Particulate Matter and its Sources in Georgia

Sangil Lee

Particulate Matters

• PM10 (<10 m) regulated due to its health concerns.

• PM2.5 (<2.5 m) believed to cause the severe health problems (premature mortality, respiratory, cardiovascular disease).

• Recently, EPA established annual (15 g/m3)and 24 hours (<65 g/m3) NAAQS for PM2.5.

chemical Speciation Trends Network (STN)

• Characterizing annual, seasonal, and spatial trends of PM2.5.

• Monitoring air quality and the progress of control programs.

• Developing emission control strategies.• Comparing the chemical speciation data to

those from other network studies.

National PM2.5(Annual Mean) Trends2001~2003

50

45

40

35

30

25

-120 -110 -100 -90 -80 -70 -60

50

45

40

35

30

25

-120 -110 -100 -90 -80 -70 -60

36

35

34

33

32

31

30-86 -85 -84 -83 -82 -81 -80

2001 2002

2003 Georgia, 2001

50

45

40

35

30

25

-120 -110 -100 -90 -80 -70 -60

Exceed Annual Standard (>15 g/m3)

32

28

24

20

16

12

8

4

0

g /m

3

PM2.5(primary) and Precursor Emissions1999

PM2.5 SO2

NH3 NOx VOCs

from www.EPA.gov

Variation of PM2.5 in Georgia2002~2003

36

35

34

33

32

31

-86 -85 -84 -83 -82 -81 -80

Richmond

Muscogee

Floyd

Dekalb

Coffee

Clarke

ChathamBibb

Monitoring Site

Variation of PM2.5 in Georgia2002~2003

36

35

34

33

32

31

-86 -85 -84 -83 -82 -81 -80

Richmond

Muscogee

Floyd

Dekalb

Coffee

Clarke

ChathamBibb

Monitoring Site

Correlation of Major Species

PM Dekalb Clarke Floyd Bibb Muscogee Richmond ChathamDekalbClarke 0.93Floyd 0.81 0.82Bibb 0.80 0.80 0.63Muscogee 0.66 0.67 0.66 0.60Richmond 0.79 0.80 0.65 0.81 0.52Chatham 0.49 0.45 0.24 0.48 0.51 0.53Coffee 0.48 0.46 0.29 0.56 0.53 0.48 0.70

SO4 Dekalb Clarke Floyd Bibb Muscogee Richmond ChathamDekalbClarke 0.92Floyd 0.82 0.78Bibb 0.76 0.80 0.65Muscogee 0.80 0.80 0.77 0.86Richmond 0.81 0.81 0.71 0.84 0.78Chatham 0.32 0.34 0.22 0.42 0.45 0.52Coffee 0.33 0.34 0.22 0.48 0.55 0.38 0.64

NH4 Dekalb Clarke Floyd Bibb Muscogee Richmond ChathamDekalbClarke 0.91Floyd 0.83 0.78Bibb 0.75 0.81 0.60Muscogee 0.78 0.83 0.68 0.86Richmond 0.77 0.77 0.68 0.76 0.70Chatham 0.29 0.34 0.20 0.46 0.48 0.46Coffee 0.37 0.39 0.22 0.54 0.58 0.36 0.67

NO3 Dekalb Clarke Floyd Bibb Muscogee Richmond ChathamDekalbClarke 0.87Floyd 0.82 0.78Bibb 0.84 0.70 0.62Muscogee 0.73 0.67 0.68 0.90Richmond 0.48 0.57 0.58 0.45 0.37Chatham 0.32 0.39 0.40 0.54 0.43 0.54Coffee 0.69 0.52 0.63 0.72 0.66 0.51 0.45

OC Dekalb Clarke Floyd Bibb Muscogee Richmond ChathamDekalbClarke 0.86Floyd 0.72 0.72Bibb 0.84 0.82 0.60Muscogee 0.46 0.53 0.61 0.45Richmond 0.74 0.74 0.58 0.80 0.43Chatham 0.58 0.44 0.25 0.64 0.22 0.70Coffee 0.78 0.65 0.39 0.76 0.39 0.78 0.70

EC Dekalb Clarke Floyd Bibb Muscogee Richmond ChathamDekalbClarke 0.73Floyd 0.66 0.70Bibb 0.73 0.81 0.64Muscogee 0.64 0.75 0.62 0.64Richmond 0.67 0.74 0.57 0.84 0.52Chatham 0.49 0.59 0.45 0.64 0.36 0.57Coffee 0.50 0.69 0.57 0.67 0.42 0.83 0.56

36

35

34

33

32

31

-86 -85 -84 -83 -82 -81 -80

Richmond

Muscogee

Floyd

Dekalb

Coffee

Clarke

ChathamBibb

Monitoring Site

Chemical Composition of PM2.5

(2002) 19.03 +- 8.13 g/m3

19%

3%

30%

2%9%

5%

32%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2003) 17.72 +- 7.67 g/m3

18%

4%

31%

3%9%

5%

30%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2002) 16.24 +- 7.75 g/m3

12%

2%

34%

5%9%

6%

32%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2003) 16.36 +- 7.03 g/m3

14%

3%

32%

6%9%

5%

31%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2002) 17.96 +- 8.44 g/m3

16%

3%

29%

3%10%

5%

34%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2003) 16.14 +- 7.60 g/m3

16%

3%

29%

3%10%

5%

34%

(2002) 15.45 +- 7.34 g/m3

12%

3%

37%

3%8%

3%

34%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2003) 16.34 +- 15.12 g/m3

19%

3%

37%3%

7%

3%

28%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2002) 16.28 +- 6.38 g/m3

17%

5%

34%3%

8%

4%

29%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2003) 16.50 +- 6.63 g/m3

19%

6%

32%4%

8%

4%

27%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2002) 16.67 +- 6.48 g/m3

13%

3%

36%

3%9%

5%

31%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2003) 16.28 +- 8.51 g/m3

15%

3%

31%

3%10%

5%

33%

(2003) 11.58 +- 5.63 g/m3

18%

4%

33%3%

7%

4%

31%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2002) 14.87 +- 6.41 g/m3

10%

5%

37%

4%7%

4%

33%

Uniden

Others

OC

EC

NH4+

NO3-

SO42-

(2003) 14.77 +- 5.27 g/m3

11%

4%

36%

5%8%

4%

32%Uniden

Others

OC

ECNH4+

NO3-

SO42-

Rome, Floyd Decatur, Dekalb Athens, Clarke

Columbus, Muscogee Macon, Bibb Augusta, Richmond

Douglas, Coffee Savannah, Chatham

Source Apportionmentwith Chemical Mass Balance

• Quantify the source contribution to the receptor.• Cik =fijSjk i = 1,…n (chemical species) j = 1,…,m (sources), k = 1,…,l (samples).

Cij : observed conc. of species i in sample k. fij : fraction of species i in source j. Sjk : conc. of from species i in source k.

• Assumption: 1) compositions of source emissions are constant, 2) chemical species do not react with each other, 3) All sources contributing significantly to the receptor have been included in the calculation, 4) the number of sources is less than or equal to the number of species, 5) the source profiles are sufficiently different from one another, 6) measurement uncertainties are random, uncorrelated, and normally distributed.

j = 1

m

Source Profiles for CMB

1.0E-06

1.0E-05

1.0E-04

1.0E-03

1.0E-02

1.0E-01

1.0E+00Cem Kiln Coal PP

1.0E-06

1.0E-05

1.0E-04

1.0E-03

1.0E-02

1.0E-01

1.0E+00

SB

AS AL

BA

BR

CD

CA

CR

CO

CU CL

GA

FE

PB IN MN

MO NI

MG

HG

AU LA PH SE

SN TI

VA SI

AG

ZN

SR

SU

RB

KP

YT

NA

ZR

NH

4

Na K

OC

NO

3

EC

SO

4 Cl

PD TL

UR

Diesel V Gasoline V

1.0E-05

1.0E-04

1.0E-03

1.0E-02

1.0E-01

1.0E+00Wood Burning Meat Cooking

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30SOILDUST

Floyd, 18.33 +- 7.84 g/m3

6.52

0.37

1.01

2.850.750.39

0.55

5.21

0.520.16

UnxexplainCem Kiln(NH4)2SO4NH4NO3Diesel VehicleGasoline VehicleWood burningSoil dustMeat cookCoal Power plant

Dekalb, 15.58 +- 6.87 g/m31.32

0.47

4.77

0.290.37

0.74 1.05

0.98

0.12

5.47

UnxexplainCem Kiln(NH4)2SO4NH4NO3Diesel VehicleGasoline VehicleWood burningSoil dustMeat cookCoal Power plant

Clarke, 17.02 +- 8.20 g/m3

6.54

0.20

1.24

1.760.620.440.58

4.60

0.64

0.39

UnxexplainCem Kiln(NH4)2SO4NH4NO3Diesel VehicleGasoline VehicleWood burningSoil dustMeat cookCoal Power plant

Muscogee, 14.66 +- 6.67 g/m3

0.170.23

5.08

0.44 0.680.271.86

0.53

0.13

5.27

UnxexplainCem Kiln(NH4)2SO4NH4NO3Diesel VehicleGasoline VehicleWood burningSoil dustMeat cookCoal Power plant

Bibb, 15.85 +- 6.52 g/m3

5.18

0.52

0.64

1.710.730.71

0.67

4.91

0.470.32

UnxexplainCem Kiln(NH4)2SO4NH4NO3Diesel VehicleGasoline VehicleWood burningSoil dustMeat cookCoal Power plant

Richmond, 16.35 +- 7.57 g/m3

0.160.26

5.32

0.470.84 0.44 1.56

0.88

0.15

6.28

UnxexplainCem Kiln(NH4)2SO4NH4NO3Diesel VehicleGasoline VehicleWood burningSoil dustMeat cookCoal Power plant

Coffee, 12.23 +- 5.29 g/m30.10

0.02

4.03

0.46

0.98 0.161.86

0.53

0.16

3.93

UnxexplainCem Kiln(NH4)2SO4NH4NO3Diesel VehicleGasoline VehicleWood burningSoil dustMeat cookCoal Power plant

Chatham, 15.63 +- 5.74 g/m3

5.28

0.28

0.65

1.140.830.99

0.48

5.09

0.32 0.59

UnxexplainCem Kiln(NH4)2SO4NH4NO3Diesel VehicleGasoline VehicleWood burningSoil dustMeat cookCoal Power plant

Summary

• Metro-areas have higher PM2.5 mass than NAAQS level( >15g/m3).

• The higher correlation, the closer location.• Sulfate and Organic Carbon in chemical

composition.• Secondary and Wood Burning in sources.