reasonable progress demonstration case study for saguaro wilderness area arizona regional haze...

Reasonable Progress Demonstration Case Study

for Saguaro Wilderness Area

Arizona Regional Haze Stakeholder Meeting

January 22, 2007

Saguaro Wilderness Area

Source: WRAP Causes of Haze Website (http://coha.dri.edu)

Saguaro West (SAWE)

Saguaro NM (SAGU)

Source: VIEWS websitehttp://vista.cira.colostate.edu

http://coha.dri.edu/

http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/

SAGU Baseline Extinction Budget

Source: WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Monitoring >> Compositionhttp://vista.cira.colostate.edu/tss/

http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/tss/

SAWE Baseline Extinction Budget

Source: WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Monitoring >> Composition

20% Best Day Compositionat SAWE and SAGU

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

NO3 SO4 EC OC CM Fine Soil

Aerosol Species

Ligh

t Ext

inct

ion

(Mm

-1)

SAWESAGU

Source: Chart made from two spreadsheets posted at:WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Monitoring >> Composition

20% Worst Day Compositionat SAWE and SAGU

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

NO3 SO4 EC OC CM Fine Soil

Aerosol Species

Ligh

t Ext

inct

ion

(Mm

-1)

SAWESAGU

Source: Chart made from two spreadsheets posted at:WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Monitoring >> Composition

Reasonable Progress Under the Federal Regional Haze Rule

• States set reasonable progress goals based on:– Consideration of 4 statutory factors

• Costs• Time necessary for compliance• Energy and non-air quality environmental impacts• Remaining useful life of potentially affected sources

– The uniform rate of progress (measured in deciviews) necessary to attain natural conditions by 2064

• States adopt long-term strategies to achieve these goals

• States implement BART

Uniform Rate of Progress (worst days)

Source: WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Monitoring >> Trends

Uniform Rate of Progress• Essentially a 20% reduction in manmade haze

(dv) per planning period (10 years)• Heavily dependent on:

– Assumptions regarding future natural conditions– Contribution of non-WRAP sources to baseline– Representativeness of 2000-04 baseline

• 24 of the 77 Class I sites have no more than 3 years of data in baseline period

– These issues more accute in the West• Haze rule promulgated in 1999

A Species-Based Approach to RP

• Isolate some of the URP issues previously noted• Species differ significantly from one another in

their:– Contribution to visibility impairment– Spatial and seasonal distributions– Source types– Contribution from natrual and international sources– Emissions data quality– Atmospheric science quality– Tools available for assessment and projection

SO2 NOx OC CMEmission Sources

Almost entirely anthro.Mostly point sources.

Mostly anthro.Mix of combustion sources.

Diverse.Mix of anthro, fire, and biogenic VOCs.

Diverse.Very difficult to partition wb dust into nat/anthro.

Emissions Data Quality

Very good overall. Activity data less good for area sources.

Good.Activity data less good, some coding concerns w/ smaller point, area, and O&G sources.

Fair.Good activity data & conf. in PM2.5 emissions, but uncertain spec. of PM2.5 & bio. VOCs.

Poor, except for some locales.Categorically complete but accuracy very uncertain.

Emission Projections

Very good.Uncertain about area sources.

Good.Uncertain about offshore and O&G.

Fair.What to expect from fire?

Fair.What to expect from wb dust?

Atmospheric Science Quality

Very good.Meteorology probably largest uncertainty.

Fair.Chemistry more complex, but meteorology too.

Fair.Most complex, least understood, but model perf. OK.

Fair.No major chemistry, but model resolution, met. insufficient.

WRAP Tools Emission Inv.CMAQ Proj.PSAT Apport.

Emission Inv.CMAQ Proj.PSAT Apport.

Emission Inv.CMAQ Proj.PMF, WEP.

Emission Inv.Causes of Dust.WEP.

Draft WRAP Protocol for Demonstrating Reasonable Progress

• For each site and species …• Estimate progress expected from Base Case + BART in

2018• Determine any other LTSs which may be reasonable for

that pollutant and recalculate 2018 species concentration• Add up improvements from all species into dv• This becomes the RPG for the 20% worst days• Explain why this is less than URP

– Large international and natural contributions, large uncertainties in dust inventory preclude action, etc.

Determine URP for a species

IsBase+BART

projection better than

URP?

IsWRAPAnthro

reduction> 20%?

Are thereany importantuncontrolled

sources?

Are thereany important

uncontrolled orundercontrolled

sources?

Repeat for other species.

Evaluate emission & airquality trends more closely

Identify LTSs for thesesources considering the4 RPG and other factors

identified in the RHR.

Adopt, commit to adopt, orcommit to further evaluation.

Determine reductions at C1A.

Add up all species reductionsto get a RPG for worst days.

Eplain why it’s less than defaultURP but still reasonable.Set goal for best days.

Y

Y Y

N*

N N

N

Y

* Note, if no LTS beyond BART is developed, then the 4 RPG factorsare inherently taken into account via BART.

Interstate coop key.

SAGU Species Trendsand URP Glidepaths (Worst Days)

Peak day for OC on 10/30/03. Peak day for CM on May 31, 2003.

SAWE Species Trendsand URP Glidepaths (Worst Days)

Peak day for OC on 10/30/03. Peak day for CM on May 31, 2003.

SAGU Upwind Residence TimeOn 20% Wost Visibility Days (2000-04)

Source: WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Area of Interest >> Weighted Emission Potential

Ammonium Nitrate (NO3)

NO3

• Is the Base+BART projection better than URP?– Yes: CMAQ base case projections for 2018

show a 20% reduction in extinction due to NO3.

• Results do not yet include BART• Results not yet available on TSS

– Precise projection method not yet finalized

• WRAP anthro reduction is 28%– See PSAT results on next slide

NO3

• Are there any important uncontrolled upwind sources?– Use TSS to examine inventory upwind

• PSAT results• PMF results• WEP results• Emission inventories

SAGU NO3 PSAT Results2002 and 2018 base cases

Source: WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Area of Interest >> SOx/NOx Tracer

SAWE NO3 PSAT Results2002 and 2018 base cases


SAGU PMF Apportionment of NitrateWorst Visibility Days (2001-2004)

Smoke0%

SO4-Rich Secondary

2%Oil Comb. (Shipping)

0%

NO3-Rich Secondary

92%

Dust20%

Mobile / Road Dust2%

Dust1 (w/ NO3)4%

Mixture (Coal, Smelting)

0%

Source: Chart made after manipulation of data posted on WRAP Causes of Hase Website:http://coha.dri.edu/web/general/tools_PMFModeling.html

http://coha.dri.edu/web/general/tools_PMFModeling.html


SAGU NO3 WEP Results (2000-04)Sources and Areas of Potential Nitrogen Oxide Emissions Influence

2000-2004 Baseline for Saguaro National Park, AZ20% Worst Visibility Days

86.2

3.70.2 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 2.3 1.8 0.4

3.30.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e

Biogenic Natural Fire Point Area WRAP Area O&G Off-Shore On-Road Mobile Off-Road Mobile Road Dust Fugitive Dust WB Dust Anthro Fire

Source: WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Area of Interest >> Weighted Emission Potenital

SAWE NO3 WEP Results (2000-04)Sources and Areas of Potential Nitrogen Oxide Emissions Influence

2000-2004 Baseline for Saguaro West National Park, AZ20% Worst Visibility Days

85.2

5.00.1 0.1 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1

2.8 1.2 0.23.9

0.10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



AZ NOx Emissions

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

Point Area

WRAP Area

O&G

Off-Shore

On-Road

Mobile

Off-Road

Mobile

Road D

ust

Fugitive D

ust

WB Dust

Anthro Fire

Natural

Fire

Biogenic

Total

Anthro

Tons

Per

Yea

r

2002 (tpy) 2018 (tpy)

-35%

Source: WRAP website: Emissions Forum pivot tables: http://www.wrapair.org/forums/ssjf/pivot.html

Major NOx Sources in the 2018Arizona Point Source Pivot Table

External Combustion Boilers Electric Generation Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal CHOLLA POWER PLANT 14,576CORONADO GENERATING STATION 12,937TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER CO-SPRINGERVILLE 8,847AZ ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE INC 6,782IRVINGTON GENERATING STATION 2,705Future Coal EGU (B) 1,675Future Coal EGU (A) 1,675

Natural Gas 4,692Process Gas 143Distillate Oil 9

Industrial 1,895Commercial/Institutional 529

Internal Combustion Engines Electric Generation Natural Gas 5,465Process Gas 168Distillate Oil (Diesel) 99

Commercial/Institutional 3,478Industrial 1,547Engine Testing 114

Industrial Processes Mineral Products 8,005Oil and Gas Production 190Secondary Metal Production 154Food and Agriculture 91Primary Metal Production 88

http://www.wrapair.org/forums/ssjf/pivot.html

http://www.wrapair.org/forums/ssjf/pivot.html

Source Category PSAT WEP Notes

Boundary conditions

Outside state authority.High uncertainty.

CA mobile sources Note large reductions (51% in PSAT).

AZ mobile sources Note large reductions (55% in PSAT).

AZ point sources BART not yet included. Cement plants second to EGUs.

Most Likely NOx Sources Significantly Contributing to NO3at SAGU On the 20% Worst Visibility Days

Ammonium Sulfate (SO4)

SO4• Is the Base+BART projection better than URP?

– No: CMAQ base case projections for 2018 show only a 6% reduction in extinction due to SO4.

• Sources outside the WRAP have a large influence• Results not yet available on TSS

• Is WRAP anthro reduction > 20%?– No: PSAT apportionment shows only a 9% reduction

from WRAP anthro SO2 sources• BART not fully included yet• Need to correct (reduce) 2018 Hayden emissions

SO4

• Are there any important uncontrolled or undercontrolled upwind sources?– Use TSS to examine inventory upwind

• PSAT results• PMF results• WEP results• Emission inventories

SAGU SO4 PSAT Results2002 and 2018 base cases


SAWE SO4 PSAT Results2002 and 2018 base cases


SAGU PMF Apportionment of SulfateWorst Visibility Days (2001-2004)

Oil Comb. (Shipping)

32%

Smoke9%

SO4-Rich Secondary

54%

NO3-Rich Secondary

2%Dust2

0%Mobile / Road Dust

0%

Dust1 (w/ NO3)1%


2%




SAGU SO4 WEP Results (2000-04)Sources and Areas of Potential Sulfur Oxide Emissions Influence


48.3

0.9 0.2 0.0 0.1 1.2 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2

35.3

3.0 1.1

8.3

0.30

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



SAWE SO4 WEP Results (2000-04)Sources and Areas of Potential Sulfur Oxide Emissions Influence


40.7

1.7 0.1 0.1 0.12.9 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2

38.7

2.5 0.6

11.4

0.20

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



AZ SO2 Emissions

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

Point Area

WRAP Area

O&G

Off-Shore

On-Road

Mobile

Off-Road

Mobile

Road D

ust

Fugitive D

ust

WB Dust

Anthro Fire

Natural

Fire

Biogenic

Total

Anthro

Tons

Per

Yea

r

2002 (tpy) 2018 (tpy)

-3%

Changes In Point and Area Source SO2 Emissions In AZ

Area Source ChangesSCC1_DESC SCC3_DESC SCC6_DESC 2002 2018Stationary Source Fuel Combustion Industrial Distillate Oil 1,117 1,402

Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal 918 948Residual Oil 55 248

Commercial/Institutional Distillate Oil 361 460Bituminous/Subbituminous Coal 2 3

AZ Point Source Changes (Base18b - Plan02c)Springerville+Coronado+Apache -16,516Irvington 2,200Future Coal (AZ) 3,350Future Coal (Navajo-AZ) 1,675Copper 4,562Industrial Gas Boilers -500Mineral Products (cement+lime) 900Total Emissions Modeled -4,329

11-State EGU SO2 Trend

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

1998 2002 2005 2018b 2018 BART

SO2

(tpy)

PSAT Modeling Cases

Most Likely SO2 Sources Significantly Contributing to SO4at SAGU On the 20% Worst Visibility Days

Source Category PSAT WEP Notes

Boundary Conditions

Outside state authority.High uncertainty.

Pacific Ocean Outside state authority.

Mexico point & area Outside state authority.Check coastal point sources.

CENRAP point CAIR yields 23% reduction.

East U.S. point CAIR yields 56% reduction.

AZ point Contribution increases 32%. Some BART not yet included. Error at Hayden. Note broad trends.

AZ area Contribution increases 27%. Should check area source oil & coal use.

Organic Carbon (OC)

Source: WRAP Technical Support System

AORGA Change = +6% (secondary anthropogenic OC)AORGB Change = +1% (secondary biogenic OC, inc. smoke)AORGPA Change = -1% (primary OC, inc. smoke)

SAGU OC CMAQ Results 2002 and 2018 base cases

SAWE OC CMAQ Results 2002 and 2018 base cases

Source: WRAP Technical Support System >> Resources >> Area of Interest >> Organic Aerosol Tracer

AORGA Change = 0% (secondary anthropogenic OC)AORGB Change = +2% (secondary biogenic OC, inc. smoke)AORGPA Change = -1% (primary OC, inc. smoke)

SAGU PMF Apportionment of Organic CarbonWorst Visibility Days (2001-2004)

SO4-Rich Secondary

26%

Smoke26%

Oil Comb. (Shipping)

2%

NO3-Rich Secondary

14%

Dust21%

Mobile / Road Dust26%

Dust1 (w/ NO3)3%


2%




Sources and Areas of Potential Organic Carbon Emissions Influence2000-2004 Baseline for Saguaro National Park, AZ

20% Worst Visibility Days

92.7

2.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.4 1.6 0.2 2.0 0.10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e


SAGU OC WEP Results (2000-04)


SAWE OC WEP Results (2000-04)Sources and Areas of Potential Organic Carbon Emissions Influence


89.3

4.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.7 1.3 0.1

3.60.0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



AZ OC Emissions

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

Point Area

WRAP Area

O&G

Off-Shore

On-Road

Mobile

Off-Road

Mobile

Road D

ust

Fugitive D

ust

WB Dust

Anthro Fire

Natural

Fire

Biogenic

Total

Anthro

Tons

Per

Yea

r

2002 (tpy) 2018 (tpy)

+6%

SAGU CM WEP Results (2000-04)Sources and Areas of Potential Coarse PM Emissions Influence


63.2

1.9 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.3 2.4 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.9 2.70.1

27.2

0.20

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



SAWE CM WEP Results (2000-04)Sources and Areas of Potential Coarse PM Emissions Influence


59.7

2.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.0 1.9 0.0

32.9

0.10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



3-Day Back Trajectories for May 31, 2003

Source: Causes of Haze website dust analysis page:http://coha.dri.edu/dust/index.html

http://coha.dri.edu/dust/index.html

SAWE1 vs SAGU1 Coarse Mass Concentration (ug/m3)10/31/01 - 12/29/03

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

SAGU1

SAW

E1y = 3.3 + 1.3xr2 = 0.69

The high peaks occur in the spring and summer and may be wind-driven.Fine soil concentrations seem elevated at SAWE1 relative to SAGU1 in the Oct – Dec time frame. Is this the result of agricultural activity in the area?

Fine Soil Concentrations (ug/m3) -- 10/31/01 - 12/29/03

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2001

1031

2001

1121

2001

1212

2002

0102

2002

0123

2002

0213

2002

0306

2002

0327

2002

0417

2002

0508

2002

0529

2002

0619

2002

0710

2002

0731

2002

0821

2002

0911

2002

1002

2002

1023

2002

1113

2002

1204

2002

1225

2003

0115

2003

0205

2003

0226

2003

0319

2003

0409

2003

0430

2003

0521

2003

0611

2003

0702

2003

0723

2003

0813

2003

0903

2003

0924

2003

1015

2003

1105

2003

1126

2003

1217

Date

SAGU1 SAWE1

2002 2003

Extra Slides(2018 WEP Results)

SAGU NO3 WEP Results (2018)Sources and Areas of Potential Nitrogen Oxide Emissions Influence

2018 Projections for Saguaro National Park, AZ20% Worst Visibility Days

82.3

3.50.3 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2

3.5 2.0 0.45.3

0.30

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



SAWE NO3 WEP Results (2018)Sources and Areas of Potential Nitrogen Oxide Emissions Influence

2018 Projections for Saguaro West National Park, AZ20% Worst Visibility Days

80.9

4.70.1 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1

4.11.4 0.2

6.30.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



SAGU SO4 WEP Results (2018)Sources and Areas of Potential Sulfur Oxide Emissions Influence


50.5

0.8 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2

35.1

2.6 0.6

8.3

0.30

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



SAWE SO4 WEP Results (2018)Sources and Areas of Potential Sulfur Oxide Emissions Influence


41.4

1.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2

40.0

2.1 0.4

11.8

0.20

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



SAGU CM WEP Results (2018)Sources and Areas of Potential Coarse PM Emissions Influence


77.3

1.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 1.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.6 1.6 0.1

16.4

0.10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



SAWE CM WEP Results (2018)Sources and Areas of Potential Coarse PM Emissions Influence


71.6

1.9 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.7 1.3 0.0

22.6

0.10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Arizon

a

Califor

nia

Colora

doIda

ho

Montan

a

Nevad

a

New M

exico

North

Dakota

Oregon

South

Dakota Utah

Was

hingto

n

Wyo

ming

Pacific

Offs

hore

CENRAP

Easter

n US

Mexico

Canad

a

Perc

ent o

f Tot

al D

ista

nce

Wei

ghte

d Em

is x

Res

Tim

e



reasonable progress demonstration case study for saguaro wilderness area arizona regional haze...

Documents