Revised Algorithm for Estimating Light Extinction from IMPROVE Particle Speciation Data

Abstract The Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) particle monitoring network consists of approximately 160 sites at which fine particulate matter (PM2.5) mass and major species concentrations and course particulate matter (PM10) mass concentrations are determined by analysis of 24-hr duration sampling conducted on a 1-day-in-3 schedule. A simple algorithm to estimate light extinction from the measured species concentrations was incorporated in the 1999 Regional Haze Rule as the basis for the haze metric used to track haze trends. A revised algorithm was developed that is more consistent with the recent atmospheric aerosol literature and reduces bias for high and low light extinction extremes. The revised algorithm differs from the original algorithm in having a term for estimating sea salt light scattering from Cl - ion data, using 1.8 instead of 1.4 for the mean ratio of organic mass to measured organic carbon, using site-specific Rayleigh scattering based on site elevation and mean temperature, employing a split component extinction efficiency associated with large and small size mode sulfate, nitrate and organic mass species, and adding a term for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) absorption for sites with NO2 concentration information. Light scattering estimates using the original and the revised algorithms are compared with nephelometer measurements at 21 IMPROVE monitoring sites. The revised algorithm reduces the underprediction of high haze periods and the overprediction of low haze periods compared with the performance of the original algorithm. This is most apparent at the hazier monitoring sites in the eastern United States. For each site, the PM10 composition for days selected as the best 20% and the worst 20% haze condition days are nearly identical regardless of whether the basis of selection was light scattering from the original or revised algorithms, or from nephelometer-measured light scattering.

[1]  M. Hartmann,et al.  Light scattering by small particles. Von H. C. VANDE HULST. New York: Dover Publications, Inc. 1981. Paperback, 470 S., 103 Abb. und 46 Tab., US $ 7.50 , 1984 .

[2]  Naresh Kumar,et al.  Variation of Mass Scattering Efficiencies in IMPROVE , 2004, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[3]  P. Koutrakis,et al.  Concentration and Composition of Atmospheric Aerosols from the 1995 SEAVS Experiment and a Review of the Closure between Chemical and Gravimetric Measurements , 2000, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[4]  J. K. Dixon.  The Absorption Coefficient of Nitrogen Dioxide in the Visible Spectrum , 1940 .

[5]  P. Quinn,et al.  Chemical and optical properties of marine boundary layer aerosol particles of the mid-Pacific in relation to sources and meteorological transport , 1996 .

[6]  W. Malm,et al.  Review of the IMPROVE Equation for Estimating Ambient Light Extinction Coefficients , 2005 .

[7]  P. T. Roberts,et al.  On the nature and origins of visibility-reducing aerosols in the los angeles air basin , 1977 .

[8]  S. Friedlander,et al.  Gas-particle distribution factors for organic and other pollutants in the Los Angeles atmosphere , 1975 .

[9]  C. Tropea,et al.  Light Scattering from Small Particles , 2003 .

[10]  W. Malm,et al.  Intercomparison and closure calculations using measurements of aerosol species and optical properties during the Yosemite Aerosol Characterization Study , 2005 .

[11]  Jenny L. Hand,et al.  An examination of the physical and optical properties of aerosols collected in the IMPROVE program , 2007 .

[12]  Naresh Kumar,et al.  Determination of the organic aerosol mass to organic carbon ratio in IMPROVE samples. , 2005, Chemosphere.

[13]  Barbara J. Turpin,et al.  Species Contributions to PM2.5 Mass Concentrations: Revisiting Common Assumptions for Estimating Organic Mass , 2001 .

[14]  K. H. Fung,et al.  Thermodynamic and optical properties of sea salt aerosols , 1997 .

[15]  P. Quinn,et al.  Measurements of chloride depletion and sulfur enrichment in individual sea‐salt particles collected from the remote marine boundary layer , 1994 .

[16]  S. F. Marshall,et al.  Comparison of measured and calculated aerosol properties relevant to the direct radiative forcing of tropospheric sulfate aerosol on climate , 1995 .

[17]  W. Malm,et al.  Observations of smoke‐influenced aerosol during the Yosemite Aerosol Characterization Study: 2. Aerosol scattering and absorbing properties , 2005 .

[18]  Naresh Kumar,et al.  PM2.5 Mass and Light Extinction Reconstruction in IMPROVE , 2003, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[19]  U. Baltensperger,et al.  Study on the Chemical Character of Water Soluble Organic Compounds in Fine Atmospheric Aerosol at the Jungfraujoch , 2001 .

[20]  Naresh Kumar,et al.  Light Scattering from Sea-Salt Aerosols at Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) Sites , 2006, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[21]  A. Wexler,et al.  Thermodynamic Model of the System H+−NH4+−Na+−SO42-−NO3-−Cl-−H2O at 298.15 K , 1998 .

[22]  Naresh Kumar,et al.  Improved Light Extinction Reconstruction in Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments , 2005, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[23]  W. Malm,et al.  Humidity‐dependent optical properties of fine particles during the Big Bend Regional Aerosol and Visibility Observational Study , 2003 .

[24]  P. Quinn,et al.  Aerosol optical properties in the marine boundary layer during the First Aerosol Characterization Experiment (ACE 1) and the underlying chemical and physical aerosol properties , 1998 .