|
Introduction
Assessment Techniques and Example
Analyses
NMOC/NOx and NMOC/NOyRatios
- Examples of NMOC_NOx_analyses
- Analyses Along Transport
Path
Reactivity of Identified
Hydrocarbons
- Carters' 1994_Maxiumum Incremental Reaction...
- Examples of Reactivity
Assessment
- Ten Most Abundant
Hydrocarbon Species
Relative Age of Hydrocarbon
Mixture
- Analysis Examples
- Assessing the Age of an Air
Mass
Summary
References
[Workbook Table of Contents] [Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
INTRODUCTION
- Photochemical interaction of VOC and NOx form ozone.
- Each VOC reacts at a different rate and with different reaction mechanisms.
Therefore, VOCs can differ significantly in their influence on ozone
formation.
- Recently, control strategies have encouraged the use of a "less-reactive"
VOC to achieve ozone reductions.
- Emission control strategies are developed based on an assessment of whether
or not an area is "VOC-limited" or NOx-limited".
- No single analysis should form the basis for decisions on control
strategies; rather, several analyses should be performed to form a
consensus.
|
Assessing the reactivity, or ozone formation potential, of ambient and
emission inventory-derived VOCs is important.
|
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
OZONE FORMATION
POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUES
- NMOC/NOx and NMOC/NOy ratios
- Reactivity of identified hydrocarbons
- Relative age of hydrocarbon mixture
- NOy comparison to NOx
- Observational-based modeling
- Biogenic contribution to NMHC
- Other methods: ozone and NOy, other organic species
relationships
[Workbook Table of
Contents] [Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
NMOC/NOx AND NMOC/NOy
RATIOS
The ratio of NMOC to NOx or NOy in the morning is an
important parameter for photochemical systems. The ratio characterizes the
efficiency of ozone formation in NMOC-NOx-air mixtures.
- At low ratios (< 5 ppbC/ppb), ozone formation is slow and inefficient
(hydrocarbon-limited). Decreasing NOx levels may result in increased
ozone formation.
- At high ratios (> 15 to 20 ppbC/ppb), ozone formation is limited by
availability of NOx rather than NMOC (NOx-limited).
- Ratios between 5 and 15 are considered transitional, and both
NOx and NMOC controls may be effective.
If NOx-limited, generally NOx controls would be
effective in decreasing ozone (and VOC controls would not be effective).
If VOC-limited, VOC controls would be effective in decreasing ozone (and
NOx controls would not.)
|
- Ratios may change during transport of air parcels - consider the effects of
controls on both nearby areas and areas far downwind.
- When pollutant transport is a significant or dominant factor in high
ambient concentrations at a site, precursor concentrations at upwind locations
along the transport path need to be determined.
- Identify ozone contributions from local precursor emissions, transported
ozone formed in upwind locations, in-situ ozone production from transported
upwind precursors.
- What comprises NMOC and NOx in NMOC:NOx?
- Methane or not?
- Biogenics (e.g., isoprene, terpenes)?
- Carbonyl compounds?
- Unidentified hydrocarbon mass?
- Adjusted NOx? NOy? Only NOx or
NOy above a cut-off limit?
- Time standard for the ratio - standard or local?
- Time of day of the ratio?
- Subtract out the background concentrations?
[Workbook Table of
Contents] [Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
EXAMPLES OF NMOC/NOx
ANALYSES
- Frequency distributions: all ratios, by time of day
- Scatter plots of NMOC and NOx
- Spatial and temporal variations in ratios
- Analysis of the ratio as a function of time of day or along a
trajectory
- Handling instrument detection limit and background concentrations
[Workbook Table of
Contents] [Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 1.

Frequency of LMOS surface NMOC/NOx ratios in (a) all data and (b)
0700-0900 CDT data. Only ratios with NOx concentrations >
8 ppb were included (Main and Roberts, 1993). NMOC = NMHC + formaldehyde and
acetaldehyde.
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 2.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 3.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
ANALYSIS ALONG TRANSPORT
PATH
NMOC/NOx, and ozone and NOx concentrations, for
selected NMOC samples collected on June 26, 1991. Samples were selected along
an estimated time/distance path similar to an estimated trajectory for a
polluted air parcel which might have arrived at the location of the maximum
ozone concentration. The extent of reaction was about one (indicating
NOx limitations) for those samples with * in the NMOC/NOx
column. (Roberts et al., 1995b).
|
Time of Day
|
Location
|
O3
(ppb)
|
NOx
(ppb)
|
NMOC/
NOx
|
| Early morning |
Aloft along boundary |
60-86
|
3
|
14-28
|
| Early morning |
Chicago
Gary
Milwaukee |
18
34
35
|
210
32
46
|
4
7
6
|
| Mid morning |
Zion
Mid-lake Boat |
85
82
|
16
11
|
8
9
|
| Afternoon |
South-lake Boat
Aloft over South-lake Boat
Aloft over North-lake Boat
North-lake Boat
Sheboygan
Aloft over NEROE intersection
Aloft over Collins |
129
125
106
148
134
121
99
|
6
9
11
20
14
6
2
|
16*
6
6
7
12
13*
33
|
| Late afternoon |
North-lake Boat
Aloft over North-lake Boat
Sheboygan |
119
76
111
|
5
6
4
|
9*
14
17*
|
NMOC = NMHC + formaldehyde and acetaldehyde
NMOC/NOx, and ozone and NOx concentrations, for all
LMOS NMOC samples with ozone concentrations greater than 125 ppb. The mean
NMOC/NOx ratio is 10 and the median ratio is 9. The extent of
reaction was about one (indicating NOx limitations) for those
samples with * in the NMOC/NOx column. (Roberts et al.,
1995b)
|
Date
(1991)
|
Time
(CDT)
|
Location
|
O3
(ppb)
|
NOx
(ppb)
|
NMOC/
NOx
|
|
June 26
|
1300-1500
|
South-lake Boat
|
129
|
6
|
16*
|
|
June 26
|
1300-1500
|
North-lake Boat
|
148
|
20
|
7
|
|
June 26
|
1300-1500
|
Sheboygan
|
134
|
14
|
12
|
|
June 28
|
1455-1458
|
Aloft over Mid-lake Boat
|
127
|
5
|
8
|
|
July 17
|
1802-1803
|
Aloft over Tulip City
|
151
|
8
|
7
|
|
July 18
|
1309-1311
|
Aloft over NEPTS intersection
|
135
|
18
|
7
|
|
July 18
|
1300-1500
|
Mid-lake Boat
|
154
|
12
|
9
|
|
July 18
|
1427-1431
|
Aloft over Mid-lake Boat
|
136
|
5
|
12
|
|
July 18
|
1700-1900
|
Borculo
|
164
|
9
|
17
|
|
July 18
|
1804-1805
|
Aloft over Tulip City
|
154
|
8
|
9
|
NMOC = NMHC + formaldehyde and acetaldehyde
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
REACTIVITY OF
IDENTIFIED HYDROCARBONS
- Incremental reactivity may be used to assess effect of changing emissions
of a given VOC on ozone formation.
- Incremental reactivity is the change in ozone caused by adding a small
amount of test VOC to the emission in an episode, divided by the amount of test
VOC added:
g ozone/g C or mols ozone/mol C
- MIR scale was developed by W.P.L. Carter and used in "low emission vehicles
and clean fuels" regulations in California.
- Most useful in a relative rather than absolute manner.
- Uncertainty associated with MIR scale values and the notion that total
reactivity equals the sum of individual species incremental reactivities is
unverified.
- MIR scale values for >C4 aldehydes not yet available.
- Need low unidentified fraction of total NMOC to best assess the potential
reactivity of a hydrocarbon mixture.
[Workbook Table of
Contents] [Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
CARTER’S 1994 MAXIMUM INCREMENTAL REACTIVITY
VALUES FOR HYDROCARBON AND CARBONYL COMPOUNDS
|
Maximum Incremental Reactivity (MIR)a
|
| Species Name |
AIRS
No.
|
g Ozone/
g C
|
mol Ozone/
mol Cb
|
| Acetylene |
43206
|
0.5
|
0.14
|
| Ethene |
43203
|
7.4
|
2.16
|
| Ethane |
43202
|
0.25
|
0.08
|
| Propene |
43205
|
9.4
|
2.75
|
| Propane |
43204
|
0.48
|
0.15
|
| i-Butane |
43214
|
1.21
|
0.37
|
| 1-Butene |
43280
|
8.9
|
2.6
|
| n-Butane |
43212
|
1.02
|
0.31
|
| t-2-Butene |
43216
|
10
|
2.92
|
| c-2-Butene |
43217
|
10
|
2.92
|
| 3-methyl-1-butene |
43282
|
6.2
|
1.81
|
| i-Pentane |
43221
|
1.38
|
0.41
|
| 1-Pentene |
43224
|
6.2
|
1.81
|
| n-Pentane |
43220
|
1.04
|
0.31
|
| Isoprene |
43243
|
9.1
|
2.58
|
| t-2-pentene |
43226
|
8.8
|
2.57
|
| c-2-pentene |
43227
|
8.8
|
2.57
|
| 2-methyl-2-butene |
43228
|
6.4
|
1.87
|
| 2,2-dimethylbutane |
43244
|
0.82
|
0.25
|
| Cyclopentene |
43283
|
7.7
|
2.19
|
| 4-methyl-1-pentene |
43234
|
3.0c
|
0.87
|
| Cyclopentane |
43242
|
2.4
|
0.7
|
| 2,3-dimethylbutane |
43284
|
1.07
|
0.32
|
| 2-methylpentane |
43285
|
1.5
|
0.45
|
| 3-methylpentane |
43230
|
1.5
|
0.45
|
| 2-methyl-1-pentene |
43246
|
3.0c
|
0.87
|
| n-hexane |
43231
|
0.98
|
0.29
|
| t-2-hexene |
43289
|
6.7
|
1.96
|
| c-2-hexene |
43290
|
6.7
|
1.96
|
| Methylcyclopentane |
43262
|
2.8
|
0.82
|
| 2,4-dimethylpentane |
43247
|
1.5
|
0.45
|
| Benzene |
45201
|
0.42
|
0.11
|
| Cyclohexane |
43248
|
1.28
|
0.37
|
| 2-methylhexane |
43263
|
1.08
|
0.32
|
| 2,3-dimethylpentane |
43291
|
1.31
|
0.39
|
| 3-methylhexane |
43249
|
1.4
|
0.42
|
| 2,2,4-trimethylpentane |
43250
|
0.93
|
0.28
|
| n-Heptane |
43232
|
0.81
|
0.24
|
| Methylcyclohexane |
43261
|
1.8
|
0.53
|
| 2,3,4-trimethylpentane |
43252
|
1.6
|
0.48
|
| Toluene |
45202
|
2.7
|
0.74
|
| 2-methylheptane |
43960
|
0.96
|
0.29
|
| 3-methylheptane |
43253
|
0.99
|
0.29
|
| n-Octane |
43233
|
0.6
|
0.18
|
| Ethylbenzene |
45203
|
2.7
|
0.75
|
|
m&p-Xylenes |
45109
|
7.4d
|
2.05
|
| styrene |
45220
|
2.2
|
0.60
|
| n-nonane |
43235
|
0.54
|
0.16
|
| Isopropylbenzene |
45210
|
2.2
|
0.6
|
| n-Propylbenzene |
45209
|
2.1
|
0.58
|
|
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene |
45207
|
10.1
|
2.81
|
|
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene |
45208
|
8.8
|
2.45
|
|
1,2,3-trimethylbenzene |
45225
|
8.9
|
2.6
|
| o-Xylene |
45204
|
6.5
|
1.8
|
| o-ethyltoluene |
45211
|
5.3c
|
1.48
|
| m-ethyltoluene |
45212
|
5.3c
|
1.48
|
| p-ethyltoluene |
45213
|
5.3c
|
1.48
|
| m-diethylbenzene |
45218
|
4.8c
|
1.33
|
| p-diethylbenzene |
45219
|
4.8c
|
1.33
|
| n-Decane |
43238
|
0.46
|
0.17
|
| n-Undecane |
43954
|
0.42
|
0.12
|
| Formaldehyde |
43502
|
7.2
|
4.5
|
| Acetaldehyde |
43503
|
5.5
|
2.52
|
| Acetone |
43551
|
0.56
|
0.23
|
| Carbon Monoxide |
42101
|
0.054
|
0.032
|
| Methane |
43201
|
0.015
|
0.005
|
Bold indicates reactivity > formaldehyde.
a Carter (1994). Note that the paper provides only units of g
Ozone per g C.
b Calculated from g Ozone/g C values:    
Where MWo3 = Molecular weight of Ozone (48 g/mol),
MWvoc = molecular weight of the VOC, and #Cvoc is the
number of carbons in the VOC.
c Carter (1991). Note that the Carter (1994) reference did not
include an updated value for this species.
d Average of m-xylene and p-xylene values.
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 4.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
EXAMPLES
OF REACTIVITY ASSESSMENT
- Most abundant species evaluation using concentration and
reactivity-weighted data: many less-abundant species based on concentration
become important when reactivity is considered.
- Frequency distribution (histogram): assess temporal changes in the total
reactivity.
- Summary statistics by time of day: assess change in total reactivity by
time of day.
- Fingerprint plots: perform inter-site comparisons, assess changes in
composition with time of day.
- Bar plots: assess spatial and temporal changes of the total reactivity,
assess reactivity by species groups.
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
TEN
MOST ABUNDANT HYDROCARBON SPECIES
Shading indicates species on both concentration and
reactivity-scaled abundance lists.
Pico Rivera, CA
July-August 1995
|
Concentration or Wt. Fraction
|
Reactivity-Scaled Data
|
| Propane |
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene |
| Toluene |
m&p-Xylenes |
| i-Pentane |
m-Diethylbenzene |
| n-Undecane |
Toluene |
| m&p-Xylenes |
Ethene |
| m-Diethylbenzene |
o-Xylene |
| Ethane |
Propene |
| n-Butane |
p-Diethylbenzene |
| n-Nonane |
i-Pentane |
|
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene |
o-Ethyltoluene |
Data Source: Level 1, AIRS data.
Bold indicates species on both concentration and reactivity-scaled
abundance lists.
[Workbook Table of Contents] [Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Upland, CA
July-August 1995
|
Concentration or Wt. Fraction
|
Reactivity-Scaled Data
|
| i-Pentane |
1-Butene |
| Toluene |
m-Xylene |
| Propane |
Toluene |
| 1-Butene |
i-Pentane |
| n-Butane |
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene |
| n-Pentane |
o-Xylene |
| 2-Methylpentane |
Ethene |
| Acetylene |
p-Xylene |
| Benzene |
Methylcyclopentane |
| Methylcyclopentane |
1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene |
Data Source: Level 1, AIRS data.
Bold indicates species on both concentration and reactivity-scaled
abundance lists.
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Chicago-Jardine, IL
June 1996
|
Concentration or Wt. Fraction
|
Reactivity-Scaled Data
|
| Ethane |
Ethene |
| i-Pentane |
Propene |
| Propane |
m&p-Xylenes |
| Toluene |
Toluene |
| n-Butane |
1-Butene |
| Ethene |
i-Pentane |
| n-Pentane |
o-Xylene |
| Acetylene |
n-Butane |
| Benzene |
m-Ethyltoluene |
| 2-Methylpentane |
n-Pentane |
Data Source: Level 1, AIRS data.
Bold indicates species on both concentration and reactivity-scaled
abundance lists.
[Workbook Table of
Contents] [Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Stafford, CT
June 1995
|
Concentration or Wt. Fraction
|
Reactivity-Scaled Data
|
| Isoprene |
Isoprene |
| Ethane |
Ethene |
| i-Pentane |
m&p-Xylenes |
| Toluene |
Toluene |
| Propane |
Propene |
| n-Butane |
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene |
| n-Pentane |
i-Pentane |
| Benzene |
o-Xylene |
| Acetylene |
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene |
|
Ethene/m&p-Xylenes |
Styrene/t-2-Butene |
Data Source: Level 0, preliminary data.
Bold indicates species on both concentration and reactivity-scaled
abundance lists.
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
East Hartford, CT
June 1995
|
Concentration or Wt. Fraction
|
Reactivity-Scaled Data
|
| i-Pentane |
m&p-xylenes |
| Toluene |
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene |
| n-Butane |
Propene |
| Propane |
i-Pentane |
|
m&p-xylenes |
Isoprene |
| Ethane |
Ethene |
| Acetylene |
Toluene |
| n-Pentane |
1-pentene |
| 1-pentene |
3-methyl-2-butene |
|
Ethene/Isoprene |
Cyclopentene/o-xylene |
Data Source: Level 0, preliminary data, CT DEP.
Bold indicates species on both concentration and reactivity-scaled
abundance lists.
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Chamizal (El Paso), TX
June 1995
|
Concentration or Wt. Fraction
|
Reactivity-Scaled Data
|
| i-Pentane |
m&p-xylenes |
| Toluene |
Ethene |
| Propane |
Propene |
| n-Butane |
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene |
| Ethene |
Toluene |
| Ethane |
o-Xylene |
| Acetylene |
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene |
| m&p-Xylenes |
i-Pentane |
| n-Hexane |
t-2-Butene |
| Benzene |
t-2-Hexene |
Data Source: Chamizal - Level 1, AIRS data.
Bold indicates species on both concentration and reactivity-scaled
abundance lists.
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 5.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 6.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 7.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 8.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 9.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 10.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
RELATIVE AGE OF HYDROCARBON MIXTURE
- VOC may be used as indicators of ozone formation potential and tracers of
urban emissions.
- Relative abundance of more-reactive species (olefins, xylenes)
should decrease with time during the day, while less-reactive species
(paraffins, benzene) will appear to increase.
[Workbook Table of
Contents] [Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
ANALYSIS EXAMPLES
- Summary statistics
- Scatter plots
- Diurnal plots of ratios
- Nighttime vs. daytime ratios
- Comparison of ratios among sites
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
ASSESSING THE AGE OF AN AIR MASS:
COMPARISON OF AVERAGE RATIOS
(JULY 1994)
Sitea |
Benzene:
Toluene
|
m&p-Xylene:
Benzene
|
Assessment
|
| Bronx, NYb |
0.28c
|
1.55
|
Fresh
|
| E. Hartford, CT |
0.39
|
1.40
|
Fresh
|
| Stafford, CT |
0.67
|
0.56
|
Aged
|
| Chicopee, MA |
0.22c
|
1.59
|
Fresh
|
| Lynn, MA |
0.40
|
1.53
|
Fresh
|
| Cape Eliz., ME |
0.74
|
0.19
|
Aged
|
"Expected" Fresh
"Expected" Aged |
~0.4
>0.4
|
~1.5
<1.5
|
|
a Average over 1600-1800 EST unless otherwise noted.
b Average over 1500-1700 EST.
c Shows evidence of local enrichment of toluene in comparison to
other areas.
Data source: Level 0, preliminary data from CT DEP, MA DEP, NY DEC, and ME
DEP
|
Other ratios to investigate (more-reactive/less-reactive): propene/ethene,
propene/acetylene, propane/ethane, m- & p-xylenes/ethylbenzene.
|
[Workbook Table of
Contents] [Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 11.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 12.
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 13.
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 14.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
Figure 15.

[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
SUMMARY
These analyses provide information which assist in the decisions on which
species are the most important to ozone formation and begin to address the
question of NOx versus hydrocarbon emission controls.
| Analysis/Procedure |
Example Tool(s) |
| Scatter Plots |
Statistical Software, Spreadsheets |
| Frequency Distributions |
Statistics, Spreadsheet |
Spatial and Temporal:
Bar, line, hi-lo, box plots |
Statistics, Spreadsheet, VOCDat,
Voyager |
| Ratios Along Transport Path |
Review of Meteorology, Voyager |
| Abundant Species |
Spreadsheet, Statistics |
| MIR*Concentration or Wt. Frac. |
VOCDat, Spreadsheets |
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
OZONE
REFERENCES
California Air Resources Board (1994) California phase 2 reformulated
gasoline news. RFG Forum, No. 1, December.
Carter W.P.L. (1991) Development of ozone reactivity scales for volatile
organic compounds. Report prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, EPA-600/3-91-050.
Carter W.P.L. (1994) Development of ozone reactivity scales for volatile
organic compounds. J. Air & Waste Manag. Assoc. 44,
881-899.
Carter W.P.L. (1995) Computer modeling of environmental chamber measurements
of maximum incremental reactivities of volatile organic compounds. Atmos.
Environ. 29, 2513-2527.
Carter W.P.L., Pierce J. A., Luo D., and Malkina I. L. (1995) Environmental
chamber study of maximum incremental reactivities of volatile organic
compounds. Atmos. Environ. 29, 2499-2511.
Grosjean E., Grosjean D., Fraser M.P., and Cass G.R. (1996) Air quality
model evaluation data for organics. 2. C1 - C14 carbonyls
in Los Angeles air. Environ. Sci. Technol. 30,
2687-2703.
Harley R.A., Hannglan M.P., and Cass G.R. (1992) Respeciation of organic gas
emissions and the detection of excess unburned gasoline in the atmosphere.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 26, 2395-2408.
Kelly T.J., Ward G.F., and Satola J. (1995) A comparison of NOy
and conventional "NOx" measurements at a rural site in Pennsylvania.
Paper presented at the Air & Waste Management Association and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Measurement of Toxic and Related Air Pollutants
Conference, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 16-19.
Korc M.E. and Chinkin L.R. (1993) Improvement of the speciation profiles
used in the development of the 1991 LMOS emission inventory. Draft final report
prepared for the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, Des Plaines, IL, by
Sonoma Technology, Inc., Santa Rosa, CA, STI-92324-1394-DFR; December.
LADCO (1995) Lake Michigan Ozone Study. 1994 data analysis report, version
1.1. Report prepared by Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium, Des Plaines,
IL, May.
Lindsey C.G., Dye T.S., Main H.H., Korc M.E., Blumenthal D.L., Roberts P.T.,
Ray S.E., and Arthur M. (1995) Air quality and meteorological data analyses for
the 1994 NARSTO-Northeast Air Quality Study. Draft final report prepared for
Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA by Sonoma Technology, Inc.,
Santa Rosa, CA, STI-94362-1511-DFR, July.
Lurmann F.W. and Main H.H. (1992) Analysis of the ambient VOC data collected
in the Southern California Air Quality Study. Report prepared for the
California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA by Sonoma Technology, Inc.,
Santa Rosa, CA, STI-99120-1161-FR, Contract No. A823-130, February.
Main H.H. and Roberts P.T. (1993) Validation and analysis of the Lake
Michigan Ozone Study ambient VOC data. Draft final report prepared for the Lake
Michigan Air Directors Consortium, Des Plaines, IL by Sonoma Technology, Inc.,
Santa Rosa, CA, STI-90217-1352-DFR, April.
Nelson P.F. and Quigley S.M. (1983) The m, p-xylenes: ethylbenzene ratio, a
technique for estimating hydrocarbon age in ambient atmospheres. Atmos.
Environ. 17, 659-662.
NESCAUM (1995) Preview of the 1994 ozone precursor concentrations in the
northeastern U.S. 5/1/94 draft report prepared by the Ambient Monitoring and
Assessment Committee of the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use
Management, Boston, MA.
Roberts P.T., Roth P.M., Blanchard C.L., Korc M.E., and Lurmann (1995b)
Characteristics of VOC-limited and NOx-limited areas within the Lake
Michigan air quality region. Technical memorandum prepared for Lake Michigan
Air Directors Consortium, Des Plaines, IL by Sonoma Technology, Inc., Santa
Rosa, CA and Envair, Albany, CA, STI-92322-1504-TM, May.
Stoeckenius T.E., Ligocki M.P., Cohen B.L., Rosenbaum A.S., and Douglas S.G.
(1994b) Recommendations for analysis of PAMS data. Final report prepared by
Systems Applications International, San Rafael, CA, SYSAPP94-94/011r1,
February.
Systems Applications International, Sonoma Technology Inc., Earth Tech, and
Alpine Geophysics (1995) Gulf of Mexico Air Quality Study. Vol 1: Summary of
data analysis and modeling. Final report prepared for U.S. Department of the
Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans,
LA, OCS Study, MMS 95-0038.
Yarwood G., Gray H.A., Ligocki M.P., and Whitten G.Z. (1994) Evaluation of
ambient species profiles, ambient versus modeled NMHC:NOx and
CO:NOx ratios, and source receptor analyses. Final report prepared
for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobil Sources, Research
Triangle Park, NC, by Systems Applications International, San Rafael, CA,
SYSAPP94-94/081, September.
[Workbook Table of Contents]
[Top of Assessing Ozone Formation] [Previous Section] [Next Section]
|