I. Title Page
Title:
Evaluation of Prescribed Burn Impacts on Air Quality and Visibility
in the Lake Tahoe Basin
Subtheme this proposal is
responding to
Theme: Air Quality
Subtheme: Assessing the impacts of fire on air quality
Principal Investigator and
Receiving Institution
L.-W. Antony Chen, Ph.D.
Division of Atmospheric Sciences
Desert Research Institute
2215 Raggio Parkway
Reno, NV 89512
Phone: 775-674-7028
Fax: 775-674-7009
Email: antony@dri.edu
Mark C. Green, Ph.D.
Division of Atmospheric Sciences
Desert Research Institute
2215 Raggio Parkway
Reno, NV 89512
Phone: 775-674-7118
Fax: 775-674-7009
Email: Mark.Green@dri.edu
Co-Principal Investigator
Agency Collaborator
Grants Contact Person
Funding requested:
Total cost share (value of
financial and in-kind
contributions):
Xiaoliaong Wang, Ph.D.
Division of Atmospheric Sciences
Desert Research Institute
2215 Raggio Parkway
Reno, NV 89512
Phone: 775-674-7177
Fax: 775-674-7009
Email: xiaoliang.wang@dri.edu
N/A
Lycia Ronchetti
Business Manager
Division of Atmospheric Sciences
Desert Research Institute
2215 Raggio Parkway
Reno, NV 89512
Phone: 775-673-7411
Fax:
Email: Lycia.Ronchetti@dri.edu
$190,100
$47,715
0
II. Proposal Narrative
a. Project Abstract
Prescribed burning that is widely used for fuel reduction in the Tahoe basin potentially impact air and
water quality, visibility, and human exposure of air toxics. A thorough evaluation of this impact has not
been achieved due to lack of field measurements for pile-/under-burn emissions and spatiotemporal
distribution of smoke plumes. This project will employ a unique combination of source and ambient
monitoring systems and satellite remote sensing data to address the knowledge gap. Source
measurements will yield emission factors of criteria pollutants including particulate matter (PM) and
ozone (O3) precursors, as well as particle size distribution, chemical composition, and light absorption
coefficient. Ambient PM10/PM2.5 measurements will be made at five sites representative of community
exposure in the basin. The prescribed burning impact on air quality/visibility will be linked to burn and
meteorological parameters leading to recommendations for future burning strategies (e.g., burn window,
season, location [in- and out- side the basin], and technique). The project will also establish a procedure
to evaluate air quality through satellite data on a routine, cost effective basis.
b. Justification Statement
Lake Tahoe is a unique environmental asset that has been designated an “Outstanding National Water
Resource” by the US Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) to protect its water quality and its
scenic characteristics. An increasing concern to resource management agencies in the basin is the
suspended PM and O3 that impact air quality and visibility. Biomass burning could be an important
source of PM and O3 precursors, as Kuhns et al. (2004) attributed ~33% of the PM10 (particles with
aerodynamic diameter ≤ 10 μm) mass emissions in the Tahoe Basin to wild and managed forest fires.
PM2.5 and O3 precursors (i.e., carbon monoxide [CO], nitric oxide [NO], and volatile organic
compounds [VOCs]) are pollutants subject to regulation by the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and the 1999 Regional Haze Rule (RHR). Particles from biomass burning are enriched with
black carbon (BC), which is mostly produced in combustion flames (i.e., dark smoke from a fire) (Chen et
al., 2006; 2007). If deposited into lake water, BC can attenuate light 10 – 20 times more efficiently than
dust particles, thus having significant impact on water clarity. In addition, Carignan et al. (2000) noted
that fires release mobile ions such as soluble potassium (K+), chlorine (Cl–), phosphate (PO43-), sulfate
(SO42–), ammonium (NH4+), and nitrate (NO3–). Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P), in both organic and
inorganic compounds, are the most important nutrients affecting algal growth in the lake (Goldman et al.,
1993; Goldman et al., 1993). Murphy and Knopp (2000) reported that atmospheric deposition accounts
for approximately 55% of N and 27% of P load into Lake Tahoe.
Prescribed burns have been used as one means to control fuel loads in Lake Tahoe forests, but the
environmental impact of these burns has not been thoroughly evaluated. This project responds to the Air
Quality Subtheme 3b: Assessing the impacts of fire on air quality, particularly focusing on the local and
regional impacts of pile- and under-burns on ambient PM2.5 (particles with aerodynamic diameter ≤ 2.5
μm) level, chemical composition, O3 precursor concentration, visibility, and potential for deposition. This
project will assess the role of meteorology and burn technique on fire impact zone through measurement,
dispersion modeling, and data analysis. Results from this project are expected to contribute to best
management practices (BMPs) for mitigating the environmental impact of prescribed burning.
c. Background and Problem Statement
More than 100 years of wildland fire suppression has altered ecosystems that evolved with fire and
has led to a large buildup of biomass fuels. Land managers would like to reduce fuel loads through
prescribed and, in some cases, natural burns as well as through other vegetation and ecological
management methods. Prescribed burning reduces the surface fuels using understory and/or pile burning.
Underburning is the application of surface fire below an overstory of large trees and is used to restore
forest health and to mimic the historic process of low-intensity fire. Pile burning is used for fuel
1
reduction in areas not suitable for underburns. For safety considerations near residential areas, slash pile
burning is usually the best treatment method following thinning treatments in overly dense stands that
would burn too intensely in an underburn causing unacceptable levels of tree scorch and mortality.
In the Lake Tahoe Basin prescribed burning is carried out under strict guidelines that follow a
prescription from the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit (LTBMU) and other agencies such as the Lake
Tahoe Fire Protection Districts. Since 1997, thousands acres of landscape understory burns and
prescribed pile burning have been implemented on the LTBMU. Most burns were carried out in spring
and fall when numerous weather and other parameters are met. The prescribed burn areas in FY09–
FY10, for example, included four counties (Douglas, Eldorado, Placer, and Washoe) surrounding the lake
and were located in county, state, and national forest lands (Figure 1a). Many of the past and future
prescribed burns are adjacent to residential/commercial areas in Incline Village, NV, Stateline, NV, South
Lake Tahoe, CA, and Tahoe City, CA. The smoke plumes are often observable and smellable, and are
most likely adverse to visibility and human health.
I
V
IV
II
III
(a)
(b)
Figure 1. Maps of (a) LTBMU fuels treatment status and (b) MODIS satellite Lake Tahoe fire event.
The five circles in (a) indicate five population zones where ambient monitoring will be carried out as part
of this study to assess community exposure. The satellite image was acquired on 6/25/2007 during
Angora fire. White meshes in (b) indicate GOES satellite grid for AOD measurement (4 km  4 km).
Understanding the spatial and temporal distribution of pollutants released from prescribed burning is
a critical aspect to evaluate the impact of burning. This has not been achieved due to lack of a
comprehensive air monitoring network in the Tahoe basin. Efforts have been made to predict smoke
2
transport using integrated numerical models such as the CANSAC/BlueSky Smoke Forecast Model
(Brown et al., 2003; McKenzie et al., 2006; Larkin et al., 2009). However, earlier evaluations of the
BlueSky model (e.g., Adkins et al., 2003 and Berg et al. 2003) for the Hayman and Rex Creek wildfire
indicated that the BlueSky predicted PM2.5 concentrations were significantly lower than the measured
data. One of major uncertainties was attributed to PM2.5 emission factors. Emission factors could change
rapidly over the course of a burn (Chen et al., 2007; 2010), and time-integrated emission factors are not
adequate for air quality modeling (though they are more useful for developing emission inventories). It is
also not trivial to model plume rise accurately in complex terrain.
Satellite imaginary has been recommended and used to complement ground-based reporting for fire
location, timing, and scale. Smoke plumes can be resolved well by satellite, as exemplified by Figure 1b
for a wildfire event. The Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) onboard polar
orbiting satellites Terra and Aqua provides twice daily observations at a spatial resolution of ~1 km  1
km. Plume concentrations, however, can change substantially between satellite overpasses while
temporal interpolation may lead to large uncertainties. Geostationary satellites such as Geostationary
Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES) provide better temporal coverage (down to 30 min between
two snapshots). Although GOES spatial resolution is relatively coarse (e.g., 4 km  4 km), Figure 1b
shows that this resolution may still be adequate for determining the extent of smoke impact in the Tahoe
basin. The aerosol optical depth (AOD) reported by MODIS or GOES represents column-integrated PM
loading, which often correlates reasonably with surface PM10/PM2.5 concentrations during pollution
episodes (e.g., Green et al., 2009). The regression slopes, however, are event-specific. The AODPM10/PM2.5 relationship for Tahoe burning events needs to be established if satellite data are to be used to
infer burning impacts on air quality.
Prescribed burning in the Lake Tahoe Basin will continue. It is one important tool for the Forest
Service to effectively reduce the threat from wildfire and manage the forest areas for a more fire resistant
condition. Efforts need to be made, however, to reduce the impact of smoke resulting from prescribed
burning on air and water quality in the basin. This includes two aspects: 1) to understand the emission
and transport of particles/gases from prescribed burning as a function of burn type and weather
conditions; and 2) to establish satellite remote sensing as a complementary tool for monitoring regional
air quality and visibility on a routine, cost effective manner. These tasks will require conducting an
intensive monitoring program for selected prescribed burns in the Tahoe basin.
d. Goals, Objectives, and Hypotheses
This proposed research seeks to improve our understanding of the contribution of prescribed fires to
air pollutant levels in the basin. The goal will be realized by meeting the following research objectives:
1) Survey burn type (e.g., pile or understory), fuel loading and conditions (moisture content, carbon and
nitrogen content), and weather pattern for each of the selected burn events.
2) Apply a comprehensive source monitoring system to characterize particle and gas emission/ambient
concentration/particle size distribution in plumes immediately downwind of the burn events.
3) Assess burn pollutant transport through secondary monitoring sites representative of community
exposure in the basin.
4) Establish and verify procedures for satellite remote sensing of regional air quality/visibility as a tool
for assessing prescribed burning impacts.
One major hypothesis of this study is that smoke plumes from a confined burn area can influence a
broad downwind region through turbulent mixing within the atmospheric boundary layer (ABL). Pile
burns could affect air quality more than understory burns due to more intensive fires causing greater
emission rates and totals. For the same reason, burning in fall when fuel moisture is lower would show
greater impacts. It is also hypothesized that incremental PM2.5 concentration can serve as a
3
surrogate/indicator for prescribed burning impact on air quality.
e. Approach, Methodology and Location of Research
The experimental approach is designed according to the research objectives:
Task 1: Survey burn and weather parameters for each of the selected burn events
The field studies will investigate impacts of both pile and understory burning. We will work with
personnel from LTBMU and other agencies to select burn events in fall 2011 through summer 2012. We
have been working with the Forest Service for a SNPLMA Round 7 project: “Potential Nutrient
Emissions From Prescribed Fire in the Lake Tahoe Basin” (Chen et al., 2010). Effort will be made to
study burns both inside and outside the basin since they have different transport patterns. Based on forest
ecology of the Tahoe basin our choice for measurement should cover four major fuel types: 1) manzanitadominated; 2) sagebrush-dominated; 3) grass- and herbaceous species-dominated; 4) pine needle litterdominated. It is expected that 5 – 10 individual burn events will be investigated.
Field survey conducted prior to each burn will include fuel type, load, and moisture content. Fuel
loading in particular burn plots will be estimated by line transect sampling (McRae et al., 1979; Taylor
and Fonda, 1990) or photo series methods (Reeves 1988; Ottmar et al., 2000). Moisture content of fuel
will be determined by measuring the mass loss after holding the fuel sample at 90 ºC overnight. Fuel C
and N content will be determined by a FlashEA1112 CHNS-O analyzer (Thermo Scientific Inc., MA,
USA) at DRI.
Meteorological data covering the entire burn event (from 24 hrs before the burn to 24 hrs after the
burn) will be acquired through the Western Regional Climate Center (www.wrcc.dri.edu) and archived
for data analysis. Weather forecasting will be used to locate the source monitoring system.
Task 2: Quantify particle/gas emission factors, plume concentration, and particle size distribution
A DRI “In-plume” monitoring system will be located immediately (5 – 100 m) downwind of the burn
plot to 1) characterize pollutants emitted as a function of time and 2) determine burn pollutant
concentrations relative to PM2.5. Temporally-resolved emission factors will be useful for modeling
pollution transport over the basin. On the other hand, concentrations of any pollutant further downwind
may be estimated from PM2.5 concentration if the ratio of the pollutant to PM2.5 does not change.
Figure 2 illustrates the In-plume system (Wang et al., 2010). It draws air from biomass burning
plumes, dilutes it with filtered air, and quantifies carbon dioxide (CO2), CO, NO, nitrogen dioxide (NO2),
sulfur dioxide (SO2), total volatile organic compounds (VOCs), size-resolved PM including PM10 and
PM2.5, BC, and visibility (through light extinction coefficient) on a continuous basis with time resolutions
of 1 – 6 seconds. Particle size information is particularly useful for determining the potential for
deposition. Time-integrated samples by filters will be acquired for laboratory analyses of PM2.5 and
selected hydrocarbon (HC). PM2.5 speciation includes mass, elements (Na to U), water-soluble ions (K+,
PO43-, SO42–, NH4+, NO3–, etc.), organic carbon (OC), elemental carbon (EC), and air toxics such as
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The In-plume system is modularized and packaged into five
pelican boxes, and is transportable by a small pickup truck. The entire system is powered by two 12 Volt
(V) deep cycle marine batteries (EnerSys Energy Products Inc., Reading, PA, USA).
From the In-plume measurements, fuel-based emission factors can be derived using a carbon balance
approach (Andreae and Merlet, 2001):
EFx 
[ x]
FC biomass
 ([CCO2 ]  [CCO ]  [CHC ]  [CPM ])
(1)
where FCbiomass is the carbon fraction in the biomass, and [C]CO2, [C]CO, etc. are the carbon concentrations
of various species in the smoke (background subtracted), and [x] is the concentration of species x (also
4
background subtracted) of interest in the smoke. The EFs are expressed in terms of mass of pollutant
emitted per unit mass of fuel burned. If multiplied by the biomass density (kg biomass burned/acre of
burned area) the fuel-based emission factor of Eq. (1) can be transformed into an activity-based emission
factor (kg pollutant emitted/hectare of burn).
To allow the science team from DRI to participate in field measurements during prescribed burn
events all personnel will take the US Forest Service’s Basic 32 Fire course (J. Washington, Fuels
Battalion Chief, Fire & Aviation Management, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, pers. comm., 2007).
Sample Inlet
1 L/min
DustTrak
(PM10)
1 L/min
5 L/min
DustTrak
(PM2.5)
1.2 L/min
0.7 L/min
0.05 L/min
3 L/min
2.08 L/min
5 L/min
5 L/min
5 L/min
0.01 L/min
1 L/min
0.5 L/min
0.16 L/min
Diluted
Background 0.5 L/min
PP Systems CO2 sensors
Undiluted
0.5 L/min
5 L/min
MiniVol
Figure 2. Schematic diagrams of the In-plume monitoring system and ambient monitoring suite (upperright corner). The listed In-plume flow rates are for operation with a dilution ratio of 40. The dilution
ratio can be adjusted according to smoke concentrations.
Task 3. Assess burn pollutant transport and community exposure in the Tahoe basin
Five mobile monitoring suites (Figure 2, upper-right corner) will be installed at five sites
representative of community exposure: 1) Incline Village, NV, 2) Round Hill/Kingsbury/Stateline, NV, 3)
South Lake Tahoe, CA, 4) Tahoma or west shore, CA, and 5) Tahoe City, CA (see Figure 1a) to assess
transport of pollutants from prescribed burning. Siting within each community will follow Chow et al.
(2002) considering sufficient operating space, access and security, and environmental control. A survey
of each community zone will be conducted in early 2011 to determine exact site location. This survey is
leveraged by an ongoing Round 10 project: “Visibility Monitoring and Standards for Lake Tahoe Basin:
Assessment of Current and Alternative Approaches” (PI: Antony Chen), which is tasked to design a
visibility monitoring network for Lake Tahoe.
Twenty-four hours prior to a targeted burn event, the mobile monitoring suites will be brought to the
sampling sites and activated. Each suite consists of paired TSI DustTraks to measure PM10 and/or PM2.5
in real time and a battery-powered MiniVol sampler (Airmetrics Inc., San Leandro, CA, USA) equipped
5
with quartz-fiber filters to collect integrated particle samples (Figure 2). An inertial impactor will be used
to remove particles greater than 2.5 m aerodynamic diameter from the MiniVol sample flow prior to PM
sample collection. The filter samples will be submitted to DRI laboratories for analysis of particle mass,
nutrient species, OC and EC, and BC (through light absorption coefficient).
The impact of prescribed burning on PM10/PM2.5 concentrations will be assessed by analyzing time
series of DustTrak measurements. The plume arrival time at each site is first estimated by the NOAA
Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory Model (http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/HYSPLIT.php).
The HYSPLIT dispersion mode with North American Mesoscale Forcast System (NAM) meteorological
data will be employed. It is acknowledged that use of HYSPLIT with the 12 km resolution of the NAM
meteorological fields provides only an approximation of actual plume transport speed and direction. We
will also use surface meteorological data (e.g. the National Weather Service [NWS] South Lake Tahoe
monitoring station) to validate plume transport direction. PM10 and PM2.5 levels prior to the plume arrival
time are considered as a primary baseline for calculating the incremental PM10/PM2.5 concentration caused
by prescribed burning. In addition, Watson and Chow (2001) demonstrated a successive moving average
subtraction method that can distinguish neighborhood versus regional contributions. Mass measured from
filters will verify PM2.5 concentrations measured by DustTrak. Biomass burning markers (e.g., EC, K+,
and PM2.5/PM10 ratio) will further verify prescribed burning contributions to PM2.5 at the sampling site.
Although other pollutants are not measured at these community sites, their concentration increases
due to burn events may be estimated from the incremental PM2.5 concentration and ratio of PM2.5 to these
pollutants determined by In-plume system near the burn. This should apply to CO, NO, BC and other
primary pollutants that have long enough atmospheric lifetimes (i.e., > 1 day) against deposition and
chemical reaction. In one day, most of the pollutants would be vented out the basin. To verify this
hypothesis, additional CO and NO analyzers will measure at one of the five sites  usually the site closest
to the burn area  side-by-side with the mobile monitoring suite. Visibility (in terms of light extinction
coefficient) is often correlated well with PM2.5 concentration (Chow et al., 2006). A nephelometer can
also be installed at this one site to evaluate the degree to which visibility can be inferred from PM2.5
measurement.
Task 4. Establish and verify procedures for satellite remote sensing of air quality
Continuous PM measurements at the community sites provide evidence of potential burning impacts
on human exposure and visibility. The impacts will be linked to various burn and meteorological
parameters. Satellite data can assess the spatiotemporal distribution in greater detail (e.g., Figure 1b), so
satellite data will also be included in the data analysis. GOES Aerosol/Smoke Product (GASP) AOD
covering each of the burn events will be obtained from the NOAA Center for Satellite Applications and
Research (STAR). Quality assurance of the satellite data have been performed by NOAA, including an
opaque cloud product to indicate block-out zones due to solar reflectance, clouds, extreme view angles,
saturation, vegetation type, and other factors. MODIS AOD has been shown to be of higher accuracy
than GOES AOD, but the data is typically available at only near 11:30 am and 1:30 pm local time. We
will compare MODIS AOD and GOES AOD and evaluate both against surface PM2.5 and PM10 data.
The GOES imagery at 30-min resolution will first be used to verify the HYSPLIT dispersion model
confirming the smoke plume arrival times. AOD calculated from GASP represents an average column
aerosol loading in a 4 km  4 km cell. Through the Kriging interpolation technique, AOD at the six
monitoring sites (one In-plume and five community) will be calculated and closely compared with surface
PM2.5 measurement. Analysis at Fresno, California has shown that the PM2.5/AOD relationship is
sensitive to ABL mixing depth and that by accounting for mixing depth, improved PM2.5/AOD
relationships can be obtained. We will use HYSPLIT mixing depths computed from NAM
meteorological model output to define the PM2.5/AOD relationship. It is also noted that an elevated
smoke plume can give high AOD with low surface PM2.5 concentrations. We can use the satellite and
surface measurements to assess whether the smoke plumes are reaching the surface.
6
The regression slopes of AOD versus PM2.5 for burn and non-burn periods and different PM2.5 loading
ranges will be determined. PM2.5 concentration over the entire Tahoe basin can therefore be mapped out
based on AOD measurements. These regression slopes will be tested for their consistency across various
burn events. This will provide an evaluation of their applicability to future prescribed burn and/or
wildfire activities. Since the satellite data is accessible to the public at no cost, this approach could be
proven valuable as a complementary PM and visibility measurement on a routine basis.
f. Relationship of the Research to Previous and Current Studies
SNPLMA funded a Round 7 project to study potential nutrient emission and deposition from
prescribed burning. Emission factors of air pollutants were found to be sensitive to fuel type and moisture
content (Chen et al., 2010). However, that study was based on >100 laboratory burn experiments. This
proposed project focuses on measuring actual burns, providing a validation to the previous results (and
emission inventories stemmed from them). The project also complements several PM and visibility
source apportionment studies conducted for Lake Tahoe, including Tahoe Source Characterization Study
(TSCS, see Kuhns et al., 2004) and three Round 10 projects (PI: D. Obrist, M. Green, and A. Chen).
g. Strategy for Engaging with Managers
The DRI research team will coordinate with LTBMU for field measurement of prescribed burn
emissions, and work closely with the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) to select community
monitoring sites. The conclusion of the project will lead to strategies to mitigate prescribed burning
impacts. In order to ensure effective use of the data obtained as part of this study the results will be
communicated to key constituents working to improve air and water quality in the basin, particularly
TRPA. Ongoing progress and results will be presented to the Tahoe Science Consortium (TSC), EPA
Region 9, TRPA, CARB, Lahontan, NDEP, UC Davis, UNR, Caltrans, and NDOT. Our assessments will
be presented at the biannual Tahoe Science Symposium to maximize communication and information
dissemination. Scientific publications in peer-reviewed journals will result from this project.
h. Deliverables and Products

A transportable, battery-powered In-plume monitoring system specifically adapted for measurement
of emissions from prescribed burning, and five mobile ambient monitoring suites for quantifying
community exposure. These systems and their measurement methods will be described in peerreviewed literature and at conferences enabling other researchers to benefit from our experiences
made during the proposed project. Such systems can be used to study wildfire impacts as well.

Emission factors for major prescribed burning activities under ambient conditions determined with a
well-documented system and measurement procedures.

Provide assessments for the impact of prescribed burning on regional air quality and visibility and
recommend strategies (e.g., burn season, location, technique, and weather conditions) for mitigating
the smoke impact.

A well-tested procedure to evaluate air quality through satellite remote sensing data.

The research results of this project will be transitioned to stakeholders including land management
agencies, state air quality agencies, regional planning organizations and others involved in state
implementation plan (SIP) formulation.
The draft final report will contain all measurement results, data analysis, conclusions, and
recommendations. Comments and suggestions on the draft report will be incorporated into the final
report, which will be delivered 3 month after the project period. Progress will be tracked through regular
e-mails and conference calls with the program manager(s). Research results will also be made available
through the internet.
7
Schedule of Milestones
The project is expected to be completed in 18 months (6/1/2011 – 12/31/2012).
Milestone/Deliverables
Prepare progress reports
Source and ambient
monitoring system
Field study – fall burns
Field study – Spring
burns
Start Date
End Date
Description
6/1/2011 12/31/2012 Submit brief progress report to Tahoe Science
Program coordinator by the 1st of July,
October, January, and April. Prepare summary
of annual accomplishments in January.
6/1/2011
8/30/2011 Configure In-plume system and mobile
sampling suites. Begin study design and
sampling plan
9/1/2011 10/31/2011 Carry out field survey and prescribed burn
measurements for fall burning events
3/1/2012
6/30/2012 Carry out field survey and prescribed burn
measurements for spring burning events
Laboratory analysis for
PM and biomass fuel
samples
Integrated Data Analysis
11/1/2011
7/30/2012 Analyze fuel and PM chemical composition
and other properties
12/1/2011
Draft Report
10/1/2012
9/30/2012 Analyze data for emission factors, pollutant
transport assessment, and remote sensing
method development
12/31/2012 Complete draft report. Draft report submitted
to TSC by 12/31/2012
Final Report
12/31/2012
3/31/2013 Complete revisions to final report and prepare
associated manuscript(s) for submission to
peer-review journal
8
References
Adkins, J.W.; O’Neill, S.M.; Rorig, M.; Ferguson, S.A.; Berg, C.M.; Hoadley, J.L. (2003). Assessing
accuracy of the BlueSky modeling framework during wildfire events. American Meteorological
Society, 5th Symposium on Fire and Forest Meteorology, Orlando, FL. Paper number J8.8
Berg, C.M.; O’Neill, S.M.; Ferguson, S.A.; Adkins, J.W. (2003). Application of the BlueSky Smoke
Modeling Framework to the Rex Creek Wildfire. American Meteorological Society, 5th
Symposium on Fire and Forest Meteorology, Orlando, FL. Paper number P5.4
Brown, T.J.; Fujioka, F.M.; Fontana, J. (2003). The California and Nevada Smoke and Air Committee
(CANSAC): An interagency partisanship to meet decision-making needs. Proceedings of
American Meteorological Society, 5th Symposium on Fire and Forest Meteorology, Orlando, FL.
Paper number J12.4.
Carignan, R.; D'Arcy, P.; Lamontagne, S. (2000). Comparative impacts of fire and forest harvesting on
water quality in Boreal Shield lakes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 57:
105-117. ISI:000089999500012.
Chen, L.-W.A.; Moosmüller, H.; Arnott, W.P.; Chow, J.C.; Watson, J.G.; Susott, R.A.; Babbitt, R.E.;
Wold, C.; Lincoln, E.; Hao, W.M. (2006). Particle emissions from laboratory combustion of
wildland fuels: In situ optical and mass measurements. Geophys. Res. Lett., 33(L04803): 1-4.
doi:10.1029/2005GL024838.
Chen, L.-W.A.; Moosmüller, H.; Arnott, W.P.; Chow, J.C.; Watson, J.G.; Susott, R.A.; Babbitt, R.E.;
Wold, C.E.; Lincoln, E.N.; Hao, W.M. (2007). Emissions from laboratory combustion of
wildland fuels: Emission factors and source profiles. Environ. Sci. Technol., 41(12): 4317-4325.
Chen, L.-W.A.; Verburg, P.; Shackelford, A.; Zhu, D.; Susfalk, R.; Chow, J.C.; Watson, J.G. (2010).
Moisture effects on carbon and nitrogen emission from burning of wildland biomass. Atmos.
Chem. Phys., 10: 6617-6625.
Chow, J.C.; Engelbrecht, J.P.; Watson, J.G.; Wilson, W.E.; Frank, N.H.; Zhu, T. (2002). Designing
monitoring networks to represent outdoor human exposure. Chemosphere, 49(9): 961-978.
Chow, J.C.; Watson, J.G.; Lowenthal, D.H.; Chen, L.-W.A.; Tropp, R.J.; Park, K.; Magliano, K.L.
(2006). PM2.5 and PM10 mass measurements in California's San Joaquin Valley. Aerosol Sci.
Technol., 40(10): 796-810.
Goldman, C.R.; Jassby, A.D.; Hackley, S.H. (1993). Decadal, Interannual, and Seasonal Variability in
Enrichment Bioassays at Lake Tahoe, California-Nevada, Usa. Canadian Journal of Fisheries
and Aquatic Sciences, 50(7): 1489-1496. ISI:A1993MA27900017.
Green, M.C.; Kondragunta, S.; Ciren, P.; Xu, C.Y. (2009). Comparison of GOES and MODIS Aerosol
Optical Depth (AOD) to Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) AOD and IMPROVE PM2.5
mass at Bondville, Illinois. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc., 59(9): 1082-1091.
Kuhns, H.D.; Chang, M.-C.O.; Chow, J.C.; Etyemezian, V.; Chen, L.-W.A.; Nussbaum, N.J.;
Nathagoundenpalayam, S.K.; Trimble, T.C.; Kohl, S.D.; MacLaren, M.; Abu-Allaban, M.;
Gillies, J.A.; Gertler, A.W. (2004). DRI Lake Tahoe Source Characterization Study. prepared by
Desert Research Institute, Reno, NV, for California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA;
Larkin, N.K.; O'Neill, S.M.; Solomon, R.; Raffuse, S.; Strand, T.; Sullivan, D.C.; Krull, C.; Rorig, M.;
Peterson, J.L.; Ferguson, S.A. (2009). The BlueSky smoke modeling framework. International
Journal of Wildland Fire, 18(8): 906-920. ISI:000272546000002.
McKenzie, D.; O'Neill, S.M.; Larkin, N.K.; Norheim, R.A. (2006). Integrating models to predict regional
haze from wildland fire. Ecological Modelling, 199(3): 278-288. ISI:000242303300007.
9
McRae, D.J.; Alexander, M.E.; Stocks, B.J. (1979). Measurement and Description of Fuels and Fire
Behavior on Prescribed Burns: A Handbook. Report No. Report O-X-287. Prepared by Canadian
Forestry Service, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario
Murphy, D.D.; Knopp, C.M. (2000). Lake Tahoe Watershed Assessment: Vol. 1 USDA Forest Service,
Pacific Southwest Research Station, Albany CA Gen Tech Report No. PSW-GTR-175.
Ottmar, R.D.; Vihnanek, R.E.; Wright, C.S. (2000). Stereo photo series for quantifying natural fuels.
Volume III: Lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, and gambel oak types in the Rocky Mountains. PMS
832. Boise, ID: National Wildfire Coordinating Group, National Interagency Fire Center. 85 p.
Reeves, H.C. (1988). Photo guide for appraising surface fuels in east Texas: Grass, clearcut, seed tree,
loblolly pine, shortleaf pine, loblolly/shortleaf pine, slash pine, longleaf pine, and hardwood
cover types. Nacogdoches, TX.: Center for Applied Studies, S.F. Austin St. Univ. 89 p.
Taylor, K.L.; Fonda, R.W. (1990). Woody fuel structure and fire in subalpine fir forests, Olympic
National Park, Washington. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 20: 193-199.
Wang, X.; Kohl, S.D.; Chow, J.C.; Watson, J.G.; Gronstal, S. (2010). On-board Emission Measurement
from the World's Largest Heavy Haulers. In Proceedings, Leapfrogging Opportunities for Air
Quality Improvement, Chow, J. C., Watson, J. G., Cao, J. J., Eds.; Air & Waste Management
Association: Pittsburgh, PA, 476.
Watson, J.G.; Chow, J.C. (2001). Estimating middle-, neighborhood-, and urban-scale contributions to
elemental carbon in Mexico City with a rapid response aethalometer. J. Air Waste Manage.
Assoc., 51(11): 1522-1528.
10