Macon, Georgia

1

• Macon, Georgia
• Air Quality Briefing

May 7, 2003
2
Todays Agenda
3
Ozone and Particulate MatterSeparate but Related
Problems
Summer 2001
PM2.5 (mg/m3)
Ozone (ppbv)
Summer 2002
July 30
May 1
October 31
-- GIT Ozone -- EPD Ozone -- GIT PM2.5
4
MACON AIR QUALITY UPDATE
5
UPDATES

• 8 hour ozone status
• Fine particulate matter (PM 2.5) status

6
(No Transcript)
7
METRO ATLANTA OZONE PLAN
8
Pre-1999

• Enhanced vehicle emissions inspections
• Low volatility gasoline
• Gasoline vapor recovery
• 13 county open burning ban
• NOx controls on major industry
• Smog Alert ProgramClean Air Campaign

9
1999

• 150 ppm sulfur gasoline in 25 counties
• Georgia Power NOx reductions
• Stricter power plant permitting rules in 45
  counties
• New peaking generator and boiler rules in 45
  counties

10
2001-02

• Annual, stricter vehicle emissions inspections
• Open burning ban in 45 counties
• Georgia Power phasing in NOx controls

11
2003

• 90 ppm sulfur gasoline in 45 counties (goes to 30
  ppm this September)
• Georgia Power plants achieve NOx reduction in 45
  counties
• Stricter peaking generator rule
• Large industrial source NOx reductions

12
8 HOUR OZONE SCHEDULE
13
BOUNDARY FACTORS

• Local emissions/air quality
• Population density/urbanization
• Local/regional monitoring data
• Local emissions
• Traffic/commuting patterns
• Expected growth
• Meteorology
• Geography/topography
• Jurisdictional boundaries
• Level of control of emission sources
• Regional emission reductions

14
PREVIOUSLY RECOMMENDED 8 HOUR OZONE AREAS (2000)
15
USEPA RULE PROPOSAL

• Area classification approaches what subpart to
  use
• Attainment dates
• Transition from 1-hr to 8-hr NAAQS
• Anti-backsliding
• Flexibility vs mandatory controls
• Ozone transport issues
• Modeling attainment demonstrations
• Reasonable further progress requirements
• Reasonably available control measures/technology
• Conformity
• New Source Review
• Optimizing for O3 and PM
• Tribal issues
• Timing of designations and classifications

16
KEY ISSUES

• Classification
• New source review
• Transportation conformity
• Attainment plan modeling
• Reasonably available control technology

17
CLASSIFICATION

• Two USEPA proposed options
• Based on one 1 hour and 8 hour ozone design
  values
• USEPA preferred option
• Macon in Subpart 1 or 2
• Could be more or less flexible
• Attainment date three to six years

18
CLASSIFICATION

• Option 2
• Macon in Subpart 2
• Less flexible
• Marginal or moderate classification,
  depending on design value
• Attainment date three or six years

19
(No Transcript)
20
NEW SOURCE REVIEW

• 3 options being proposed
• Traditional NSR---100 ton per year VOC or NOx
  sources
• Two more flexible approaches

21
TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY

• All 8-hr areas receive one-year grace period from
  time of designations before conformity applies
• USEPA will propose rules later this year

22
REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY (RACT)

• Will likely require major (100 ton per year) VOC
  and NOx sources to install RACT

23
ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION

• If attainment date is within 3 years, will not
  require modeling
• EPA is proposing to allow such areas to rely on
  existing modeling
• If attainment date more than 3 years after
  designation, would require an attainment
  demonstration SIP

24
USEPA WEB SITE
http//www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/ ozonetech/o3im
p8hr/o3imp8hr.htm
25
PM 2.5 STATUS

• States make boundary recommendations by February
  2004
• Similar process as 8 hour ozone
• USEPA designates areas by December 2004
• Implementation rules unknown, will be proposed
  this year

26
(No Transcript)
27
NEXT STEPS

• Ensure FAQS completion
• Involve local area in planning decisions

28
(No Transcript)
29
Fall Line Emissions Inventory and Air Quality
Modeling

• Yong-Tao Hu, Talat Odman, Sergey Napelenok, Di
  Tian, Dan Cohan, Mike Chang, Jaemeen Baek, Alper
  Unal and Ted Russell

30
Issues and Objectives

• Fall Line Cities (Macon, Columbus and Augusta)
  appeared to be going in to non-attainment with
  8-hour ozone standard and the PM2.5 standard
• Proactively understand causes and possible
  strategies to deal with non-attainment
• Integrated monitoring, emissions estimation and
  modeling of region
• Apply photochemical model to region to assist
  state with SIP development
• Identify effective control strategies
• FAQS not originally supposed to be the SIP
• Georgia Tech committed to supporting EPD EAC
  SIP needs
• While focused on ozone, PM2.5 major consideration
• Will be an issue, making sure everything looks
  correct

31
Ozone Formationand Loss
NOx Emissions
Wind
VOC Emissions
Deposition
O3, HNO3
32
Ozone Isopleth
area of effective VOC control (most often highly
populated areas)
D
Constant OzoneConcentration
B
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
NOx control effective(areas with high biogenics)
High O3
C
A
Low O3
Reactive Organic Gases (VOCs)
33
Outline

• Emissions Inventory Activities (Russell)
• Updated emissions inventory (some surprises)
• Atmospheric modeling (Russell)
• Episode selection
• Emissions, meteorological and air quality
  modeling
• Macon area emissions (Cohan)
• Pollutant sensitivities (Cohan)
• Control options (Cohan)
• Discussion (All)

Note Results are preliminary though we are
pleased so far
34
Activities

• FAQS
• Point source survey of three cities surrounding
  counties
• Updated mobile source inventory in three cities
• Supplied to EPD in IDA and NIF format
• Just updated inventory using NEI99
• Some differences
• Statewide
• Mobile sources
• Point sources
• Biomass burning
• Supplied to state in NIF and IDA formats
• Emissions inventory report in final review

35
Emissions Results from SMOKE ModelingOriginal
FAQS
36
Update Difference NEI99 vs. FAQS

• NEI99 has lower NOx in some areas
• Urban areas have biggest differences
• Expect ozone differences

37
Air Quality Modeling
Air Quality Goals
Air Quality/Health Impacts
Pollutant Distributions
Control
Predictions
Observations
Air Quality Model
Emissions
Meteorology
Georgia Institute of Technology
38
Modeling Approach

• Apply MM5, SMOKE, CMAQ to three episodes
• Check episodes for representativeness
• Develop emissions
• Apply MM5/SMOKE/CMAQ system
• Evaluate
• Conduct diagnostic and sensitivity analysis runs
• Strategy assessment
• Stakeholders involved in identifying choices

39
FAQS Episodes

• August 11, 2000 August 20, 2000
• Primary FAQS period
• High ozone statewide
• FAQS measurements, Houston Supersite period
• Col 8-hr, Mac. 8-hr, AtlMacColAug 8-hr, All
  8-hr, Atl. 1-hr
• August 10, 1999 August 21, 1999
• High ozone and PM
• Atlanta Supersite period
• Mac 8-hr, AtlMacColAug 8-hr (part), All 8-hr
  (part), Aug 8-hr
• July 5, 2001 July 20, 2001
• High ozone and PM
• FAQS measurements, ESP01 period
• Atl 8-hr, Atl 18-hr, AtlMacColAug 8-hr, All
  8-hr, Aug 8-hr

40
Models-3 Air Quality Modeling System

• Models-3/Community Multiscale Air Quality
  Modeling System (CMAQ)
• Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions Modeling
  System (SMOKE)
• Models-3/EDSS Input/Output Applications
  Programming Interface (I/O API)
• Fifth-Generation Penn State/NCAR Mesoscale
  Modeling System (MM5)
• Package for Analysis and Visualization of
  Environmental data (PAVE)

41
Air Quality Modeling
IC, BC, Photolysis rates
42
FAQS Air Quality Modeling First Scenario

• MM5/SMOKE/CMAQ
• 36-km, 12-km and 4-km with Lambert Conformal
  Projection (30N,60N,90W) and Origin at (40N,90W)
  
• Ozone Episode of August 11-20, 2000
• High ozone and PM throughout SE
• Included in number of episode selections
• Updated urban area definitions using 2000 Census

43
36-km
12-km
4-km
44
Model Setup and Parameters

• Meteorology MM5V3
• MM5 grids are 3 cells larger on each side than
  CMAQ grids
• 34 vertical layers with the top at 70mb
• NCEP ETA data and ADP observational data as
  inputs
• OSU land-surface scheme, MRF,
• One-way nesting, Surface FDDA for only winds and
  Gridded FDDA ( no FDDA with finest grid)
• Emissions SMOKE1.3
• SAMI inventory for 1995 with Projection Factors
  from EGAS
• Parts of the inventory updated by Georgia Tech
• New spatial surrogates based on census 2000, new
  definition of urban areas
• the new set of temporal profiles released by EPA
• Mobile5b for applying VMT inventory (Mobile6
  coming)
• SAPRC99
• BEIS3 with BELD3

45
Model Setup and Parameters (continued)

• Air Quality CMAQ 2002 release
• 36-km, 78x66 cells 12-km, 78x66 cells 4-km,
  102x78 cells
• 13 vertical layers, 7 layers in the lowest
  kilometer
• SAPRC99, MEBI solver
• AERO3 Module
• Default initial and boundary conditions
• One-way nesting

46
Meteorological Modeling Results
47
NWS 22 at Augusta
NWS 2625 at Columbus
NWS 21 at Macon
48
Hourly surface meteorological variables simulated
at 12-km or 4-km cells vs. observed at NWS
stations (26 falling in faqs12 and 8 in faqs4)
49
Simulated vs. Observed in faqs4
50
Diurnal Modeled vs. Observed at NWS 22
51
MBE RMSE for Each NWS Sites
52
Air Quality Modeling Results
53
Site 31 at Augusta
Site 25 at Columbus
Site 1 at Macon
Site 27
Site 35
54
Surface Ozone Results from CMAQOriginal FAQS
Inventory
Maximum observed 173
55
Hourly ozone concentrations Simulated at 12-km
or 4-km cells vs. Observed at AIRS ozone sites
FAQS Sites (22 falling in faqs12 and 18 in faqs4)
56
Simulated vs. Observed in faqs4
57
Diurnal Modeled vs. Observed Ozone at Columbus
58
Diurnal Modeled vs. Observed Ozone at Macon
59
Diurnal Modeled vs. Observed Ozone at Augusta
60
MNB MNE for Each Episode Day
faqs12 18 hours faqs4 12 hours
61
MNB MNE for Each Ozone Sites
62
Impact of Updated Emissions
Original
NET99-based
63
Impact of Controls 2000 (new) vs. 2007
Emissions reductions lead to about a 10 ppb ozone
reduction nb these results are preliminary and
need to be verified
64
Modeling Now What?

• Need to investigate/verify differences in
  emissions inventory
• Lower ozone in Augusta
• Model performance may change
• Holding off on 12 km simulations while we
  investigate
• Preliminary results suggest reductions of 10 /-
  ppb in peak ozone from controls
• Subject to above investigations and verifying
  projections
• Would bring borderline MSAs in to attainment

65
Summary

• MM5 and CMAQs application in FAQS episode of
  August 11-20, 2000 shows a very good agreement
  between the 12-km and 4-km simulations and
  observations, especially on surface variables.
• Ozone simulation agrees well in Fall Line Cities
• Measurements show some spatial variability
• Finer scale agrees slightly better
• MM5 does not go as stable as it should at night
• Known problem does not affect daytime/peak ozone
  levels
• Future work will focus on
• Verifying updated emissions (NET 99, Statewide
  survey, MOBILE 6, HPMS)
• Additional episodes
• 99 and 01 meteorology underway, emissions in
  process
• Dan Cohan
• Emissions, sensitivities, controls start the
  discussions

66
Control Strategy Options for Ozone in Macon

• Daniel Cohan, Yongtao Hu, Alper Unal, Ted Russell
• Georgia Institute of Technology
• Fall-Line Air Quality Study Meeting
• May 7, 2003

67
Cars Trucks
Industry
Non-Road
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
SUNLIGHT
Ozone
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
Industry
BIOGENIC
Cars Trucks
68
University of Georgia Selig Center website
69
VOC Sources in Macon MSA

• Anthropogenic Sources
• Cars
• Solvents (Paints, Automotive Products, Adhesives,
  etc.)
• Gasoline Stations
• Tobacco curing
• Paper manufacture

70
NOx Sources in Macon MSA
71
NOx Sources by County Year 2000
72
Macon NOx Sources Point
Facility (Tons per day)
73
(No Transcript)
74
Macon NOx Sources Non-Road
Source Type (Tons per day)
75
Macon NOx Sources Area
Source Type (Tons per day)
76
NOx Point Sources in GA
Branch (Putnam Co.)
Scherer (Monroe Co.)
Source EPA NET-99 website
77
Neighboring County NOx Emissions
Plant Branch
Plant Scherer
Weyerhaeuser
78

• Overall Reduction 2000?2003 (based on summer 00
  dispatch)
• 40 reduction at Branch, 28 reduction at
  Scherer
• Combined reduction of 73 tpd (216 tpd ? 143 tpd).

79
Control Strategies

• Potential options that could be considered to
  reduce NOx emissions

80
Point Source Controls Within Macon MSA

• Georgia Power Arkwright (power plant 8.8 tpd
  NOx)
• Source coal-fired boilers (0.67-0.75 lb/MMBtu)
• Options SNCR, low-NOx burners, or SCR
• Riverwood International (paper mill 8.1 tpd NOx)
• Sources Wood-bark, coal, and natural gas
  boilers pulping
• Options LNB, SNCR, or SCR for boilers
• Southdown (Medusa) Cement (cement kiln 6.8 tpd
  NOx)
• Sources wet and dry cement kilns in-process
  coal use
• Options mid-kiln firing or SCR

81
Point Source ControlsNeighboring Counties

• Georgia Power Plant Scherer (111 tpd)
• 2003 addition of over-fire air will cut
  approximately 32 tons per day
• Selective catalytic reduction could reduce
  emissions by an additional 56 tons per day
• Georgia Power Plant Branch (105 tpd)
• 2003 addition of low-NOx burner will cut
  approximately 42 tons per day
• Selective catalytic reduction could reduce
  emissions by an additional 54 tons per day

Reductions assume 0.07 lb/MMbtu rate planned
for Plant Bowen SCRs, and same dispatch rates as
summer 2000
82
Mobile Source Controls(Macon MSA 2000 inventory
30 tons per day)

• Cleaner fuel vehicles
• Low-sulfur fuels and cleaner vehicle standards
  on-the-way
• Could add low-RVP Georgia Gasoline for VOC
  control
• Inspection Maintenance
• Atlantas program, or OBD only
• Speed limit reduction or enforcement
• Truckstop electrification
• Incentives for cleaner vehicles
• New vehicles, retrofit diesel vehicles, or
  scrappage

83
Mobile Source Controls (cont.)

• Transportation Control Measures
• Carpools/Vanpools/Ride Share
• Teleworking
• HOV lanes
• Mass Transit
• Bike pedestrian facilities
• Economic Incentive TCMs
• Parking policies
• Insurance pricing
• Mileage-based ad valorem taxes
• Gas taxes

84
Non-Road Emission Controls

• Railroad Equipment (4.2 tpd NOx)
• Cleaner locomotives yard equipment (engine
  modifications, LNG fuel, or SCR)
• Reduce idling
• Construction Mining Equipment (4.2 tpd NOx)
• Clean contracting to require 2007 on-road
  diesel vehicle fuel standards
• Operating restrictions
• Industrial Equipment (1.2 tpd NOx)
• Incentives to upgrade to cleaner equipment

85
Area Source Emission Controls

• Industrial natural gas combustion (1.7 tpd NOx)
• Low-NOx burners, SCR, SNCR
• Open, managed, prescribed burning (0.8 tpd)
• Ban or restrict during ozone season

86
Ozone Sensitivity Modeling

• Sensitivity The change in ozone
  concentrations predicted to result from a change
  in emissions.
• How much would ozone change in response to an
  emissions reduction
• at a point source
• across an MSA
• throughout the Southeast
• Area of influence Which emitters affect ozone
  concentrations at a given receptor?
• Preliminary results Work in progress!

87
Sensitivity to control of
VOC
NOX
Mobile
Non-Mobile
Aug. 17 peak hour
88
Ozone Sensitivity to Macon MSA Emissions (2 p.m.
Aug. 11, 2000)
NOx
VOC
NOx
89
Ozone Sensitivity to Atlanta Emissions (2 p.m.
Aug. 11, 2000)
NOx
VOC
90
AOI Macon Ozone to NO(preliminary!)
Response to 1 mol/s NO source
Scaled by NO emissions
91
Conclusions

• VOCs Biogenic emissions predominate.
• NOx
• Within 5-county MSA, most emissions originate
  from vehicles and several point sources.
• Branch Scherer are largest emitters regionally.
• Preliminary modeling indicates Macon is
  NOx-sensitive. On-going modeling and analysis
  will examine the relative influence of emissions
  from Atlanta, Macon, and nearby power plants
  under a range of meteorological conditions, and
  the response of ozone to potential control
  strategies.