1. A Review of Time Integrated PM2.5 Monitoring Data in the United States
Kenneth L. Demerjian
Atmospheric Sciences Research Center
University at Albany – SUNY
United Nations Economic Commission for European (UNECE)
European Monitoring and Evaluation Program (EMEP)
Workshop on Particulate Matter (PM) Measurement and Modeling April 20-23, 2004
New Orleans, LA

2. U.S. EPA PM National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant
Standard/Type
Particulate Matter
(PM 10)
50 mg/m3 annual mean /P&S
150 mg/m3 24-hr /P&S
(PM 2.5)
15 mg/m3 annual mean /P&S
65 mg/m3 24-hr /P&S

3. Daily Distribution of 24-hr PM2.5 Mass from 17 NYC FRM Monitors

4. NYC 2002 FRM Monitors Annual Distribution of 24-hr PM Mass

6. PM Speciation Network Samplers
Speciation Sampler
24-hr Sample Volume (m3)
OC Blank Correction Factor (ug/m3)
Met One SASS
9.6
1.4
Anderson RASS
10.4
1.28
R&P 2300
14.4
0.93
URG MASS
16.7
0.56
IMPROVE
32.8
0.4
STN: 1 in three day operation; three simultaneous filters
Nylon – IC, Teflon – XRF, Quartz – OC/EC

7. MET ONE Spiral Aerosol Speciation Sampler (SASSTM)

8. STN Monitoring Sites: October 2001 – September 2002

9. Spatial Distribution of STN/FRM Annual PM2
Spatial Distribution of STN/FRM Annual PM2.5 Mass October 2001 – September 2002

10. STN Annual PM2.5 Mass FRM vs. STN

11. STN Annual Composition

12. Spatial Distribution of STN Annual PM2
Spatial Distribution of STN Annual PM2.5_SO4 Mass October 2001 – September 2002

13. Annual Sulfate Fraction of PM2.5 Mass

14. Spatial Distribution of STN Annual PM2
Spatial Distribution of STN Annual PM2.5_NO3 Mass October 2001 – September 2002

15. Annual Nitrate Fraction of PM2.5 Mass

16. Spatial Distribution of STN Annual PM2
Spatial Distribution of STN Annual PM2.5_NH4 Mass October 2001 – September 2002

17. Annual Ammonium Fraction of PM2.5 Mass

18. Spatial Distribution of STN Annual PM2. 5_OC. 1
Spatial Distribution of STN Annual PM2.5_OC*1.4 Mass October 2001 – September 2002

19. Annual Total Carbon Fraction of PM2.5 Mass

20. PM2.5 Mass Fraction as Carbon Botanical Garden - Bronx, NY

21. PM2.5 Mass Fraction as Sulfate Botanical Garden - Bronx, NY

22. PM2.5 Mass Fraction as Nitrate Botanical Garden - Bronx, NY

23. PM2.5 Mass Fraction as Carbon Pinnacle State Park - Addison, NY

24. PM2.5 Mass Fraction as Sulfate Pinnacle State Park - Addison, NY

25. PM2.5 Mass Fraction as Nitrate Pinnacle State Park - Addison, NY

26. PM_EC vs. PM_OC*1.4 Seasonal Correlation Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY

27. PM_EC vs. PM_OC*1.4 Seasonal Correlation Pinnacle State Park Addison, NY

28. Winter PM2.5 OC vs. EC – Queens College
Jan ’96 NEI POA/PEC
1.27
Jan ’99 NEI POA/PEC
2.35

29. Summer PM2.5 OC vs. EC – Queens College
Jul ’96 NEI POA/PEC
1.03
Jul ’99 NEI POA/PEC
0.96

30. Time-Integrated Measurements
What have we learned about the PM air quality issues from time-integrated measurements?
Distribution of major PM composition varies regionally
Sulfates greater in the east, nitrates greater in the west
Organics show limited spatial variability
Seasonal variations indicated more nitrates in the winter and more sulfate and organics in the summer

31. Time-Integrated Measurements
What sort of hypothesis testing is being supported by these measurements?
Provide long term time series of PM2.5 components
Accountability for control strategies and health comes
Fuel sulfur rule
2007 diesel emission standard
NOx regulation
PM nitrate/sulfate changes with reductions in SO2
Process related production of PM components

32. Time-Integrated Measurements
What are the advantages of time-integrated measurements?
Provide long term PM speciation data with modest field technician support and modest overall cost (compared to alternatives)
Centralized laboratory analyses and QA/QC procedures improves data quality

33. Time-Integrated Measurements
What are the most serious issues by way of representing what is actually in the air?
Carbon blank issues and VOC adsorption
MDL for metals
Time resolution
Loss of volatile PM (nitrates and organics)

34. Time-Integrated Measurements
Which issues confound our ability to test hypotheses, to explain PM concentrations?
Water and volatility of nitrates and SOA
Are critical variables missing that are needed for the support of hypothesis testing/interpretation of mass and species composition measurements?
MDL for critical trace elements will limit source apportionment applications
EC blanks corrections and MDL will likely limit tracking EC perturbations resulting from diesel emission controls

35. Time-Integrated Measurements
Are the issues/problems intractable in the near term?
ICP/MS analysis techniques can provide improved MDLs for trace metals (as compared to XRF)
How is confidence in the values created in lieu of standards?
Instrument laboratory and field intercomparisons

36. Acknowledgments This work was supported in part by
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cooperative agreement # R
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), contract # 4918ERTERES99,
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC), contract # C

37. Thanks for your attention.