INTERSTATE AIR POLLUTION
STUDY
BI-STATE DEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
STU LOUIS DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HOSPITALS
ST. LOUIS - DIVISION OF
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
EAST ST. LOUIS - AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL
COMMISSION
PHASE II PROJECT REPORT
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
EAST SIDE HEALTH
DISTRICT
MISSOURI DIVISION
OF HEALTH
ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT
OF PUBLIC HEALTH
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF
METROPOLITAN STU LOUIS
IV. ODORS-RESULTS OF SURVEYS
ILLINOIS AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
DHEW
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
-------
INTERSTATE AIR POLLUTION STUDY
PHASE II PROJECT REPORT
IV. ODORS - RESULTS OF SURVEYS
prepared by
H. Neff Jenkins
T. O. Harris
Protec*i°n
(5PL-16)
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
U. S. Public Health Service
Division of Air Pollution, Technical Assistance Branch
Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center
Cincinnati, Ohio
June 1966
-------
Copies of this report are available from the cooperating agencies listed on the
cover of this report and from the Technical Assistance Branch, Division of Air Pol-
lution, Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center, 4676 Columbia Parkway, Cin-
cinnati, Ohio.
-------
FOREWORD
The Interstate Air Pollution Study was divided into two phases. Phase I, a
general study of the overall air pollution problems in the St. Louis - East St. Louis
Metropolitan area, was conducted to determine specific activities that would re-
quire further study in Phase II of the project. The effort was divided into two
phases to provide a logical stopping point in the event that interest and resources
for proceeding further might not materialize. The necessary impetus did continue,
however, and the Phase II operation was also completed.
The Phase I operation resulted in a detailed report, designed primarily for use
of the Executive Committee members and their agencies in making decisions con-
cerning the Phase II project operation. A Phase I summary report was also pre-
pared; it received wide distribution.
Numerous papers, brochures, and reports were prepared during Phase II oper-
ations, as were some 18 Memorandums of Information and Instruction concerning the
project. All of these documents were drawn upon in the preparation of the Phase II
project report. The Phase II project report consists of eight separate volumes un-
der the following titles:
I. Introduction
II. Air Pollutant Emission Inventory
III. Air Quality Measurements
IV. Odors - Results of Surveys
V. Meteorology and Topography
VI. Effects of Air Pollution
VII. Opinion Surveys and Air Quality Relationships
VIII. Proposal for an Air Resource Management Program.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance and cooperation of the follow-
ing individuals and organizations.
Mr. Francis L. Bunyard, Mr. Jack R. Farmer, and Mr. Frederick J. Roland, of
the Technical Assistance Branch, Division of Air Pollution, U.S. Public Health
Service, for their assistance in the reduction of thousands of individual pieces of
data into a meaningful form.
Chief Olson, of the St. Louis Fire Department, for his permission to the St. Louis
firemen to serve as odor observers.
Chiefs of the participating firehouses in St. Louis County and Illinois for their per-
mission to firemen to serve as odor observers (See list in Appendix).
St. Louis County Health Department for preparing the chemical solutions used for
odor sensitivity testing.
East St. Louis - Air Pollution Control Commission for assistance in locating vol-
unteer odor observers.
Mr. John J. Jamison, Digital Computer Programmer, Statistical Services, U.S.
Public Health Service, for his assistance in developing the computer program for
evaluation of the odor observations.
Mr. Charles E. Zimmer for his assistance in the statistical interpretation of the
data.
Mr. Gerard A. DeMarrais, Meteorologist with the U.S. Weather Bureau on assign-
ment to the Public Health Service, for determining the atmospheric stability classes
for the odor observation times.
IV
-------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
SURVEY DESCRIPTION 2
Selection of Odor Observers 2
Odor Observation Locations 2
Dates and Times 3
Procedure 4
FREQUENCY OF ODOR DETECTION 4
Metropolitan Area 4
St. Louis 4
TIMES WHEN ODORS ARE PREVALENT 7
KINDS OF ODORS 10
Metropolitan Area 10
St. Louis 13
METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS 13
Wind Speed 13
Atmospheric Stability 16
Precipitation 17
LOCATION OF ODORS 19
EFFECT OF METEOROLOGY ON ODOR RESPONSE FREQUENCY 23
ODOR SOURCES 29
ODOR EPISODE 29
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 37
APPENDICES 40
Appendix A - Odor Observation Locations 40
Appendix B - Odor Survey St. Louis - E. St. Louis Metropolitan Area ... 42
Appendix C - Phase II Odor Survey St. Louis - E. St. Louis Metropolitan
Area Observer Instructions 46
Appendix D - Stability Classes--St. Louis Odor Survey 48
-------
IV. ODORS-RESULTS OF SURVEYS
INTRODUCTION
Preliminary information obtained from two odor surveys conducted during
Phase I of the Interstate Air Pollution Study indicated the need for a further in-
vestigation of the odor problems in the St. Louis Metropolitan Area. The two
earlier surveys were limited in geographical coverage, number of observers, and
number of observations recorded.
The first of the Phase I surveys took place during the 2-week period from
May 25 to June 7, 1963, and utilized St. Louis City firemen as observers. During
the course of this study 307 observations were made at six fire stations in the south
St. Louis area.
The second survey was conducted by the air pollution inspectors of the St. Louis
Division of Air Pollution Control, and covered the periods June 10 through 14 and
June 17 through 21, 1963. Eight observers were used, and 207 observations re-
sulted from the study. In contrast to the survey performed by the firemen, in
which observations •were made at 7 a.m. , 8 p.m. , 10 p.m. , and 12 midnight, the
survey performed by the air pollution inspectors covered normal working hours
only, •with observations at 9 a.m. , 12 noon, and 3 p.m. Observation sites were
not fixed locations, and observations •were made by each inspector at the street
intersection nearest him at a particular observation time.
During the Phase I surveys, odors were detected in 40 percent of the observa-
tions made by the firemen, and in 38 percent of those made by the air pollution in-
spectors. The most frequently detected odors were those associated with chemical
manufacturing; they represented 25 percent of the total. The next three most fre-
quently detected and potentially undesirable odors were food processing, 16 per-
cent; burning refuse, 16 percent; and putrid odors, 6 percent.
During the Phase I surveys, odors were detected in over 40 percent of all of
the observations made in inspector territories 2, 7, and 10. Within these three
territories are large tracts of industrially zoned land, which undoubtedly contain
many of the sources responsible for the high response frequencies observed in
these territories.
The Phase II survey reported on herein was greatly expanded in terms of the
number of observation stations (79), the geographical area encompassed, and the
total number of observations made (5, 022). (For the location, elevation, and
zoning of the stations, see Appendix A. ) The results of the current survey will,
therefore, give a more definitive picture of the odor problems encountered in the
Interstate Air Pollution Study Area.
The objective of the Phase II Odor Survey was to provide answers to the follow-
ing questions:
1. What areas in Metropolitan St. Louis have odor problems?
-------
2. What types of odors affect each area?
3. What odor types are the most undesirable?
4. When are odors prevalent?
5. What are the meteorological conditions associated with the occurrence of
odors?
6. Where are the potential odor sources located?
7. Are there interjurisdictional and interstate problems related to odor
control?
SURVEY DESCRIPTION
Selection of Odor Observers
Firemen were selected as the principal odor observers for the Phase II Odor
Survey. Experience with these men during Phase I showed them to be reliable,
conscientious observers. In addition, the firehouse locations are distributed
relatively uniformly throughout the area and are staffed 24 hours a day. Excellent
cooperation was received from all fire departments that participated in the survey.
To obtain information in areas in which fire department personnel were not
present, an attempt was made to use private citizens as odor observers. This
effort, for the most part, was a failure. Of the five citizens selected as observers,
only three returned the odor observation folders, one of which was used incorrectly.
Each potential odor observer was given an odor sensitivity test to check his
capability for detecting odors. (See Appendix B for the test description and sample
forms. ) The test also gave the observers a relative feeling of what was considered
to be a strong or faint odor. At the same time the odor sensitivity test was given,
each observer was instructed in the procedure for making and recording the odor
observations. The test and instruction were administered by project staff members.
Odor Observation Locations
The odor observation locations were fixed points determined in most cases
by the addresses of the fire stations. The data presented in this report were
gathered from a total of 79 locations, 37 in St. Louis, 29 in St. Louis County, and
a total of 13 in the Illinois communities of East St. Louis, Alton, Cahokia, Brooklyn,
National City, Hartford, and Wood River. Because fire stations were used primari-
ly, the observation locations are related more to population density than area. Al-
though the number and distribution of observation stations were greatly expanded
for this study, the number of sites available in Illinois, especially in East St. Louis
Monsanto, and Granite City, was limited because of fewer cooperating fire sta-
tions in these areas. Figure 1 shows the odor observation locations on a grid map.
-------
ODOR OBSERVATION STATIONS
SEVEN ADDITIONAL STATIONS
420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500°" 510 520
Figure 1. Odor observation locations.
Dates and Times
The Phase II Odor Survey was conducted continuously during 2 weeks from
November 18 through December 1, 1963. Five odor observations were made each
day at 79 locations in St. Louis, St. Louis County, and Illinois. The odor observa-
tion times were 7 a.m. , 2 p.m. , 8 p.m. , 10 p.m. , and 12 midnight.
-------
Procedure
Except for the difference in observation times, the procedures employed and
the forms used for this survey were the same as for Phase I.
The firemen at each firehouse were given a manila folder containing a schedule
of assignments for the odor observers, an observer instruction sheet, 14 observa-
tion forms, and an addressed return envelope. Copies of these forms are in
Appendix C.
Space was allocated on the observation form to permit the observer to describe
the various odors in his own words. It was felt that the use of this method would
produce more valid results than would have been obtained through the use of pre-
selected odor categories. The use of such preselected categories could bias the
observers' decisions because of limiting the number of descriptive terms. As
might be expected, however, this approach produced a wide variety of odor de-
scriptions; and to adapt these to data processing, each odor description had to be
characterized as belonging to one of nine particular odor types. This classifica-
tion, together with the number of odor observations pertaining to each type,
for each of the three geographical areas is presented in Table 1.
FREQUENCY OF ODOR DETECTION
Metropolitan Area
The odor survey results for the Metropolitan St. Louis Area were evaluated
separately for the three primary political parts, St. Louis, St. Louis County, and
Illinois. St. Louis observers recorded the highest frequency of both total and un-
pleasant odors (Table 2 and Figure 2). Illinois results were only slightly lower
than for St. Louis; whereas, St. Louis County experienced significantly lower fre-
quencies. For the entire metropolitan area, 29.6 percent of all observations in-
dicated the presence of odors, 66 percent of which were unpleasant.
Four of the five daily odor observations were at times when the meteorological
conditions are relatively poor for odor dispersal. The frequencies of odor detec-
tion given above are, therefore, more representative of what might be expected in
the evening and early morning rather than during the -whole day. (See Table 3).
The fact that odors were detected in 29. 6 percent of the observations, however,
indicates that odors are a significant air pollution problem, in metropolitan St. Louis.
St. Louis
Since the Phase I odor survey data were summarized by air pollution inspec-
tor territories, the Phase II data had to be treated in a similar manner to permit
comparison of the results. Figure 3 shows the areas encompassed by the inspector
territories; Table 4 summarizes the Phase II data; and Figure 4 compares the re-
sults of the two studies.
The fact that the percentage of positive odor* responses was higher for the
Phase I survey was expected and results from at least the following factors: (1) The
*As used in this report, "positive odors" are odors detected by the observers dur-
ing the observation periods.
-------
Table 1. ODOR TYPES BY PRINCIPAL AREA IN
PHASE II ODOR SURVEY
Category
1. Chemical
2. Food processing
3. Combustion
4. General industrial
Odor type
Chemical
Sulfurous
Soap or detergent
Refinery
Medicinal
Vanilla or coumarin
Other
Unknown
Total
Coffee roasting
Bakery
Brewery
Restaurant
Grain
Other
Unknown
Total
Gasoline and diesel engine exhaust
Coke-oven and coal gas odors (steel mills
Maladjusted heating systems
Coal smoke
Smokey
Other
Unknown
Total
Asphalt
Plastics
Solvents
Fertilizer plants
Paint and related industries
Oily
Foundry odors
Other
Unknown
! Total
5. Animal Rendering
Stockyards
6. Combustible waste
Poultry
Other
Unknown
Total
Open dump fires
City incinerators burning garbage
Home incinerators, backyard trash fires,
I wood smoke, and burning leaves
Burning rubber
Other
Unknown
Total
7. Decomposition
Sewage
Nonburning garbage
Other
Unknown
S. Vegetation
Total
9. Miscellaneous ' General
No description
Foul - not specified
Putrid - source not specified
Not pleasant
Smog
Clean or fresh
Total
Number reported
St. Lout
140
37
2
0
14
7
22
2
224
.
11
17
3
3
2
-
36
55
2
-
98
95
2
-
252
1
1
2
2
11
3
-
-
-
20
10
6
-
-
-
16
8
1
135
8
9
1
162
11
25
9
0
45
5
17
0
11
1
1
93
123
3
St. Louis
County
13
6
-
8
-
-
15
-
42
.
6
-
3
0
1
0
10
52
7
3
55
42
3
2
164
5
-
.
.
3
3
-
1
-
12
2
-
-
-
.
2
2
3
136
3
-
-
144
26
1
1
-
28
22
15
1
0
1
4
60
81
27
Illinois
16
2
0
11
1
0
4
1
35
.
-
-
-
3
-
-
3
9
2
-
19
32
.
-
62
-
.
.
-
-
13
-
8
8
30
.
30
-
-
-
30
6
2
33
2
-
-
43
1
1
-
-
2
2
2
1
1
-
3
3
10
36
-------
Table 2. FREQUENCY OF ODOR DETECTION IN PHASE II ODOR SURVEY
(November 18 - December 1, 1963)
Area
St. Louis
% of positive observations
% of total observations
St. Louis County
% of positive observations
% of total observations
Illinois
% of positive observations
% of total observations
Metropolitan Area
% of positive observations
% of total observations
Pleasant
94
11.9
3.8
101
22.4
5.7
32
12.9
4.0
227
15.2
4.5
Unpleasant
546
69.4
22.3
274
60.9
15.4
166
66.9
21.0
986
66.4
19.6
No
reaction3'
147
18.7
6.0
75
16.7
4.2
50
20.2
6.3
272
18.3
5.4
Positive
observations
787
32.2
450
25.2
248
31.3
1,485
29.6
Total
observations
2,446
1,784
792
5,022
No reaction as to whether odor was pleasant or unpleasant.
Table 3. ODORS BY TIME OF DAY IN PHASE II ODOR SURVEY
(November 18 - December 1, 1963)
Area
St. Louis
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
St. Louis County
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
Illinois
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
Metropolitan Area
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
7 a. m.
126
483
26. 1
66
371
17.8
43
164
26. 2
235
1,018
23. 1
2 p. m.
136
494
27.5
85
370
23.0
39
161
24.2
260
1, 025
25.4
8 p. m.
192
490
39.2
119
372
32.0
54
162
33.3
365
1,024
35.6
10 p.m.
176
491
35.8
106
360
29.4
56
161
34.8
338
1, 012
33.4
12 M
157
488
32.2
74
311
23.8
56
144
38.9
287
943
30.4
-------
TOTAL POSITIVE
UNPLEASANT
PLEASANT
NO REACTION*
TOTAL POSITIVE
UNPLEASANT
PLEASANT
NO REACTION*
TOTAL POSITIVE
UNPLEASANT
PLEASANT
NO REACTION*
TOTAL POSITIVE
UNPLEASANT
PLEASANT
NO REACTION*
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST. LOUIS CO.
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN AREA
10
20
30
40
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS IN WHICH
ODORS WERE DETECTED
Figure 2. Odor frequency summary for Phase II Odor
Survey (*indicates no reaction as to whether
odor was pleasant or unpleasant).
sampling times were different, particularly in the case of the survey conducted by
the inspectors. (2) The nature of the air pollution inspectors' work would be apt
to cause them to be in areas where odors are highly prevalent. (3) Since the sur-
veys were carried on at different seasons of the year, the meteorological condi-
tions were different. (4) Many more observations were made in the Phase II sur-
vey. (5) Certain types of odors are more prevalent in the fall than in the spring,
and vice versa.
TIMES WHEN ODORS ARE PREVALENT
Most frequently detected in the evening hours, odors reached a maximum at
8 p.m. in St. Louis and St. Louis County, and at 12 midnight in Illinois. Odors
were at a minimum at 7 a. m. in St. Louis and St. Louis County, and at 2 p. m. in
Illinois. A graphical summary of the variation in odor frequencies at different
times of the day is presented in Figure 5.
The decrease in odors after 8 p.m. in St. Louis and St. Louis County is
probably attributable to a reduction in the amount of combustible waste burning
late in the evening and a decrease in transportation activities.
-------
roo
TERRITORIES 8 AND 9
WERE REGARDED AS ONE
UNIT FOR PURPOSES
OF THIS STUDY.
740
720
roo
Figure 3. Inspector territories in St. Louis Phase II Odor Survey.
-------
PHASE I
PHASEH
PHASE I
PHASE n
PHASE I
PHASE n
PHASE I
PHASE n
PHASE I
PHASEH
PHASE I
PHASE n
PHASE I
PHASED
PHASE I
PHASE 0
PHASE 1
PHASE E
PHASE I MEAN
PHASE H MEAN
Figure 4.
10
ST. LOUIS
INSPECTOR
TERRITORIES
ZJ
CITY OF ST. LOUIS
0 20 40 60 80 100
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS IN WHICH ODORS
WERE DETECTED
Odor frequencies by St. Louis Inspector Terri-
tories - Phase I and II Odor Surveys.
Table 4. FREQUENCY OF ODOR DETECTION IN ST. LOUIS
INSPECTOR TERRITORIES - PHASE II ODOR SURVEY
Inspector
territory
No. 1
No. 2
No. 3
No. 4
No. 5
No. 6
No. 7
No. 8 and 9
No. 10
Total
Pleasant
odor
7
11
20
2
14
5
8
8
18
93
Unpleasant
odor
71
51
50
58
35
16
34
31
151
497
No reaction
by observer
20
16
16
18
12
9
4
2
42
139
Total
positive
98
78
86
78
61
30
46
41
211
729
Total
observations
308
254
197
132
264
194
216
190
580
2,335
Percent
occurrence
of odors
31.8
30.7
43. 1
51.5
23. 1
15.5
21. 3
21.6
36.4
31.2
-------
50
x
o
— LU 40
HUJ
^0
CC L±J
LJ IT
CO UJ
30
O 20
ZO
LJ
O
-------
Table 5. PHASE II ODOR SURVEY, FREQUENCY OF ODORS BY CATEGORY
Area
St. Louis
(Total observations - 2, 446j
Positive observations
Unpleasant observations
Unpleasant observations 4 positive observations, %
Positive observations-rtotal positive observations, %
Positive observations 4- total observations, %
St. Louis County
(Total observations = 1,784)
Positive observations
Unpleasant observations
Unpleasant observations-i-positive observations, %
Positive observations 4 total positive observations, %
Positive observations 4- total observations, %
Illinois
(Total observations = 792)
Positive observations
Unpleasant observations
Unpleasant observations 4- positive observations, %
Positive observations - total positive observations, %
Positive observations 4total observations, %
Metropolitan Area
(Total observations = 5,022)
Positive observations
Unpleasant observations
Unpleasant observations -positive observations, %
Positive observations 4 total positive observations,%
Positive observations-*- total observations, %
Odor type
•-j
o
V
j3
8
224
178
79.5
28. 3
9.2
42
33
78.6
8.9
2.4
35
30
85.7
14.0
4.4
301
241
80. 1
19.9
6.0
br
.a
w
to
•s S
0 A
o £
36
10
27.8
4.5
1.5
10
0
0
2. 1
0.6
3
0
0
1.2
0.4
49
10
20.4
3.2
1.0
5
m
3
1
O
O
252
180
71.4
31.8
10. 3
164
119
72.6
34.7
9.2
62
30
48.4
24.8
7.8
478
329
68.8
31.6
9.5
*t3
rt h
s|
4) 'o
o .a
19
13
68.4
2.4
0.8
12
7
58.3
2.5
0.7
30
18
60
12.0
3.8
61
38
62.3
4.0
1.2
,-
1
c
16
15
93.8
2.0
0.6
2
2
100
0.4
0. 1
30
30
100
12.0
3.8
48
47
97.9
3.2
1.0
OJ
3
• H
to
3
A V
S »
O d
U ?
162
88
54.3
20.5
6.6
144
72
50
30.5
8. 1
43
20
46.5
17.2
5.4
349
180
51.6
23. 1
6.9
^
6
B
o
o.
u
1)
Q
45
42
93.3
5.7
1.8
28
27
96.4
5.9
1.6
2
1
50
0.8
0.3
75
70
93.3
5.0
1.5
nj
a
a
5
2
4.0
0.6
0.2
22
3
13.6
4. 7
1.2
2
0
0
2.S
0.3
29
5
17.2
I.'
0. t
n)
2
O
C
^
U
U
0)
• H
S
30
18
60.0
3.8
1.2
21
8
38.1
4.4
1.2
7
4
57. 1
2.8
0.9
58
30
51.7
3.8
1.2
a
0
• H
a
M
U]
t)
0
Z
3
2
66.7
0.4
0. 1
27
6
22.2
5.7
1.5
36
33
91.7
14.4
4.5
66
41
62. 1
4.4
1.3
•H rj
^H 0
A **
a?
^ h
oi a
'S S
H o
792
472
250
1,514
aOdors described as clean or fresh were removed for this tabulation.
erage temperature for the study period was 43. 7° F, which requires a significant
amount of space heating, especially at the observation times of 7 a.m. , 8 p.m. ,
10 p.m. , and 12 midnight. These odors would be greatly reduced during the warm
months. Motor vehicle odors were also included •within the combustion category,
but are not seasonal. Odors resulting from the use of home incinerators, back-
yard trash fires, wood smoke, and burning leaves were considered as a single
subcategory (see Table 1), and accounted for by far the greatest number of com-
bustible waste odors. The small number of observations attributed to open dump
fires is probably related to the fewer number of observation stations on the Illinois
side of the river, where most of the open dumps in the Study area are operated.
Many of the combustible waste odors were from burning leaves, a significant source
for about 2 months during the late fall. Slightly less than 50 percent of the com-
bustible waste odors were described as unpleasant.
Chemical odors were the third most common odor type detected in the metro-
politan area, and the second most frequently detected odor in St. Louis. Chemical
odors, detected in St. Louis in more than 9 percent of the observations, represent
28 percent of all odors observed there. In this survey 80 percent of all chemical
odors were described as unpleasant. Chemical odors are often detected at great
11
-------
MISCELLANEOUS
VEGETATION
DECOMPOSITION
COMBUSTIBLE WASTE
ANIMAL
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL
COMBUSTION
FOOD PROCESSING
CHEMICAL
NO DESCRIPTION
10
20
30
PERCENT OF POSITIVE ODOR
OBSERVATIONS BY TYPE
Figure 6. Odor types in St. Louis - Phase II Odor Survey.
distances from their sources so that one point source can often affect a large area.
During the odor episode described later in this report, an odor originating in
Illinois was detected in Missouri at places 12 miles from the source.
Odors from animals, decomposition of sewage and vegetation, food processing,
and the general industrial categories were not widespread, but were detected fre-
quently in areas close to their sources. Animal odors were most frequently de-
tected in Illinois because an observation station was located in the stockyards area
at National City. Animal odors are a more severe problem during the warm sum-
mer months because of the increased decomposition resulting from higher tem-
peratures. Animal and decomposition odors were described as unpleasant over
90 percent of the time. St. Louis and Illinois both have rendering plants and stock-
yards, which can be sources of unpleasant odors, especially during the warmer
months of the year. St. Louis County and Illinois have some open sewage ditches,
septic tanks, and open dumps that can be sources of objectionable odors.
Food processing odors originate from many sources and were described as un-
pleasant about 20 percent of the time. They do not usually travel very far, with
the exception of the brewery malt smell and a few other odors typical of large
operations.
Figures 9, 10, and 11 compare graphically the frequency of kinds of odors
detected during the 2-week period for St. Louis, St. Louis County, Illinois, and the
12
-------
MISCELLANEOUS
VEGETATION
DECOMPOSITION
COMBUSTIBLE
ANIMAL
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL
COMBUSTION
FOOD PROCESSING
CHEMICAL
NO DESCRIPTION
0
10
20
30
40
PERCENT OF POSITIVE ODOR
OBSERVATIONS BY TYPE
Figure 7. Odor type in St. Louis County -
Phase II Odor Survey.
entire metropolitan area as a whole. Figure 12 indicates the frequency of occur-
rence of the different types of odors that were described as unpleasant.
St. Louis
Table 6 reports the number of odors of each category by inspector territory.
Based on percent of total observations, chemical odors are most prevalent in
territories 2, 8, 9, and 10; whereas, combustion odors prevail in territories 1, 3,
and 4. Other odors also vary among territories, but not so markedly. The prev-
alence of combustion odors causes territories 3 and 4 to have the two highest per-
cent frequencies of total odors. Territory 10 experienced the third highest percent
frequency of total odors, primarily because of the large number of chemical odors
reported.
METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS
Wind Speed
Figure 13 shows graphically how the frequency of odor detection decreases
with an increasing wind speed; a more detailed analysis is given in Table 7. The
reasons for the comparatively high frequency of odors in the 20-to-30-mile-per-
13
-------
MISCELLANEOUS
VEGETATION
DECOMPOSITION
COMBUSTIBLE WASTE
ANIMAL
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL
COMBUSTION
FOOD PROCESSING
CHEMICAL
NO DESCRIPTION
0 10 20 30
PERCENT OF POSITIVE ODOR
OBSERVATIONS BY TYPE
Figure 8. Odor type in Illinois - Phase II Odor Survey.
Table 6. KINDS OF ODORS DETECTED IN ST. LOUIS - PHASE II ODOR SURVEY
Inspector
territory
No. 1
No. 2
No. 3
No. 4
No. 5
No. 6
No. 7
No. 8 and 9
No. 10
CO
§
• H
"Si
Total
observ
308
254
197
132
264
194
216
190
580
T-H
r \
Chemie
19
24
2
9
1
9
17
110
M
CO
Food
proces
1
2
4
4
15
1
9
§
to
Combu
35
14
50
58
15
9
6
5
52
i — i
ni
i— 1 -H
Genera
industr
8
2
1
1
2
Animal
5
10
0)
i — i
a
to
Is
O ni
U £
18
30
18
18
25
12
9
8
14
§
• H
•H
CO
O
OH
Decom
9
10
6
3
5
4
8
f3
o
',,
Vegeta
1
1
1
1
CO
O
CD
a
^
Miscel
8
9
68
1
9
9
7
11
hour range in the Illinois area is not clear. The data indicate that wind speeds of
less than 15 mph accompany a rapid increase in odors detected to a high of 43 per-
cent at 0 to 5 mph. Above 10 mph the frequency of odors detected decreases,
but at a slower rate. When the wind speed drops below 10 mph, a condition that
14
-------
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
ST LOUIS CITY
ST LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
§ COMBUSTION
COMBUSTIBLE WASTE
CHEMICAL
0 2 4 6 8 10
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS IN WHICH ODORS
WERE DETECTED
Figure 9. Variation of combustion, combustible waste,
and chemical odors in different parts of Study
area - Phase II Odor Survey.
12
Table 7. ODOR VARIATIONS WITH WIND SPEED -
PHASE II ODOR SURVEY
Area
St. Louis
Positive observationsa
Total observations
% positive
St. Louis County
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
Illinois
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
Metropolitan area
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
0-5
220
464
47.4
119
329
36.2
66
148
44.6
405
941
43.0
Wind s
5-10
325
875
37. 1
197
645
30. 5
97
282
34.4
619
1,802
34. 4
speed,
10-15
121
487
24.8
63
353
17.8
39
159
24.5
223
999
22. 3
mph
15-20
83
380
21. 8
51
282
18. 1
28
125
22. 4
162
787
20.6
20-25
34
206
16.5
18
148
12. 2
15
66
22.7
67
420
16. 0
25-30
4
34
11.8
2
27
7.4
3
12
25.0
9
73
12.3
aPositive observation means odor detected.
15
-------
ST LOUIS CITY
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL
ANIMAL
DECOMPOSITION
_L
02468
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS IN WHICH ODORS
WERE DETECTED
Figure 10. Variation of general industrial, animal, and
decomposition odors in different parts of
Study area - Phase II Odor Survey.
occurs 58 percent of the time, the potential for a community odor episode increases
greatly,
Atmospheric Stability
Figure 14 and Table 8 present a comparison of odor frequencies as related to
the Pasquill-Gifford-Turner stability classes. An explanation of these classes is
given in Appendix D.
Because of the low solar altitude during the late fall, moderate to strong in-
solation conditions do not exist (see Table D-l, Appendix D). Stability class 1
is associated solely with moderate and strong insolation conditions, and class 2
also involves these insolation conditions. It is not surprising, therefore, that
stability classes 1 and 2 did not occur during the study period.
An examination of Figure 14 reveals that the lowest frequency of odor detection
occurred with the neutral condition 4 rather than with the more unstable condition 3.
The reason for this is apparently due to the higher wind speeds that accompany con-
16
-------
ST LOUIS CITY
ST LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
MISCELLANEOUS
FOOD PROCESSING
VEGETATION
0 2 4 6 8 10
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS IN WHICH ODORS
WERE DETECTED
Figure 11. Variation of miscellaneous, food processing, and vegeta-
tion odors in different parts of Study area - Phase II
Odor Survey.
dition 4. These higher wind speeds are evidently more effective in diluting odors
than are the slightly unstable conditions of class 3 accompanied by lower wind speeds.
This situation is also illustrated in Figure 15, which points to the high occurrence of
odor detections with the low wind speeds accompanying the more stable conditions
5 and 6.
Under conditions 5 and 6 odors can travel for long distances at high concentra-
tions, partially because these are the most stable of the atmospheric conditions
and partially because of the low wind speeds accompanying them.
Precipitation
The relationship between occurrence of rain and the frequency of odor detec-
tion is illustrated in Figure 16. During rainy conditions the frequency of odor de-
tection in the metropolitan area was 20 percent as against 31 percent for no-rain
conditions.
One of the main factors contributing to this decrease would be the reduction in
the amount of combustible wastes burned when it raining. Also, during this period
of the year precipitation often occurs with a frontal movement, which tends to force
out the existing air mass and replace it with cleaner air. In addition, these frontal
movements are generally accompanied by higher than average wind speeds and in-
creased instability, which also aid in the dispersal of pollutants.
17
-------
MISCELLANEOUS
VEGETATION
DECOMPOSITION
COMBUSTIBLE WASTE
ANIMAL
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL
COMBUSTION
FOOD PROCESSING
CHEMICAL
NO DESCRIPTION
80
100
UNPLEASANT ODORS AS PERCENT
OF TYPE TOTALS
Figure 12. Percent of each odor type considered unpleasant
by observers in St. Louis Metropolitan Area -
Phase II Odor Survey.
Table 8. ODOR VARIATION WITH STABILITY -
PHASE II ODOR SURVEY
Area
St. Louis
Positive observations3-
Total observations
% positive
St. Louis County
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
Illinois
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
Metropolitan Area
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
Stability class
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
83
249
33.3
60
191
31.4
21
83
25.3
164
523
31.4
4
231
1, 072
21.5
122
779
15.7
83
348
23.9
436
2, 199
19.8
5
95
274
34.7
68
207
32. <;
34
96
35. '.
197
577
34. 1
6
378
851
44.4
200
607
32.9
110
265
41.5
688
1,723
39.9
aPositive observation means odor detected.
18
-------
CO
tr
o
Q
o
X
o
_ LJ
50
40
30
I-UJ
OC LJ
LJtr 20
CO IJ
10
LJ
O
tr
LJ
Q.
I I I
D ST. LOUIS CITY
O ST LOUIS COUNTY
A ILLINOIS
A METROPOLITAN AREA
0-5 5-10 10-15 15-20 20-25
WIND SPEED RANGE, mph
25-30
Figure 13. Odor variations with wind speed - Phase II Odor
Survey.
LOCATION OF ODORS
Odors can be detected in almost every type of area - residential, commercial,
and industrial. Although the majority of the most objectionable odors are usually
produced in the industrial and commercial areas, residential zones are the source
of various odors; these odors most often originate from food preparation and the
disposal of solid wastes by combustion and in the form of sewage.
Odors are expected to be more prevalent in industrial areas than they would be
in commercial or residential areas. The frequency of odors by zoning classification
of the area in which the observation points were located •was determined and is re-
ported in Figure 17. It shows that the commercial and industrial zones* in the St.
Louis Metropolitan Area had 46. 5 percent positive odor observation compared to
28. 5 percent for the business zones and 25. 2 percent for the residential area. The
percentage of positive odor observations that were reported as unpleasant ranged
from 71 for commercial and industrial zones to 58 for residential zones (Figure 18).
Figure 19 shows the industrial parts of the St. Louis Metropolitan Area. These
areas and the neighborhoods surrounding them would have odors most frequently
detected in them.
*The Revised Code of St. Louis, 1948, was used as a guide in establishing the
zoning classifications used in this report.
19
-------
CO
IT
o
O
O
I
O
sS
45
40
35
o£
HUJ 30
tr uj
uj cr
co ui
o
u.
o
ai
o
cc
UJ
Q.
25
20
15
D ST. LOUIS CITY
O ST. LOUIS COUNTY
A ILLINOIS
A METROPOLITAN AREA
SLIGHTLY
UNSTABLE
4
NEUTRAL
5
STABLE
6
VERY
STABLE
STABILITY CLASS
Figure 14. Odor variations with stability classes
Phase II Odor Survey.
A few characteristic odor types familiar to most residents of metropolitan St.
Louis were selected for further study. The first was chemical odors. The area
affected is shown in Figure 20. The darker area on the figure has the higher level
of odors. Chemical odors are a significant problem in the cities of St. Louis and
East St. Louis, but St. Louis County is relatively free from them.
The second odor type selected for further study was rendering and meat pack-
ing. Figure 21 shows the areas affected by odors from the meat processing in-
dustries. The areas shown here are relatively small compared to those affected
by the chemical odors, but because of their extreme unpleasantness they are of
major importance. Here again this problem is found only in St. Louis and Illinois.
20
-------
Q
UJ
*s
o
o
UJ
O
IT
UJ
Q.
40
§5
OH
HUJ 30
^ Q
o: uj
LJ (T
CO UJ
00 >
20
,0
0
O - WIND SPEED
A - PERCENT ODORS DETECTED
3
SLIGHTLY
UNSTABLE
12
Q.
E
Q"
UJ
UJ
Q
z
5
4
NEUTRAL
5
STABLE
6
VERY
STABLE
STABILITY CLASS
Figure 15. Comparison of odor detection and wind velocity with stability class -
Phase II Odor Survey.
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
NO RAIN
RAIN
I
0 10 20 30 40
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS IN WHICH
ODORS WERE DETECTED
Figure 16. Odor variations with precipitation -
Phase II Odor Survey.
21
-------
ST LOUIS CITY
ST LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
ST. LOUIS CITY
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
ILLINOIS
METROPOLITAN
AREA
RESIDENTIAL
BUSINESS
COMMERCIAL
AND INDUSTRIAL
_L
J_
J
10 20 30 40 50 60
PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS IN WHICH ODORS
WERE DETECTED
Figure 17. Odor variations associated with land use -
Phase II Odor Survey.
RESIDENTIAL
BUSINESS
COMMERCIAL,
INDUSTRIAL
_L
_L
20
40
_L
60
80
PERCENT OF POSITIVE ODOR
OBSERVATIONS REPORTED UNPLEASANT
Figure 18. Unpleasant odor variations associated
with land use in Study area - Phase II
Odor Survey.
22
-------
LEGEND
BOUNDARIES
STATE
COUNTY
HIGHWAY MARKERS
FEDERAL
-O- STATE
*• HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AREAS
400~' 410 420 430 440 450 4(0 470 410 490 500"*' 510 520 530 540 550
Figure 19. Heavy industrial areas.
Odors produced by burning dumps are a problem of considerable magnitude to
the residents of the Illinois area and St. Louis County. Because the contaminants
from these sources are released at ground level, they are capable of affecting a
considerable geographical area before being dissipated. Since odors produced by
burning dumps are very similar to those produced by burning garbage and rubbish in
alleys and back yards, the areas affected by these two types of sources could not be
separated and were, therefore, not mapped.
EFFECT OF METEOROLOGY ON ODOR OBSERVATION FREQUENCY
Although each of the meteorological elements considered in this section has
some bearing on the frequency of positive odor observations, none is as important
23
-------
LEGEND
AREAS IN WHICH CHEMICAL ODORS
WERE DETECTED IN MORE THAN
OF ALL OBSERVATIONS.
AREAS IN WHICH CHEMICAL ODORS
WERE DETECTED IN FROM I TO
OF Al I OBSERVATIONS
Figure ZO. Areas where chemical odors were detected relatively frequently.
24
-------
$::;$ AREAS IN WHICH RENDERING AND
MEAT PACKING ODORS REPRESENTED
MORE THAN 5% OF ALL ODORS OB-
SERVED.
ODOR OBSERVATION LOCATIONS.
420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500°°° 510 520
Figure 21. Area affected by rendering and meat packing odors.
as wind direction. It not only controls where the odor will be observed but also
gives a very good indication of the source. The relationship between percent posi-
tive odor observations and wind direction is shown in Figure 22. Table 9 gives a
detailed breakdown of these same data. Note that the east wind is associated with
higher odor levels in all areas except Illinois.
Tables 10 through 12 show, respectively, the influence that would be expected
on the frequency of odor detection from the meteorological factors of wind speed,
25
-------
en
cr
o
o
o
x
o
30
Ui
OC. UJ
UJ CE
CO UJ
20
UJ
o
cc
UJ
CL
D ST. LOUIS CITY
O ST. LOUIS COUNTY
A ILLINOIS
A METROPOLITAN AREA
10
N
(NNW-NE)
E
(ENE-SE)
S
(SSE-SW)
W
(WSW-NW)
WIND DIRECTION
Figure 22. Odor variations with -wind direction - Phase II Odor Survey.
atmospheric stability, and precipitation. The data for the northerly directions are
very meager; however, for the sake of completeness the data for this direction have
been included. Table 10 indicates that the percentage of "winds less than 10 mph was
zero for northerly winds, 47 for easterly winds, 80 for southerly winds, and 41 for
westerly winds. If wind speed were the only factor influencing the frequency of posi-
tive odors, the expected order of decreasing frequencies would be S, E, W, and N
because odors would be detected more frequently with winds of less than 10 mph.
The effect that atmospheric stability would have on the frequency of odor detec-
tion is shown in Table 11. Stability condition 6 produced the highest frequency of
positive odor observations during the study (Figure 15), The percentages of ob-
servation times with class 6 stability for the E, S, W, and N direction were 41, 20,
19, and 0, respectively.
The occurrence of precipitation during the study period, on a percentage basis
(Table 12), was highest when winds came from the easterly and southerly directions;
therefore, on the basis of precipitation it should be expected that the overall fre-
quency of positive odor observations with winds stemming from these directions
•would be lower.
26
-------
Table 9. ODOR VARIATIONS WITH WIND DIRECTION -
PHASE II ODOR SURVEY
Area
St. Louis
Positive observationsa
Total observations
% positive
St. Louis County
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
Illinois
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
Metropolitan Area
Positive observations
Total observations
% positive
Wind direction
NNW-NE
N
7
34
20.6
3
25
12
2
11
18.2
12
70
17.1
ENE-SE
E
215
599
35.9
137
446
30. 7
58
193
30. 1
410
1,238
33. 1
SSE-SW
S
108
351
30.8
62
232
26.7
36
113
31.9
206
696
29.6
WSW-NW
W
287
1, 106
25.9
155
824
18.8
99
360
27.5
541
2,290
23.6
Calm
170
356
47.8
93
257
36.2
53
115
46. 1
316
728
43.4
aPositive obersvation means odor detected.
Table 10. WIND SPEEDS AND WIND DIRECTION
Wind
direction
N (NNW-NE)
E (ENE-SE)
S (SSE-SW)
W (WSW-NW)
Wind observations
0-10 mph
0
8
8
13
10-30 mph
1
9
2
19
Total
1
17
10
32
% of times
•wind is
< 10 mph
0
47
80
41
Expected order
of decreasing
frequencies of
odor occurrence
4
2
1
3
Summarizing the meteorological factors of wind speed and stability associated
with the various wind directions as they occurred during the survey (Table 13)
should have given the highest frequency of positive odor observations from a south-
erly direction, with the second highest from the east. Precipitation as it occurred
ihdicated that the southerly and easterly wind directions would produce the lowest
frequency of odors. The actual frequency of positive odor observations for St. Louis
and St. Louis County, however, occurred -with easterly •winds instead of southerly
winds, as predicted by the meteorological variables. It is concluded, therefore,
that source location coupled with wind direction causes the odor frequency maximum
27
-------
Table 11. STABILITY AND WIND DIRECTION
Wind
direction
N (NNW-NE)
E (ENE-SE)
S (SSE-SW)
W (WSW-NW)
Stability class
observations
3456
1 - -
2 8-7
4 312
2 20 4 6
Total
1
17
10
32
% 6
0
41
20
19
Expected order
of decreasing
frequencies of
odor occurrence
4
1
2
3
Table 12. PRECIPITATION AND WIND DIRECTION
Wind
direction
N (NNW-NE)
E (ENE-SE)
S (SSE-SW)
W (WSW-NW]
Weather observations
accompanied by rain
Rain
-
3
2
3
No rain
1
14
8
29
Total
1
17
10
32
% rain
0
18
20
9
Expected order
of decreasing
frequencies of
odor occurrence
1
3
4
2
Table 13. SUMMARY OF RANKINGS OF ACTUAL AND EXPECTED FREQUENCIES
BASED ON METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS EXISTING FOR WIND DIRECTIONS
Wind
direction
N (NNW-NE)
E (ENE-SE)
S (SSE-SW)
W (WSW-NW)
Expected order of
decreasing frequencies
Wind
speed
4
2
1
3
Stability
4
2
1
3
Precipi-
tation
1
3
4
2
Combined
effect
4
2
1
3
Actual order of
decreasing frequencies
Metro
4
1
2
3
St.
Louis
4
1
2
3
St. Louis
C ounty
4
1
2
3
111.
4
2
1
3
28
-------
with the easterly direction in these areas. The Illinois area ranking does follow the
expected order, and, therefore, indicates the proximity of sources to observation
points. An example of the importance of wind speed and stability, as well as direc-
tion, was shown by the odor episode that occurred on the evening of November 24,
1963. It was accompanied by stability class 6 and winds of 8 miles per hour or less.
Figure 23 emphasizes the importance of wind direction in connection with the
detection of chemical odors. The data concerning this type of odor were correlated
with wind direction for each of the sampling stations, and for each station the
wind direction corresponding to the greatest number of chemical odor observations
was selected and plotted on the map. The length of the arrow is proportional to
the number of times chemical odors were observed. With but two exceptions,
these odor vectors are associated with winds blowing from the ESE to SSE direc-
tions; and as is indicated on the map, the majority of the observation stations
experiencing frequent chemical odors are located within the City of St. Louis. The
figure defines the odor relationship between the large chemical manufacturing com-
plex on the east side of the Mississippi River and the downtown area of St. Louis,
where unpleasant chemical odors are often observed.
ODOR SOURCES
Figure 24 through 26 show the location of potential sources of odors in St. Louis,
St. Louis County, and Illinois, respectively. The sources are classified into nine
(five general and four specific) types. The type of odor indicated for a particular
potential source was determined from the nature of the activities responsible for the
emissions. Figure 27 shows the locations of the solid waste disposal sites and
municipal incinerators for the metropolitan area.
The figures show that most of the potential odor sources are located along the
Mississippi River on the east side of St. Louis, and in and around East St. Louis,
Illinois. Only a few potential odor sources exist in St. Louis County.
ODOR EPISODE
A severe odor episode was experienced during the Phase II Odor Survey on
Sunday evening, November 24, 1963. The St. Louis Police Department and the
Laclede Gas Company received over 100 complaints before 8:00 p.m. An inspector
for the St. Louis Division of Air Pollution Control was called in to investigate the
complaints. By traversing the area in his automobile, he was able to trace the
odor all the way back to the edge of the Mississippi River. Since the wind was from
a southeasterly direction, he concluded that the odor was originating across the
river in Illinois.
The data collected by the odor survey network the evening of the odor episode
are presented in three maps, Figures 28, 29, and 30, one for each observation
time. The chemical odor observations made during the episode, according to the
category established in Table 1, were used to draw rough boundary lines around
the area affected. The 8:00 p.m. map (Figure 28) shows the odors extending all
the way from the Mississippi River to Lindberg Road, a distance of more than 10
miles. The cone-shaped path expanding out in the direction of the wind is the nor-
mal diffusion pattern for emissions from a point source with a steady wind. The
10:00 p.m. and midnight maps are almost identical, except that by midnight the
29
-------
Length of arrow indicates the maximum number of
chemical odors observed at a given station, with
the wind blowing in the direction toward which the
arrow is pointing. i 234567
Tip of arrow corresponds to the location
of the observation station.
Figure 23. Association of chemical odor observations with wind direction.
30
GPO 828—153-5
-------
740
700—'
690
MERCHANTS BR
730
McKINLEY BR
720
VETERAN'S MEMORIAL
BRIDGE
EADS BR
710
McAflTHUR BR
ANIMAL ODORS
ODORS FROM COMBUSTION PROCESSES
^ - ODORS FROM FOOD PROCESSES
D - GENERAL CHEMICAL ODORS
E - GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ODORS
F - FOUNDRY ODORS
G - REFINERY ODORS
H - ODORS FROM DECOMPOSING WASTE
I - SEWAGE ODORS
Figure 24. Location of potential odor sources in St. Louis.
31
-------
-A - ANIMAL ODORS
B - ODORS FROM COMBUSTION PROCESSES
•C - ODORS FROM FOOD PROCESSES
, D - GENERAL CHEMICAL OOORS
'E - GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ODORS
F - FOUNDRY ODORS
G - REFINERY ODORS
H - ODORS FROM DECOMPOSING WASTE
- I - SEWAGE ODORS
820
810
800°°°
790
780
770
760
750
740
730
720
710
700°°°
690
680
670
660
650
420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520
Figure 25. Potential odor sources in St. Louis County.
J840
32
-------
ANIMAL ODORS
ODORS FROM COMBUSTION PROCESSES
ODORS FROM FOOD PROCESSES
GENERAL CHEMICAL ODORS
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ODORS
FOUNDRY ODORS
REFINERY ODORS
ODORS FROM DECOMPOS ING WASTE
SEWAGE ODORS
Figure 26. Potential odor sources in Illinois portion of Study area.
33
-------
• SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
A MUNICIPAL INCINERATOR
Figure 27. Solid waste disposal sites.
wind had shifted a little more to the east and had caused the diffusion cone to shift
to the south. In addition, odors of a similar nature were detected in a circular
band along the St. Louis boundary in the south. This circular path follows the low
area of South St. Louis along the River des Peres drainage channel. The slight
shift in wind direction appears to have caused the diffusion cone to shift enough
to the south so that it split in two directions on an east-west ridge that extends
along the south of Forest Park. Although the odor path in South St. Louis does
not follow the wind direction, such an occurrence is not impossible with the exis-
ting topography and meteorological conditions. It is also possible that the odors
detected in South St. Louis along the boundary between St. Louis and St. Louis
County may have originated from another source located near the mouth of the River
des Peres. None of the observers in Illinois experienced any odors that could be
associated with this episode.
As expected, the actual descriptions used by the odor observers to describe
what was probably the same odor or *".wo odors for the 10:00 p.m. and 12 midnight
observations varied considerably. All descriptions seemed to be similar enough for
the odor to have been from the same source.
On the evening of November 24, 1963, the winds ranged from 6 to 8 mph from
a southeasterly direction. The stability condition was 6 (very stable condition),
34
-------
' 7 tf*i" l' ii
ST. LOUIS
DATE: 11/24/63
TIME: 2000
WIND Dl RECTION: SE
WIND SPEED: 6 mph
STABILITY: 6
A ODOR OBSERVATION
LOCATIONS
:•:•:•:•:•:•: AREA AFFECTED
Figure Z8. Odor episode, 8 p.m. map.
and there •was no rain. Although these conditions are very favorable for an odor
episode, they are in no sense unusual and may occur fairly frequently, particularly
when an anticyclone passes with its highest pressure zone just to the north of the
St. Louis area.
35
-------
MADISC
srV
LEGEND
DATE: 11/2^/63
TIME: 2200
WIND DIRECTION: ESE
WIND SPEED: 8 mph
STABILITY: 6
A ODOR OBSERVATION
LOCATIONS
•:•:•:•:•::: AREA AFFECTED
Figure 29. Odor episode, 10 p.m. map.
Although the odor episode of November 24 was probably a result of an indus-
trial breakdown or spill, it clearly illustrates the nature of the interstate chemical
odor problem. An odor originating in Illinois resulted in discomfort to a consider-
able number of people in both St. Louis and St. Louis County in Missouri in an area
in excess of 25 square miles.
36
-------
LEGEND
DATE: 11/24/63
TIME: 2400
WIND DIRECTION: ESE
WIND SPEED: 7 mph
STABILITY: 6
A ODOR OBSERVATION
LOCATIONS
&:':&' AREA AFFECTED
Figure 30. Odor episode, midnight map.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The object of the Phase II Odor Survey was stated in the form of seven questions.
Each of these questions is answered and discussed below along with some conclusions
drawn from the survey data.
37
-------
1. What areas in metropolitan St. Louis have odor problems?
Odors were detected more often in St. Louis and Illinois than in St. Louis
County. The most objectionable and intense odors occur near the location of large
chemical plants and rendering plants. Areas frequently affected by such odors are
shown in Figures 20 and 21. The most odorous areas found in metropolitan St. Louis
tend to be within or very near commercial and industrial areas (see Figures 18 and
19).
2. What types of odors affect each area?
The occurrence of combustion and combustible waste odors was quite similar
for the three areas (Table 14). Chemical odors, on the other hand, were consid-
erably higher in St. Louis than in Illinois or St. Louis County. Combustible waste
odors were probably abnormally high because of seasonal leaf burning.
Table 14. PERCENT OF OBSERVATIONS
IN WHICH ODORS WERE DETECTED
Type of odor
Combustion odors
Combustible waste
Chemical
St. Louis
10. 3
6.6
9.2
St. Louis Co.
9.2
8. 1
2.4
Illinois
7.8
5.4
4.4
3. What odor types are the most undesirable?
All types of odors other than food processing and vegetation were described by
the observers as being unpleasant over 50 percent of the time. Animal, decom-
position, and chemical odors were described as unpleasant most frequently, with
97. 9, 93. 3, and 80. 1 percent, respectively. See Figure 12.
4. When are odors prevalent?
The percent positive odor observations were the highest for the 8:00 p.m.
observation time. More odors were generally detected at night than during the day.
See Figure 5.
5. What are the meteorological conditions associated with odors?
The meteorological conditions associated with a high frequency of positive odor
aVTrati rvn R Wf^TP Rffl follows:
observations were as follows:
a. Wind speeds less than 10 mph (Figure 13).
b. Stable atmospheric conditions (Figure 15).
38
GPO 828-153-4
-------
c. No rain (Figure 16).
d. Winds out of the east for odors detected in St. Louis and St. Louis
County (Figure 22).
e. Winds out of the south for odors in Illinois (Figure 22).
6. Where are the potential odor sources located?
Many of the major odor sources in the St. Louis City area are on strips of
industrially zoned properties adjacent to the Mississippi River. An additional strip
of industrially zoned property runs west from the middle of downtown St. Louis
County border, and it, too, is a frequent source of odors. On the Illinois side there
are considerable concentrations of industry in the East St. Louis, Alton, Granite
City, and Monsanto areas, which give rise to objectionable odors.
7. Are there interjurisdictional and interstate problems related to odor control?
The odor episode experienced during the survey was caused by odors that orig-
inated in Illinois, crossed the Mississippi River, and extended all the way west
across St. Louis and into St. Louis County almost to the St. Louis Municipal Air-
port. This episode clearly indicated that severe interstate odor problems do exist
in the metropolitan area.
Further indication of the existence of interstate and interjurisdictional odor
problems is presented in Figure 23, which strongly indicates that the chemical
odors so frequently observed in St. Louis arise from the industrial complexes on
the Illinois side of the Mississippi River.
The results of the survey described here indicate that unpleasant odors are of
relatively frequent occurrence in the St. Louis Metropolitan Area. The existence
of these odors is a source of considerable discomfort to the multitude of persons
forced to breathe this contaminated air during the course of their everyday activi-
ties. Future increases in population and industrialization will surely cause the
odor situation to become even more undesirable if steps are not taken to alleviate
present conditions and prevent the occurrence of future odor problems.
39
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - ODOR OBSERVATION LOCATIONS
LOCATION
St. Louis City
No. 1
2
3
4
5-25
6
7-33
8
9
10
11-16
12
13
14
15-39
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
34
35
36
37
38
40-41
42
43
44
a.
Grid coordinates
485
491
484
478
489
492
487
490
494
479
489
479
468
479
493
483
474
460
486
480
460
475
474
479
476
479
476
466
460
488
472
467
468
481
477
492
466
473
439
705
712
700
695
721
713
710
726
720
725
704
738
728
706
711
720
717
692
733
711
714
688
732
730
742
720
713
723
700
716
683
706
698
744
701
715
712
722
759
Elevation, ft
550
450
520
510
520
460
510
470
460
510
430
510
560
550
460
550
500
450
430
510
550
460
500
510
510
490
490
490
480
490
450
600
460
420
550
460
450
510
530
Zoning
1
5
1
1
1
3
1
1
4
1
5
2
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
1
4
2
1
1
3
1
3
2
1
4
See Figure 1.
"Zoning code: 1, residential; 2, business; 3, commercial; 4, industrial; and
5, unrestricted.
40
-------
LOCATION
St. Louis County
Kirkwood
Florissant Valley No. 1
Florissant Valley No. 2
Ladue No. 1
Lemay Fire Dept.
Riverview No. 1
Riverview No. 2
Jennings, Mo.
Pine Lawn
Spanish Lake, Mo.
Moline
Hazelwood
Berkeley
Community No. 1
Community No. 2
Olivette
University City No. 1
University City No. 3
Clayton
Richmond Heights
Maplewood
Shrewsbury
Webster Groves No. 1
Webster Groves No. 2
Affton
Mehlville Dist. No. 1
Mehlville Dist. No. 2
Mehlville Dist. No. 3
Illinois
Cahokia
Alton No. lc
Cahokia
Alton No. 4C
Alton No. 5C
Wood Riverc
Hartford0
Venice
Brooklyn
National City
E. St. Louis -Me Calloughc>
E. St. Louis - Chanselorc> d
E. St. Louis - Brownd
Grid
431
455
458
442
467
487
482
474
467
486
470
445
452
447
443
440
458
451
451
456
455
456
444
451
449
455
461
438
491
494
498
504
509
520
520
497
500
504
d527
523
501
coordinates
697
773
768
719
680
757
751
748
738
774
758
768
758
744
740
730
724
728
722
714
708
701
701
701
685
669
665
677
692
811
691
815
811
799
790
729
724
718
704
701
707
Elevation, ft
640
570
600
600
480
550
480
530
560
570
530
520
550
650
650
650
550
570
590
530
510
450
550
530
560
620
500
640
410
440
410
540
540
440
430
400
410
420
410
410
410
Zoning
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
4
1
1
1
:These stations not included on Figure 1.
Not a fire station.
41
-------
APPENDIX B - ODOR SURVEY ST. LOUIS - EAST ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN
AREA
ODOR SENSITIVITY TEST
As an odor observer, you will be taking observation simultaneously along with
about 100 other firemen in the metropolitan area. The odor survey covers about
400 square miles; this means that each observer is essentially representing a four-
square-mile area. The data from each observation will be keypunched on cards to
be analyzed by a Honeywell "400" digital computer located at the Robert A. Taft
Sanitary Engineering Center in Cincinnati, Ohio. The importance of each observa-
tion makes it necessary for us to give an odor sensitivity test to all the participants
of the study, to make sure they are capable of detecting odors.
Description of Test
The chemicals used to determine your ability to detect odors will be vanillin,
amyl acetate, and butyric acid. The first two odorants are pleasant, but the
third, butyric acid, has a stench much like rancid butter. Three dilutions will be
prepared of each odorant -- one is considered to be below the normal threshold or
detection level, one is detectable by a majority of the normal population, and one
is a factor of 10 higher than the normal detectable level. Each participant will be
asked to select the odorous container from a group of three, two of which are only
distilled water.
Instructions
Three containers will be passed among the group for each test. One contains
an odorous fluid, while the others simply contain distilled water. The observers
should take short sniffs of the samples to insure that the odorant reaches the ol-
factory receptor surfaces that are high up in the nasal passages. Select the con-
tainer A, B, or C that appears to have even the slightest odor and mark an (X) in
the appropriate block on the test sheet.
42
-------
ODOR STUDY OF ST. LOUIS - E. ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AREA
ODOR SENSITIVITY TEST RECORD
Fire House
Location
Captain: Even_
Grid Coordinates
X Y
Folder Location
Pay Telephone No.
Odd
Pollutant Code
cc.
2-6
cc. 7-8
Odorant
Strength
Udo:
Obs<
i-ous Uont
ainer
;rver Number Observer Name
^
1
A
2
£3
3
.rt.
4
o
5
o
6
£>
7
A
8
r>
9
ri
Q
o*
cc. 17-19 ^
-P
(0
H
O
(U
n)
Q
i — 1
1
*
o
U
<0
V
H 5
«Q
v O
W
1
o
43
-------
TEST SHEET
Name
Test No.
B
10
TEST SHEET
Name
Test No.
B
10
TEST SHEET
TEST SHEET
Name
Name
Test No.
A B
Test No.
A
B
10
10
44
-------
w
w
H
M
O
rt
H
w
s a
S3 «
H) O
O h
5? •
PH W
O
J
W
>
rt
g
8
o
rt
w
w
pq
O
.a
ni
ON °
-g
(S
o
to
<1>
O
o
U
O
S! h
> «
to C
61
Observer
Name
on of
p
Descr
Odo
a
• H
H
SuoJ4g
3UOJX[ 0
t^-
o
t^-
i-H
xD
r— 1
in
•*
i — i
0
rj
fM
(NJ
•*
(M
•
CO
§
. -3
.0 S
- 5
•a i
2 2 2 S 2 -« o
-------
APPENDIX C - PHASE II ODOR SURVEY ST. LOUIS - EAST ST. LOUIS
METROPOLITAN AREA
OBSERVER INSTRUCTIONS
1. START SURVEY at 7 a.m. on Monday, November 18, 1963.
2. Make daily observations at 7 a.m., 2 p.m., 8 p.m., 10 p.m., and 12 midnight.
3. If the scheduled observer is not available, the next man in line under the appro-
priate odd or even shift should make the observation.
4. Observers preferably should not smoke, chew gum, or chew tobacco for at
least 30 minutes prior to observations.
5. Go outside the fire house and immediately take a few SHORT SNIFFS of the air.
It is preferable to take observations at the back of the fire house, away from
the street in an open area (avoid the detection of odors originating at the fire
house).
6. Record the results on the Observation Form.
1. Strength (Mark with X)
2. Description (Use own words - avoid looking at
terms used by other observers).
3. Name (Last name only is sufficient).
4. Observers reaction (Mark with X).
5. Do you have a cold (Mark with X).
6. Rain (Mark with X).
7. Return folder to specified folder location.
8. SURVEY FINISHED Midnight, Sunday, December 1, 1963. Place folder in the
provided addressed envelope and drop in mail box (No postage necessary).
9. Thanks for your cooperation.
46
GPO 828-153—3
-------
PHASE II
ODOR SURVEY ST. LOUIS - E. ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AREAS
SCHEDULE
Fire House_
Location
Grid Coordinates
Folder Location_
ODD
EVEN
Obs.
No.
Captain
Observers
Obs.
No.
Captain
Observers
3.
4.
3.
4.
DATE TIME
OBSERVER
11/18
11/19
7 A. M.
2 P. M.
8 P. M.
10 P. M.
12 M. N.
7 A. M.
2 P. M.
8 P. M.
10 P. M.
12 M. N.
47
-------
APPENDIX D - STABILITY CLASSES--ST. LOUIS ODOR SURVEY
For the St. Louis odor survey, the Pasquill-Gifford-Turner stability classes
were used; however, these stability classes were modified somewhat by use of
data obtained from instruments located at different heights on towers in St. Louis.
Table D-l gives the six classes of stability in terms of the surface wind, the
solar insolation for the daytime, and the cloud cover at night. Strong insolation
corresponds to a solar altitude greater than 60° with clear skies, and slight insola-
tion corresponds to a solar altitude from 15° to 35 °F with clear skies. Cloudiness,
which decreases insolation, was considered along with solar altitude in determining
insolation. Insolation that would be strong with clear skies was classified as mod-
erate with broken middle clouds and as slight with broken low clouds. The neutral
category, 4, was assumed for conditions with cloud cover greater than 6/10 and a
ceiling less than or equal to 10, 000 feet during day or night.
Table D-l. PASQUILL-GIFFORD-TURNER
KEY TO STABILITY CLASSES
Surface wind speed
(at 10m.),
mph
< 4.5
4.5- 6.7
6.7-11.2
11.2-13.4
13.4
Insolation
Strong
1
1-2
2
3
3
Moderate
1-2
2
2-3
3-4
4
Slight
2
3
3
4
4
Night
Thinly overcast
or
> 5/10 low cloud
-
5
4
4
4
< 4/10
cloud
-
6
5
4
4
Definitions of stability classes: 1, extremely unstable; 2, unstable;
3. slightly unstable; 4, neutral; 5, stable; 6, very stable..
48
GPO 828-153—2
-------
JD.S. ^vlron^ntal Protection Agenc2
Xte€i--3 5, Library fiPL-16)
230 5. Dearborn Ht-eet. ttoom 1670
Chicago. IL 6UG04
------- |