PM2.5 in the Upper Midwest

Michael Koerber

Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium

Cite: The Health Effects of Air Pollution on Children, Dr. Michael Kleinman, UC-Irvine, September 19, 2000

PM2.5 particles are so small that 30 of them side-by-side would barely equal the width of a human hair (graphic courtesy of U.S. Department of Energy)

PM2.5 v. PM10 v. TSP

Cite: NARSTO Fine Particle Assessment Review Draft, August 15, 2001

PM NAAQS

• TSP (1971):• Annual = 75 ug/m3

• 24-hour = 260/150 ug/m3

• PM10 (July 1987):• Annual = 50 ug/m3

• 24-hour = 150 ug/m3

• PM2.5 (July 1997): • Annual = 15 ug/m3

• 24-hour = 65 ug/m3 (98th percentile)

Regulatory Schedule

• 2002: 3 years data available (‘99 - ’01)• Dec 2003: Finalize review of PM NAAQS• 2003-4: State recommendations for

designating nonattainment areas• 2004-5: EPA designates areas (per

TEA-21 legislation)• 2007-8: States submit SIPs with control

strategies for PM2.5 and haze

PM2.5 Monitoring Data

• State Monitors • FRMs (filter-based), continuous, speciation

• IMPROVE (rural)

• Special Studies• Upper Ohio River Valley Study (DOE)• Midwestern Aerosol Characterization Study

(EPRI)

IMPROVE (rural sites)

Seney NWR, Michigan

Key Points• Compliance with NAAQS:

– nonattainment of annual standard likely over broad region of eastern U.S. (and CA), including across IL-IN-OH-SE MI

• Data analyses show…– Temporally: (1) concentrations relatively consistent throughout the year,

with some seasonal variation (higher levels during winter [urban] and summer; and (2) daily concentrations present public health issues

– Spatially: regional contributions dominate– Chemically: (1) sulfates and organics (urban) dominate, and (2) nitrates

important during winter

• PM2.5 - regional haze - ozone related, which suggests need for integrated SIP planning

Annual Average Concentrations FRM Data (1999 - 2000)

Annual Average Concentrations FRM Data (1999 - 2000)

24-Hour Average Concentrations FRM Data (1999 - 2000)

Number of Sites > NAAQS1999 - 2000

Conceptual Model of PM2.5

• Spatial Variations

• Temporal Variations

• Chemical Variations

• Meteorological Conditions

• Multi-Pollutant Relationships (PM2.5-haze-ozone)

Annual Average Concentrations IMPROVE/CASTNet Data (1997 - 1999)

Urban v. Rural(Annual Average Concentrations)

Urban v. Rural(DOE Upper Ohio River Valley Study)

Cite: Semi-Annual Technical Progress Report, ATS, Oct. 31, 2001

Urban v. Rural

Air Quality Index

Category PM2.5 O3 (8-hour)Good 0 - 15ug/m3 0 - 64ppbModerate 15 - 40 65 - 84Unhealthy for sensitive groups 40 - 65 85 - 104Unhealthy 65 - 150 105 -1 24Very unhealthy 150 - 250 125 - 374

High Daily ConcentrationsEffect on Public Health

Ozone v. PM2.5 AQI Days1/1/99 - 9/30/01

Chemical Composition - Rural Sites IMPROVE/CASTNet Data (1997 - 1999)

Chemical Composition - Rural

Chemical Composition - Rural

Chemical Composition - Rural/Urban

Meteorological Conditions (Back Trajectories)

Contoured Trajectories: Cincinnati

Regression Trees (met only):Cincinnati

northerly winds,low wind speed

TerminalNode 1

STD = 8.271Avg = 21.623

N = 30

TerminalNode 2

STD = 5.634Avg = 13.637

N = 109

Node 2WSPD_MAX <= 4.850STD = 7.103Avg = 15.360

N = 139

TerminalNode 3

STD = 8.895Avg = 22.713

N = 165

Node 1VWIND_ME <= 0.178STD = 8.913Avg = 19.351

N = 304

southerly winds

northerly winds, high wind speed

PM2.5 v. Visibility Ozone v. Visibility

Wrap-Up

• Summary of Key Points

• Future Issues

Key Points• Compliance with NAAQS:

– nonattainment of annual standard likely over broad region of eastern U.S. (and CA), including across IL-IN-OH-SE MI

• Data analyses show…– Temporally: (1) concentrations relatively consistent throughout the year,

with some seasonal variation (higher levels during winter [urban] and summer; and (2) daily concentrations present public health issues

– Spatially: regional contributions dominate– Chemically: (1) sulfates and organics (urban) dominate, and (2) nitrates

important during winter

• PM2.5 - regional haze - ozone related, which suggests need for integrated SIP planning

Future Issues

• Technical– More data analysis (source apportionment)– Understanding response to emission reductions

• Programmatic– Public outreach (PM2.5 and ozone)– Nonattainment designations– PM-coarse