United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Sciences Research EPA-600 7 79 197
Laboratory September 1979
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
Research and Development
Aerosol Source
Characterization
Study in
Miami, Florida
Trace Element
Analysis
Interagency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program
Report
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7 Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research and
Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of, and development of, control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide'range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/7-79-197
September 1979
AEROSOL SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY IN MIAMI, FLORIDA
Trace Element Analysis
by
Kenneth A. Hardy
Department of Physical Sciences
Florida International University
Miami, Florida 33199
Contract No. 68-02-2406
Project Officer
Ronald K. Patterson
Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA 27711
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Environmental Sciences Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publica-
tion. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention
of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.
XI
-------
ABSTRACT
Aerosol in Miami, Florida was sampled in June 1975 to better characterize
the aerosol in an urban environment devoid of heavy industry. The three
sampling sites selected were an area with light industrial activity, one with
heavy commercial activity, and a sparsely populated residential area. Sam-
pling devices at each site included a five-stage cascade impactor and a streaker
sampler to give the time distribution.of trace elements. A wind-direction-
sensitive sampling system controlling four five-stage cascade impactors was
installed at one site. Size and time distributions of trace elements heavier
than aluminum were determined by proton induced x-ray emission at Florida
State University. Determining the directional distribution of the aerosol
trace elements allowed pinpointing of strong local sources. The calculated
aerosol source coefficient indicated less than 10 percent of the aerosol mass
in Miami can be attributed to the sea spray.
111
-------
CONTENTS
Abstract iii
'Figures . . . . . .•;•;-•-. .- . . . . . , . . . . . .--••. . . .-.-.-. .". - vi
Tables viii
1. Introduction 1
2. Recommendations 4
3. Experimental Conditions and Procedures 5
4. Data Analysis 7
Size distribution data 7
Wind-direction-sensitive distribution data 8
Distribution as a function of time 8
Aerosol source coefficients 10
Directional distribution of particulate matter 15
Further analytical applications 17
5. Site-by-Site Summary 18
Site 10. . . 18
Site 11 20
Site 14 * 21
References.
61
v
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
• 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Size distribution data for P, S, Cl, and K at site 10. ...
Size distribution data for Ca, Ti, V, and Cr at site 10. ..
Size distribution data for Mn, Fe, Ni, and Cu at site 10 . .
Size distribution data for Zn, Br, and Pb at site 10 ....
Size distribution data for P, S, Cl, and K at site 11. . . .
Size distribution data for Ca, Ti, V, and Cr at site 11. ..
Size distribution data for Mn, Fe, Ni, and Cu at site 11 . .
Size distribution data for Zn, Br, and Pb at site 11 ....
Size distribution data for P, S, Cl, and K at site 14. ...
Size distribution data for Ca, Ti, V, and Cr at site 14. . .
Size distribution data for Mn, Fe, Ni, and Cu at site 14 . .
Size distribution data for Zn, Br, and Pb at site 14 ....
Size distribution of P, S, Cl, and K, as a function of wind
Size distribution of Ca, Ti, Fe, and Cu as a function of
Size distribution of Zn, Br, and Pb, as a function of wind
Time distribution of S, Cl, K, Ca, Ti, and V, at sites 10,
1 1 and 14 6/2/75 to 6/9/75
Time distribution of Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Cu, and Zn, at sites
10 11 and 14, 6/2/75 to 6/9/75
Time distribution of Br and Pb at sites 10, 11, and 14,
6/2/75 to 6/9/75; and traffic count at site 10, 6/4/75
Time distribution of S, Cl, K, Ca, Ti, and V, at sites
in. 11. and 14. 6/10/75 to 6/14/75
s:
3
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
VI
-------
21 Time distribution of Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Cu, and Zn, at sites
10, 11, and 14, 6/LO/75 to 6/14/75 42
22 Time distribution of Br and Pb at sites 10, 11, and 14,
6/10/75 to 6/14/75 43
23 Angular distribution of P, S,.C1, and K, site 10 44
24 Angular distribution of Ca, Ti, V, and Cr, site 10 45
25 Angular distribution of Mn, Fe, Ni, and Cu, site 10 46
26 Angular distribution of Zn, Br, and Pb, site 10 47
27 Angular distribution of S, Cl, K, and Ca, site 11 48
28 Angular distribution of Ti, V, Cr, and Mn, site 11 49
29 Angular distribution of Fe, Ni, Cu, and Zn, site 11 50
30 Angular distribution of Br and Pb, site 11 51
31 Angular distribution of P, S, Cl, and K, site 14 52
32 Angular distribution of Ca, Mn, Fe, and Ni, site 14 53
33 Angular distribution of Cu, Zn, Br, and Pb, site 14 54
34 Possible particulate sources near sampling site 10 55
35 Aerial photograph of site 10 56
36 Possible particulate sources near sampling site 11 57
37 Aerial photograph of site 11 58
38 Possible particulate sources near sampling site 14 59
39 Aerial photograph of site 14 60
VII
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Meteorological Conditions, 6/3/75 to 6/13/75 6
2 Mass Weighted Mean Diameter, Sites 10, 11, and 12 9
3 Mass Weighted Mean Diameter from Selected Sector Impactors . 9
4 Fractional Element Composition of Major Sources of Aerosol , 11
5 Results of Source Coefficient Calculation 12
6 Calculated Source Coefficient. . 13
7 Results of Hi-Vol Measurements 14
8 Radii for Polar Plots in Figures 23 to 33 16
9 Site 14 Angular Distributions 16
Vlll
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The City of Miami offers a unique opportunity to study an aerosol primarily
derived from a marine atmospheric background, modified by naturally derived
aerosol components such as soil dust, nonindustrial urban activity, light
industry, stationary power generation plants, and automotive emissions (Hardy
et al. 1976). Activities in the Miami area are primarily service oriented,
the area being a resort and retirement community. Approximately 25 percent
of the work force is employed in wholesale and retail trade. The next largest
categories of employment are professional and related services; manufacturing;
transportation, communications; and public utilities. These categories com-
prise nearly 65 percent of the total employment in the Miami area. The largest
manufacturing industry is apparel manufacturing, then machinery, metal products
and equipment manufacturing, in that order (Epstein and Lynn, 1976). No heavy
industrial activity is carried on in the Miami area.
In order to aid in the characterization of an atmospheric aerosol,
knowledge of the trace element concentrations as a function of particle size,
time, and meteorological conditions, in addition to the normally measured
parameters, such as total aerosol mass, is necessary. A study was undertaken
in June 1975 with the cooperation of the Dade County Pollution Control Depart-
ment and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for aerosol characterization
in Miami, Florida.
In this study, Dade County sampling sites 10, 11, and 14 were chosen.
These were located at 6400 NW 27 Avenue, Miami; 251 E. 47 Street, Hialeah; and
7700 SW 87 Avenue, Miami; respectively. Sites 10 and 11 were close to light
-------
industrial activity, and site 14 (background site) was primarily a residential
area in southwest Dade County. All sites were exposed to high automotive
traffic density. The sampling sites are indicated on Figure 1.
Sampling devices at each station included a five-stage Battelle design
cascade impactor (Mitchell and Pilcher 1959), _an eight-stage Andersen cascade
impactor (Andersen 1966), a streaker sampler giving 2-h time resolution (Nelson
et al. 1975), and a hi-vol sampler to measure total aerosol mass. In addition,
sampling site 10 was equipped with an experimental wind-direction-sensitive
sampling system (DeJong et al. 1978), operating four Battelle impactors to
sample only when the wind was blowing from a selected 90° quadrant and above a
predetermined minimum velocity. The four quandrants were centered around the
northeast, southeast, southwest, and northwest directions. The Battelle
cascade impactors classified particulates into six size ranges of d < 0.25 pm,
0.25 < d < 0.5 pm, 0.5 < d < 1.0 pm, 1 < d < 2 pm, 2 < d < 4 pm, and 4 < d pm,
equivalent aerodynamic diameter (Mitchell and Pilcher 1959). The inlet cutoff
diameter for both the streaker and the Battelle impactor is ~ 15 pm, compared
to ~ 100 pm for the hi-vol sampler diameter. The streaker is a continuous
sampling device utilizing 0.4 pm pore size Nuclepore filters that can give 2-h
time resolution from a 0.12 m sample (Nelson et al. 1975). The streaker and
cascade impactor samples were analyzed by proton induced x-ray emission
(Johansson et al. 1972) at Florida State University. The hi-vol samples were
weighed by the Dade County Department of Pollution Control to determine the
total aerosol mass and analyzed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(Research Triangle Park, North Carolina) for total hydrogen, carbon, and
nitrogen content. Remaining portions of the hi-vol samples and selected
Andersen samples were microscopically analyzed by the IIT Research Institute
(Draftz 1979).
-------
Ercvvard County
Dade County
Figure 1. Map of Dade County, Florida, indicating sampling sites 10, 11, and 14
-------
SECTION 2
RECOMMENDATIONS
This study characterized the aerosol in Miami in general terms. Several
problems remain to be solved before a better characterization of the aerosol
can be made. To enable better calculation of the source coefficients, the
elemental composition of natural aerosol sources must be studied. For ex-
ample, during specific meteorological conditions, a considerable fraction of
the particulate matter in Miami may be transported from the Sahara Desert
(Savoie and Prospero 1976). The elemental composition of soil dust and lime-
stone dust should be determined for the Miami area. The method of finding the
directional distribution of particulate matter should be perfected by a
longer-term study in an area such as Miami. The contribution of the Ever-
glades to the aerosol burden in Miami must be determined; as this study in-
dicates, the Everglades may be a significant source of sulfur particulates.
The marine environment contribution to the aerosol burden should be determined
with more precision.
The national emission inventory must be updated to take into account
sources other than fuel combustion. A small manufacturing operation involving
arc welding may contribute a significant portion of the particulate burden of
iron, for example. Turbojet aircraft emissions should be studied, as they are
a large source of particulate matter at sites under their flight path.
It is of interest to compare the particulate levels observed in this
June 1975 study to those observed a year earlier (Hardy et al. 1976). The
sampling was not at the same locations, but the data indicate the particulate
levels have not changed significantly.
-------
SECTION 3
EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS AND PROCEDURES
Samples were collected in Dade County between 6/2/75 and 6/12/75. Three
sampling locations were selected; sampling site number 10 was centered in a
light industrial area, sampling site number 11 in a densely populated resi-
dential area, and sampling site number 14, the background site, was located in
a lightly populated residential area in southwest Dade County. The streaker
samplers were operated continuously for the sampling period. The hi-vol
samplers and the Battelle cascade impactors were changed on a 24-h basis. The
wind direction Battelle samplers were changed when a sample large enough for
analysis was collected. Weather observations were made at Miami International
Airport by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. The
surface wind speed and direction were averaged over 3-h intervals. Radiosonde
observations were made at 7:00 am and 7:00 pm and were used to obtain informa-
tion about the mixing height and temperature inversions. The mixing height,
as determined from the radiosonde data, was generally about 1,000 ft. Trace
precipitation occurred on 4 days during the sampling period, and thunderstorm
activity on 3 of these. Temperature inversions were evident in the morning
observations, and on 6/5 the inversion persisted all day. A weak low pressure
system passed over the South Florida area on 6/6 and 6/7. Table 1 summarizes
the meteorological data during the sampling period.
-------
T&BLE. 1* MEEEQBQIOSIC&L. mHQIXIQliSj 6/3/15 tQ J&O3/75.
! '
pate
|B/3
P/4
16/5
fe/6
|6/7
|6/8
16/9
e/-ie
16/11
|6/12
15/13
4
Resultant
wind
speed
(km/hr)
3
3
3
2
15
10
4
±e
13
2
4
Resultant
wind
direction
(degrees)
70
340
230
180
240
220
180
±30-'
100
110
170
Inversions
7:00 am
mild.
weak
mild
mild
mild
strong
strong
"nririct
mild
mild
mild
pThe inversions are classified weak, mild or strong, depending on the divergence
of the radiosonde data from the normal adiabatic lapse rate.
-------
SECTION 4
DATA ANALYSIS
The hi-vol sampler filters and aerosol samples collected with Andersen
eight-stage cascade impactors were microscopically analyzed. The results are
summarized in a separate report (Draftz 1979) .
SIZE DISTRIBUTION DATA
From the cascade impactor samples collected at each site, nine sets of
size distribution data were selected for analysis. Five sets of size distribu-
tion data from Dade County site 10 were selected, two from site 11, and two
from site 14. The size distribution data are presented in Figures 2 through
13. To simplify data analysis, the size distributions from site 10 for 6/2,
6/3, and 6/4 were averaged, and the size distributions for 6/11 and 6/12 were
averaged .
The mass weighted mean diameter, d, useful in characterizing elemental
size distributions, is defined as:
6
7 m.d.
- '=1 1 1
d = i^T - (Eq. 1)
o
m.
where i = summation index, specifying the stage of the cascade impactor
m. = mass collected on stage i
d. = average equivalent aerodynamic diameter of particulates
collected on stage i
-------
The assignment of the average diameter is somewhat arbitrary, as stages 1 and
6 are open-ended. The diameters used in the calculation were 0.19, 0.37,
0.75, 1.5, 3.0, and 6.0 ym for stages 6 through 1, respectively. The nine
sets of distribution data shown in Table 2 are useful to compare the samples
collected with similar devices (Battelle cascade impactors) at the different
sites. The error in these figures is ~ 20 percent.
WIND-DIRECTION-SENSITIVE DISTRIBUTION DATA
From the site 10 wind-direction-sensitive system of four cascade impactors,
four sets of data were analyzed. Elemental size distribution as a function of
wind direction are presented in Figures 14 to 16. Each of the four impactors
was operated in its selected sector when the wind was blowing from that sector,
until (after ~ 24 h) a sample sufficient for analysis was collected. These
samples, therefore, represent an average over time periods that are different
for each wind direction. The mass mean diameters were calculated using Equa-
tion 1 and are presented in Table 3. Lines connecting the data points in
Figures 14 to 16 are to aid the eye in following the data trend.
DISTRIBUTION AS A FUNCTION OF TIME
The time distribution of particulates was measured with streaker samplers
at all sampling sites throughout the sampling period (Nelson et al. 1975).
The data are presented in Figures 17 to 22. A traffic count taken adjacent to
site 10 is shown on Figure 19. The observed correlation between lead and
bromine (Figure 19) is as expected. Levels of some soil-derived elements
appear correlated with wind velocity; for example, K, Ca, Ti, Cr, Mn, Fe, and
Ni levels increase on 6/7, 6/8, 6/10, and 6/11 (Figures 17 and 18). A sur-
prising result is the lack of correlation between the traffic count taken
adjacent to site 10 and the levels of lead and bromine at that site (Figure
19).
-------
TABLE 2. MASS WEIGHTED MEAN DIAMETER (ym),
SITES 10, 11, AND 12
Site 10 Site 10
Element (June 2,3,4) (June 11,12)
P
S
Cl
K
Ca
Ti
V
Cr
Mn
Fe
Hi
Cu
Zn
Br
Pb
i.aa 2.79
1.09 2.06
4.15 4.88
2.60 3.50
4.00 4.86
1.48 3.05
0.62 0.98
1.30 4.44
1.94 3.11
2.77 3.01
2.24 2.02
1.34 1.33
2.03 4.01
1.53 1.17
1.29 1.12
Site 11 Site 11 Site
(June 5) (June 12) (June
2.25 3.01 2.86
1.35 0.85 1.04
4.69 4.90 3.88
3.08 2.71 2.91
4.07 4.89 4.30
2.50 2.92 2.08
0.33 0.52 0.53
0.41
1.00 3.08 3.67
3.35 3.00 3.49
4.12 3.99 2.78
2.02 2.19 2.51
3.02 2.09 2.92
2.05 2.00 2.28
1.69 1.07 2.18
TABLE 3. MASS WEIGHTED MEAN DIAMETER
FROM SELECTED SECTOR IMPACTORS, SITE
Element NE
P 2.23
S 1.34
Cl 4.80
K 3.11
Ca 4.95
Ti 2.27
Pe 3.35
Cu 3.31
Zn 3.18
Br 1.96
Pb 1.30
SE SW
1.25 2.29
1.01 1.45
4.44 4.29
2.76 3.10
3.90 4.67
1.62 2.48
2.38 2.98
2.09 3.01
2.42 2.97
1.53 1.93
0.93 2.07
14 Site 14
5) (June 12)
3.44
1.66
5.17
3.29
5.40
3.03
0.48
1.28
3.15
3.53
2.18
1.80
2.49
3.22
2.23
(ym)
10
NW
0.4
1.31
1.78
1.22
1.55
2.22
2.94
3.12
3.07
0.96
0.73
-------
AEROSOL SOURCE COEFFICIENTS
A useful way of analyzing air particulate data is the computation of the
aerosol source coefficients (Miller et al. 1972). The concentration of air
particulate matter at a sampling site due to several sources can be written:
. = Jot. .Y. -m. (Eq. 2)
i L. ID ID 3
where j = source of the particulate matter
C. = concentration (ng/m ) of an element i at the collection site
a.. = fractional composition of element i emitted by source j
m. = mass of particulate matter attributable to source j
y.. = coefficient of fractionization, describing the loss of
element i between the source and the sampling station
The m.'s may be determined from the experimentally observed concentrations by
a linear least squares criterion. The quantity minimized is:
ry
(x. - Ja. ,Y • .HI. )
yv i L ID '13 D
Q = L - - (Eq. 3)
which takes into account the error (a.) in the observed concentration (x.).
In general, the Y- • coefficients are not known but can be assumed to be close
to 1. The a. . coefficients describe the composition of an aerosol emitted by
a source j ; these are known for anthropogenic sources but less well known for
natural sources. In the calculations presented here, Y- • is taken to be 1.
The method is satisfactory for total particulate matter, however less satis-
factory for particulate matter classified by size, because the fractional
composition for particulate matter as a function of particle size is not well
known.
In the calculation it was assumed that the aerosol evolved primarily from
six major sources: sea salt, fuel oil fly ash, cement dust, automotive emis-
sions, limestone, and soil. In the composition of fuel oil fly ash, a 10
percent conversion of SO to particulate matter was assumed. Table 4 shows
the assumed source fractional composition for the major components of Miami
aerosol.
10
-------
TABLE 4. FRACTIONAL ELEMENTAL COMPOSITION OF MAJOR SOURCES OF MIAMI AEROSOL
Element
P
S
Cl
K
Ca
Ti
V
Cr
Mn
Fe
Ni
Cu
Zn
Br
Pb
Limestone
0.31 x 10~3
0.30 x 10~3
0
-2
0.27 x 10
0.30 x 10°
0.35 x 10~3
0
0
0
0.38 x Kf 2
0
0
0
0
0
Cement
0
0.10 x 10"1
0
-3
0.80 x 10
0.46 x 10°
0.18 x 10~2
0
0
0.30 x 10~3
0.21 x lO"1
0
0
0
0
0
Automobile
0
0.10 x 10°
-1
0.69 x 10
0
0.48 x 10"1
0
0
0
0
0.82 x 10"1
0
0
0.12 x 10"1
0.15 x 10°
0.41 x 10°
Fuel oil
fly ash
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
39
39
18
13
11
53
13
11
25
66
12
13
79
0
x 10°
0
_o
x 10
x 10
x 10
x lo"1
-3
x 10
x 10
x 10
x 10
-3
x 10
x 10
x 10
xlO-3
Soil6
0.26 x 10~3
0.19 x 10~3
-3
0.48 x 10
-3
0.24 x 10
0.13 x 10~2
0.3 x 10~2
0
0
0
0.23 x 10"2
0
0
0
0
0
Sea salt
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
34
26
55
11
16
30
1
26
40
19
x
x
X
X
X
0
0
0
x
X
0
X
X
X
0
10 6
10"1
o
10
_1
10
lo"1
io"6
ID'5
c
10
io~6
10~2
"Pettijohn 1948
American Society for Testing and Materials
"rcahill and Feeney 1973
Winchester and Desaedeleer 1975
^Parsons 1897
Sverdrup 1942
-------
TABLE 5. RESULTS OF SOURCE COEFFICIENT CALCULATION
Element
P
S
Cl
K
Ca
Ti
V
Cr
Mn
Fe
Hi
Cu
Zn
Br
Pb
Site
Observed
325
620
650
209
4340
29
12
24
12
485
22
10
33
132
780
± 160
± 250
± 260
± 60
± 800
± 6
± 3
± 8
± 5
± 100
± 11
± 5
± 11
± 40
± 230
10
Calculated
5a
628
655
25a
4341
70
9
0.5a
2.8a
392
20
0.153
22
274
745
Site
Observed
270
745
251
195
3440
18
19
3
8
285
8
104
45
255
950
±
+
+
+
+
+
±
+
±
±
±
+
+
+
±
135
350
100
78
1300
7
10
1
4
100
4
50
23
100
200
11
Calculated
7a
746
253
403
3441
46a
13
0.7a
0.23
272
323
0.9a
27
337
921
Site 14
Observed
192
1110
240
167
3830
30
9
2
6
280
7
3
20
88
440
± 100
± 200
± 100
± 67
± 1000
± 10
± 4
± 1
± 3
± 80
± 4
± 2
± 8
± 30
± 80
Calculated
8.6
1109
242
44
3830
753
26a
1.3
Ia
246
62a
1.6
13
1573
429
aThese calculated values are not within one standard deviation of the observed values.
-------
Table 5 presents the calculated elemental abundances, while Table 6
presents the calculated aerosol source composition. The aerosol source co-
efficients were calculated from elemental abundances obtained by averaging the
observed mass on each stage and summing these averages over the six stages.
When a stage was missing, a size distribution was assumed, including an assumed
value for the missing stage. In most cases, the agreement between the cal-
culated and observed elemental abundances was good with the exception of
phosphorus, where the observed value was always much higher. The total mass
calculated for sites 10 and 11 is lower than the total mass observed in the
hi-vol sampler measurements; nevertheless, since the calculation reproduces
the elemental abundances, it is a good representation of the aerosol composi-
tion as measured by the cascade impactors. The composition of cement dust and
limestoae are notably similar, and their sum is ~ 30 percent of the total mass
at all sites. The soil component is ~ 50 percent of the total mass. The
automobile component varies from 3 to 8 percent, the background site (site 14)
having 3 percent. The fuel oil fly ash component varies from 3 to 7 percent,
with the larger source coefficients at sites closer to fossil fuel power
plants. Sea spray is a minor component of the aerosol observed at the three
sites, the greatest component being 3 percent. Background site 14 calculated
total mass, 37 yg, (Table 6) agrees well with the observed total mass at the
background site (Table 7), where the average hi-vol measurement was 32 ± 12 yg.
TABLE 6. CALCULATED SOURCE COEFFICIENT FOR MIAMI AEROSOL
(% OF TOTAL MASS)
Component
Sea salt
Cement dust
Auto
Fuel oil
fly ash
Soil
Limestone
Mass
Site 10
3
30
6
3
59
-
30 ug
Site 11
0.6
-
8
5
48
38
28 ug
Site
0.
6
3
7
59
23
37
14
7
ug
13
-------
TABLE 7. RESULTS OF HI-VOL MEASUREMENTS (yg/m3)
Site 10
Date
6/2
6/3
6/4
6/5
6/6
6/7
6/8
6/9
6/10
6/11
6/12
Mean
Mass
69.1
67.4
52.9
81.1
94.9
44.9
—
—
83.9
84.0
83.1
74 ± 16
C
7.6
8.2
—
9.7
11.5
4.6
—
—
5.9
5.9
7.2
7 + 2
H
0.55
0.67
—
0.83
1
0.38
—
—
0.55
0.63
0.68
0.6 + 0.2
N
0.29
0.50
—
0.98
1.73
0.36
—
—
0.37
0.38
0.79
0.7 ± 0.5
Mass
51.6
50.1
40.5
55.8
73.1
—
27.1
—
72.2
66.4
67.3
56 ± 15
Site 11
C
6.8
7.6
5.2
6.9
8.7
—
3.. 5
—
5.4
4.6
—
6 ± 2
H
0.51
0.64
0.54
0.63
0.84
—
0.29
—
0.53
0.54
—
0.6 ± 0.2
N
0.33
0.61
0.58
0.85
0.97
—
0.27
—
0.50
0.39
—
0.6 ± 0.3
Mass
16
31.1
31.9
30.4
19
19.2
29.2
51.2
44.3
48.1
32 ± 12
Site 14
C
3.3
3.9
3.7
4.4
2.2
2.19
3.4
3.2
2.26
3.65
3.2 ± 0.8
H
—
0.25
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.26
0.4
0.31
0.4
0.3 ± 0.1
N
—
0.20
0.43
0.45
0.46
0.2
0.18
0.26
0.26
0.23
0.5
0.3 ± 0.1
-------
Agreement at the other sites is not good. At site 10, calculation accounts
for 40 percent of the observed mass, and at site 11, 50 percent of the ob-
served mass. The major cause for this nonagreement is that calculation could
not account for the many small sources in these two industrial areas. In
addition, the cascade impactor's first stage is an open size interval d > 4 ym;
however, the efficiency probably drops for d > 8 pm. The efficiency of the
hi-vol samplers used is not well known, but probably is better than the effi-
ciency of the cascade impactors for d > 8 ym.
DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICULATE MATTER
The directional distribution of the elemental concentration of particulate
matter may be determined by combining the information obtained from the streaker
samplers with meteorological information. The streaker samples were sorted
into groups with a 10° change in wind direction, and the observed concentra-
tion in these groups was averaged. The results are plotted in Figures 23 to
33. The plot radii are shown in Table 8. The most striking example of the
usefulness of the method is shown by the distribution of lead and bromine at
background site 14. The peak in the lead and bromine directional distribution
is to the southwest, pointing toward a large county-operated filling station.
This local source also accounts for the unusual size distribution of lead and
bromine at this sampling site. Analysis of the directional distribution of
pollutants is simplified at site 14, where fewer local sources exist. Some of
the distributions at site 14 can be accounted for by the sources listed in
Table 9. Sites 10 and 11 present a more complex analysis problem; however,
the distribution of some elements may be understood without knowledge of
individual sources. At site 10, the sulfur peak to the southeast points to a
small fossil fuel power plant, the chlorine distribution is primarily to the
east, potassium and calcium distributions are nearly isotropic, vanadium and
nickel have peaks in the direction (SE) of a fossil fuel power plant. Chromium
has a peak in the distribution towards Miami International Airport, a site of
industrial activity involving nonferrous metals. A small welding shop is
located ~ 0.5 km south of site 10 and would account for the iron and nickel
distribution peaks toward the south. The lead and bromine distributions are
similar, with peaks to the east, traceable to automotive traffic on 1-95
15
-------
TABLE 8. RADII FOR POLAR PLOTS IN FIGURES 23 TO 33 (ng/m )
Element
P
S
Cl
K
Ca
Ti
V
Cr
Mn
Fe
Hi
Cu
Zn
Br
Pb
Station 10
1404
28
6875
7
14
337
68
103
131
3667
35
37
140
1408
7028
Station 11
-
3143
698
354
6875
177
35
36
72
1400
71
169
35
356
1419
Station 14
1400
2750
1400
354
3819
-
-
-
70
638
68
71
69
880
3536
Element
TABLE 9. SITE 14 ANGULAR DISTRIBUTIONS
Angle
(degrees)
Probable Source
Distance
(tan)
160
Cl
Ca
Fe
Hi
Br,Pb
225
90-150
200
100-140
225
330
90-135
180
225
225
Fossil fuel power plant
(937 tons S02/year)
Fuel oil dispersing
Sea spray
Water purification plant
Construction (highway)
Concrete dust
Residential construction
Highway construction
Welding, repair shop
Auto repair
Automotive fuel dispensing,
auto repair
8
< 1
10
< 1
1
< 1
2
< 1
< 1
< 1
< 1
16
-------
north. Site 11 chlorine distributions lie primarily to the east and the
potassium and calcium to the northwest toward quarrying operations. The peaks
in the other elemental distributions are probably due to unidentified local
sources.
FURTHER ANALYTICAL APPLICATIONS
The total mass of sulfur as measured by the cascade impactors may be used
to deduce the amount of ammonium sulfate in the aerosol. The north-south ratio
of ammonium sulfate is 0.88, while the observed ratios are 1.2 at site 10, 1.0
at site 11, but only 0.27 at site 14. (Tables 5 and 7) This suggests another
sulfur source, possibly insecticide, near site 14.
A simple calculation based on hi-vol particulate data allows a qualitative
explanation of the observed total particulate mass and is in agreement with
the calculated emission factors for automobiles and fuel oil fly ash. According
to the national emissions data system figures for 1975 (Epstein and Lynn 1976),
the total particulate mass emitted in Bade County is 3 x 10 kg/year. Auto-
mobile particulates are 3.3 x 10 kg/year or 11 percent of the total, and fuel
oil particulates are 3.4 x 10 kg/year, again 11 percent of the total. These
figures are in reasonable agreement with the calculated automobile emission
factors of 5.8, 7.7, and 2.7 percent at stations 10, 11, and 14, respectively
(Table 6). Calculated fuel oil fly ash emission factors are 2.7, 4.5, and 6.5
percent at sites 10, 11, and 14, respectively.
17
-------
SECTION 5
SITE-BY-SITE SUMMARY
SITE 10
The elemental size distributions for site 10 indicate that Br and Pb re-
sult primarily from combustion sources, (i.e., small-particle-favored distri-
butions), while the elements Cl, K, Ca, Ti, and Fe exhibit large-particle-
favored distributions typical of abrasive sources. Bimodal distributions are
exhibited by P, S, V, Cr, Mn, Ni, and Zn, indicating multiple sources. No
significant difference is observed in the shape of the size distributions for
the two data sets. The mass weighted mean diameter data averaged for 6/2,
6/3, and 6/4 indicate that Cl, K, Ca, and Fe are from abrasive sources, while
S, Ti, Cr, Br, and Pb are from combustion type sources. The data averaged for
6/11 and 6/12 indicate that Cl, K, Ca, Cr, and Zn are from abrasive sources,
while S, Ni, Cu, Br, and Pb are from combustion type sources. This informa-
tion indicates that Cl, K, and Ca are primarily from abrasive sources, while
S, Br, and Pb are primarily from combustion sources. The remaining elements
would appear to be from multiple sources.
The mass weighted mean diameter values taken from the wind-direction-
sensitive size distribution data (Table 3) indicate small-particulate sources
for P, Cl, K, and Ca are located northwest of the sampling site, and Pb has a
large-particulate source southwest of the sampling site. The distribution
shape for the other elements is similar for the four sectors sampled.
The elemental directional distribution data show that S, Cl, and K sources
lie southeast of the sampling site. Ca is distributed uniformly except for a
peak in the northwest direction, toward several cement manufacturing facilities.
18
-------
The Ti distribution has prominent peaks in the southeast, south, and northwest
directions. Numerous auto repair and painting facilities are located on 27
Avenue, south of the sampling site; and auto repair, paint, and metal fabricators
are northwest of the sampling site. Elements V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, and Zn have
peaks in the southeast direction, toward the downtown area, and other peaks
generally in the southerly and northwesterly direction. Source identification
is difficult at site 10 because of the variety of industries located west of
the sampling site. Figure 34 shows the location of these industries relative
to the sampling site. Lead and bromine distribution peaks could be caused by
automotive activity at the corner of 32 Avenue and 71 Street (Figure 35).
The time distribution of the elements measured is shown in Figures 17 to
22. Levels of S and Cl on 6/8 and 6/9 increased slightly when the inversions
in the morning were strong. The sharp peaks in the distribution of Fe, Br,
and Pb do not seem to be correlated with weather conditions, but the increase
in Zn concentration occurred when a temperature inversion persisted all day.
The traffic count on 27 Avenue adjacent to the sampling station is shown
in Figure 19. A remarkable feature of the Pb and Br time distributions is the
lack of correlation with the traffic count on the adjacent roadway.
The source coefficients calculated from the elemental data do not agree
with the conclusions from microscopical data analysis (Draftz 1979). The
elemental data indicate that the primary aerosol components at site 10 were
caused by the reentrainment of soil and cement dust into the atmosphere, pos-
sibly by automotive activity; minor components appear to have been contributed
by salt spray, automotive emissions, and fuel oil fly ash. Light industrial
activity to the south, west, and north of the sampling site contributes heavily
to the levels of elements such as Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, and Zn. Levels of Pb
and Br at the site are not resultant of traffic on 27 Avenue, adjacent to the
sampling site; they are more likely caused by transportation associated with
the industrial park, west of the sampling site, and traffic on 1-95, east of
the sampling site.
19
-------
SITE 11
The elemental size distributions at site 11 indicate that Cl, Ca, and Fe
are large-particle-favored distributions typical of abrasive sources. V, Cr,
Mn, Br, and Pb size distribuirons are typical of combustion sources. The size
distribution of sulfur indicates that a large-particle source of sulfur
contributes to the aerosol at site 11. P, K, Ti, Ni, and Zn exhibit bimodal
distribution typical of multiple sources. The Cu size distribution indicates
a source of Cu particulates in the 1 to 2 ym range close to the sampling site.
The mass weighted mean diameter shown in Table 2 indicates that Cl, Ca,
and Ni are primarily from abrasive sources; while S, V, Cr, Cu, Br, and Pb are
from combustion sources. The mass weighted mean diameter is similar on both
sampling days, with the exception of Mn, indicating a small particulate source
influenced the size distribution for the 6/5 sample set.
The observed elemental directional distribution indicates a strong
source(s) of S, K, Ca, V, Mn, Fe, and Zn to the northwest of the sampling
site. Cl is primarily from the east, as would be expected. A Ti source is
located northeast of the sampling site, while Br and Pb originate primarily
from the west. Interpreting these data is difficult, since the sampling site
was located adjacent to a school shop where various industrial activities,
such as welding and auto repair, are taught. Figure 36 depicts possible sources
near the sampling site; Figure 37 is a photograph of the sampling site.
The time distribution of the elements is featureless, with the exception
of higher Cu levels at site 11 than at the other two sampling sites. The Cu
levels are higher during the day from Monday through Friday, dropping on the
weekend. The probable source is high school shop activity.
The source coefficients calculated for site 11 indicate that fuel oil fly
ash, auto emissions, and sea spray constitute a minor component of the aerosol
observed at this site. Primary components are soil and limestone dust, possibly
related to the cement manufacturing activities west of the sampling site. The
elemental analysis agrees in general with the microscopical analysis of the
20
-------
samples at site 11 (Draftz 1979). However, elemental analysis indicates the
primary aerosol component is reentrained soil dust, probably from general
activity in the area rather than from automobiles in particular. Both micros-
copy and elemental analysis indicate a higher contribution from automobiles
at site 11 than at site 10.
SITE 14
The elemental size distributions of P, Cl, K, Ca, Ti, Mn, and Fe are
typical of abrasive sources. The size distributions of S and V are typical of
combustion-type sources. Ni, Cu, Zn, Br, and Pb elemental size distributions
are bimodal, indicating two distant sources. The size distribution of Ti, Ni,
and Cu were markedly different for the two samples analyzed. The Cu size
distribution observed for the 6/5 sample indicates a Cu particulate source in
the 1 to 2 ym range. This source was not observed in the 6/12 sample set.
The size distribution of Br and Pb are unusual and not typical of tail pipe
emissions. The mass weighted mean diameter data from Table 2 indicate that
Cl, K, Ca, Mn, and Fe are large-particulate-favored size distributions and S
and V are small-particle-favored size distrbutions. The analysis of the
directional distribution of particulate matter at site 14 is simplified, be-
cause the sampling site is in a primarily residential area. Table 9 identifies
possible sources for the elements and their distance from the sampling site.
Figure 38 is a map of possible sources near the sampling site; Figure 39 is
an aerial photograph of the site. During the sampling period, the freeway
southeast of the sampling site was under construction. The prominent peaks in
the Cu and Zn distributions are most likely produced by this freeway construc-
tion activity.
The elemental time distributions show higher levels of elements S, Cl, K,
Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, and Ni on 6/8 and 6/9 when strong inversions were observed
in the morning (Table 1), suggesting that sources for these elements are not
close to the sampling site. The peaks in the Cu and Zn time distributions at
~ 2400 on 6/6 indicate a local source for these two elements. The same cor-
relation is observed with Br and Pb on 6/7 and with Cu and Zn on 6/16.
21
-------
The source coefficients calculated for site 14 indicate the primary
source of aerosol at site 14 is soil dust, attributable to local construction
activity. The sea spray contribution here approximates that at site 11, while
the automotive contribution is about one-half that of the other two sites, as
would be expected. The fuel oil fly ash contribution is higher because of a
nearby fossil fuel power plant.
22
-------
1*10*
ng/m9
~a
5M
1
*M
o_
I
• SITEIO-S/2,S/3,6/4
o SITE 10- 6/11,6/12
I"IW —
i.,ol
r
§ i«io'.
..«£
ixio"1
• SITE 10-6/2,6/3,6/4 s
o SITE 10-6/11,6/12
}1 ^ ^ { 1 11
1 !
xlO3-
RATION n«/m3
x
• SITE 10 -S/2, 6/3,6/4
o SITE 10-6/11,6/12
lx 10
ixio"
0 SITE 10 -6/11,6/12
Figure 2. Size distribution data for P, S, Cl, and K at site 10.
23
-------
»<
i»n.
nn.
o SITE 10-6^1,6/12
l«rfj
I* 0.
I»IO.
• SITE 10 - 6/Z,6/3,6/<»
a SITE IO-6/1I.6/12
} {
* *
BIO
Tl i»i
• SITE 10- 6/2,5/3,6* V
o SITE 10- 6/11, 6/12 1,10*
j { "i "wi
8 i i 1
{ ,1 < i-
Cr
» SITE 10- 6/e,6/3,6/<4
oSITEIO-6/ll,6/IZ
' 1 1 11 '
* * W ' i * * *««» * i
Figure 3. Size distribution data for Ca, Ti, V, and Cr at site 10.
24
-------
i»rai
no!
I«K3?
i.e.
• SITE IO-6/2,6/3,6<<»
o SITE 10-6/11, a/12
Mfl
I»KJ_
"°J
• SITE 10-(
o SITE K3-6/11,6/12
1 I
WKSL
i'"°L
««£
• SITE 10- 6/2,6/3,6/4
a SITE 10-6/11,6/12
*!!'
i i
*f
l.d!
Cu
a SITE K5-8/II, 8/12
'''','"
Figure 4. Size distribution data for Mn, Fe, Ni, and Cu at site 10.
25
-------
"f
1.0.
Zn
• SITE 10- 6/2,6/3,6/4
o SITE KJ-6/11,6/12
if ' f
w wi
"| I.K£
<
i ""°!
«•£
mo"1
...o1
Br
o SITE IO- 6/11,6/12 |lKj»
'l i»io!
11 1 f t , !
{ I T j I rw1.
f '
Pb
• SITE 10-6/2,6/3,6/4
a SITE 10-6/11,6/12
H
JT
',""-
f
Figure 5. Size distribution data for Zn, Br, and Pb at site 10.
26
-------
,.»'
i.ioi
«oL
MO"
• SITE II - 6/S P
a SITE II - 6/12 |J|(J3
"f i , i >i " i"
1 t T L |"»'.
I S
,,,o'
S
• SHE II- 6/S
a SITE II -6/12
fi
I
1.10s.
I.I04.
i ""°-
|
i.ai
0
• SITE 11-6/9 Cl «IO-
o SITE 11-6/12
r
i? 1
1 a i»ro!.
J f
i »•£
,
• SITEII-6/5
o SITE 11-6^2
i! , «
6 s
Figure 6. Size distribution data for P, S, Cl, and K at site 11.
27
-------
»«
I i«ioi
1 I«K52J
I«O.
• STEII-6/S
o srreii-s/a
Ca
i«K>i
i»i$i
• SITE II -6/5
o SITE II -6/IZ
{ *
i*WS
moi
v^
1
CONCENTRJ
&
...
I«K3"Z
• STTEII-6/S
o STTEII-S/a
f
i
T
{
•
\ ""°-
a
1
&
|
1 I*K£
i
-2
I»IOI
• STTEII-6/S
o SITE Il-S^a
{
1 ' I
I
1 1 I
Figure 7. Size distribution data for Ca, Ti, V, and Cr at site 11.
28
-------
-
wo°_
i«oL
,.io-2
• SITEII-6/S **
o SITEII-6/12
n 3
i i
T I «
f I 9 I •-
1 ? I 9 a •,
I ^ I Ti u wo
I
i>o!
, _. ,. .. i«"?°
• SITEII-S/S ft
o SrTEII-S/12
« ,! 1
I j
i i *
* 4 'STASE* i '
4 'STASE*
no.
• SITE II-
o SITE II-
6/B
Cu
• SITE H-S/5
o SITE II -
6/12
6 S
2 I
Figure 8. Size distribution data for Mn, Fe, Ni, and Cu at site 11.
29
-------
...oi
"f
I'lO.
• SITE II-S/S
° SITE II-6/IZ
Zn
1 ! i
1
I*IO'
I«1U_
i«ioi
.f i»ioi
§
|
1 i»rol.
o
i»«2
|XIOH
ar
• SITE1I-S/S l»IOl
"H
* - f g
* • P
1 , » , I
5 ! J 5 i a i'.o?
°
n ni
1,10°
Pb
. 5ITEII-S/5
o SITE II- 6^2
?
^ i 5 \ !
I
i
Figure 9. Size distribution data for Zn, Br, and Pb at site 11.
30
-------
1*0
IMO"
l"IW_
s
• SITE 14-6/9 P
o SITE 14- 6/12
i, i fi « !i r
1 11 8«i
1 I 1
i
• SITE 14-6/5 S
o SITE I4-S/I2
I J
i T T? h
l\ I1 i
ff
1
<•«£
wo"
• SITE 14-6/S
o SITE 14-6/12
6 5
I«KJ*
i»iol
• SITE 14- 6/5
a SITE 14-6/12
6 S
f i
2
Figure 10. Size distribution data for P, S, Cl, and K at site 14.
31
-------
1*10?
€ ,.,o2
1
>
flu NOI1VU1
| IXIO1.
,.ȣ
ixio"1
ix Wi
I ""°°-
CONCENTRATION i
5.
IX o!
I*IO"3
CO
> sue. io-B/3
o SITE 14-6/12 J
\
I
\
I
\
4STAK3
• SITE 14-6/5 V
o SITE 14-6/12
;
[
i :;
-
1*10!,
ixiof
V»:
ITRATION
S 1*10°
IXKJi!.
l,10-z
IXIO*
ixtol
I 1X102
?
|
I.Ki!
I*IO"5
• SITE 14-6/5 Ti
o SITE 14-6/12
i ' 1
I
^ 1 l
6 5 'sraeeS 2 '
• SITE 14-6/3 Cr
a SITE 14-6/12
i
T
::I
Figure 11. Size distribution data for Ca, Ti, V, and Cr at site 14.
32
-------
WWJ,
11.*!
<««£
. SITE 14-6/5
o SITEI4-6/IJ
- .
4 ?
I
i I
, , i !
"s z
§
I
B i*ioi
1.10?
o SIT! 14-i/iz
«*
"l .»»0.
§ i»rol
niof
,.|tf3
• SITE 14- 8/5 N' WBI
o SITEW-6/B
* "^ I»I00
fj T ?
f i ! j
I i»<
-
mo3
• SITE 14-6/S C"
8 'SITEI4-Si1Z
if j i
if
12. Size distribution data for Mn, Fe, Ni, and Cu at site 14.
33
-------
i.iol
• SITE 14-6/5
o SITE 14-6/13
X
5
S ,x,0°_
§
nidi
-2
IXtO
IX 10*
IXIO!
1*10..
|x|gl
""
Q
IXIO_
I»IOH
• SITE 14-6/5
o SITE 14-6/12
J 5 Ij
j{
* 5 4STA6E3 4 '
4
8r "" "
it £
e
• O
i
j •
!
J
6 5 4 STAGE3
h-
<
o:
J z
;. o i»io.
" * 5
U0°
• SITE 14-6/3
" SITE 14-6/12
'i ! ' ''l '
T ^ 5
I
2 ' 65 4STAOE3 2 '
Figure 13. Size distribution data for Zn, Br,- and Pb at site 14.
34
-------
IX 10s
ix 10;
I ..ioi
IX10*
1X101
irt ,
I moi
§
P
<
o:
i-
§ i*rai
1*10 _
STAGE3 * !
6 * STAGE3 2
IX10-
lx 10.
«!03.
ce
lx Ol
Ixio
SITE 10
• ME
sw
NW
STAGE4
Figure 14. Size distribution of P, S, Cl, and K, as a function of wind
direction.
35
-------
'101
IX10.
Ix 101
• ,ME
o SE
• SW
• NW
lx 10'
"f ixiol
SITE 10
« NE
!X|Q-
IX 10-
IxlOl
S 5 4 3 2
5T4GE
Figure 15. Size distribution of Ca, Ti, Fe, and Cu, as a function of wind
direction.
36
-------
lx JO!
f««3_
3 1X101
lx 10.
6 5
I i«io;
IXIO.
IXIO"'
1x10.
I I>I02J
UIOl
4 r 2
STAGE
IXIO.
SITE 10
• NE
o SE
• sw
• NW
6 =
Figure 16. Size distribution of Zn, Br, and Pb, as a function of wind
direction.
37
-------
88888.88.8.
X 6/2 S 6/3 2 6/4 S 6/5 X 6/6 * 6/7 £ 6/6 X
2 6/2 5 6/3 S 6/4 S 6/5 X 6/6 * 6/7 * 6/8 * 6/9
TIME
S 8 8 rt H ft
S 6/2 S 6/3 ~ 6/4 S 6/5 ° 6/6 I 6/7
TIME
2888
6/6 * 6/7 £ 6/B * 6/9
TIME
J3 ft 8 8 8 888
S 6/2 S 6/3 5 6/4 S 6/5 8 6/6 * 6/7 % 6/6 X 6/9
6/3 1 6/4 1 6/5 2 6/6 I 6/7
6/8 * 6/9
Figure 17. Time distribution of S, Cl, K, Ca, Ti, and V, at sites 10, 11, and
14, 6/2/75 to 6/9/75.
38
-------
I 6/2 X 6/3 S 6/4 3 6/5 1 6/6 X 6/7 * 6/8 X
TIME
6/2 3 6/3 3 6/4 5 e/S X 6/6 X 6/7 * B/B 1 6/9
I 6/2 » 6/3 S 6/4 ~ 6/3 t 6/6 I 6/7 X 6/6 X 6/8
TIME
I 6/2 I 6/3 § 6/4 g e/S 2 6/6 £ 6/7 $
6/6 X 6/9
_
I 6/2 I 6/3 § 6/4 § 6/5 2 6/6 * 6/7 X 6/8 X
8 8 S 2 8 8 8 8
X 6/2 1! 6/1 S fi/4 5 6/5 X 6/6 X 6/7 X 6/8 X 6/0
Figure 18. Time distribution of Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Cu, and Zn, at sites 10, 11,
and 14, 6/2/75 to 6/9/75.
39
-------
_, __, =—r
88888888
X 6/2 5 6/3 S 6/4 S 6/5 S 6/6 X 6/7 % 6/B X
STATION 10
TOTAL TRAFFIC COUNT
6/4 !«bo 6/5 i
-------
if
3: 8 8 8
«/» 6/11 " 6/12 " 6/13 " 6/14
TIME
if:
6/K1 " 6/11
6/13 " 6/14
6/10 " 6/11 " 6/K " 6/13 " 6/14
8/10 6/11
6/13 ™ 6/14
6/11 6/12 " 6/13 " 6/1
Figure 20. Time distribution of S, Cl, K, Ca, Ti, and V, at sites 10, 11, and
14, 6/10/75 to 6/14/75.
41
-------
6/13 6/14
8888
6/K) 6/11 6/12 6/13 ™ 6/11
6/10
6/13 " 6/M
6/13 " 6/14
Figure 21. Time distribution of Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Cu, and Zn, at sites 10, 11,
and 14, 6/10/75 to 6/14/75.
42
-------
!°1
y*
1
ff:
6/10
8 8
6/12 " 6/13 " 6/14
Figure 22. Time distribution of Br an<3 Pb at sites 10, 11, and 14, 6/10/75
to 6/14/75.
43
-------
SITE 10
SITE 10
Cl
SITE 10
SITE 10
Figure 23. Angular distribution of P, S, Cl, and K, site 10.
44
-------
Ca
SITE 10
Ti
SITE 10
SITE 10
Cr
SITE 10
Figure 24. Angular distribution of Ca, Ti, V, and Cr, site 10.
45
-------
Mn
SITE 10
Fe
SITE 10
Ni
SITE 10
Figure 25. Angular distribution of Mn, Fe, Ni, and Cu, site 10.
46
-------
Zn
SITE 10
Br
SITE 10
Pb
SITE 10
Figure 26. Angular distribution of Zn, Br, and Pb, site 10.
47
-------
SITE
Cl
SITE
SITE
Ca
SITE II
Figure 27. Angular distribution of S, Cl, K, and Ca, site 11.
48
-------
Ti
SITE II
SITE II
Cr
SITE
Mn
SITE
Figure 28. Angular distribution of Ti, V, Cr, and Mn, site 11.
49
-------
Fe
SITE li
Ni
SITE I
w -
Zn
SITE II
Figure 29. Angular distribution of Fe, Ni, Cu, and Zn, site 11,
50
-------
Br
SITE
w -
Pb
SITE II
w -
Figure 30. Angular distribution of Br and Pb, site 11.
51
-------
SITE 14
SITE 14
W -
Cl
SITE 14
SITE 14
Figure 31. Angular distribution of P, S, Cl, and K, site 14.
52
-------
Ca
SITE 14
Mn
SITE 14
Ni
SITE 14
Figure 32. Angular distribution of Ca, Mn, Fe, and Ni, site 14,
53
-------
Cu
SITE 14
Zn
SITE 14
Br
SITE 14
Pb
SITE 14
Figure 33. Angular distribution of Cu, Zn, Br, and Pb, site 14.
54
-------
w-
5.
75 ST
•I
"16
,17
,18
19.
20
SAMPLING
SITE I 0
25.
.22
71 ST
62 ST
7.
3
9:
.12
•10 43
.14
II. «I5
28.
30j
32."
,26
• 27
54 ST
33-.34
Key:
1. Pioneer Metals
2. Arrow Chemicals
3. Inland Steel Container
4. Wonder-Cote
5. American Tire Corp.
6. American Chemical Company
7. Consolidated Oil
8. Burda Metals
9. Russel Metals
10. Court Paper Company
11. Dixie Plywood
12. American Robin (zippers)
13. Stanley's Truck and Auto
14. Biscayne Paper Co.
15. Seoane General Welding
16. Killiam's Paint s Body
17. Hubbel Metals, Inc.
IS. B S B Welding
19. Grand Prix Boat
20. Inter-American Auto Painting
21. Miami Concrete
22. Star Chemical
23. Automotive junk yard
24. Britt Metal Processing
25. Radiator Shop
26. Metro-Dade County Transit Agency
27. Ceasar's Auto Repair
28. Robert's Paint & Body
29. Miami Jack Service
30. J. H. Vamper Body Shop
31. Scotti Body Shop
32. Eliot's Body Shop
33. Norton Tire Co.
34. Banner Tire Co.
Figure 34. Possible particulate sources near sampling site 10,
55
-------
Figure 35. Aerial photograph of site 10.
-------
1. Oum* Illincia foraat Induct* Diviaion
2. Pan Iparlrin PUatici Company
1. Sayth Van and Storaga
Pradftia-a Auto Rapair
Arnold Qartnar 6 Co.
aactor Auto Paint
4. A f B Autoaobila Shop (paint and body)
ACT Aufo Elactrlo Co.
Back's Truck Rapair e Sarvica
5. Robart-a Cutting Sarvica
Tha Schun Co. at Fla., Inc. Imatal nanufacturing)
Action natal Products
Hlalaah Paint t Body Shop
Rlalaah Auto xlaotrie
Twin Sarvica station
6. Mobil Sarvica Station
Ragar Cantury Paint &. Body shop
Bayaao Paint s Body Shop (and radlatora)
Hoek-HMtar Inc. {^anacal valdln;)
Airaa Auto Rapair
1. Bail'i »»«»>-- Sarrlca
Vaaeo lac. of alalaah (v>ldln«)
3. sqrth Van and Staiaaa
Hodalo Auto Paint t Body Shop
9. Lula A. Sonialai Paint « Body
'Solac Auto< Rapalf
MB Salaa and Auto Kapalr
Urn. Harziaon Co. (aatal fabrication)
John Hancy Aluainua < Iron Furnituza Rapair
Friendly Auto Paint I Body
Aatona Gacaga
Tlo y sobrlno Paint f Body
rlozida optical ManufactuzlnT Co.
Sura-snap Corp. (mapa, zippara, faatanar*)
10. Craaa Tool fi Dia Co., Inc.
Smmit Product* Co.
Induatzial Shop fart Lift, Inc. (valding and r«pair»
Caballaco Paint c Body Shop
staal Rulo c Ola Co.
11. union 76 Sarvlea Station
C fi G Auto Rapair
Alllad Plating Suppllaa
Saraor, Inc.
Srundy Kaon
Aircraft Haldara
12. Hodarh Painting CQ.
x-Part Paint G Body (auto rapair)
Oaad Car Parta fi Radiator sarvica
orlanta TTananiaalofi sarvica
13. dnivaraal Auto Radiator. Inc.
Taaco Cnamleal, Inc.
Studio of Sculptor*, Inc. (oannaquin rafiniahlng)
14. Hlalaah ttalding fi Ornanantal
Hialaah Elaetric Motor Rapair
scraan Art Poatar, Inc.
m«iMi^ Aluainua Oo.
PVC Fabricatora
Magnus shaat natal. Inc.
Philllpa Battariaa Co., Inc.
B c R Tool Spacialtiaa, Inc.
15. Pacific. Haata SuppHaa (ganaral walding)
Eddiaa Sarvica (autop)
VUanntaa Wo Tona Paint i Body
16. Do Caapo Trucking Rapair, Inc.
P < p Boat Corp.
17. Auto Car Parti (junk yard)
Hagua Vaad Auto Parta (junk yard)
contlnantal Buapar Plating sarvica
J c I Matal Products (nalding)
IB. Jorgaa OmaBantal Iron
Oaka Battariaa Factory Salaa
Uaaeo Salaa, Inc. (garbaga containar nanufacturlng)
-20. Andra> Roofing
nay Marina
Pan National Panca Mfg. Co.
21. Royal Praciaion Producta Corp.
Eoglar EoglAaaring Carp.
Rouaa Shaat Matal shop
22. Dada Oil coapany (Union 76)
King Iron work*
Baatam staal Corp.
Oaad Auto Parta (junk yard)
Hlaltah Radiator fi Air Conditioning Sarvica
Auto junk yard
J i y Hatala (truck rapairs and waldlAg)
23. Baaa Oil Sarv4ca station
24. ROOM Sarvica station
25. Taxaco Sarvica Station
26. standard Oil Sarvica Station
Figure 36. Possible particula,te sources near sampling site 11.
57
-------
Figure 37. Aerial photograph of site 11.
-------
w,
Key.
1. Metro-Dade Fire Department—Maintenance
2. Alexander Orr, Jr. Water Treatment Plant
3. Alexander Orr, Jr. Water Treatment Plant—Maintenance
4. Standard Oil Service Station
5. Quik Hart Service Station
6. AMACO Service Station
7. Exel Service Station
8. EXXON Service station
Figure 38. possible particulate sources near sampling site 14.
59
-------
i * P*K ***» i
:**V**~ '--'I
•••>•«;r<-~ .» »i,
* ^ »«t^ «•«* * *.
* i r « •
• t • » *
•
;.»'*«— i.
': . «r ::*
tn
o
»«»»*«•« <•
•• ,. '•*
i*a*«r?^fc-»*"- r:
i » ** f »» «fc»»»^«
f .SZ'jI/'*--;—*•—
tfc'!.j^ n'u ii u
**« S* »««»5 »• tl
* ' ' ,"''*«' i ?
i -nn« »* « »J *« **
• * * * r
', - ; '
» * i • •.
.»»*•* »
,» t,« « »
* i » t
"» % »i - ^
•1 '
Figure 39. Aerial photograph of site 14.
-------
REFERENCES
American Society for Testing and Materials. Standards for Portland Cement.
ASTM-C-150.
Andersen, A. A. 1966. A Sampler for Respiratory Health Hazard Assessment.
Am. Ind. Hyg. Assn. J. 27:160-165.
Cahill, T. A., and P. J. Feeney. 1973. Report to California Air Resources
Board: Contribution of Freeway Traffic to Airborne Particulate Matter.
ARE 502. University of California at Davis.
DeJong, G., D. Watts, L. Spiller, and R. Patterson. 1978. Programmable
Instrument for Controlling Atmospheric Sampling. JAPCA. 28(4):373-376.
Draftz, R. G. In press. Aerosol Source Characterization Study in Miami,
Florida. Microscopical Analysis. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Epstein, B. S., and D. A. Lynn. 1976. National Assessment of the Urban
Particulate Problem, XIV. EPA-450/3-76-026L, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Hardy, K. A., R. Akselsson, J. W. Nelson, and J. W. Winchester. 1976.
Elemental Constituents of Miami Aerosol as a Function of Particle
Size. Env. Sci. Technol. 10:176-182.
Johansson, T. B., R. Akselsson, and S. A. E. Johansson. 1972. Proton Induced
X-Ray Emission Spectroscopy in Elemental Trace Analysis. Adv. X-Ray
Anal. 15:373-387.
Miller, M. S., S. K. Friedlander, and G. M. Hedy. A Chemical Element Balance
for the Pasadena Aerosol. J. Coll. Interface Sci. 30:165.
Mitchell, R. I., and J. M. Pilcher. 1959. Improved Cascade Impactor for
Measuring Aerosol Particle Sizes. Ind. Eng. Chem. 51:1039-1042.
Nelson, J. W., B. Jensen, G. G. Desaedeleer, K. R. Akselsson, and J. W. Win-
chester. 1975. Automatic Time Sequence Filter Sampling for Rapid
Multi-Element Analysis by Proton Induced X-Ray Emission. Adv. X-Ray
Anal. 19.
Parsons, A. A. 1897. Florida Agricultural Experimental Station Bulletin #3.
Gainesville, Florida.
61
-------
PettiJohn, F. J. 1948. Sedimentary Rocks. Harper Brothers, New York.
Savoie, D., and J. M. Prospero. 1976. Sahara Aerosol Transport Across the
Atlantic Ocean. Conference on Ocean-Atmosphere Trace Interactions.
Seattle, Washington.
Sverdrup, H. U. 1942. The Oceans. Prentice-Hall, New York.
Winchester, J. W., and G. G. Desaedeleer. 1975. Nondestructive Activation
Analysis, Proceedings. Amsterdam.
62
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
ORT NO.
",-600/7-79-197
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOWNO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
AEROSOL SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY IN
MIAMI, FLORIDA
Trace Element Analysis
5. REPORT DATE
September 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Kenneth A. Hardy
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Florida Internationl University
Department of Physical Sciences
Tamiami Trail
Miami, Florida 33199
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
EHE625 EA-011 (FY-76)
11. CONTRACT/GRAN!
68-02-2406
NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory - RTF, NC
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final 6/76 - 6/79
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/09
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
Aerosol in Miami, Florida was sampled in June 1975 to better characterize
the aerosol in an urban environment devoid of heavy industry. The three sampling
sites selected were an area with light industrial activity, one with heavy commer-
cial activity, and a sparsely populated residential area. Sampling devices at
each site included a five-stage cascade impactor and a streaker sampler to give the
time distribution of trace elements. A wind-direction-sensitive sampling system
controlling four five-stage cascade impactors was installed at one site. Size and
time distributions of trace elements heavier than aluminum were determined by
proton induced x-ray emission at Florida State University. Determining the direc-
tional distribution of the aerosol trace elements allowed pinpointing of strong
local sources. The calculated aerosol source coefficient indicated less than 10
percent of the aerosol mass in Maimi can be attributed to the sea spray.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFI£RS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
*Air pollution
*AerosoIs
*Particle size distribution
*Chemical analysis
*Trace elements
Miami, Florida
13B
07D
06A
06F
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
71
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
63
------- |