Monitoring strategy, technical issues

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A EUROPEAN AEROSOL PHENOMENOLOGY: TOTAL CARBON, ELEMENTAL CARBON AND ABSORPTION COEFFICIENT Fabrizia Cavalli European Commission – DG Joint Research Centre.
Advertisements

Task Force on Modelling and measurement activity : synergies with FAIRMODE Laurence Rouïl (INERIS) Co-chair of the TFMM.
1 Towards an improved European Infrastructure for reactive trace gas monitoring within ACTRIS Christian Plass-Duelmer, Stefan Reimann, S. Gilge, A. Werner,
PM 2.5 Carbon Measurements in EPA Region 10 Robert Kotchenruther, Ph.D. NW-AIRQUEST June, 2011.
What are the important parameters that need to be defined for a carbonaceous aerosol analysis ? Hélène CACHIER Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de.
Example Conceptual Models for Organic Sampling Artifacts on Quartz Fiber Filter Prepared by Marc Pitchford for the IMPROVE/CSN Carbon Monitoring Workshop.
Carbon artifact adjustments for the IMPROVE and CSN speciated particulate networks Mark Green, Judith Chow, John Watson Desert Research Institute Ann Dillner.
EPA Precursor Gas Training Workshop PM 2.5 Chemical Speciation Network (CSN) Carbon Conversion Joann Rice.
Section highlights Organic Aerosol and Field Studies.
Intensive measurements and modelling of size segregated chemical composition of aerosols in June 2006 and Jan 2007 Wenche Aas, Rami Alfarra, Elke Bieber,
Developments in EMEP monitoring strategy and recommendations from AirMonTech Kjetil Tørseth, NILU/EMEP-CCC.
Cooperation of EMEP/CCC and EEA on near real-time air quality data. Presented by Wenche Aas Though most of the work is done by: Tim Haigh, Bernt Rondell,
/tfmm3 EMEP Chemical Coordinating Centre Measurements of particulate matter in EMEP Current implementation Kjetil Tørseth, Wenche Aas, Michael.
Faculty of Natural and Mathematical Sciences University of Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina Report on quality assessment of learning and training courses.
EMEP INTENSIVE MEASUREMENT PERIODS IN CLOSE PARTNERSSHIP WITH EU PROJECTS Wenche Aas, Andres Alastuey, Francesco Canonaco, Fabrizia Cavalli, Franco Lucarelli,
Relevant activities in EMEP Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC (NILU) EMEP Monitoring programme Expansion to the EECCA region, HTAP QA/QC.
Uncertainties in atmospheric observations Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC.
Wish-list to the Emission community.  TFMM annual meeting held in Zagreb on the 6-8 May 2013  Main issues :  Review of the implementation of the EMEP.
Synergies between EMEP and EUSAAR Wenche Aas and Kjetil Tørseth EMEP/CCC (NILU)
EMEP Monitoring programme Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC (NILU)
Model Evaluation Comparing Model Output to Ambient Data Christian Seigneur AER San Ramon, California.
Secondary Organic Aerosols
EMEP Monitoring Strategy Status and challenges, with main focus on the EECCA region Wenche Aas and Kjetil Tørseth EMEP/CCC (NILU)
ENEON first workshop Observing Europe: Networking the Earth Observation Networks in Europe September, Paris [EMEP,ACTRIS,HELCOM,CAMP and more/NILU]
Conclusions Scope: more flexible, decide each year (pollutants, countries) Timing : August-October Reports: Overview report necessary, incl recommendations.
Atmospheric Sciences Research Center University at Albany QA/SAC for the Americas World Data Centre for Precipitation Chemistry QA/SAC of the Americas.
Aerosol chemistry studies at the SMEARIII station in Kumpula
Svetlana Tsyro, David Simpson, Leonor Tarrason
SWIFT-WFD Screening methods for Water data InFormaTion in support of the implementation of the Water Framework Directive Contribution to the monitoring.
Measurements of PM10 a contribution from EIONET
Contribution from AQUILA to Air Policy Review
EMEP intensive measurements, June 2006 and Jan 2007
EMEP intensive measurements
Wenche Aas and Karl Espen Yttri (EMEP/CCC)
ACTRIS Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor (ACSM) Network and new filter off-line techniques to measure PM chemical composition and determine organic aerosol.
other ‘emerging tools’
with EUSAAR NA2 Partners
A Review of Time Integrated PM2.5 Monitoring Data in the United States
John Munthe and Ingvar Wängberg
Implementation of the EMEP monitoring strategy
Progress on sampling and analysis of carbonaceous aerosols:
EMEP Monitoring Strategy
Status of data from EMEP intensive period 2008/2009
PM modelling assessment in Northern Italy
TFMM PM Assessment Report
Time-Integrated Particle Measurements : Status in Canada
Uncertainties in atmospheric observations
EMEP/ACTRIS/COLOSSAL intensive measurement period Des 2017 – March 2018 Wenche Aas, EMEP/CCC.
TFMM Work plan for 2010 Build-up the appropriate framework for the implementation of the revised monitoring strategy Technical support to the Parties.
Challenges with Integrated Measurements of OC and BC (or EC)
An Overview of the EUSAAR I3 Project
EUSAAR contribution to the EMEP intensive field campaigns
Jean-Philippe Putaud, Fabrizia Cavalli
Wenche Aas, Kjetil Tørseth, Cathrine Lund Myhre
Future intensive field periods Recommendations
Low-cost methods for gas/particle distribution of nitrogen species
Bernhard Rappenglück, Maurice Habram
Introduction – workshop on EBAS and Data Quality
Lessons learnt from the EMEP intensive measurements
UK (CEH) and ACTRIS WP3: In-situ chemical, physical and optical properties of aerosols WP4: Trace gases networking: Volatile organic carbon and nitrogen.
EMEP new monitoring strategy in France Nathalie Poisson - ADEME
Wenche Aas Status of EMEP measurements today Field intercomparison
EMEP Monitoring strategy
Experience from the EMEP VOC measurements
Welcome TFMM workshop on the implementation of the EMEP monitoring strategy Introduction to the monitoring strategy QA/QC activities of EMEP organisation.
EC/OC – monitoring within EMEP
EMEP intensive measurement periods
EMEP Monitoring strategy
Svetlana Tsyro, David Simpson, Leonor Tarrason
Quality assurance and data quality in relation to trend assessments in EMEP Kjetil Tørseth, Wenche Aas and Jan Schaug Documenting changes in atmospheric.
Presentation transcript:

Monitoring strategy, technical issues Report from the Oslo workshop and upcoming events Wenche Aas EMEP/CCC

A Gas/Particle distribution Passive samplers, low cost denuder, filterpack, annular denuder, continuous methods Sampling frequency at Level 2 and Level 3 A flexible approach is necessary, and parties may choose between providing campaigns/intensive periods of hourly measurements or longer-term 24 hour Better coordination of the timing of such intensive periods is necessary. Agreement is needed on the timing strategy and the level of ambition Coating material for denuders and filters Methodological artefacts Corrections for imperfect or incomplete sampling QA/QC

B. EC/OC Prefired Quartz fiber filters? Pre-firing should be avoided if possible, as it activates the filters. Mass and the carbonaceous content from the same filters? Preferably not The filter face velocity for sampling of OC? Need to know whether correction for artefacts shall be applied or not. Which instrument should be used? Difference between instruments, temperature programmes, and the monitoring system for charring – transmission or reflectance? TC and Aethalometer, an alternative approach. Is it OK to measure only total carbon ? What about WSOC? Which sampling method should be used to correct for artefacts: QBT: Poor knowledge concerning use in background areas. Denuder-Quartz-fiber filter-sorbent: perhaps a better alternative than QBT. Sampling time: Less than 12 hour to avoid gas/particle problems. But it will affect the mass…

C. Size segregated aerosol chemistry Which PM sizes to priorities? Either PM10 and PM.2.5 or PM10 and PM1 Denuder ? A denuder should be put in front. Commercial denuders not available Filter type discussed (which to chose depends on the use) Mass closures are recommended Major concerns: Conversion factor for OC to OM, missing compounds, water, different sampling times, Dust. Mass and chemical speciation separated? Ideally, yes Continues PM10 monitors Monitors can be accepted in EMEP if proven to be equivalent. Concerns about the quality and the jungle of correction factors that are used. The equivalent tests are often done at higher concentrations than repr for EMEP. On the other hand PM10 mass is not of critical importance for EMEP, and less quality data may be acceptable if flagged properly for studying the temporal resolution

D VOC Which VOC Species to be considered? Which methods? Alkanes C2-C13; Isoprenoids, C2-C4, Alkynes Acetylene Aromates C6-C13 Alcohols C1-C4; Aldehydes C1-C6 Ketones C2-C9 Acetates C3-C6 Halocarbons C1-C2 Which methods? No standard procedures for C7 to C13 is defined yet. Sampling: Specific enrichment techniques. Artefact formation has to be carefully assessed. Analytical Procedure, GC-FID C2-C7 (C7-C14 requires GC-MS) HPLC-DAD, PTR-MS for carbonyls QA/QC Use Audit questionnaire from WMO-GAW Joint GAW/EMEP courses Use DQO and metadata form from GAW

Follow ups Include the clear recommendations and new standard methods in the EMEP manual. Courses and training: 1) Low cost denuder workshop in May 2) VOC (and CO2) workshop in June 3) EMEP CCC. One course annually, each autumn. Next topic is not decided. Suggestions are welcomed Quality assurance e.g. field and lab intercomparison and audits for new sites and methods Further studies necessary for several items. JRC Ispra will do field campaigns on EC/OC 2. Constituents of the organic aerosols Workshop in Oslo 26-27 May