Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet 

Kentucky Division for Air Quality 

------------------------------------------- 

Appendix B.6 

Continuous Measures of 

Speciated PM2.5 

 

Appendix B.6 - 1 

Kentucky Regional Haze SIP

July 23, 2007

Patricia Brewer1, Scott Reynolds2, 

Roger Tanner3, Eric Edgerton4, Ben Hartsell4,

Jim Renfro5, Hoke Kimball6, John Calcagni7

1VISTAS

2South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Con

3 Tennessee Valley Authority 

4Atmospheric Research Associates

5National Park Service

6North Carolina Department of Natural Resources

7Environmental Protection Agency

VISTAS Special Monitoring Stu

Continuous Measures of Speciated PM
Presentation Objectiv

• Special Monitoring Studies

• Continuous Monitors: PM2.5, Sulfate

Nitrate, Total Carbon, Black Carbon
Monitoring Objective

 Use continuous monitors of PM2.5 

sulfate, nitrate, total carbon and bcarbon to characterize daily and strends 

 Data collected Mar 2003 - Dec 200 Raw data available in AQS Normalized data available from VIS Draft VISTAS Report authored by R

Tanner, TVA
CLASS 1 URBAN

Great Smoky Mtns.

Cape Romain

Raleigh

VISTAS Focus Sites

Atlanta
March 2003 - December 2004• Continuous monitoring:

• Sulfate, Nitrate, Total Carbon (R&P inst• Black Carbon (Aethalometer)• Continuous Mass (TEOM)• Precursor gases - SO

2, NO

y, CO 

• Light Scattering (Nephelometer) at Clas

areas)

• Meteorology• Alternative Sulfate and Nitrate methods

• Filter-based Speciation: IMPROVE or STN

Focus Sites
Lessons Learned fro

Continuous Monitor

• Continuous PM2.5 mass (TEOM) sh

good agreement to PM2.5 mass from 
PM2.5

 2003

y = 1.3336x + 3.

R2 = 0.8542

y = 1.0749x + 2.

R2 = 0.9629

y = 0.8383x + 2.

R2 = 0.9051

0

1020304050

0 10 20 30 40 

Filter

Continuous

Mass

Continuous PM2.5 mass shows good agreement to PM2.5 ma
Lessons Learned fro

Continuous Monitor

• Aethalometer (BC) has good performance • R&P instruments for S, N, and Total C ac

good data capture (>75%) when operating

• Periodic failures R&P instruments

• S, N, TC, BC continuous data needs to be 

normalized to filter-based data to interpret 

• Correlations by Site and Quarter 

• Continuous speciated monitors have high u

and data management 

• Postscript: R&P monitors are being discontinu• Alternative commercial continuous monitors
V IS T A S F o c u s S ite T E O M P M 2 5

Q 3 2003

0

1 02 03 04 05 06 0

7 /1 7 /8 7 /1 5 7 /2 2 7 /2 9 8 /5 8 /1 2 8 /1 9 8 /2 6 9 /2 9 /9 

micrograms / cubic meter

DK PM MB PM CR PM LR PM

Third Quarter 2003

V IS T A S F o c u s S ite S u lfa te

2003

0

1 02 0

7/1 7/8 7/15 7/22 7/29 8/5 8/12 8/19 8/26 9/2 9/9 9

micrograms / cubic meter

MB SO 4 CR SO4 LR SO 4

S
V IS T A S F o c u s S ite T o ta l C a rb o n

2003

0

1 0

7/1 7/8 7/15 7/22 7/29 8/5 8/12 8/19 8/26 9/2 9/9 

micrograms / cubic meter

MB TC CR TC LR TC

Third Quarter 2003

V IS T A S F o c u s S ite T E O M P M 2 5

Q 3 2003

0

1 02 03 04 05 06 0

7 /1 7 /8 7 /1 5 7 /2 2 7 /2 9 8 /5 8 /1 2 8 /1 9 8 /2 6 9 /2 9 /9 

micrograms / cubic meter

DK PM MB PM CR PM LR PM 

C
Lessons Learned fro

Continuous Monitor

• Continuous monitors high scat

compared to filter-based data

• Capture same spatial and sea

trends as filter-based data
Filter comparis

Sulfate - IMPR

Look Rock Sulfate

Q3 2003

05

10152025

7/1 7/8 7/15 7/22 7/29 8/5 8/12 8/19 8/26 9/2 9/9 9/16 

micrograms / cubic meter

LR SO4fLR SO4
Filter comparis

Sulfate - IMPR

Cape Romain Sulfate

Q3 2003

05

10152025

7/1 7/8 7/15 7/22 7/29 8/5 8/12 8/19 8/26 9/2 9/9 9/16 

micrograms / cubic meter

CR SORfCR SO4
Filter comparis

Sulfate – STN

Millbrook Sulfate

Q3 2003

05

10152025

7/1 7/8 7/15 7/22 7/29 8/5 8/12 8/19 8/26 9/2 9/9 9/16 

micrograms / cubic meter

MB STN SO4MB SO4
Sulfate

2003

y = 1.0079x + 0.7062

R2 = 0.6451

y = 0.6538x + 1.2038

R2 = 0.7711

y = 0.5623x + 0.6845

R2 = 0.7775

05

101520

0 5 10 15 

Filter

Continuous

Sulfate
Nitrate

2003

y = 0.322x + 0.10

R2 = 0.1171

y = 0.9853x + 0.0657

R2 = 0.7019

y = 0.5556x + 0.1306

R2 = 0.3529

0.00.51.0

0.0 0.5 

Filter

Continuous

Nitrate
Carbon

2003

y = 0.783x + 0.7507

R2 = 0.6823

y = 1.2608x + 0.4168

R2 = 0.5383

y = 0.4249x + 

R2 = 0.759

048

1216

0 4 812 

Filter

Continuous

Total Carbon
Elemental Carbon

2003

y = 0.6704x + 0.7892

R2 = 0.6108

y = 1.0152x + 0.5788

R2 = 0.4042

y = 0.2646x + 0.8859

R2 = 0.591

048

1216

0 4 812 

Filter

Continuous

Elemental to Black Carbon
Normalizing Continuo

Monitoring Data

• Continuous data was normalized to 

data to facilitate comparison to modvalues

• Regressions calculated for each site, 

quarter 
Lessons Learned fro

Continuous Monitor

• Diurnal and seasonal trends:

• Sulfate: 

• GRSM > MILL > ROMA in summer• Little regional difference other seaso

• Consistent with regionally distributed so

• Highest in summer at all sites • Afternoon peak in warm seasons, no

seasons

• Consistent with photochemical product
Diurnal Pattern of Average Sulfate in Winter (Jan-Mar) 

at Focus Sites 

0.01.02.03.04.05.0

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[SO4

=

], μg/m3

ROMAGRSMMILL
Diurnal Pattern of Average Sulfate in Spring (Apr-Jun) 

at Focus Sites 

0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.0

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[SO4

=

], μg/m3

ROMAGRSMMILL
Diurnal Pattern of Average Sulfate in Summer (Jul – Sep) 

at Focus Sites

0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.09.0

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[SO4

=

], μg/m3

ROMAGRSMMILL
Diurnal Pattern of Average Sulfate in Fall (Oct – Dec) 20

at Focus Sites

0.01.02.03.04.05.0

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[SO4

=

], μg/m3

ROMAGRSMMILL
Lessons Learned fro

Continuous Monitor

• Diurnal and seasonal trends:

• Nitrate:

• Highest in winter, lowest in summer

• Seldom greater than 1 

μg/m3 except wi

• Consistent with temperature dependen

• MILL > ROMA > GRSM• Dawn peak at MILL, before rush hou

• Consistent with high RH before dawn

• Local sources
Diurnal Pattern of Average Nitrate in Winter 2004

at Focus Sites

0.000.501.001.502.002.503.00

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[NO3-], ug/m3

ROMA 2004GRSM 2004MILL 2004
Diurnal Pattern of Average Nitrate in Spring at 

Focus Sites

0.000.200.400.600.801.001.201.401.60

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[NO3

-

], μg/m3

ROMA 2003GRSM 2003MILL 2003ROMA 2004GRSM 2004MILL 2004
Diurnal Pattern of Average Nitrate in Summer at 

Focus Sites

0.000.100.200.300.400.500.600.700.800.901.00

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[NO3

-

], μg/m3

ROMA 2003GRSM 2003MILL 2003ROMA 2004GRSM 2004MILL 2004
Diurnal Pattern of Average Nitrate in Fall 

at Focus Sites

0.000.200.400.600.801.001.201.401.60

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[NO3

-

], μg/m3

ROMA 2003GRSM 2003MILL 2003ROMA 2004GRSM 2004MILL 2004
Lessons Learned fro

Continuous Monitor

• Diurnal and seasonal trends:

• Black Carbon

• Similar loadings in all seasons • Dekalb > MILL > GRSM = ROMA• Peaks correspond to AM and PM rush ho

urban areas

• Primary emissions, local sources, 

• Total Carbon

• MILL > GRSM = ROMA• At GRSM, TC and OC are slightly higher 

than other seasons; other sites show no strend
Diurnal Pattern of Average Black Carbon in Spring

at Focus Sites 

0.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.50

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[BC], μg/m3

ROMA 2003GRSM 2003MILL 2003Dekalb 2003ROMA 2004GRSM 2004MILL 2004Dekalb 2004
Diurnal Pattern in Average Black Carbon in Summe

at Focus Sites

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[BC], 

μg/m

3

ROMA 2003GRSM 2003MILL 2003Dekalb 2003ROMA 2004GRSM 2004MILL 2004Dekalb 2004
Diurnal Pattern in Average Black Carbon in Fall 

at Focus Sites

0.000.501.001.502.002.503.00

00:00 03:00 06:00 09:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00 

Hour of Day

[BC], ug/m3

ROMA 2003GRSM 2003MILL 2003Dekalb 2003ROMA 2004GRSM 2004MILL 2004Dekalb 2004
Next Steps 

 Finalize draft report for VISTAS 

Continuous Monitoring

 Additional analyses? 

 Compare diurnal trends from contin

data (2003, 2004) to CMAQ model trends (2002)

 Use monthly averages since different 

 Compare trends to SEARCH data  Submit manuscript for publication