United States
                  Environmental Protection
                  Agency
Atmospheric Research and
Exposure Assessment Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
                  Research and Development
EPA7600/S3-90/052 Aug. 1990
&EPA         Project  Summary
                   A  Chamber and  Modeling
                   Study  to Assess the
                   Photochemistry  of Formaldehyde

                   H.E. Jeffries, K.G. Sexton, J.R. Arnold, Y. Bai, J.L. Li, and R. Grouse
                    A  new analytical method for
                  formaldehyde (HCHO) was implemen-
                  ted for use in the UNC outdoor smog
                  chamber, and HCHO measurements
                  obtained  with this  method  were
                  compared with those obtained using
                  other analytical techniques.  Six dif-
                  ferent calibration standards for HCHO
                  were found to agree within ± 2%, and
                  the  different  HCHO  analytical
                  methods had precisions of  ±10%.
                  New experiments in which HCHO was
                  an initial reactant and in which HCHO
                  was  produced chemically  were
                  performed.  The  older  and  newer
                  HCHO analytical methods agreed to
                  within 10% in these experiments.
                    A  very explicit photochemical
                  reaction mechanism for  ethene and
                  propene  was formulated to  explain
                  the chamber  observations.  The
                  ethene mechanism showed excellent
                  agreement with chamber observa-
                  tions; the propene mechanism, how-
                  ever, did not perform as  satisfactory.
                  A  comparison  of these  explicit
                  mechanisms with the Carbon Bond IV
                  (CB4) mechanism, which is  used in
                  several EPA air  quality simulation
                  models, showed excellent agreement
                  for ozone (<10% error),  nitrogen ox-
                  ides, and  hydrocarbon oxidation
                  rates; the CB4, however,  consistently
                  underpredicted the HCHO maximum
                  by about 13%.
                    An analysis of a simulation of an
                  urban scenario showed that chemical
                  production  of HCHO was the dom-
                  inant factor governing afternoon
                  HCHO concentrations. Ethene and
                  other olefins were the source of 58-
                  62%  of the HCHO produced and
aromatics were responsible for 10-
12%.
  It was concluded  that the  CB4
mechanism can be used to predict
ambient HCHO levels with an error of
about 20%.
  This  Project  Summary  was
developed by EPA's Atmospheric
Research and  Exposure  Assessment
Laboratory, Research  Triangle Park,
NC, to announce key findings of the
research  project  that is  fully
documented in a separate report of
the same title (see Project Report
ordering information at back).

Introduction
  Because of a growing concern about
the health  risks  of exposure  to
formaldehyde, the  U.S. EPA  is
considering regulating  HCHO ambient
levels.  An initial exposure  assessment
conducted by EPA concluded that 80-
90% of ambient HCHO is  produced  by
the photochemical  oxidation  of
hydrocarbon (HC) species.  Thus, photo-
chemical reaction models will have to be
used to relate emissions and emissions
controls to ambient  levels of  HCHO.
Current photochemical models accepted
by EPA for use in oxidant  models were
not  specifically developed to predict
HCHO. In fact, the model developers had
reservations about the HCHO chamber
data and,  therefore, only made limited
comparisons between  predicted and
observed   HCHO. In  particular, it  had
been suggested by model developers
that the  University  of  North Carolina
(UNC)  HCHO chamber measurements
may  have suffered  from positive
interferences and thus could be too high

-------
by almost a factor of  two. HCHO data
obtained in a chamber facility operated
by the  Statewide Air Pollution  Research
Center  (SAPRC)  were  lower  (and thus
more consistent with model predictions)
than that from UNC, but the SAPRC data
were more variable. Thus the accuracy of
HCHO predictions obtained with existing
photochemical models was  uncertain
mainly  because of a lack of  believable
measurements of HCHO in the chamber
data used to develop and test models.
  The  work  described  in  this  summary
was carried out to determine  if existing
EPA photochemical reaction mechanisms
can be  used  to predict  accurate ambient
levels of HCHO. The approach taken was
to a) implement and test newer and more
reliable HCHO analytical  methods and
calibration  sources in the  UNC chamber,
b) conduct new  chamber  experiments
with the newer and older HCHO analytical
methodology,  c)  compare new  results
with those in the existing  12-year data
base used  to develop the EPA  models, d)
perform modeling  exercises to diagnose
problems in data and model formulations,
and e) examine HCHO predictions in light
of the new information.


Formaldehyde Measurements
  A new diffusion-scrubber, fluorescence
detector   HCHO  monitor (Dasgupta
Monitor)   was implemented and its
performance was compared   to  seven
other techniques  for measuring  HCHO.
Several conclusions were drawn from this
work:
• All  formaldehyde sources  used as
  calibration standards agreed to within
   ±2%.
• The  paraformaldehyde permeation
  tube was shown to be a very accurate
  and  stable  calibration standard for
  HCHO.
• Significant  interferences  did not
  appear  in  any  test of either the CEA
  555  HCHO  monitor (in use  for 11
  years at UNC)  or the Dasgupta HCHO
  instrument (in use for 3 years at UNC).
• There is weak  evidence that the CEA
  response,  when not  zero-checked for
  twenty  minutes every three  hours,
  may exhibit  a positive drift;  data
  collected during such periods may not
  be correctable. When  zero-checked
  regularly, the CEA response does not
  show any significant bias.
• There   is  no  evidence  that the
  Dasgupta  HCHO instrument exhibits
  more than  a 5%  bias  at  any time.
  Several  aspects of this  particular wet-
  chemical fluorescence technique, how-
  ever, can  make some  individual data
   points more uncertain  than  others.
   When the Dasgupta HCHO instrument
   is operated in a well-maintained mode,
   it exhibits a precision of ~6 ppb at a
   level of -155 ppb (3.8%).
•  Despite  concerted and on-going
   efforts  at QA  and   calibration,
   uncertainty persists regarding some of
   the HCHO data taken over the past 12
   years in the UNC chambers. Errors in
   recording and processing the data are
   always  possible,  and  calibration
   standards have not always been as
   available  and  reliable as they are
   today. Thus, there  are  some  HCHO
   data  in  the UNC chamber database
   that cannot be shown to be wrong, but
   which are  contrary  to  expectations
   given our  current understanding of
   HCHO chemistry.
•  Based upon  the  comparison  of the
   Dasgupta  monitor   with   the
   chromotropic acid bubbler method and
   the FTIR method used at SAPRC,  it
   appears  that  the  HCHO standards
   used  at  SAPRC are accurate  and
   consistent  with the UNC and EPA
   standards to ±2%.
•  The  SAPRC  chromotropic  acid
   bubbler method appears to be erratic
   at high,  reasonably steady levels of
   HCHO. It also can have a low  bias for
   all measurements taken  on  a given
   day,  even  if  it had no bias  the day
   before.  The bubbler  method also
   never measured  higher than  the
   Dasgupta  method   in   seven
   experiments.
•  The  newer and  older  instruments
   showed  excellent agreement for  a
   wide  range of chamber HCHO levels.
   Thus  we have strong evidence that the
   UNC  HCHO   chamber  data  are
   accurate. Therefore,  any disagreement
   between  model  and  chamber
   observations  is  probably  due to
   inaccurate  representations  in  the
   models.


Explicit Photochemical
Mechanism
    An  explicit  photochemical  reaction
mechanism was formulated using  existing
kinetics  data  reviews and the literature.
The  mechanism includes explicit chem-
istry for  methane,  formaldehyde,  ethane,
acetaldehyde,  organic  nitrates  and
peroxyacetylmtrate,  ethene,  glycoalde-
hyde, glyoxal,  propene,  and detailed
radical  representations.  Particular atten-
tion was paid to  the state of knowledge
for the fate  of the Criegee biradicals as
review suggested that this was the most
ill-defined aspect  of olefin  chemistry in
the existing  EPA  mechanisms. The
explicit mechanism was used to simulate
a) ozone-ethene kinetics  experiments
conducted by  several investigators,  b)
nighttime ozone-ethene  and ozone-
propene experiments conducted in the
UNC chamber, and c)  sunlight irradiated
experiments containing oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and  CO,  HCHO, acetaldehyde.
ethene, or  propene  that were  also
conducted  in  the  UNC  chamber.  In
almost all cases except  propene, the
agreement between the simulations and
the observations  was excellent for NOX,
03, HCs, and  HCHO.  For  propene, the
theory  and  the   sparse   kinetics
information for the  two-carbon Criegee
biradical   were   in  substantial
disagreement  with the  chamber results
for NOx-propene experiments.  Some
modelers made ad hoc adjustments to
the propene-ozone  mechanism to  allow
better simulation of chamber data and in
doing so may have compromised HCHO
predictions.  Several  conclusions  were
reached based on the simulation tests:
•  Our chamber simulations support the
   higher absorption  cross-sections  of
   Moortgat compared to Bass.
•  We present indirect and nonconclusive
   evidence that  hydroxy-ethyl nitrate is
   formed  through reaction of  NO with
   the ethene-OH adduct to an extent of
   4%.
•  The yields given  in  the literature  for
   stabilized Criegee biradicals for O3 +
   olefin reactions are based on the loss
   of either 03 or the olefin,  both of which
   have  other consumption pathways in
   the experimental  system.  Therefore,
   when these yields  are used  in  a
   mechanism,  they should be corrected
   to reflect these other losses.
•  The  reactions of  the  CT  Criegee
   biradical appear to be reasonably well
   understood,  with the exception of  its
   reaction  with  water.  We  presented
   indirect and inconclusive  evidence that
   a large fraction of the reaction of this
   biradical with  water could  lead  to
   HCHO and  H202-  If our  assumed
   pathway is correct, there  exists a large
   potential  for forming H202  by  dark
   reactions.
•  The chemistry of  glycoaldehyde may
   be  sufficiently  different  from that  of
   acetaldehyde that  the  CB4 approx-
   imation of representing glycoaldehyde
   as acetaldehyde is questionable.
•  New  chamber experiments  using
   glycoaldehyde  as the primary reactant
   are needed for  continued  model
   testing.  Chamber  experiments emp-
   loying glyoxal as the primary reactant
   would also be beneficial.

-------
•  A technique for the  reliable, real-time
   measurement of formic acid in ethene-
   NOX chamber  experiments should be
   developed.
•  More high concentration  ethene-NOx
   chamber  experiments  should  be
   conducted on cool days to investigate
   the anomalously high HCHO formation
   observed  in the cool-weather exper-
   iments carried  out in this study.
•  Although the model  fits to the very
   wide  range  of experiments  simulated
   here  were  excellent, we  believe that
   further work is needed on  the  UNC
   chamber wall model.
•  The excellent  "goodness-of-fit"  of the
   explicit ethene mechanism to a  large
   range of   conditions  in  the   UNC
   chamber  over a 12-year period is
   strong evidence  that the  mechanism
   does explain the observed chemistry
   in a  manner  consistent with  known
   kinetics data.  Although there  remain
   some doubtful elements in the ethene
   mechanism, it is at present the best
   explanation we can construct, and  we
   believe that it can  be taken  as  a
   standard against which to measure the
   performance of the  ethene portion of
   air quality  simulation mechanisms in
   common use by EPA.

Performance of the CB4
Mechanism
   The Carbon Bond Four  mechanism
was used to simulate several ethene and
propene chamber experiments and the
results were compared  to those obtained
with the explicit mechanism.  These tests
of CB4  used  a)  HCHO photolysis  rates
derived from  the  cross-sections reported
by Moortgat,  b) the newest UNC chamber
characterization model, and c)  the  latest
information on  in-chamber actinic fluxes.
The conclusions  reached from  analyzing
these simulations were:
•  With regard to predicting 03, the CB4
   mechanism  is excellent for ethene-
   NOx experiments. It  is  slightly  worse
   than  the explicit mechanism for NO
   and NOX, but not significantly so.
•  At all levels of ethene tested, the CB4
   consistently underpredicted the HCHO
   maxima observed in ethene-NOx ex-
   periments  by about 13%. The  cause
   of this underprediction is complex and
   related to  a number  of approximations
   used in the CB4:
    a)   There  are too few radical-radical
        termination reactions in the CB4
        for it  to simulate the correct
        efficiency of  HO2  production
        from the ethene +  OH reaction;
        it  therefore predicts  too  much
        ethene consumption  and too
        much  production  of  HO2  and
        N02.
    b)   Acetaldehyde  is  not  a good
        substitute for  glycoaldehyde  in
        these high concentration  exper-
        iments.
    c)   Certain important  pathways  in
        the  Criegee biradical  reactions
        have been omitted in the CB4.
•  Like the explicit propene mechanism
   described in this  work,  the CB4
   mechanism does  poorly in simulation
   propene-NOx experiments with initial
   propene concentrations  above ~- 1.5
   ppmC.
•  Previous  testing of  the CB4 with
   toluene and xylene  experiments from
   the  UNC  chamber  showed  that the
   CB4  overpredicts HCHO. Confirming
   toluene and xylene  experiments were
   conducted in  this  study and  these
   experiments  show  levels of  HCHO
   similar to  those obtained  in  the
   previous experiments. Thus,  we con-
   clude that the CB4  mechanism over-
   predicts  HCHO yields from toluene
   and  xylene by about a factor of two.
   The  observed yields of HCHO are low,
   however, amounting  to only about 3%
   of the aromatic carbon.

Urban Simulations
   A time-resolved mass balance method
was used to analyze predictions of  HCHO
obtained in a simulation of a typical urban
scenario. This analysis  showed that:
•  Chemical production of HCHO  ac-
   counts for 70-90% of the total  HCHO
   observed. A  "pseudo-photostationary
   state" is reached at  approximately the
   same level  regardless  of whether  or
   not initial HCHO and HCHO emissions
   are included in the simulation.
•  Large  early morning dilution rapidly
   reduces  any HCHO initially present
   and  most of the initial HCHO is gone
   by 1300 LOT (maximum 03  occurred
   at 1900 LOT).
•  Over  the day,  the  olefins and
   acetaldehyde were responsible  for ap-
   proximately  60%  of the  HCHO  that
   was  produced. The non-ethene  olefins
   made their contribution in the  morning,
   ethylene  contributed  all day,  and
   acetaldehyde increased  its  contribu-
   tion  to HCHO production near the end
   of the day.
•  An analysis of the  CB4 mechanism
   and  the UNC chamber data  suggests
   that  the CB4 is able to predict  HCHO
   formation  in urban HC  mixtures fairly
   accurately. It appears, however,  that
   the  CB4 underpredicts HCHO  forma-
   tion  from  olefinic  HCs and  over-
   predicts  HCHO  formation  from
   aromatic  HCs.  Thus, the  good
   agreement  appears  to  be due  to
   compensating errors.

Conclusions
   The purpose  of  this  study was  to
determine  if  present  photochemical
reaction mechanisms  can be  used  to
predict accurate ambient levels of  HCHO
for various scenarios of HC and NOX. We
believe that this is probably the case for
the most commonly  used EPA  mech-
anism, the Carbon Bond Four mechanism
(CB4). Some parts of the CB4 (and other
similar mechanism),  however,  are not
fully  accurate descriptions of the  impor-
tant  HCHO  producing  chemistry.  The
errors are probably small, only  resulting
in  approximately a 20%  error  in  max-
imum HCHO predictions. The magnitude
of the  error  depends  upon  the
composition  of the HC mixture used  in
the  simulation   because there  are
compensating errors  in different HC
classes. A  second weakness that CB4
has for this  application is  that  it  has a
very  compressed  representation  for the
most important species producing HCHO,
the various  olefin  classes.  For example,
acetaldehyde  is  used  in  the  CB4  to
represent internal  olefins. The accuracy
of the CB4 for predicting HCHO formation
could be  improved by slightly expanding
the representation  of  olefins  in the
mechanism.
                                                                          .S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1990/748-012/20063

-------
   H.E. Jeffries, K.G. Sexton, J.R. Arnold, Y. Bai, J.L Li, and R. Grouse are with the
        University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27514
   Marc/a C. Dodge is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
   The complete report, entitled "A Chamber and Modeling  Study to -Assess the
        Photochemistry of Formaldehyde," (Order No. PB 90-240 581/AS; Cost:
        $39.00, subject to change) will be available  only from:
            National Technical Information Service
            5285 Port Royal Road
            Springfield, VA22161
            Telephone: 703-487-4650
   The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
            Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory
            U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
            Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
United States                   Center for Environmental Research
Environmental Protection         Information
Agency                         Cincinnati OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

EPA/600/S3-90-052

-------