.5 analyzers fall within this class

• At this time we are encouraging operators– To purchase FEM equipment when replacing analyzers

Thank you

Ambient Air Quality Management for PM2.5 in Alberta

CASA PM & O3 / CAAQS / Assessments


Maxwell [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Canada-wide Standards (CWS)

• June 2000 – Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment established the Canada-wide Standards

for fine particulate matter and ozone. – PM2.5: 30 ug/m3 based on three-year average 98th

percentile 24-hour average• Applies to Census

Metropolitan Areas (CMAs) and CensusAgglomerations (CAs)– Ex) Edmonton and

Calgary CMAs (> 100 000)

– Ex) Red Deer CA (< 100 000)

Alberta’s PM and Ozone Management Framework

• 2003 – Clean Air Strategic Alliance developed the Particulate Matter and Ozone Management Framework

• The Framework is Alberta’s implementation plan for CWS– committed to annual assessments– based on Keeping Clean Areas Clean– proactive management

PM2.5 and Ozone Management Framework

Management Level

OzoneDaily max 8h

(ppb)

PM2.5 24h

(µg m-3)

Red Mandatory Plan to Reduce Below CWS

Exceedance Trigger (CWS)

65 30

Orange Management Plan Action Level

Planning Trigger

58 20

Blue Surveillance Actions

Surveillance Trigger

-- 15

Green Baseline Monitoring and Data Gathering

MandatoryPlan toReduce

Below CWS

ManagementPlan

SurveillanceActions

BaselineMonitoringand DataGathering Flex

ible Man

agement T

oolsStrin

gent Man

agement T

ools

Action T

riggers

Exceedance TriggerPM2.5: 30 µg/m3

ozone: 65 ppb

Planning TriggerPM2.5: 20 µg/m3

ozone: 58 ppb

Surveillance TriggerPM2.5: 15 µg/m3

ozone: See note

Action Levels

Note: For ozone, AENV will determine on an annual basis whichareas are in baseline and which areas are in surveillance

Existing

Regulato

ry and Ma

nagemen

t Tools

MandatoryPlan toReduce

Below CWS

ManagementPlan

SurveillanceActions

BaselineMonitoringand DataGathering Flex

ible Man

agement T

oolsStrin

gent Man

agement T

ools

Action T

riggers

Exceedance TriggerPM2.5: 30 µg/m3

ozone: 65 ppb

Planning TriggerPM2.5: 20 µg/m3

ozone: 58 ppb

Surveillance TriggerPM2.5: 15 µg/m3

ozone: See note

Action Levels

Note: For ozone, AENV will determine on an annual basis whichareas are in baseline and which areas are in surveillance

Existing

Regulato

ry and Ma

nagemen

t Tools

Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS)

• CAAQS to replace CWS in 2015• Formally agreed to on Oct 11, 2012• CAAQS Framework modeled after

Alberta’s Framework– Standards and thresholds more stringent

than Alberta’s Framework– Introduces a new annual PM2.5 standard

• First report to be released in late 2014 – based on 2011-13 data

Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) Framework

• Modeled after the CASA PM and Ozone Framework

Management Level

OzoneDaily max 8h

(ppb)

PM2.5 Annual(µg m-3)

PM2.5 24h

(µg m-3)

2015 2020 2015 2020 2015 2020

Red Actions for Achieving Air Zone CAAQS

Threshold (CAAQS)

63 62 10.0 8.8 28 27

Orange Actions for Preventing CAAQS Exceedance

Threshold 56 6.4 19

Yellow Actions for Preventing AQ Deterioration

Threshold 50 4.0 10

Green Actions for Keeping Clean Areas Clean

CASA Framework

CAAQS Framework

Annual Assessments – History to Date

• Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development has committed to CASA to perform annual assessments of PM2.5 and ozone to determine action levels.

• First assessment was for 2001 - 2003 period.– Resulted in Edmonton, some parts of West Central and

Fort Saskatchewan areas; Red Deer; and Calgary being assigned to the Management Plan action level for ozone.

– Subsequent assessments have shown Red Deer, Calgary to have dropped out of Management Plan action level for Ozone but “once you’re in, you’re in.”

• Assessments for CMAs with multiple stations based on spatial average– CMAs with some high stations may be classified into

lower management levels

Annual Assessments – Assessment Methods

• Involves analysing specifics of each event over the triggers. – Ex) Back-trajectories, Forest fire activity, Source regions,

Meteorology, Levels of other substances• Natural, Background, and Transboundary influences

are removed from final assessed values.Forest Fires and Back Trajectories for air parcel arriving at Edmonton

on 19 Aug 2010 at 18:00 MDT.

Monitors

500

700

850

920.605

Annual Assessment DemoStep 1: Calculate 24-Hour Average Values

Aug 14: 6.2 μg/m3

Aug 15: 8.0 μg/m3

Aug 16: 12.0 μg/m3

Aug 17: 9.8 μg/m3

Aug 18: 13.2 μg/m3

Aug 19: 159.6 μg/m3

Aug 20: 87.5 μg/m3

Aug 21: 73.2 μg/m3

Aug 22: 37.1 μg/m3

Aug 23: 21.4 μg/m3

Aug 24: 15.9 μg/m3

Aug 25: 16.6 μg/m3

Data from Edmonton in August 2010

Annual Assessment DemoStep 2: Rank Daily Values from High to Low

Aug 14: 6.2 μg/m3

Aug 15: 8.0 μg/m3

Aug 16: 12.0 μg/m3

Aug 17: 9.8 μg/m3

Aug 18: 13.2 μg/m3

Aug 19: 159.6 μg/m3

Aug 20: 87.5 μg/m3

Aug 21: 73.2 μg/m3

Aug 22: 37.1 μg/m3

Aug 23: 21.4 μg/m3

Aug 24: 15.9 μg/m3

Aug 25: 16.6 μg/m3

98th Percentile – 8th highest

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Annual Assessment Demo Step 3: Analyse and Remove Events

Aug 19: 159.6 μg/m3

Aug 20: 87.5 μg/m3

Aug 21: 73.2 μg/m3

May 18: 39.9 μg/m3

Jan 29: 67.9 μg/m3

Feb 24: 59.1 μg/m3

Jan 28: 57.9 μg/m3

Jan 19: 56.9 μg/m3

Dec 6: 47.8 μg/m3

Dec 7: 46.4 μg/m3

Jan 20: 44.0 μg/m3

Mar 1: 43.8 μg/m3

Forest Fire Smoke

Forest Fire Smoke

Forest Fire Smoke

Wintertime Smog

Wintertime Smog

Wintertime Smog

Wintertime Smog

Wintertime Smog

Wintertime Smog

Wintertime Smog

Wintertime Smog

Not Analysed

Aug 19: 159.6 μg/m3

Aug 20: 87.5 μg/m3

Aug 21: 73.2 μg/m3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Annual Assessment Demo Step 4: Recalculate Annual 98th Percentile

Aug 19: 159.6 μg/m3

Aug 20: 87.5 μg/m3

Aug 21: 73.2 μg/m3

May 18: 39.9 μg/m3

Jan 29: 67.9 μg/m3

Feb 24: 59.1 μg/m3

Jan 28: 57.9 μg/m3

Jan 19: 56.9 μg/m3

Dec 6: 47.8 μg/m3

Dec 7: 46.4 μg/m3

Jan 20: 44.0 μg/m3

Mar 1: 43.8 μg/m3

98th Percentile

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Annual Assessment Results PM2.5 – 2008-2010

2008-10 Assessment for Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

(background, trans-boundary and natural influences removed)

CWS Exceedance Action Level

Management Plan Action Level

Surveillance Action Level

Monitoring Action Level

Data not available

Squares represents the Edmonton and Calgary Census Metropolitan Areas (CMAs).

Asterisk (✱) indicates incomplete data set.

CWS Exceedance Action Level

Management Plan Action Level

Surveillance Action Level

Monitoring Action Level

Data not available

Squares represents the Edmonton and Calgary Census Metropolitan Areas (CMAs).

Asterisk (✱) indicates incomplete data set.

CITYof

EDMONTON

CITYof

CALGARY

Central

Northwest

East

CentralEast ✱✱

✱

✱

✱

✱

Fort Chipewyan

Fort McKay

Tomahawk

Fort McMurray - Patricia McInnes

Syncrude UE-1

Fort Saskatchewan

Elk Island

CALGARY

Red Deer

Fort McMurray - Athabasca Valley

EDMONTON

Lethbridge

Lamont

Grande Prairie

Genesee

Medicine Hat

Powers

South

Drayton Valley

EvergreenPark

Beaverlodge

Smokey Heights

Cold Lake

✱Anzac

Caroline

Edson

CITYof

EDMONTON

CITYof

CALGARY

Central

Northwest

East

CentralEast ✱✱

✱

✱

✱

✱

Fort Chipewyan

Fort McKay

Tomahawk


Syncrude UE-1

Fort Saskatchewan

Elk Island

CALGARY

Red Deer


EDMONTON

Lethbridge

Lamont

Grande Prairie

Genesee

Medicine Hat

Powers

South

Drayton Valley

EvergreenPark

Beaverlodge

Smokey Heights

Cold Lake

✱Anzac

Caroline

CITYof

EDMONTON

CITYof

CALGARY

CITYof

EDMONTON

CITYof

CALGARY

Central

Northwest

East

CentralEast ✱✱

✱

✱

✱

✱

Fort Chipewyan

Fort McKay

Tomahawk


Syncrude UE-1

Fort Saskatchewan

Elk Island

CALGARY

Red Deer


EDMONTON

Lethbridge

Lamont

Grande Prairie

Genesee

Medicine Hat

Powers

South

Drayton Valley

EvergreenPark

Beaverlodge

Smokey Heights

Cold Lake

✱Anzac

Caroline

Edson

Annual Assessment Results PM2.5 – 2009-2011

Annual Assessment ResultsRed Deer Riverside

• Prior to 2008 – 2010 assessment period, PM2.5 was below Management Plan action level.

• 2009 – 2011 assessment indicated that Red Deer Riverside was at the Mandatory Plan action level.– Within the Edmonton CMA, some stations exceed,

however, the CWS applies to the CMA, therefore Edmonton remained in achievement.

01-03 02-04 03-05 04-06 05-07 06-08 07-09 08-10 09-11 10-120.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

Assessment Period

PM2.

5 Co

ncen

trati

on (u

g/m

3)


Planning Trigger

Exceedance TriggerRed Deer Riverside CWS assessments (2001-2012)

Transition to CAAQS:Take-home Messages

• CAAQS Framework– modeled after AB Framework; proactive– lower thresholds– Annual PM metric added– Red Deer riverside would not meet hourly or annual

average CAAQs based on 2010-2012– If included in LUF regional plans, would have a regulatory

mechanism for implementing CAAQS (previously no regulatory backstop)

The Parkland Airshed Management Zoneand Particulate Matter

Red Deer PM2.5 Information SessionNovember 28, 2014

What is PAMZ?• PAMZ is a non-profit society that monitors air quality and

manages air quality issues in west central Alberta• Comprised of representation from all three stakeholder

groups – Industry, Government, & Public/NGO• Approximately 50 member organizations and a dozen

public members at large• Operating Guidelines:

– Openness and Transparency– Inclusiveness and Collaboration– Consensus Decision-making

• Has a formal process for identifying and addressing air quality issues (monitoring, workshops, CASA, etc.)

Formed in 1997, began monitoring in 19993rd of 9 Provincial Airshed Zones42,000 km2, 2014 pop. estimate 273,000

Continuous Monitoring

Passive Monitoring

Air Quality Monitoring Program

4 Continuous StationsEach w/ SO2, TRS, NO2-NO-NOX, O3, THC-CH4, PM2.5 (Red Deer H2S & CO, NO TRS)2 PermanentRed Deer (urban) & Caroline (rural)

2 PortablesMartha Kostuch and David McCoyRespond to stakeholder issues, fills geographic (towns > 5,000) and technical data gaps

35 Station Zone-Wide Passive Monitoring NetworkSO2, NO2 and O3

PAMZ Passive Air Quality Monitoring Sites

PAMZ Air Quality Monitoring Sites (ALL)

www.pamz.org

PAMZ and PM

2000 - Began Monitoring PM10 and PM2.5 at Caroline & the Martha Kostuch Portable using Automated Dichotomous Filter-Based Monitor (Partisol 2025) operated on a 6-Day NAPS Schedule

2005 - Replaced Partisols at Caroline & Martha with BAM 1020 Semi-Continuous PM2.5 Monitor (Hourly Average based on 55 minutes) The Met One Instruments Model BAM-1020 was the firstinstrument to obtain U.S. EPA Federal Equivalent Method (FEM)designation for continuous PM2.5 monitoring- Added BAM 1020 to David McCoy Portable

- Took over Red Deer Riverside Station Operations from ESRD which included a TEOM 1400 PM2.5 Monitor

PAMZ and PM2007 - ESRD replaced TEOM 1400 with TEOM SMS, no collocated

monitoring period (monitor needed by ESRD elsewhere) - No discernable change in PM2.5 levels associated with the TEOM changeover

2009 - ESRD replaced TEO SMS with TEOM FDMS, no collocated monitoring period (monitor needed by ESRD elsewhere)

2010 - Recommended that City of Red Deer ‘s Environmental Master Plan use the CASA PM2.5 Framework management trigger (20 µg/M3) based on 2006-08 CWS assessment and preliminary 2007-2009 estimate- Suspected we may have a step-change in PM2.5 levels but was not confirmed until a detailed examination of wintertime PM2.5 exceedance events was conducted in the fall of 2010

TEOM SMS TEOM FDMS

PAMZ and PM2011 - Commissioned NOVUS Study to better understand higher

average PM2.5 levels at Riverside and high PM2.5 episodes observed in winters of 2010 and 2011- NOVUS study focused on impact of Civic Yards relocation – bus barns and increased vehicle traffic- Recognized there was probably an impact from changeover to the TEOM FDMS, but without collocated monitoring over the winters of 2010 and 2011 could only infer from collocation studies at other sites (Edmonton South)- Began pursuing a 2nd monitoring site for Red Deer in a primarily residential area away from the River Valley and any local influences from the Civic Yards and Riverside Industrial Park

Pre 2009

Post 2009

Novus Study“Overall, the impact on the Riverside Dr. monitoring station due to

increased vehicular traffic attributed to the re-location of the Red Deer

Civic Cards is an increase in particulate emissions of 13 to 20%.

“The combined effect of buses and increase in traffic caused an

increase in maximum hourly and daily PM2.5 concentrations at the

monitoring station, particularly in the wintertime.”

“The modeled seasonal variation patterns of PM2.5 levels are aligned

with the FDMS PM2.5 measurement.”

The study did not look at changes in PM2.5 levels associated with

changeover from TEOM SMS to TEOM FDMS

PAMZ and PM

2012 - Began continuous monitoring at Lancaster Site to determine site’s suitability for permanent site (David McCoy November 2012 – March 2013, Martha Kostuch July 2013 – March 2014)- Some correlation between Riverside and Lancaster winter exceedance events and monitoring at PAMZ’s Innisfail and Crossfield-Carstairs monitoring locations

2013 - Replaced TEOM FDMS PM2.5 monitor at Red Deer Riverside with Sharp 5030 (FDMS unit still operating at station for collocated monitoring study) Preliminary results - TEOM FDMS hourly average reads 2.7 µg/M3 higher than Sharp 5030


Planning Trigger

Exceedance Trigger

PAMZ and PM2014 - Heavily involved in development of ESRD PM2.5 Response

- Replacing BAM 1020 at Caroline with Sharp 5030 (December) - Establishing 2nd permanent station in Red Deer at Lancaster - Application approved Nov 12, decision advertised Nov. 14, appeal period ends today, tentative installation week of Dec 1- Fencing, landscaping & permanent power installation will be accomplished in Spring 2015

Future - Implement any actions assigned to PAMZ by the PM2.5 Response Plan-Closely monitor PM2.5 levels at Riverside and Lancaster sites- Replace BAM1020 at Lancaster with Sharp 5030

- Speciation study of PM at Riverside and/or Lancaster?

Lacombe Site

PAMZ in 2014Maintain operation of PAMZ continuous and passive air quality monitoring

networks

Establish 2nd permanent station in Red Deer at Lancaster

Assisting AESRD on development of PM2.5 Response

PAMZ Technical Working Group, PAMZ Communications Committee, ESRD Advisory Group

Continuing implementation of PAMZ Ozone Management Plan (Year 6)Maintaining its public education and outreach programs Action Hero Awards - June 4 (Clean Air Day) Held a Vehicle Emissions Testing Clinic in Red Deer - June 4Maintained Martha Kostuch Education Scholarship - Alex Johnson)Photo Contest (Nov 30 Deadline)

Particulate Matter 101 Red Deer Particulate Matter Information Session Matthew Parsons Air Quality...

Documents

Transcript of Particulate Matter 101 Red Deer Particulate Matter Information Session Matthew Parsons Air Quality...