Particulate Matter 101
Outline:
1. Definitions
2. Sizes
3. Sources
4. Composition
5. Lifetime & Transport
6. Sinks
7. Effects
Red Deer Particulate Matter
Information Session
Matthew Parsons
Air Quality Development –
Meteorological Service of Canada,
Environment Canada
November 28, 2014
What is Particulate Matter?
Soot
Organic Material
Pollen
Mineral Dust
• Particulate Matter (PM)
– Microscopic solid or
liquid particles
suspended in the
atmosphere
– Often expressed in
terms of mass per unit
volume (e.g., μg/m3 ).
Page 2 – November 28, 2014
What is Particulate Matter?
Lifetime &
Transport
Composition
Size
Source
Page 3 – November 28, 2014
Sizes
Nano
Ultrafine
Fine
PM2.5
PM10
TSP
Page 4 – November 28, 2014
Coarse
Sources
• Primary PM:
– PM emitted directly to
the atmosphere.
• Secondary PM:
– PM formed in the atmosphere through chemical reactions of
gases.
Pollutant Gases
Secondary PM
• PM and precursor gases can be from both natural
and anthropogenic sources.
Page 5 – November 28, 2014
Composition
Alberta’s Capital Region PM2.5
Ammonium Sulphate
30
PM2.5 Concentration / µg m-3
Ammonium Nitrate
Organic Material
25
Elemental Carbon
Soil & Trace Elements
20
Sodium Chloride
Particle Bound Water
15
10
5
0
Cold Season Non-event
Cold Season Event
Warm Season Non-event
Event: PM2.5 concentration ≥ 20 µg m-3
Non-event: PM2.5 concentration < 20 µg m-3
Page 6 – November 28, 2014
Warm Season Event
Warm Season: April – September
Cold Season: October - March
Lifetime & Transport
• Atmospheric lifetimes for PM is in the range of hours
•
(>10µm) to weeks (<1µm).
Transport of PM is driven
by meteorological
conditions (e.g., wind,
atmospheric stability).
– PM can be transported
horizontally in the
atmosphere over long
ranges.
– Vertical transport of PM
between atmospheric
layers is limited.
Page 7 – November 28, 2014
Red Deer
Sinks
Wet Deposition
Page 8 – November 28, 2014
Dry Deposition
Growth
2011 International Comparison
Sofia
Warsaw
Rome
Brussels
Lyon
Berlin
Barcelona
Amsterdam
Paris
Hamburg
Prague
London
Pittsburgh
Chicago
RED DEER
Madrid
Phoenix
Houston
Milwaukee
Washington
CALGARY
Boston
MONTRÉAL
EDMONTON
Seattle
Stockholm
Denver
TORONTO
OTTAWA/GATINEAU
Environment Canada, Air and Climate Indicators, (2014)
Sydney
http://ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators
VANCOUVER
0
5
10
15
20
Annual Average PM2.5 Concentration / µg
Page 9 – November 28, 2014
25
m-3
30
2012 Provincial Comparison
Red Deer - Riverside
Crescent Heights
Edmonton - East
Albian Mine Site
Hinton
Edmonton - McIntyre
Calgary - Northwest
Edmonton - Centre
Drayton Valley
Lamont
Fort McKay South
Anzac
Evergreen Park
Redwater
Patricia McInnes
Smoky Heights
Caroline
Edson
Powers
Genesee
Environment Canada, Air and Climate Indicators, (2014)
Tomahawk
http://ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators
0
2
4
6
8
Annual Average PM2.5 Concentration / µg
Page 10 – November 28, 2014
10
m-3
12
Red Deer Annual Averages
Annual Average PM2.5 Concentration / µg m-3
18
Red Deer - Riverside
National Average
2015 Standard (CAAQS)
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Year
Page 11 – November 28, 2014
2009
2010
2011
2012
Environment Canada, Air and Climate Indicators, (2014)
http://ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators
Why does Particulate Matter Matter?
Health
Visibility
Air Quality Health Index (AQHI)
1
Risk:
2
3
Low
(1 – 3)
4
5
6
7
Moderate
(4 – 6)
• Plant health
• Soil/water nutrient balance and toxicity
Page 12 – November 28, 2014
8
High
(7 – 10)
9
10
+
Very High
(Above 10)
• Corrosion enhancement
• Climate effects
Monitoring of Particulate Matter
in Alberta
Red Deer Particulate Matter
Information Session
Shelley Morris
shelley.morris@aemera.org
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
–
–
–
–
Parameter
SO2
H2S
NO2/NOx
O3
Detection
Limit
0.1 ppb
0.02 ppb
0.1 ppb
0.1 ppb
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
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 metals
PM2.5 organic and elemental carbon
PM2.5 sulfate, nitrate and other ions
PM2.5 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
SHARP 5030
TEOM-FDMS
BAM-1020
TEOM-SES
GRIMM
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 Number
Environment 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
•
•
•
•
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 EDM 180
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)
•
•
•
•
•
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
Met One BAM 1020
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 & 5030i
Synchronized 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
Red Deer Particulate Matter Information
Session
Maxwell Mazur
Maxwell.mazur@gov.ab.ca
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 Census
Agglomerations
(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
urveillance
Actions
Baseline
Monitoring
and Data
Gathering
Management
Level
Red
Existing Regulatory and Management Tools
anagement
Plan
Flexible Management Tools
Mandatory
Plan to
Reduce
elow CWS
Stringent Management Tools
tion Levels
Exceedance
Trigger
(CWS)
Orange
Planning
Trigger
Blue
Surveillance
Trigger
Green
Ozone
Daily max 8h
(ppb)
PM2.5
24h
(µg m-3)
Mandatory Plan to Reduce Below CWS
65
30
Management Plan Action Level
58
20
Surveillance Actions
--
15
Baseline Monitoring and Data Gathering
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
Ozone
Daily max 8h
(ppb)
2015
Red
2020
PM2.5
Annual
(µg m-3)
2015
2020
PM2.5
24h
(µg m-3)
2015
2020
Actions for Achieving Air Zone CAAQS
Threshold
(CAAQS)
63
Orange
Actions for Preventing CAAQS Exceedance
Threshold
Yellow
Threshold
Green
62
56
10.0
8.8
6.4
28
27
19
Actions for Preventing AQ Deterioration
50
4.0
10
Actions for Keeping Clean Areas Clean
CAAQS Framework
CASA 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 Demo
Step 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 Demo
Step 2: Rank Daily Values from High to Low
1
Aug 14:
6.2 μg/m3
2
Aug 15:
8.0 μg/m3
3
Aug 16:
12.0 μg/m3
4
Aug 17:
9.8 μg/m3
5
Aug 18:
13.2 μg/m3
6
Aug 19:
159.6 μg/m3
7
Aug 20:
87.5 μg/m3
8
Aug 21:
73.2 μg/m3
9
Aug 22:
37.1 μg/m3
10
Aug 23:
21.4 μg/m3
11
Aug 24:
15.9 μg/m3
12
Aug 25:
16.6 μg/m3
98th Percentile – 8th highest
Annual Assessment Demo
Step 3: Analyse and Remove Events
1
Aug 19:
159.6 μg/m3
Forest Fire Smoke
2
87.5 μg/m3
73.2 μg/m3
Forest Fire Smoke
3
Aug 20:
Aug 21:
4
Jan 29:
67.9 μg/m3
Wintertime Smog
5
Feb 24:
59.1 μg/m3
Wintertime Smog
6
Jan 28:
57.9 μg/m3
Wintertime Smog
7
Jan 19:
56.9 μg/m3
Wintertime Smog
8
Dec 6:
47.8 μg/m3
Wintertime Smog
9
Dec 7:
46.4 μg/m3
Wintertime Smog
10
Jan 20:
11
Mar 1:
12
May 18:
44.0 μg/m3
43.8 μg/m3
39.9 μg/m3
Forest Fire Smoke
Wintertime Smog
Wintertime Smog
Not Analysed
Annual Assessment Demo
Step 4: Recalculate Annual 98th Percentile
1
Aug 19:
159.6 μg/m3
2
Aug 20:
87.5 μg/m3
3
Aug 21:
73.2 μg/m3
4
Jan 29:
67.9 μg/m3
5
Feb 24:
59.1 μg/m3
6
Jan 28:
57.9 μg/m3
7
Jan 19:
56.9 μg/m3
8
Dec 6:
47.8 μg/m3
9
Dec 7:
46.4 μg/m3
10
Jan 20:
11
Mar 1:
12
May 18:
44.0 μg/m3
43.8 μg/m3
39.9 μg/m3
98th Percentile
Annual Assessment Results
PM2.5 – 2008-2010
2008-10 Assessment
for Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
Fort Chipewyan
(background, transboundary and
natural influences
removed)
Fort McKay
Syncrude UE-1
Fort McMurray - Patricia McInnes
Evergreen
Park
CWS Exceedance Action Level
Management Plan Action Level
Surveillance Action Level
Monitoring Action Level
Fort McMurray - Athabasca Valley
Anzac ✱
Smokey Heights
Grande Prairie
Cold Lake
Beaverlodge
CITY
of
EDMONTON
Central ✱
South
Fort Saskatchewan ✱ Lamont
✱
Edson Powers
Elk Island
Tomahawk
Drayton Valley
Genesee
EDMONTON
Red Deer
Northwest
Data not available
Caroline
Squares represents the Edmonton
and Calgary Census Metropolitan
Areas (CMAs).
Asterisk (✱) indicates incomplete
data set.
East
CALGARY
Medicine Hat
✱ Lethbridge
Central ✱
East
CITY
of
CALGARY
✱
Annual Assessment Results
PM2.5 – 2009-2011
Annual Assessment Results
Red 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.
PM2.5 Concentration (ug/m3)
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
Red Deer Riverside CWS assessments (2001-2012)
Exceedance Trigger
Planning Trigger
Surveillance Trigger
10.0
5.0
0.0
01-03
02-04
03-05
04-06
05-07
06-08
Assessment Period
07-09
08-10
09-11
10-12
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 Zone
and Particulate Matter
Red Deer PM2.5 Information Session
November 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 1999
• 3rd of 9 Provincial Airshed Zones
• 42,000 km2, 2014 pop. estimate 273,000
Continuous
Monitoring
Passive
Monitoring
Air Quality Monitoring Program
• 4 Continuous Stations
– Each w/ SO2, TRS, NO2-NO-NOX, O3, THC-CH4, PM2.5
(Red Deer H2S & CO, NO TRS)
– 2 Permanent
• Red Deer (urban) & Caroline (rural)
– 2 Portables
• Martha Kostuch and David McCoy
• Respond to stakeholder issues, fills geographic (towns > 5,000) and technical
data gaps
• 35 Station Zone-Wide Passive Monitoring Network
– SO2, NO2 and O3
PAMZ Passive Air Quality Monitoring Sites
PAMZ Air Quality Monitoring Sites (ALL)
www.pamz.org
PAMZ and PM
2000
2005
- 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
- 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 first
instrument 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 PM
2007
2009
2010
- 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
- ESRD replaced TEO SMS with TEOM FDMS, no collocated
monitoring period (monitor needed by ESRD elsewhere)
- 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 PM
2011
- 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
2013
- 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
- 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
Exceedance Trigger
Planning Trigger
Surveillance Trigger
PAMZ and PM
2014
Future
- 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
- 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 2014
• Maintain 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 4
Maintained Martha Kostuch Education Scholarship - Alex Johnson)
Photo Contest (Nov 30 Deadline)