v>EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Sciences Research
Laboratory
Research Triangle Park (SIC 27711
»79
Research and Development
Plan for Air Pollution
Research in the Texas
Gulf Coast Area
Volume I. Plan for
Air Quality Studies
L-rik
-------
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
environmental 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 SPECIAL REPORTS series. This series is
reserved for reports which are intended to meet the technical information needs
of specifically targeted user groups. Reports in this series include Problem Orient-
ed Reports, Research Application Reports, and Executive Summary Documents.
Typical of these reports include state-of-the-art analyses, technology assess-
ments, reports on the results of major research and development efforts, design
manuals, and user manuals.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/8-79-008a
April 1979
PLAN FOR AIR POLLUTION RESEARCH
IN THE TEXAS GULF COAST AREA
Volume I. Plan for Air Quality
Studies
by
Gary Tannahill, Bryan Lambeth,
David Balfour, David Jones, Joe Stuart
Radian Corporation
8500 Shoal Creek Blvd.
Austin, Texas 78766
EPA Contract No. 68-02-2955
Project Officer
Basil Dimitriades
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Division
Environmental Science Research Laboratories
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE RESEARCH LABORATORIES
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 Science Research
Laboratories, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publi-
cation. 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.
ii
-------
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to develop a plan for air pollution
research in the Texas Gulf Coast Area (TGCA). The plan will be used to
support a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study of air pollution
problems in the TGCA.
Key issues associated with air pollution in the TGCA were identified.
From these issues, a number of hypotheses were developed and prioritized.
Six program options for air pollution research were recommended which would
provide the most comprehensive and cost-effective means of data collection
and analysis.
The programs recommended were:
Support Program for Comprehensive Health Effects Studies
Program for Ambient Air Sampling and Model Development/
Validation
Program to Identify the Occurrence and Distribution of
Hazardous Pollutants
Program for a Detailed Study of Airborne Aerosols
Program for a Detailed Study of Ambient Oxidants and
Hydrocarbons
Program for a Combined Aerosol-Oxidant-Hydrocarbon Study
I
Detailed program plans are provided for each study, as are cost and
duration estimates.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-02-2955 by
Radian Corporation under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
iii
-------
CONTENTS
Abstract ±±±
Figures vii
Tables viii
Abbreviations and Symbols x
1. Introduction 1
2. Nature of the Air Pollution Problem 4
Pollutant Definition and Description 4
Pollutant Impact 5
Pollutant Sources 8
Pollutant Transport and Transformation 8
Pollutant Fate 9
3. Characterization of Air Pollution and Meteorology in the Texas
Gulf Coast Area 10
Emissions Data 10
Ambient Pollutant Data 13
Meteorological Data 21
Comparison of the Air Pollution Situation in Houston with
Other Regions 30
4. Issues and Hypotheses to Be Investigated 31
Principal Issues and Hypotheses 31
5. Proj ect Options 45
Establish and Maintain a Data Base for the TGCA 46
Evaluate and Analyze Prior TGCA Study Results 47
Conduct an Extensive Source Characterization Study 47
Conduct an Extensive Aerosol Characterization Study 49
Perform Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses of Aerosol
Samples 49
Conduct an Extensive Oxidant/Hydrocarbon Study 52
Characterize Natural Pollutant Emissions 52
Conduct a Personal Monitoring Study of Selected Pollutants... 52
Conduct an Airborne Profile of Pollutant Flux Into and Out
of the TGCA 54
Conduct a Plume Tracking Study 54
Conduct Chamber and/or Captive Air Studies 54
Validation and/or Development of Air Pollutant Models 58
Conduct Long Term Monitoring 58
Meteorological Support Tasks 58
Quality Assurance During Data Collection 60
6. Research Programs 61
Program Plan I - Support for Health Effects Studies 63
-------
Program Plan II - Intensive Sampling Program Combined
with Model Development/Validation 64
Program Plan III - Detailed Study of the Occurrence and
Distribution of Hazardous Pollutants 65
Program Plan IV - Detailed Aerosol Study 66
Program Plan V - Detailed Oxidant/Hydrocarbon Study 67
Program Plan VI - Combined Aerosol-Oxidant-Hydrocarbon
Study 69
7. Air Pollution Research Capabilities of Local Public Agencies 71
Governmental Agencies 71
Universities 71
References 82
v i
-------
TIGURES
Number Page
1-1 Texas Gulf Coast Study area 2
1-2 Immediate Houston vicinity , 3
3-1 Locations of monitoring sites with data reported in Table 3-3.. 15
3-2 Wind rose diagrams for "March-April-May and June-July-August
for Intercontinental Airport, Houston Hobby Airport (all
hours), and Houston Hobby Airport (6 am GST only) 23
3-3 Wind rose diagrams for September-October-November and Decemfaer-
January-February for Intercontinental Airport, Houston Hobby
Airport (all hours), and Houston Hobby Airport (6 am CST only). 24
4-1 Components of research plan development 32
-------
TABLES
Number
2-1 MAJOR CLASSIFICATION OF AIR POLLUTANTS AND CONTAMINANTS... 6
2-2 CRITERIA POLLUTANTS 7
3-1 HOUSTON AREA 1973 EMISSIONS TOTALS 11
3-2 1975 EMISSIONS TABLE FOR THE COMBINED HOUSTON AND GAL-
VESTON SMSA1 S 12
3-3 SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT AMBIENT AIR MEASUREMENTS FOR THE
HOUSTON AREA 1975-1977 14
3-4 TSP PARAMETERS IN THE TACB DATA FILE 16
3-5 INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBON MEASUREMENTS FROM SAMPLES COLLEC-
TED BETWEEN 6 AM and 9 AM DURING JULY 1976 BY WSU 18
3-6 TOTAL ALDEHYDE AND AMMONIA DATA SUMMARY FOR 1973-1977 FOR
SITES WITH AT LEAST 30 SAMPLES PER YEAR 20
3-7 RESTRICTED VISIBILITY OCCURRENCES AT THE HOUSTON INTER-
CONTINENTAL AIRPORT 1970-1976 (BASED ON 8 OBSERVATIONS
PER DAY AT 3 HOUR INTERVALS BEGINNING AT MIDNIGHT CST
EACH DAY) 25
3-8 PERCENT FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF THE PASQUILL STABILITY
CATEGORIES AT THE HOBBY AIRPORT 1959-1968 27
3-9 LOW LEVEL INVERSION FREQUENCIES AND AFTERNOON MIXING
HEIGHTS, TRANSPORT WINDS, AND VENTILATION FOR THE HOUSTON
AREA 28
3-10 APPROXIMATE NUMBER OF EPISODES AND EPISODE DAYS FOR THE
HOUSTON AREA IN 5 YEARS (1960-1964) FOR EPISODES LASTING
AT LEAST 2 DAYS WITH NO SIGNIFICANT PRECIPITATION 29
4-1 PRINCIPAL AIR POLLUTION ISSUES IN THE TEXAS GULF COAST
AREA 33
4-2 HIGH PRIORITY HYPOTHESES 35
4-3 INTERMEDIATE PRIORITY HYPOTHESES 39
4-4 LOW PRIORITY HYPOTHESES 43
5-1 TYPES OF DATA 48
5-2 SOURCE SAMPLING 50
5-3 EXAMPLE POLLUTANT MONITORING PLATFORMS 51
5-4 TYPES OF MICROSCALE MONITORING 53
5-5 EXAMPLE METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING PLATFORMS 55
5-6 TYPES OF RESEARCH 57
5-7 VALIDATION AND/OR DEVELOPMENT OF AN AIR POLLUTION MODEL... 59
6-1 POSSIBLE PROJECTS 62
7-1 PUBLIC AGENCIES SURVEYED 72
7-2 RESOURCES OF THE TEXAS AIR CONTROL BOARD 73
7-3 RESOURCES OF HARRIS COUNTY. 74
7-4 RESOURCES OF THE CITY OF HOUSTON HEALTH DEPARTMENT 75
7-5 RESOURCES OF BAYLOR UNIVERSITY, INSTITUTE FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES '. 76
7-6 RESOURCES OF ST. THOMAS UNIVERSITY, INSTITUTE FOR STORM
RESEARCH 77
7-7 RESOURCES OF TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY 78
-------
TABLES (Continued)
Number Page
7-8 RESOURCES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON 79
7-9 RESOURCES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN 80
7-10 RESOURCES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON 81
ix
-------
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
ABBREVIATIONS
DJF
DP
EC
EPA
FID
FPD
GC/MS
HAOS
HC
HOU
IAH
IR
JJA
MAM
NMHC
NOAA
PA
PAN
ppb
ppm
PSD
RH
RSP
December-January-February
Dew point
Electron Capture
Environmental Protection Agency
Flame lonization Detector
Flame Photometric Detector
Gas Chromatograph with Mass Spectrometer
Houston Area Oxidants Study
Hydrocarbon
Houston Hobby Airport
Houston Intercontinental Airport
Infrared
June-July-August
March-April-May
Non-Methane Hydrocarbon
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Particulate
Peroxyacetyl Nitrate
Parts per billion
Parts per million
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Relative Humidity
Respirable
-------
SMSA
SON
SwRI
TACB
TEM
TC
TGCA
TGCS
THC
TS
UV
UH
WD
WS
WSU
SYMBOLS
Be7
cm
CO
Cr
H2S
Ug/m3
'rtn
Ni
NO
NO 2
NO
03X
°x
p32
Pb
SO 2
SO 4
SO
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area
September-October-November
Southwest Research Institute
Texas Air Control Board
Temperature
Thermal Conductivity
Texas Gulf Coast Area
Texas Gulf Coast Study
Total Hydrocarbon
Total Sulfur
Ultraviolet
University of Houston
Wind Direction
Wind Speed
Washington State University
beryllium-7
methane
carbon monoxide
chromium
hydrogen sulfide
microgram per cubic meter
manganese
nickel
--. nitric oxide
nitrogen dioxide
oxides of nitrogen
ozone
oxidant
phosphorus- 32
lead
sulfur dioxide
sulfate
oxides of sulfur
xi
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is planning a three year,
$3,000,000 study of air pollution problems in the Texas Gulf Coast Area
(TGCA). The main purpose of this study is to investigate the nature,
sources, and fate of air pollution in the TGCA, with special emphasis on
the health effects of air pollution. Houston will be the focal point of
the Texas Gulf Coast Study (TGCS), since considerable data are available for
Houston; its environment is similar to the rest of the TGCA; and it is the
most rapidly growing part of the TGCA. Figure 1-1 shows Houston and surround-
ing areas, including Harris County and adjacent counties. This area repre-
sents the combined Houston and Galveston Standard Metropolitan Areas with the
addition of Chambers County. The immediate Houston vicinity is shown in
more detail in Figure 1-2. Additional information concerning the Texas Gulf
Coast Planning Study, of which this document is a part, are provided in the
following:
Volume II. Plan for Health Effects Studies
Volume III. Summary of Previous Air Quality Studies
and Data
Volume IV. Summary of Previous Health Effects Studies
and Data
Volume V. Local Viewpoints on Research Needs
This volume (I) provides a framework for the investigation of the air
pollution problem in the Houston area, in conjunction with Volume II issued
by Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) concerning the health effects aspects
of the problem. Section 2 describes the general nature of the air pollution
problem, followed by a more specific characterization of air pollution in the
TGCA in Section 3. Next, issues are defined in Section 4, and for these
issues, hypotheses are also listed. Section 5 describes a number of project
options which are designed to test the hypotheses and to help resolve the
issues. Total costs and priorities for the overall program are discussed in
Section 6, with a description of the expected agency cooperation in Section 7.
-------
Conroe
_ _ _jMontgomery
'County
Liberty
County
wn'
Chambers
County
Texas
/
s
GALVESTON
Sholes Field
Galveston County
r I
Jackson
Freeport
Figure 1-1. Texas Gulf Coast Study .area.
-------
Figure 1-2. Immediate Houston vicinity,
-------
SECTION 2
NATURE OF THE AIR POLLUTION PROBLEM
Several basic questions need to be discussed, concerning the general
nature of the air pollution in the TGCA:
What are the pollutants?
What are the impacts of these pollutants?
Where do the pollutants originate?
What changes occur in the composition and distribution of
pollutants in the atmosphere?
What are the fates of the pollutants?
Significant progress has been made toward answering these questions, but
many important aspects remain unanswered. Additional knowledge relevant
to these questions must be gained from present and future studies to achieve
an economical and effective solution to Houston's air pollution problems.
POLLUTANT DEFINITION AND DESCRIPTION
To determine what is polluting the air, it is first necessary to de-
fine air pollution. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 (PL 95-95, August
7, 1977), approved by the U.S. Congress, defined the term 'air pollutant'
to mean "any air pollution agent or combination of such agents, including
any physical, chemical, biological, radioactive (including source material,
special nuclear material, and byproduct material) substance or matter which
is emitted into or otherwise enters the ambient air". However, for the
purpose of defining air quality criteria and control techniques, the Clean
Air Act includes only air pollutants:
which "cause or contribute to air pollution which may
reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health
or welfare" (in the judgement of the Administrator
of the Environmental Protection Agency), and
"the presence of which in the ambient air results from
numerous or diverse mobile or stationary sources."
The Clean Air Act further defines that "all language referring to effects
on welfare includes, but is not limited to, effects on soils, water, crops,
vegetation, manmade materials, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility,
-------
climate, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards to transporta-
tion, as well as effects on economic values and on personal comfort and well
being." Consequently, air pollutants can be judged harmful because of
effects caused while they are airborne, and/or after they have been removed
to the earth's surface. Also, air pollutants can be natural, such as wind
blown dust or volcanic emissions, but they are more frequently man-made
near urban areas. Air pollutants can be broadly classified into two major
categories:
particulate matter and
gaseous matter,
Particulate matter or aerosols include both liquid and solid particles
suspended in the atmosphere, such as mists, dust, fumes, condensation nuclei,
and smoke, while gaseous matter includes gases and vapors. Table 2-1
provides a classification of major types of air pollutants, their precursors,
and other important components. In addition to these components, another
important factor to consider for particulate matter is the particle size.
The fate of particulate matter in the human respiratory system is a direct
function of particle size, shape and density (or aerodynamic diameter).
Inertial deposition and light scattering coefficient (atmospheric visibility)
are also dependent upon particle size.
Several of the pollutants cateogrized in Table 2-1 have been identified
as criteria pollutants for which state and national ambient air quality
standards have been established (Table 2-2).
POLLUTANT IMPACT
The most important impact of air pollution is on public health. The
health effects of air pollution will be discussed in a separate report by
SwRI for the Health Study Designs. Air pollution can also reduce atmos-
pheric visibility, produce unpleasant odors, damage property, and injure
plant and animal life. Low atmospheric visibilities can be hazardous to air-
craft and are generally considered aesthetically undesireable. Similarly,
some pollutant odors are considered very offensive, or annoying. Significant
economic impacts can occur from icorrosion of materials and injury to crops.
These economic effects can be caused by various forms of air pollution,
including oxidants and certain aerosols, as well as by products of air pollu-
tion such as acid rainfall or soot deposits. Other detrimental effects on
animals or plants may be viewed as inhumane or aesthetically disagreeable.
One final aspect of air pollution impacts that requires attention is
the effect of air pollution on insolation. Particulates in the atmosphere
may alter local or even global climates by absorbing and scattering sun-
light that would otherwise reach the ground. Increased levels of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere would influence climate by trapping more heat in
the atmosphere. Finally, certain gases, such as f luorocarbons, may reach and
deplete the stratospheric ozone layer, thus causing an increase of harmful
.ultraviolet radiation at the ground level.
-------
TABLE 2-1. MAJOR CLASSIFICATION OF AIR POLLUTANTS AND CONTAMINANTS
Classification
Major Components
PARTICULATE MATTER
Inorganic
Sulfur Compounds
Nitrogen Compounds
Halogen Compounds
Elemental Carbon
Other Non-Metals and
their Compounds
Alkali and Alkaline-Earth
Metals and their Compounds
Other Metals and their
Compounds
Radioactive Isotopes
Organic
Biological
Non-Biological
GASEOUS MATTER
Oxidants
Oxides of Nitrogen
Other Nitrogen Compounds
Oxides of Carbon
Other Carbon Compounds
Sulfur Compounds
Halogen Compounds
Radioactive Gases
Sulfate (SOO, Sulfites (SOl), Sulfides (S ),
Sulfuric Acid (H2SOO
Nitrate (N03~), Ammonium (NHi, ), Nitrite (N02~)
Chlorides (Cl~), Fluorides (F~), Bromides (Br~),
Iodide (I~), Chlorates
Elemental Carbon (C)
Silicon (Si), Boron (B), Phosphorus (P),
Arsenic (As)
Calcium (Ca), Sodium (Na), Potassium (K),
Magnesium (Mg), Beryllium (Be), Lithium (Li)
Iron (Fe), Lead (Pb), Zinc ' (Zn), Manganese (Mn),
Copper (Cu), Vanadium (V), Titanium (Ti),
Nickel (Ni), Tin (Sn), Chromium (Cr), Cadmium
(Cd), Antimony. (Sb), Cobalt (Co), Asbestos
Beryllium-7 Be7), Uranium-238 (U ), Radium-
226 (Ra226), Polonium-210 (Po*0), Phosphorus-32
(P32)-
Pollen, Molds, Spores, Fungi, Bacteria, Virus
Hydrocarbons (HC), Organic Acids, Epoxides,
Polymers, Polynuclear Aromatics, Halogenated
Organics, Heterocyclic Organics, Oxygenated
Organics
Ozone (Os), Peroxyacetyl Nitrate (PAN),
Chlorine (Cla)
Nitrogen Dioxide (N02), Nitric Oxide (NO)
Ammonia (NHs), Hydrogen Cyanide (HCN), Amines,
Nitric Acid (HN03)
Carbon Monoxide (C0\ Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Methane (CH*), Hydrocarbons (HC), Aromatics,
Paraffins, Olefins, Alkanes, Alkynes,
Alcohols, Aldehydes, Ketones, Carboxylic
Acids, Heterocyclic Organics, Polycyclic Organics,
Esters, Ethers
Sulfur Dioxide (SOz), Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S),
Mercaptans, Sulfides, Disulfides
Chlorine Compounds, Bromine Compounds, Iodine
Compounds, Fluorocarbons
Radon-222 (RN222)
-------
TABLE 2-2. CRITERIA POLLUTANTS
Maximum Concentrations
Pollutant
Sulfur Dioxide (S02)
Total Suspended Particulate (TSP)
Lead (Pb)
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Photochemical Oxidant-Ozone (Os)
Non-Methane Hydrocarbons (6-9 am)
(NMHC)**
Nitrogen Dioxide (N02)
Averaging
Interval
Annual
24-Hour*
3-Hour*
Annual***
24-Hour*
3-Month
8-Hour*
1-Hour*
1-Hour*
3-Hour*
Annual
National Primary
Standard
(Ug/ms)
80
365
75
260
1.5
10,000
40,000
160
160
100
(ppm)
0.03
0.14
>
9.00
35.00
0.08
0.24
0.05
National Secondary
Standard
(Ug/m3)
1,300
60
150
10,000
40,000
160
160
100
(ppm)
0.50
9.00
35.00
0.08
0.24
0.04
*Not to be exceeded more than once per year.
**Guideline.
***Geometric Mean.
-------
All of these impacts - on health, visiblity, materials, animals, plants,
and climate - need to be considered in the design of useful air pollution
control strategies. However, the effects of air pollution on public health
are of initial and primary concern.
POLLUTANT SOURCES
Pollutants in the atmosphere are commonly referred to as primary and
secondary in origin. Primary pollutants are those which are emitted directly
into the air, while secondary pollutants are those which are formed by
chemical reactions or physical interactions in the atmosphere. In addi-
tion, several important classifications are used to distinguish pollutant
sources:
point and area,
stationary and mobile,
anthropogenic and natural, and
local and distant.
For modeling purposes, sources are usually divided into point and area
categories. Point sources are large emission sources concentrated from a
small area, such as a stack, vent, or building, while area sources consist
of numerous small sources covering a larger area, commonly greater than one
square mile. Thus, area sources include mobile sources such as combustion-
driven vehicle emissions and widespread sources such as vehicle entrained
dust and emissions from home heating, gasoline transfer, painting, and dry
cleaning. Stationary sources are generally large industrial sources, but
include both point and area source that are stationary in location." For
control purposes, it is helpful to distinguish between anthropogenic
(man-made) and natural sources as well as local and distant sources.
Local sources are generally considered sources within a city or metropoli-
tan area, while distant sources are sources from well beyond the metropoli-
tan area, sometimes as far as 1,000 miles beyond or more.
POLLUTANT TRANSPORT AND TRANSFORMATION
The distribution, concentration, and composition of pollutants in the
atmosphere are affected by;
meteorological conditions,
chemical reactions, and
other particle and gaseous interactions.
Meteorological conditions of wind, sunshine, and cloud cover strongly
affect pollutant dispersion and transport, which in turn affect pollutant
distribution and concentration. Also, temperature, humidity, sunshine,
cloud cover, and precipitation influence chemical reaction rates and particle
and gaseous interactions. Chemical reactions, which form secondary pollu-
tants, occur between atmospheric gases, within liquid particles, and on the
-------
surface of liquid and solid particles. Gases and particles interact by
means of absorption and adsorption, and vapors can condense to form
particles.
POLLUTANT FATE
All of the previously described factors, which cause changes in pollu-
tant composition and concentration, ultimately affect pollutant fate. Chemi-
cal reactions may change some pollutants into relatively harmless products
or even remove them from the atmosphere at the earth's surface. Particles
and gases are trapped in the respiratory systems of animals and man by
interception, impaction, diffusion, absorption, and adsorption. Precipita-
tion scavenges particulate matter as well as water soluble gases, delivering
them to the soil and surface waters. Finally, mixing of the atmosphere
sooner or later disperses pollutants to less harmful concentrations, and
the large scale movements of the atmosphere transport pollutants over long
distances. However, increasing emissions on a regional and global scale
may cause significant increases in regional and worldwide air pollution
levels.
-------
SECTION 3
CHARACTERIZATION OF AIR POLLUTION AND METEOROLOGY IN THE TEXAS GULF COAST AREA
Considerable air pollution and meteorological data have been collected
for the Houston area by public and private organizations. A summary of
this information has been provided in the Gulf Coast Planning Study Resource
Document (Volume III) (1) previously prepared as part of the TGCS planning
project. The existing data provide a useful characterization of the air
pollution problem in the Houston area. These data consist of three major
categories:
emissions,
ambient pollutant, and
meteorological data.
A review of the data is helpful for making comparisons between air pollu-
tion problems that exist in the Houston area and air pollution problems
in other regions of the nation, and for determining which pollutants should
be emphasized for study.
EMISSIONS DATA
Emissions data compiled by the TACB for the Houston area during 1973
are summarized in Table 3-1. The 1975 TACB emissions data have not been
completely compiled by county, so that only partial totals are available
for 1975 (Table 3-2). More detailed breakdowns of some of these pollutant
emissions are available for specific point sources, but such detailed emis-
sions are not widely available for all point and area sources. However,
plans are currently being made to provide greater detail, especially for
hydrocarbons, for the 1975 and 1978 TACB Emissions Inventories. Also, the
EPA is planning to compile area source data for the Houston area for
1978. Seasonal variations are indicated on some individual TACB inventory
questionnaires, but otherwise, emissions data for time periods less than
a year are not available. Spacial distributions of .1975 point source
emissions for HC, NO , SO , and PA are presented in Volume III (1).
A. X
The most significant aspect of the .1973 emissions totals is the pre-
dominance of point sources as the major source of emissions in the Houston
area. Point sources accounted for 80 percent of the 1973 hydrocarbon emis-
10
-------
TABLE 3-1. HOUSTON AREA 1973 EMISSIONS TOTALS
Pollutant - tons/year
Houston Study
Area
Harris County
Galveston
County
Brazorla
County
Fort Bend
County
Waller County
Montgomery
County
Liberty County
Chambers
County
Total Emissions
Point Source
Area Source
Total Emissions
Point Source
Area Source
Total Emissions
Point Source
Area Source
Total Emissions
Point Source
Area Source
Total Emissions
Point Source
Area Source
Total Emissions
Point Source
Area Source
Total Emissions
Point Source
Area Source
Total Emissions
Point Source
Area Source
Total Emissions
Point Source
Area Source
NOX
498,836
378,679
120,157
236,839
155,059
81,780
79,088
69,725
9,363
108,525
100,735
7,790
19,158
13,964
5,194
6,551
4,455
2,096
18,350
11,958
6,392
4,425
981
3,444
25,900
21,802
4,098
S02
206,269
191,637
14,632
157,076
147,734
9,342
36,357
33,718
2,639
10,573
9,708
865
601
251
350
170
8
162
574
173
401
254
6
248
664
39
625
THC
687,505
553,022
134,483
369,293
272,162
97,131
111,346
101,704
9,642
173,042
165,479
7,563
6,150
962
5,188
7,303
5,578
1,725
11,463
5,125
6,338
3,636
250
3,386
5,272
1,762
3,510
CO
1,445,331
858,449
586,882
888,902
445,682
443,220
257,498
216,869
40,629
151,680
122,506
29,174
19,896
178
19,718
6,296
128
6,168
90,344
68,002
22,342
14,064
1,018
13,046
16,651
4,066
12,585
PA
91,293
60,227
31,066
58,605
40,701
17,904
10,378
8,367
2,011
9,267
6,771
2,496
4,878
1,542
3,336
1,158
133
1,025
2,037
663
1,374
2,309
595
1,714
2,661
1,455
1,206
Source: Texas Air Control Board (2),
-------
TABLE 3-2.
1975 EMISSIONS TABLE FOR THE COMBINED
HOUSTON AND GALVESTON SMSA'S*
Pollutant
Tons
of Total
Total Hydrocarbon Compounds 343,078
(Non-Methane)
Point 209,103
Area 133,975
100
61
39
Total NOX
Point (for HC sources
only)
Area
327,094
200,209
126,885
100
61
39
Total SOX
Point
Area
NA
NA
15,547**
Total CO
Point
Area
NA
NA
562,964**
Total Particulate
Point
Area
NA
NA
32,144**
* Chambers County not included.
** Includes 1976 emissions data for Harris County.
NA: iNot ravailable.
Sources: Texas Air Control Board (3)(4).
12
-------
sions, 76 percent of the NO emissions, 93 percent of the SO emissions, 59
percent of the CO emissions, and 66 percent of the particulate emissions
totals for the 8-county Houston area. Most of these point source contribu-
tions come from industrial fuel combustion and process losses. Exhaust
emissions from gasoline-fueled land transportation, according to the 1973
data, accounted for only 16 percent of the hydrocarbon emissions, 16 percent
of the NO emissions, 1 percent of the SOx emissions, 38 percent of the CO
emissions, and 9 percent of the particulate emissions from the Houston area.
Similar breakdowns for contributions to total emissions have not been com-
piled for the 1975 TACB Emissions Inventory. The relative contributions
of point sources may have decreased significantly since 1973 because of
increased control efforts. The new 1978 inventory should indicate whether
any such changes have occurred.
AMBIENT POLLUTANT DATA
Ambient pollutant data from Texas Air Control Board (5) (TACB) and
City of Houston (6) monitors in the Houston area are summarized in Table
3-3. The locations of these monitors are shown in Figure 3-1. Ambient
pollutant data are available for only the major pollutants (03, NOX, N02,
NO, total HC, NMHC, CHi^ , SOa, HaS, total sulfur, and CO) on a long-term
continuous hourly basis (although frequent short gaps appear throughout the
data). Intermittent (non-continuous) data for total oxidants, total sulfur,
total aldehydes, ammonia, and total suspended particulate cover a longer
time span, but observations are generally for one 24-hour average every six
days. The total sulfur and total oxidant measurements (by bubbler) have been
abandoned because of serious problems with the measurement techniques. De-
tailed chemical analyses have been performed for most particulate samples
(Table 3-4) . A few air pollution studies have undertaken more extensive and
detailed monitoring for up to about five months. Pollutants such as PAN,
halocarbons, individual hydrocarbons, respirable aerosols, aldehydes, freon,
beryllium-7 and pollen, as well as particle size distribution, have been
measured during these short-term intensive studies.
The most significant aspects of the pollutant data are the relatively
high ozone, hydrocarbon and particulate levels which have exceeded their
respective standards. Hourly average ozone levels of up to 0.321 parts
per million (ppm) have been measured, and nine out of ten long-term moni-
toring sites have measured ozone levels exceeding 0.230 ppm. Only the Clute
monitor near the coast has not reported such high ozone levels; a maximum
of 0.186 ppm has been reported.
All seven of the locations which regularly measure non- methane hydro-
carbons (NMHC) in the Houston area have greatly exceeded the three-hour
6-9 AM guideline for this pollutant. One City of Houston site has reported
a 6-9 AM average as high as 18.6 ppm, and the highest 6-9 AM average at a
TACB site has been 6.4 ppm. All of these long-term sites have measured
NMHC well over the 0.24 ppm 6-9 AM standard during each of the last three
years.
13
-------
TABLE 3-3. SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT AMBIENT AIR MEASUREMENTS FOR THE HOUSTON AREA 1975-1977.
(All measurements In parts per million, except TSP in micrograms per cubic meter.)
OZONE
Maximum 1975
Hourly 1976
Average 1977
Number of 1975
Hours over 1976
.08 ppm 1977
Number of 1975
Hours over 1976
.08 ppm 1977
May-Oct
Only
NITROGEN DIOXIDE
Maximum 1975
Hourly 1976
Average 1977
Annual ^
Average 19y?
NON-METHANE
HYDROCARBON
Highest 1975
6-9 am 1976
Average 1977
SULFUR DIOXIDE
Maximum 1975
Hourly 1976
Average 1977
Maximum 1975
3 hour 1976
Average 1977
Annual 1975
Average 1976
1977
TOTAL SUSPENDED
PARTICIPATE
Maxtimim 1975
24 Hour 1976
Average 1977
Annual 1975
Geometric 1976
Mean 1977
*,
v
00
3
0.256
--
103
88
":":
«
«
~-
149
227
273
57
60
62
g
«i
5
'O
H
<
0.321
0.272
0.270
251
397
322
218
307
269
0.13
0.14
0.11
0.02
0.02
0.02
2.1
3.9
6.2
0.11
0.01
0.01
0.10
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
153
134
1041
64
65
74
Parkhurst
(NE)
0.267
0.286
0.302
242
534
481
221
447
404
0.13
0.14
*
*
18.6
7.0
15.5
_
__
150
220
200
63
64
67
a
5
£
ss
.. JB^.
0.288
0.297
0.222
202
279
255
180
232
224
0.21
0.32
0.18
0.03
0.02
0.03
3.9
3.4
6.1
0.20
0.12
0.11
0.13
0.07
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
204
198
841
82
90
91
Clinton
(E)
0.307
0.278
0.205
214
518
224
188
446
213
0.35
0.24
*
*
6.3
10.1
4.2
0.56
0.63
0.44
0.53
0.43
0.34
*
*
*
__
334
142
Crawford
(CENT)
0.254
0.223
0.309
186
188
119
171
167
105
0.41
0.29
0.13
*
*
*
12.4
7.6
10.3
0.17
0.26
0.14
0.19
*
*
163
119
629
71
69
76
MacGregor
(CENT)
0.198
0.270
0.254
116
243
170
96
219
129
_
0.12
*
__
__
149
175
252
62
53
53
S~\
fi3
CO
w
V
s.
0.285
0.289
0.281
255
289
281
255
434
129
_ _
__
_..
_. _
_ _
__
.«.
205
228
240
65
60
63
X
u
H
U
CO
I
0.222
0.225
0.236
288
311
188
233
257
179
0.10
0.29
0.12
0.01
a 01
0.02
5.4
3.8
2.9
0.21
0.31
0.03
0.12
0.21
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
126
207
1203
59
57
64
a
4J
3
H
U
0.160
0.186
0.185
187
205
133
145
152
84
0.09
0.11
0.09
0.01
0.01
0.01
3.1
4.5
6.4
0.02
0.09
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
180
185
781
74
71
89
*Not available at present
Sources:
Texas Air Control Board (5)
City of Houston (6)
14
-------
V
1 Lang
2 Aldine
3 Parkhurst
4 Mae Drive
5 Clinton
6 Crawford
7 MacGregor
8 Fuqua
9 Texas City
10 Clute
X"
Figure 3-1. Locations of monitoring sites with data reported
in Table 3-3.
15
-------
TABLE 3-4. TSP PARAMETERS IN THE TACB DATA FILE
Parameter
Particulate
Nitrate
Sulfate
Organics
Aluminum (Al)
Silicon (Si)
Fluoride
Chloride (Cl)
Arsenic (As)
Cadmium (Cd)
Beryllium (Be)
Iron (Fe)
Lead (Pb)
Bromide (Br)
Rubidium (Rb)
Zirconium (Zr)
Iodide (I)
Boron (B)
Thallium (Tl)
Chromium (Cr)
MDL*
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.8
0.8
0.006
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.02
0.08
0.1
0.08
0.06
Parameter
Copper (Cu)
Tin (Sn)
Antimony (sb)
Manganese (Mn)
Nickel (Ni)
Molybdenum (Mo)
Vanadium (V)
Titanium (Ti)
Zinc (Zn)
Cobalt (Co)
Calcium (Ca)
Sodium (Na)
Strontium (Sr)
Potassium (K)
Magnesium (Mg)
Barium (Ba)
Phosphorus (P)
Sulfur (S)
Germanium (Ge)
Selenium (Se)
MDL*
0.02
0.08
0.04
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.004
0.006
0.02
0.04
0.01
0.1
0.02
0.01
0.1
0.1
0.06
0.04
0.06
0.04
* MDL - Minimum detectable limit in micrograms per cubic meter
16
-------
Total suspended particulate (TSP) levels have been measured in excess
of the 75 microgram per cubic meter (ug/m3) geometric mean annual standard,
as well as the 260 Ug/m3 24-hour standard, at several sites in the Houston
area. Of the ten sites shown in Table 3-3, four have exceeded the annual
standard during the last three years. In addition to these sites, TSP
ismonitored at many other locations in the Houston area. Several of these
sites have recorded levels that violated the national ambient air quality
standards.
The annual standard for nitrogen dioxide (NQa) has not been exceeded
at any of the eight city and state continuous monitors, and only the
24-hour standard for sulfur dioxide (SOa) has been exceeded at one of six
city and state continuous monitors. The City of Houston Clinton site re-
corded a 24-hour average of 0.161 ppm on December 11, 1975, which exceeds
the standard of 0.140 ppm. However, SOa levels have not been observed over
the standards at any of these sites since that time. Consequently, no
violations of the national SOz standard have been reported.
i
Peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN) levels have been monitored on a short-term
basis during two air pollution studies in the Houston area. Scientists from
Washington State University (7) measured PAN levels from July 2 to 23, 1976 at
one location in northwest Houston (Lang). They found only two occasions on
which PAN persisted into the night (at concentrations less than 1 ppb) with a
daily 10 AM to 4 PM average of only 1.0 ppb. The highest hourly average
measurement was 11.5 ppb. PAN levels were also measured from June through
October, 1977 at three locations (Aldine, Crawford, and< Fuqua) in the
Houston area as a part of the Houston Area Oxidants Study (HAOS). The HAOS
measurements (8) showed a maximum monthly average of 1.2 ppb which occurred
during July, 1977 at the Aldine site, with a peak instantaneous reading of
15.6 ppb during October, 1977 also at the Aldine site. The average levels
over the 5-month study period ranged from 0.58 ppb at the Crawford site
(downtown) to 0.90 ppb at the Aldine site (north of Houston). Both the
WSU and HAOS measurements showed relatively high PAN levels concurrent with
relatively high oxidant levels, although the reverse was not always true.
During the HAOS monitoring period, there were times wfeen the oxidant levels
were high, while PAN levels were low.
The WSU study identified abo!u_t__75 hydrocarbon species which accounted
for about 90 percent of the total non-methane hydrocarbons present, during
July, 1976. Integrated samples were gathered at three sites (Lang, Aldine,
and Fuqua) with grab samples from other locations. These measurements showed
large variations in composition and total NMHC with distance and time.
Table 3-5 provides a summary of the 6-9 AM detailed hydrocarbon measurements
from July, 1976. Afternoon hydrocarbon levels were generally lower by
about a f actor of :thiiee,' compared to the 6-9 AM measurements.
Other detailed hydrocarbon measurements have been obtained during
studies in July 1973 and July - August 1974 by the University of Houston (9),
in 1975 by the Texas Air Control Board (10), from June-October 1977 for
HAOS, and from September 15 to October 15, 1978 for the Houston Air Pollution
17
-------
CO
TABLE 3-5. INDIVIDUAL HYDROCARBON MEASUREMENTS FROM SAMPLES COLLECTED BETWEEN
6 AM AND 9 AM /DURING JULY 1976 BY WSU
(Ug/m3)
Ethane
Ethylene
Acetylene
Propane
Propene
i-Butane
n-Butane
1-Butene
i-Butene
t-2-Butene
c-2-Butene
i-Pentane
n-Pentane
1-Pentene
2-Methylpentane
3-Methylpentane
n-Hexane
2 , 4-Dimethylpentane
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
p&m-Xylene
o-Xylene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene
All of the above HC
All other NMHC
Total NMHC
LANG
(17
Monthly
Average
27.0
13.0
18.0
70.5
21.0
39.0
116
4.0
5.5
8.0
*
109
93.5
4.0
28.0
19.5
18.0
5.5
18.0
37.5
10.0
25.5
11.5
5.0
12.0
3.5
723
380
1103
SITE
Days)
Maximum
118
20.0
31.5
621
82.5
205
846
10.0
8.5
24.0
*
599
296
19.0
125
73.5
48.0
14.5
42.5
61.0
17.0
40.5
19.5
11.5
30.0
7.0
2527
1662
4189
ALDINE SITE
(10
Monthly
Average
18.0
13.5
6.0
34.5
7.5
20.5
37.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
*
34.5
19.0
1.5
12.5
8.0
12.5
2.5
10.0
70.5
68.5
225
119
163
180
41.5
SL110
2239
3349
Days)
Maximum
33;0
23.0
10.0
58.0
13.0
33.0
64.0
3.0
4.0
5.5
*
65.0
32.0
2.5
23.0
13.5
28.0
4.0
14.0
173
224
778
385
975
522
125
2893
' 8005
10898
FUQUA
(12
Monthly
Average
18.0
34.0
10.0
40.5
19.0
32.0
34.5
2.5
2.5
3.5
*
37.0
26.0
1.5
10.0
7.5
13.0
2.5
10.5
22.0
10.0
26.5
14.0
5.0
32.5
5.5
421
387
808
SITE
Days)
Maximum
73.0
126
32.0
110
145
148
79.0
6.0
8.5
12.0
*
77.0
85.5
4.0
23.0
16.0
23.5
7.0
23.5
39.0
36.0
137
80.0
19.0
258
37.0
889
2051
2728
* less than 0.5 yg/m3
Source: Westberg (7)
-------
study (HAPS). The HAOS and HAPS data are not available at this writing, but
the other studies have reported hydrocarbon levels and variations similar
to the WSU data. The UH study showed a much higher percentage of samples
containing olefins in the downtown Houston area (65% of 377 samples) compared
to Pasadena (13% of 379 samples) and La Porte (4% of 108 samples).
Total aldehydes and formaldehyde have been measured on a non-continuous
basis (one 24-hour average about every six days) by bubblers at numerous
locations in the Houston area since 1973 (11)^ More sparse data are available
from earlier years. During the period from 1973 through 1977, sites
reporting at least 30 samples per year showed annual geometric means that
ranged from 3 to 10 yg/m3 in Harris County and from 2 to 19 yg/m3 in Gal-
veston County (see Table 3-6). Maximum 24-hour averages for each of these
years ranged from 7 to 111 yg/m3 in Harris County and from 5 to 270 yg/m3 in
Galveston County. Attempts were made during the HAOS (12) program to iden-
tify individual constituents of aldehydes. However, the only component
that was found in measurable quantities (over 10 ppb) was formaldehyde.
Comparisons of simulataneous measurements of total aldehydes and formalde-
hyde have indicated that formaldehyde is frequently a major constituent of
the total aldehydes.
Ammonia has also been measured by bubblers on an intermittent basis
(one 24-hour average about every six days) at most of the same sites that
measure total aldehydes(11). Large variations appear in the data, with annual
geometric means ranging from 3 to 97 yg/m for sites in Harris County and
3 to 14 yg/m3 for sites in Galveston County. The highest annual 24-hour
averages have ranged from 7 to 977 yg/m for sites in Harris County and
from 8 to 1400 yg/m for sites in Galveston County (only data from sites
with at least 30 samples for a given year have been included in this summary).
Diurnal and/or seasonal trends are apparent for most of the pollutants
that have been measured in the Houston area. Diurnal trends can only be
established for pollutants monitored continuously with sampling averages
covering a period no longer than about three hours. Diurnal trends for
ozone, oxides of nitrogen, non-methane hydrocarbons, sulfur dioxide, and
carbon monoxide have been presented in the Resource Document (1). Two types
of diurnal patterns are evident for these five pollutants. One type, for
ozone, shows a maximum in the early afternoon with low levels at night.
The other four pollutants generally reach a maximum at night, usually in
the early morning (between 3 am and 7 am GST) with a minimum during the
early afternoon. A diurnal pattern for total aldehydes was reported by the
UH 1973-74 study (9), using 3-hour averages, which suggested a maximum
during the afternoon.
Seasonal trends are most evident for ozone and oxides of nitrogen.
Hourly ozone averages show a pronounced summer maximum from May through
October. Of the ten city and state sites which recorded continuous data for
at least one year since 1973, five have had their highest hourly average in
June, two in July, two in August, and one in May, The lowest monthly ozone
maximums generally occur during January or February. Monthly averages
19
-------
TABLE 3-6. TOTAL ALDEHYDE AND AMMONIA DATA SUMMARY FOR 1973-1977 FOR SITES WITH AT LEAST 30
SAMPLES PER YEAR (yg/m3)
to
o
H
1973
Total 1974
1975
Aldehydes 1976
1977
1973
1974
Ammonia 1975
1976
1977
ARRIS COUN
ANNUAL
Geometric Mean
Lowest Highest
3 9
4 10
4 8
2 6
3 7
20 97
3 44
3 38
3 40
3 17
T Y SITES
MAXIMUM
2 4 -Hour Average
Lowest . Highest
14 71
14 100
17 111
7 79
9 33
280 992
18 887
12 785
7 750
12 977
G A L V E
S T 0 N
ANNUAL
Geometric
Lowest
9
9
7
4
2
3
3
2
3
4
Mean
Highest
19
17
14
5
4
14
8
7
10
5
COUNTY SITES
MAXIMUM
24-Hour Average
Lowest Highest
32 157
106 270
52 104
19 36
5 25
49 1400
80 208
25 197
8 133
21 52
Source: Texas Air Control Board (11)
-------
of all the NO data at the four TACB sites in the Houston area show a maxi-
mum in November or December. The lowest monthly maximums as well as the
lowest monthly averages for NO have occurred from May through September
at the four TACB sites. Sulfur dioxide levels at the few continuous-criteria
sites with significant measurements have shown a winter maximum, summer
minimum trend. Consistent seasonal trends are not readily apparent for
NMHC and CO, although the highest monthly averages of CO have occurred
in January and December.
METEOROLOGICAL DATA
Meteorological data have been recorded by the National Weather Service
since 1881 at several locations in the Houston area. More recently, meteo-
rological data have been reported from other sources in the Houston area,
including ambient air monitoring programs. More detailed information about
these various sources is contained in the Resource Document (1). A general
view of the Houston climate can be described from this wealth of data.
The Houston sub-tropical climate is strongly influenced by warm moist
tropical air originating from the Gulf of Mexico during the late spring,
summer, and fall. Cool dry.continental air reaches a peak of influence
during the winter, with occasional outbreaks of arctic air bringing very
cold and dry air to the area. Coastal effects are noticeable year-round.
Temperatures show less diurnal variation near the coast, with cooler maximum
temperatures and warmer minimum temperatures on the average, compared to
locations farther inland. Wind speeds and humidity are slightly higher,
on the average, near the coast. The normal temperature gradients along
the coast cause sea breeze and land breeze effects, which are most noticeable
within about 50 miles of the coast during periods of light winds and abun-
dant sunshine. With light winds and clear skies, a land breeze normally
appears within several hours after sunset, blowing from the north or north-
east. Shortly after sunrise, the wind veers (turns clockwise) to the south-
east, south, or southwest along the coast. This turning of the wind spreads
inland during the day, causing a sea breeze to appear at later times during
the day farther inland. Occasionally, with ideal conditions, the sea breeze
will penetrate as far as 80 to 100 miles inland by the late afternoon, before
it begins to dissipate around sunset.
National Weather Service (13) temperature, precipitation, relative
humidity, and wild normals for Houston and Galveston have frefSn presented in
the Resource Document (1). In summary, monthly average daily maximum tempera-
tures range from 62.6°F in January up to 94.3 F in August, while monthly Q
average daily minimum temperatures range from 41.5 F in January up to 72.8 F
in July at Houston (based on data from 1941-1970 that is mainly from Hobby
Airport). Normal monthly precipitation totals range from 1.68 inches in
March up to 5.10 inches in May at Houston (1941-1970). The long-term average
relative humidity is 75 percent (1914-1959) (14), with monthly averages
ranging from near 70 percent in November to near 80 percent in January.
The normal annual daily range in relative humidity is from about 60 percent
at noon to about 90 percent at 6 AM (CST). Montly average dew points range
21
-------
from 45 F in January to 73 F in July and August, with an annual average of
60°F for Houston (1946-1965) (14).
The prevailing wind direction is from the south-southeast, but signi-
ficant variations in wind direction frequency occur on a seasonal basis.
Figures 3-2 and 3-3 show the seasonal variations of wind direction and speed
frequencies for the Intercontinental Airport (IAH) (15) and Hobby Airport
(HOU) (16). In addition, the 6 am CST wind rose for HOU is included for
each season to show that significant diurnal variations of wind direction
and wind speed exist. Each wind rose displays the frequency of occurrence
of wind direction and wind speed. The wind direction points toward the
center of the wind rose diagram, with the total frequency by direction given
to the outside (thus in Figure 3-2 at IAH during March-April-May, the wind
blows from the north 8.07% of the time, from the north-northeast 5.35%
of the time, etc.) A scale for wind speed frequencies is shown. The summer
and fall wind roses show the greatest influence of the land breeze - sea
breeze regime, with much higher frequencies of wind direction from north
through east at 6 am than for the entire day. Likewise, the full-day wind
roses for summer and fall show much higher frequencies of wind direction
from the southeast through south compared to the corresponding 6 am wind
roses.
The percentage of possible sunshine ranges from 45% in January and
March to 67% in June, with an annual average of 57% for Houston (IAH 1970-
1977) (13). The cloudiest month is January, with an average sunrise to
sunset sky cover of 6.8 tenths and 17 cloudy days, while October is the
clearest month, with an average sunrise to sunset sky cover of 5.2 tenths
and 11 clear days (IAH 1970-1977) (13).
The number of days per month with measureable precipitation (0.01
inch or more) ranges from seven days in September to 11 days in January,
with an annual total of 103 days for Houston (1935-1970) (13). However, the
number of days on which thunder is heard ranges from two days in November,
December, January, and March, to 10 days in July, with an annual average of
42 days per year (1941-1970) (13). Heavy fog (visiblities of 1/4 mile
or less) is most frequent during the winter with up to seven days with
heavy fog during January, while June and July normally have no heavy fog
occurrences. An average of 42 days with heavy fog occur each year (1948-
1970) (13).
Visibilities less than seven miles occurred about 25 percent of the time
at IAH (1970-1976) (12), with visibilities less than three miles occurring
about 10 percent of the time on an annual basis. On a seasonal basis, visibi-
lities less than seven miles vary from about 19 percent of the time in the
summer to about 30 percent of the time during the spring (see Table 3-7). Vi-
sibilities less than three miles range from about 5 percent of the time during
the summer to about 14 percent of the time during the winter. Smoke and
haze with visibilities less than seven miles are reported for about 17
percent of the time on an annual basis, ranging from about 14 percent of
the time in the summer to about 22 percent of the time in the spring. Dust
with visibilities less than seven miles was reported for less than 1 percent
22
-------
MAM
JJA
1.*
IAH
1970-76
Wind Speed Frequency
Scale
HOU
1959-68
xoua- i.a
11 1
V I
>-»
IMI
i MI
n TI
6 am CST
HOU
1959-68
-------
SON
t
N
DJF
IAH
1970-76
Wind Speed
Frequency
Scale
HOU
1969-68
(W.il
I IT.
Figure 3-3. Wind rose diagrams for September-October-November
(left) and December-January-February (right) for
Intercontinental Airport - IAH (top), Houston
Hobby Airport - HOU (middle), and Houston Hobby
Airport - HOU - 6 am CST (bottom).
24
-------
TABLE 3-7. RESTRICTED VISIBILITY OCCURRENCES AT THE HOUSTON INTERCONTINENTAL AIRPORT
1970-1976 (BASED ON 8 OBSERVATIONS PER DAY AT 3 HOUR INTERVALS BEGINNING
AT MIDNIGHT CST EACH DAY).
DEC-JAN-FEB
Number Percent
Total Observations
Visibility Less
Than 3 Miles
Visibility Less
Than 7 Miles
Smoke and/or Haze*
Dust*
5056
713
1253
732
0
100.0
14.1
24.8
14.5
0.0
MAR-APR-MAY
Number Percent
5152
638
1524
1109
6
100.0
12.4
29.6
21.5
0.0
-TUN-JUL-AUG
Number Percent
5152
239
992
725
0
100.0
4.6
19.3
14.1
0.0
SEP-OCT-NOV
Number Percent
5096
502
1264
830
0
100.0
9.9
24.8
16.3
0.0
TOTAL
Number Percent
20456
2092
5033
3396
6
100.0
10.2
24.6
16.6
0.03
*With visibility less than 7 miles.
Source: National Climatic Center (15)
Ui
-------
of the time on an annual basis, with all of the occurrences during the spring
(IAH 1970-1976) (12). All of these visibility and visibility related ob-
servations described above provide only a rough estimate of the actual visi-
bilities, because visibilities in the Houston area frequently vary signi-
ficantly with direction. Any such directional variations are qualitatively
averaged for each individual observation, thereby introducing a significant
error source.
Neutral stability conditions, as determined by the Pasquill-Turner
classification scheme (17), occur more frequently than stable or unstable
conditions (see Table 3-8). Stable conditions are the next most frequent
condition, while unstable conditions are the least frequent atmospheric
condition, year-round (1959-1968). Inversions (increasing temperature with
height) within 500 feet above the ground are most frequent in fall and winter,
for the hours of 6 am CST and 6 pm CST (see Table 3-9) (18).
Afternoon mixing heights are highest, on the average, during the summer
and lowest during the winter, as might be expected because of changes in
insolation. Conversely, afternoon transport winds are highest during the
winter and lowest during the summer (see Table 3-9) (19). The mixing height
is the height to which strong vertical mixing of the air takes place, while
the transport wind is the average wind speed in the mixed layer. Ventilation,
which is the product of mixing height multiplied by transport wind, is
highest on the average in summer and fall, and lowest during the winter.
Ventilation provides a measure of the ability of the atmosphere to disperse
pollutants. High ventilation values, greater than about 6,000 meters
squared per second, are generally considered to be associated with good
dispersion conditions. Ventilation values of less than 4,000 meters squared
per second, with transport wind speeds of four meters per second or :less, ;are
associated with air stagnation and poor dispersion conditions, while the
4,000 to 6,000 range may be considered marginally stagnant.
The number of air stagnation episodes for a five year period (1960-1964)
are shown in Table 3-10 for various afternoon mixing heights and transport
wind speeds. An exact determination of the number and duration of air stag-
nation episodes for that period is not possible because of a lack of upper
air soundings for the Houston area. However, the data presented have been
interpolated from tabulations for Lake Charles, Shreveport, and San
Antonio (19). This interpolation provides an estimate of the occurrence of
one air stagnation episode in the fall, with an afternoon mixing height
of up to 1000 meters and a transport wind of four meters per second or less.
Likewise, 12 episodes with an afternoon mixing height of up to 1500 meters
and a transport wind of four meters per second or less are estimated. These
12 episodes covered an estimated total of 28 days. All of the episode
totals presented above and in Table 3-10 are for five years. Also, only .'
episodes lasting at least two days without significant precipitation have
been included. The greatest number of episode days is estimated to have
occurred during the fall for the two most stagnant cases described above.
26
-------
TABLE 3-8. PERCENT FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF THE PASQUILL STABILITY CATEGORIES AT THE HOBBY
AIRPORT 1959-1968
Stability
Very
Unstable
Unstable
Slightly
Unstable
Near
Neutral
Near
Neutral
Stable
Pasquill
Category
A
B
C
D(day)
D (night)
E and F
DJF
0.03
1.63
6.03
67.97
11.98
12.36
MAM
0.38
3.13
7.08
65.17
11.47
12.77
Season (%)
JJA
1.43
8.03
13.45
32.42
15.46
29.20
SON
0.50
4.99
9.99
42.21
16.36
25.96
Annual (%)
0.57
4.38
9.05
52.49
13.73
19.78
10
Sources: National Climatic Center (16)
National Climatic Center (17)
-------
TABLE 3-9. LOW LEVEL INVERSION FREQUENCIES AND AFTERNOON MIXING HEIGHTS, TRANSPORT WINDS, AND VENTILATION
FOR THE HOUSTON AREA
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
Annual
Low Level Inversion Frequency
(Percent of Total 6AM and 6PM
CST Observations)
32
20
20
35
26
Afternoon
Mixing Height
(Meters)
Afternoon
Transport Wind
(Meters/Second)
900
7.5
1100
7.0
1500
5.5
1400
6.0
1200
6.5
to
00
Afternoon
Ventilation
(Meters Squared/Second)
6750
7700
8250
8400
7800
Period of Record: 1960-1964, except Inversion Frequency June 1955-May 1957
Sources: Hosier (18)
Holzworth (19)
-------
TABLE 3-10. APPROXIMATE NUMBER OF EPISODES AND EPISODE DAYS FOR THE HOUSTON AREA IN 5 YEARS (1960-1964)
FOR EPISODES LASTING AT LEAST 2 DAYS WITH NO SIGNIFICANT PRECIPITATION.
(Number of Episodes/Number of Episode Days/Season*)
Afternoon
Transport
Wind
(Meters/Second)
<2.0
Peak Afternoon
<500 <1000
0/0 0/0
Mixing Height (Meters)
<.1500
0/0
<2000
0/0
£4.0 0/0 1/2/F 12/28/F 20/47/SU
£6.0 2/4/F 13/31/W 66/174/F 77/256/SU
vo - -- -- "
* Season with greatest number of episode days, W-Winter, SP-Spring, SU-Summer, F-Fall
SOURCE: Holzworth, 1972.
-------
COMPARISON OF THE AIR POLLUTION SITUATION IN HOUSTON WITH OTHER REGIONS
The combination of air pollutant emissions and meteorology in the
Houston area create a unique air pollution situation for such a large city.
Most other large cities in the United States are located in cooler, drier
climates, with significantly lower percentages of contribution to total
emissions from petrochemical industrial sources. The only large cities with
similar meteorological environments are cities located along the Gulf coast
and the south Atlantic coast, including New Orleans, Tampa-St. Petersburg, and
Miami. Of these cities, New Orleans has the most similar environment to the
Houston area because of its climate and petrochemical industries. However,
even the New Orleans environment has significant differences from the Houston
environment, mainly because of a higher air stagnation potential at New
Orleans with a less pronounced land-breeze and sea-breeze influence on wind
direction.
As a result of varying emissions and climates, air pollution composi-
tion and levels differ significantly between regions and even between some
cities in the same region. Only a few cities have reported ozone levels
near or greater than those reported in the Houston area. During the period
1974-1976, the Los Angeles, Fresno, San Jose, and Oakland areas in California,
as well as Denver, Chicago, eastern Pennsylvania, and southwestern Connecti-
cut reported ozone levels comparable to or higher than the Houston area (20).
Data from 1974 (21) suggests that most cities the size of Houston, or larger,
are reporting total hydrocarbon and nitrogen dioxide levels near or greater
than in the Houston area, including New York City, Washington, St. Louis,
Los Angeles, and San Francisco. Sulfur dioxide levels are generally higher
in cities in the Northeast and the Great Lakes area than over the rest
of the nation, including the Houston area (20). Also, total suspended
particulate levels have generally been higher in urban areas of the north-
central and northeastern U.S., as well as in the western U.S., than in the
Houston area (20)- most notably in Pittsburg, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago,
St. Louis, Denver, and Los Angeles. These comparisons are only intended
to provide a rough comparison of Houston with other large cities in the U.S.
Clearly, a more detailed comparison of the air pollution situations in the
Houston area with other regions is warranted on the basis that such compari-
sons should help in analyzing and solving the air pollution problems in all
of these regions.
30
-------
SECTION 4
ISSUES AND HYPOTHESES TO BE INVESTIGATED
The goals of the research addressed in this report are: (1) to improve
understanding of the short- and long-term effects of air pollution on public
health and welfare in the Texas Gulf Coast Area (TGCA) and, (2) to improve
understanding of the character, impact, origin, transport, transformation
and fate of air contaminants in the TGCA so that cost effective air pollu-
tion control strategies can be developed.
To effectively design an air pollution research program with limited
funding it is necessary to focus all resources on the acquisition of infor-
mation which will be most useful in providing a better understanding of the
factors which affect air pollution levels and thcxr impact. The approach
used here is to first identify the principal issues (questions to which
conflicting answers have been given) associated with air pollution in the
TGCA. These issues then lead to hypotheses (unproven statements) to be
investigated which in turn lead to experiments to be performed. These
experiments generate data which require analyses. These analyses provide
results which contribute to che resolution -the issues. Figure 4-1 is a
schematic of this process.
This section contains the principal issues and the hypotheses developed
from these issues. Section 5 suggests experiments which will effectively
test these hypotheses. A comprehensive research program is described in
Section 6. Hypotheses regarding the public health effects of air pollutants
in the TGCA are given in more detail in Volume II Plan for Health Effects
Studies.
PRINCIPAL ISSUES AND HYPOTHESES <
Table 4-1 contains the principal issues associated with the air pollu-
tion questions in the TGCA. Except for Issue No. 1 which concerns the
uniqueness of the TGCA, and to a limited extent Issue No. 9 which concerns
the impact of increased coal utilization, these issues are a statement of the
general air pollution issues for the entire United States at this time. The
issues have evolved during the past several years from studies of the air
pollution problem and from attempts to implement the Clean Air Act and other
legislation. In the research developed here these issues will be examined
within the context of the TGCA.
31
-------
ISSUES ^
lead to
HYPOTHESES
lead to
EXPERIMENTS
which generate
DATA
which requires
ANALYSES
which provide
RESULTS , . , , LJ l -
which help resolve
Figure 4-1. Components of research plan development.
32
-------
TABLE 4-1. PRINCIPAL AIR POLLUTION ISSUES IN THE TEXAS GULF COAST AREA
1. UNIQUENESS OF THE TEXAS GULF COAST AREA
Are there unique pollutants or factors (meteorology, etc.) which
exist in the TGCA and should be considered when setting air quality
standards and/or designing emission control strategies?
2. CHARACTER AND EXTENT OF AIR POLLUTION LEVELS AND EMISSIONS IN THE TEXAS
GULF COAST AREA
Have all of the important atmospheric pollutants in the TGCA been
identified and/or characterized?
3 PUBLIC EXPOSURE VS_ POTENTIAL HEALTH HAZARD
What is the relationship between the measured ambient pollutant
concentrations and the potential health hazard to the public?
4. SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY VALIDITY
Are we accurately measuring pollutant levels?
5. PRIMARY VS SECONDARY POLLUTANTS
What is the relationship between source emissions and observed
pollutants at an ambient receptor site?
6. LONG RANGE TRANSPORT OF POLLUTANTS
Is TGCA air quality significantly affected by long range transport
of pollutants from other areas?
7. NATURAL VS ANTHROPOGENIC POLLUTANTS
To what extent do natural pollutants contribute to primary
and/or secondary pollutant levels?
8. AIR QUALITY MODEL UTILITY
Can current air quality models accurately predict pollutant levels
in the TGCA?
9. IMPACT OF INCREASED COAL UTILIZATION
How will increased coal utilization affect pollutant levels?
10. MOST COST-EFFECTIVE POLLUTANT CONTROL STRATEGIES
Can we directly or indirectly control the pollutants of concern in
an economic and effective manner
33
-------
The hypotheses presented in Tables 4-2 through 4-4 refine these issues to
a set of specific unproven statements or questions relevant to air pollu-
tion in the TGCA. The specifity of the hypotheses permits experiments to
be designed to amplify or resolve them.
Priorities are assigned to each hypothesis based on its estimated
probable contribution to a better understanding of air pollution in the TGCA.
Within each priority class, hypotheses are not ranked, only labeled numeri-
cally for reference. The issue or issues associated with each hypothesis
are indicated.
34
-------
TABLE 4-2. HIGH PRIORITY HYPOTHESES
1.1 Volatile organics to NO ratios are generally much larger in the TGCA than in other major
urban areas. (1, 2, 5, 10)
1.2 Ground-level concentrations of Oa, NO , large-sized particles and SO 2 are sometimes
significantly different from concentrations aloft. (2, 5, 6, 8)
1.3 Known or suspected carcinogenic or mutagenic compounds are present in significant quantities
in airborne particulate matter in the TGCA. (1, 2, 3)
1.4 Organic aerosols in TGCA air are not hygroscopic. (2, 5)
1.5 A large percentage of the organic content of TGCA aerosol samples is polymeric. (2)
1.6 Airborne particulate samples from the TGCA have a significantly higher percentage of organic
compounds than samples from other major urban areas. (1, 2)
1.7 Smaller aerosol particles (less than 3 ym) have a significantly higher percentage of organic
01 compounds than larger particles in the TGCA. (2, 3, 5)
1.8 Elemental carbon (e.g., soot) is not a major constituent of TGCA airborne particulates.
(2, 5, 7)
1.0 TGCA particulate samples are lower in sulfate and nitrate content than samples from other
major urban areas. (1, 2, 5)
1.10 The percentage of sulfates and nitrates in smaller aerosol particles (less than 3 ym) is
significantly greater than in large particles. (2, 5)
1.11 The metallic content of large airborne particles is significantly different from small
particles. (2, 3, 5)
l.lla The existing pollution monitoring network is insufficient for a determination of three-
dimensional pollution levels in the TGCA (2, 4, 8, 9, 10)
Issues related to each hypothesis are in parentheses
(continued)
-------
TABLE 4-2. (continued)
1.12 Some constituents of TGCA aerosols are highly volatile and/or unstable. (2, 4, 5)
1.13 Air pollutant concentrations actually experienced by most TGCA residents during their normal
daily activities are significantly different from measured, outdoor ambient concentrations.
(2, 3, 10)
1.14 Changes in atmospheric visibility in the TGCA is primarily due to changes in ambient relative
humidity. (2, 3, 10)
1.15 Unidentified or unrecognized air pollutants significantly contribute to adverse public
health effects in the TGCA. (2, 3, 10)
1.16 Only mobile sources directly emit significant quantities of volatile aldehydes into the
TGCA atmosphere. (2, 3, 5, 6, 7)
1.17 The chemical composition of fugitive gaseous organic emissions from a stationary source
is very similar to the point source emissions at the same source. (2, 5, 10)
1.18 Fugitive gaseous organic emissions from stationary sources comprise a large fraction, of
the total organic emissions from these sources. (2, 5, 10)
1.19 Each organic emission source category in the TGCA (stationary, mobile, and vegetative)
emits unique organic compounds. (2, 5, 6, 7, 10)
1.20 Natural gaseous organic emissions comprise a significant fraction of the total organic
emissions in the TGCA. (2, 5, 6, 7, 10)
1.21 The mixture of volatile organic compounds detected in ambient air is significantly different
than the sum of all the volatile organic' emissions. (2, 5, 6, 7, 10)
1.22 Trees in the TGCA emit significant quantities of organic vapors which easily form small
particles (especially, condensation nuclei). (2, 5, 6, 7, 10)
(continued)
-------
TABLE 4-2. (continued)
1.23 The emission rates of most stationary sources are highly constant with time (hourly, daily,
seasonally and yearly). (2,5, 10)
1.24 Few stationary sources in the TGCA directly emit organic particles, (2, 5, 10)
*7 Q 9
1.25 High Be and P concentrations occur at ground level only when transport of air from the
stratosphere has occured. (2, 10)
1.26 Mobile or stationary sources in the TGCA do not emit significant quantities of elemental
carbon (e.g., soot). (2, 5)
1.27 Few emission sources in the TGCA directly emit small-sized (less than 3 ym) sulfate and
nitrate particles. (2, 5, 6, 7)
1.28 Controlled stationary source emissions are primarily small-sized particles (less than 3 ym) .
(2, 5, 6, 7, 10)
to 1.29 Large quantities of small and/or large particles are emitted to the atmosphere in the TGCA
*sj due to ocean spray. (2, 5, 10)
1.30 Transport of ozone and haze from the central and southeastern U.S. may significantly in-
fluence air pollution levels in the TGCA. (1, 5, 6, 10)
1.31 03 transported from the stratosphere produces ground-level chemical reaction initiators
which may cause high ground-level Os concentrations. (5, 7, 10)
1.32 Oa transported from the stratosphere is a significant direct source of ground-level Os
concentrations. (5, 7, 10)
1.33 Air transported into the Houston area which has not been influenced by stratospheric air
frequently contains relatively high concentrations of Oa and organic gases. (5, 6, 7, 10)
1.34 Os trapped aloft at night is frequently transported to ground-level by daytime mixing.
(5, 10)
(continued)
-------
TABLE 4-2. (continued)
1.35 Oa trapped in layers aloft is relatively stable, especially during the night time hours.
(2, 6, 7)
1.36 Ambient Os concentrations tend to be higher downwind of Houston. (2, 5, 6, 10)
1.37 Reduction in ambient organic concentrations alone will not result in significant reductions
in ambient ozone or aerosol levels. (5, 6, 7, 10)
1.38 Stratospheric air is frequently transported to ground-level near synoptic frontal zones.
(7, 10)
1.39 Release of waste heat in the downtown and ship channel areas of Houston significantly affects
mesoscale air flow in the area. (10)
1.40 Aerosol levels are highly correlated with atmospheric ventilation, but ozone levels are not.
(2, 5, 6, 7, 10)
CO
00 1.41 Existing air dispersion models, reactive and non-reactive, are not useful for relating
air quality to emission in the TGCA (1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10)
1.42 Photochemical reactions found to be important in oxidant formation in other regions of the
country are not important in the TGCA. (1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10)
-------
TABLE 4-3, INTERMEDIATE PRIORITY HYPOTHESES
2.1 The ratio of total nonmethane organic vapors to total ambient oxides of nitrogen is highly
variable in time and space in the TGCA. (2, 5, 10)
2.2 Ambient levels of ozone are not highly variable spatially in the TGCA except during stag-
nant weather conditions, (2, 5, 6, 7, 10)
2.3 Existing analytical methods for gaseous organics do not reliably identify organic compounds
present in ambient air. (2, 4, 6, 7)
2.4 Existing aerosol, aeroallergen and organic vapor sampling techniques do not provide re-
producible, representative ambient air samples suitable for chemical and/or physical
analyses. (2, 4, 6, 7)
2.5 Under field operating conditions, existing methods for sampling ambient aerosols by size
poorly discriminate particle size. (2, 4, 6, 7)
2.6 Aerosol particles in the TGCA have a higher relative water content than aerosols in other
major urban areas. (1, 2, 6, 7)
2.7 Most airborne particles in the TGCA are coated with an outer liquid layer. (2)
2.8 Very small particles (condensation nuclei) are present in TGCA's atmosphere in lower con-
centrations than in other major urban areas. (1, 2, 5)
2.9 Most airborne particles from the TGCA do not absorb significant quantities of visible light,
but do absorb considerable ambient thermal (IR) radiation. (2)
2.10 A few metallic elements (less than 10) occur in every total suspended particulate sample. (2)
2.11 Ambient concentrations of CO and S02 are generally low and spatially uniform in the TGCA
except near specific emissions source areas. (2, 6, 7, 9, 10)
(continued)
-------
TABLE 4-3. (continued)
2.12 Few sulfides as gases are present in the TGCA's atmosphere except in very localized source
areas. (2, 5)
2.13 Carbonates and sulfides are not significant constituents of aerosol samples obtained in the
TGCA. (2, 5)
2.14 Most metals are present in TGCA aerosol samples as oxides, not sulfates or nitrates.
(2, 5)
2.15 Airborne asbestos levels do not significantly exceed rural background levels except in very
localized areas. (2, 10)
2.16 Radioactivity of TGCA aerosol samples is low compared to local geologic background levels. (2)
2.17 Airborne pollen levels in the TGCA vary significantly with the seasons. (2)
2.18 Airborne molds, spores and bacteria are significantly higher in the TGCA than in other major
urban areas. (1, 2)
2.19 Airborne particles in direct sunlight have a higher temperature than the air around them. (2)
2.20 Haze levels are generally higher in the downtown and ship channel areas of Houston, (2, 5, 10)
2.21 Total solar radiation and solar ultraviolet radiation differs significantly in intensity
during hazy conditions below the lowest Inversion layer. (2)
2.22 Economically significant vegetative classes are not affected by air pollution in the TGCA. (10)
2.23 Some air pollutants (e.g., CO, NO and organics) are present in higher concentrations indoors
at work and home than in outdoor ambient air. (2, 3, 10)
2.24 Indoor concentrations of 0. are significantly less than outdoor ambient concentrations.
(2, 3, 10)
(continued)
-------
TABLE 4-3. (continued)
2.25 Visibility has significantly deteriorated in the TGCA in recent years. (2)
2.26 Organic emissions from petroleum related stationary sources are primarily alkanes. (2)
2.27 Large amounts of gaseous ammonia are emitted by man-made and natural sources in the TGCA.
(2, 5, 10)
2.28 Large-sized (greater than 3 ym) tire fragments only occur in aerosol samples near major
traffic areas. (2, 7, 10)
2.29 Some stationary sources emit a unique "spectrum" of-trace metals, (2, 6, 7, 10)
2.30 Some stationary source emissions are unique in the TGCA in one or more trace elment. (2, 6,
7, 10)
2.31 High ozone levels from stratospheric intrusion of air into the troposphere may persist in
temperature inversion layers for long term periods of days or weeks. (7)
2.32 High ozone of stratospheric origin trapped in elevated temperature inversion layers may
reach low enough elevations to become mixed to the surface by thermal or mechanical
mixing near the ground, or by downrushing air associated with thunderstorms. (7)
2.33 Air pollution orginating from continental areas may.sometimes cross the Gulf of Mexico
before reaching the TGCA. (7)
2.34 Low visibility usually occurs with persistent northeasterly winds. (2)
2.35 Aerosols generated by ocean spray are often transported in significant quantities into the
Houston area. (1, 5, 6, 7, 10)
2.36 The concentration of small-sized aerosols is not highly correlated with high ozone levels
in the TGCA. (2, 5, 6, 7, 10)
2.37 Only small-sized (<3 ]im) particulate emissions are tranported significant distances from
their original emission source. (5, 6, 10)
(continued)
-------
TABLE 4-3. (continued)
2.38 Some aerosol particles act as catalysts for the conversion of gaseous pollutants to
solids or liquids. (5, 7, 10)
2.39 As airborne particles are transported through the TGCA, the particles increase in size
by adding materials which are different for different source areas. (5, 6, 7)
2.40 Ambient Os is primarily removed by reaction with other airborne species (gases and aerosols).
(5)
2.41 Hygroscopic gases and particles are removed from the TGCA atmosphere primarily by rainfall
wash-out. (6)
2.42 Significant amounts of ambient nitrogen oxides are removed by conversion to nitric acid
(10)
2.43 Ambient S02 is primarily removed by conversion to sulfates in the TGCA. (5, 9, 10)
p-
2.44 Air pollution is not significantly affecting acidity of rain in the TGCA. (9, 10)
-------
TABLE 4-4. LOW PRIORITY HYPOTHESES
3.1 Brown haze that occurs in the TGCA is primarily due to absorption of light by ambient levels
of N02. (2)
3.2 Visibility in the Houston area is significantly lower than visibility in nearby rural
areas. (2)
3.3 All of Houston is occasionally affected by objectionable airborne odors. (2)
3.4 Air pollution in the TGCA does not significantly affect the corrosion of exposed materials
or buildings. (2, 10)
3.5 Absorption of light by airborne particles plays little part in reduction of visibility or
discoloration of the TGCA's atmosphere. (2)
3.6 The composition of gaseous organic emissions from stationary sources differs significantly
from mobile source emissions, (2, 5, 6, 7, 10)
3.7 Mobile or stationary sources in the TGCA do not emit significant quantities of carbonate
particulates. (2, 5)
3.8 Total nonmethane volatile organic emissions are much larger in the TGCA than other major
urban areas. (1, 2, 6, 7, 10)
3.9 SOa emissions in Houston are relatively small compared to other major urban areas.
(1, 2, 9, 10)
3.10 Stable isotope ratios of sulfur, nitrogen and carbon containing emissions are significantly
different for different emission sources in the TGCA (especially, anthropogenic versus
natural). (2, 5, 6, 7)
3.11 The existing meteorological monitoring network is insufficient for a determination of
mesoscale, three-dimensional air flow (up to 5000 ft.) in the TGCA. (8, 9, 10)
(continued)
-------
TABLE 4-4. (continued)
3.12 Fugitive emissions are not transported as far as stack emissions of the same pollutant.
(5, 6, 10)
3.13 A land-sea breeze regime occasionally recirculates air in the TGCA for several days.
.(1, 5, 6)
3.14 Mesoscale air flow is often affected by a land-sea breeze originating from* the Gulf of Meicico.
(1, 6)
3.15 High ambient temperatures in TGCA significantly affect atmospheric reactions. (1, 5, 7, 10)
3.16 Hygroscopic particulate emissions quickly become larger particles in the TGCA. (5, 7, 10)
3.17 The dominant psuedo-removal mechanism for airborne pollutants is many-fold dilution with
clean air by normal atmospheric ventilation processes. (10)
3.18 Removal of pollutants by vegetation is insignificant in the TGCA. (10)
3.19 Ambient 63 is not significantly removed by rainfall wash-out. (2)
3.20 Small-sized (less than 3 jam) aerosols are removed from the TGCA atmosphere primarily by
settling as larger particles. (5, 10)
-------
SECTION 5
PROJECT OPTIONS
Because of the interrelated nature of the suggested project options,
the most efficient approach for conducting these projects would be to have
one centralized program. The program approach would allow specific data
collection for each individual project while providing common support
services. Proper program management would reduce redundant tasks and allow
each project to benefit from the others. A centralized data bank with com-
mon formatting would insure maximum utilization of data during this program
and any follow-on analyses of the collected data.
Program tasks can be discussed in common terms for all of the involved
projects including:
review of existing relevant data,
methods evaluation,
collection of data,
data processing and archiving,
quality assurance, and
data analysis including statistical analysis, gross
correlations, case studies and modeling.
Through a centralized program, the individual efforts from each of the
following projects described below can be brought together as meaningful
parts of the whole problem.
The issues described in Section 4 can be investigated by collecting
appropriate data and then interpreting the data with respect to selected
hypotheses. The collection of data may involve field sampling and monitor-
ing, or just the archiving and interpretation of existing data. The data
analysis can be accomplished by statistical analysis, gross correlation
analysis, case studies, and mechanistic modeling.
The projects outlined here are meant to serve as primary topics of
investigation. The discussions should serve as a basis for developing a
detailed scope of work. More detailed experimental plans for individual
hypotheses will be required before execution of the project. Scheduling of
some projects will in certain cases rely upon completion of a previously
45.
-------
conducted project. Others may be conducted simultaneously during a combined
effort, or run parallel over similar or overlapping time frames.
ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN A DATA BASE FOR THE TGCA
Initial efforts should be directed towards establishing a data base
for the TGCA. This data base would provide all previously collected data
pertaining to:
TGCA air quality,
TGCA emission sources, and
relevant meteorological data.
Additionally, during the course of conducting all other projects, this data
base must be maintained through continuous updating.
A consistent format for storing the data will need to be adopted, and
consistent units should also be chosen. The SAROAD (Storage and Retrieval of
Aerometric Data) format for monitoring data and the EIS (Emissions Inventory
Subsystem) format for emissions data are examples of formats that could be
used. The final format will need to be flexible enough to allow spaces
for all of the parameters to be measured or inventoried, including detailed
HC and detailed particulate data. A consistent set of units should be used
for the entire data base to allow easy comparison of the data. This estab-
lished format will serve as a guide to all study participants for furnishing
results of specific projects and/or tasks.
The data base should be archived on both computer disc files and tape
files. The disc files will provide easy access to the data. Tape files
would serve as a back-up archive to help insure that no data is lost.
An emissions inventory is currently being conducted (during 1978) by
the Texas Air Control Board. This inventory should be available during
1979 and will likely be expanded to give more detailed emissions data for
hydrocarbons. The 1975 TACB Emissions Inventory is presently being re-
evaluated to provide both point and area source data for NOa, NO, S02, SO^,
nonreactive HC, olefins, parrafins, aromatics, and aldehydes in computerized
form, in addition to the NO , THC, CO, SO , and PA data which is already
available. A similar expansion for particulates may be needed to support
possible modeling efforts. The most important particulate parameters for
such an expansion would be particle size range and composition. All of the
emissions data will also need to be archived on computer discs and tapes
for easy access and back-up capability.
Additional processing of data will be needed for the generation of data
summaries. These summaries will need to be arranged in a format that can
be used for data analysis. Both tables and plots can be computer-generated
to aid analysis. Also, summaries of data will be needed to show diurnal,
monthly (or seasonal), and annual trends for both analysis and reporting
purposes.
46
-------
EVALUATE AND ANALYZE PRIOR TGCA STUDY RESULTS
Many hours of long-term ambient monitoring data and short-term research
data are available for evaluation. After this information has been compiled,
(data base) data can be evaluated for accuracy and completeness, and addi-
tional analyses may be conducted where warranted. This effort would serve to
more completely define the.key.hypotheses requiring investigation in order
to.resolve various issues.
Three types of data analysis techniques are presented in Table 5-1.
Statistical analysis and gross correlation analysis should be employed for
studying large sets of data, and would be most appropriate for studying
both old and new data sets. Case studies could be used to examine specific
interesting episodes in much more detail than would be practical or possible
for the long-term studies. Each of these types of analysis can be used to
investigate:
Upwind-downwind pollutant changes,
Local pollutant transport,
Long range pollutant or precursor transport,
Weather conditions associated with high or low pollutant
levels,
Temperature or sunshine effects,
Rainfall effects,
Atmospheric ventilation effects, and
Diurnal, seasonal, and annual trends of pollutant levels
and interactions.
All of these analyses should help to reveal additional knowledge of the
air pollution problems in the Houston area.
CONDUCT AN EXTENSIVE SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY
One of the prerequisites for understanding the contributions of various
pollutant emissions to the observed air pollution burden is an accurate de-
tailed characterization of air pollutant emissions in the TGCA. The relative
contributions of industrial, transportation, natural, and distant emissions
need to be determined as accurately as possible. Some of these emissions have
a direct impact on observed ambient pollutant levels (primary pollutants),
such as entrained dust and carbon monoxide. However, many emissions have an
indirect effect (pollutant precursors), in that they influence the formation
of pollutants such as oxidants and particulates. Both primary and precursor
pollutant emissions need to be characterized.
Emissions of many important types of sources in the TGCA are poorly
characterized. Detailed, quantitative measurements of selected sources are
needed to better understand what airborne substances are being emitted into
47
-------
TABLE 5-1. TYPES OF DATA ANALYSIS
1. Statistical Analysis - to include step-wise regression analysis,
standard error analysis, correlation coefficients, partial
correlations, and factor analysis of pollutant and meteoro-
logical parameters.
Cost - $25,000 for one month of data, $5,000 extra for each
additional month of data.
2. Gross Correlations - to include trend studies (annual, seasonal, and
diurnal) and comparisons of pollutant and meteorological data
(including air trajectories) from various locations and for
various conditions covering the entire study period.
Cost - $10,000 for one month of data, $3,000 extra for each
additional month of data.
3. Case Studies - detailed investigation of specific episodes (parti-
cularly high ozone or high aerosol episodes - generally
lasting 1 to 5 days) using trajectory analysis, and data
comparisons.
Cost - $6,000 for one case study, $3,000 for each additional
case study.
48
-------
the TGCA's air. Detailed hydrocarbon analysis and size-fractionated particul-
ate sampling and chemical analysis is desirable (Table 5-2).
This information, when added to the previously established data base,
will allow a more detailed pollutant balance to be constructed for the TGCA.
In this manner the emitted pollutants can more completely be compared and/or
contrasted to measured ambient pollutant levels.
CONDUCT AN EXTENSIVE AEROSOL CHARACTERIZATION STUDY
Based upon the analysis of past aerosol characterization results, it may
be necessary to gather additional data. Two areas of study can be addressed
to increase our knowledge of the nature of the TGCA aerosol:
physical characterization and
chemical composition.
Specific attention should be paid to the respirable aerosol fraction and
characteristics related to decreased visibility. During such a study,
additional measurements should be made to document meteorological conditions
and levels of gas and/or vapor phase pollutants (Table 5-3 ).
Data analysis of the results of such a sampling effort should be directed
toward answering specific hypotheses in an attempt to resolve such issues as:
contribution of secondary aerosol vs. primary aerosol
to the total suspended particulate level and the
respirable particulate level and
contribution of natural aerosol (sea salt, dust, etc.) vs.
anthropogenic aerosol to the total suspended particulate
level and the respirable particulate level.
Sample collection must be conducted in a way so that the aerosol composi-
tion is not affected. This requirement may involve extensive methods
development and/or investigation in the areas of gain and/or loss of
volatile components, gas-particle reactions and problems related to the
high relative humidity in the TGCA.
1
PERFORM QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE ANALYSES OF AEROSOL SAMPLES
A Complete knowledge of the chemical composition of the TGCA aerosol is
needed to define the potential health hazard to the public-analysis
should be performed to define levels of toxic metals such as arsenic and
cadmium> as well as possible carcinogenic or mutenogenic agents such as
polycyclic organic compounds. Close cooperation should be maintained with
health effects studies to insure that analytical sensitivity and known
exposure levels are compatable. The chemical composition of the aerosol
will provide additonal information in the form of specific source contribu-
tions .
49
-------
TABLE 5-2. SOURCE SAMPLING
Source Sampling - portable set of instruments to measure detailed HC, S02,
S03, I^SOij, NOX, NO, CO, and particle size distribution and
chemical composition of various air pollution sources.
Cost - $50,000 per week, hired service.
50
-------
TABLE 5-3. EXAMPLE POLLUTANT MONITORING PLATFORMS
1. Baseline - continuous monitoring of S02 and fuel combustion related
radioactive isotopes, with rainfall acidity monitoring, TSP
and possible monitoring of a few specific hydrocarbons or
oxidants (which may be affected by control strategies).
Cost $15,000 per site initial costs (hired service for
one month), $6,000 per month operating costs for
one site, $4,000 per month operating costs for
each additional site.
2. Standard - trailer configuration for continuous monitoring of Oa, NOX,
NO, THC, CHi,, CO, S02, WD, WS, TEM, (with N02 derived from
NOX-NO, and NMHC from THC - CHi») and non-continuous monitoring
of TSP.
Cost - $40,000 per site initial costs (hired service for
one month), $5,000 per month operating costs for one
site, $2,000 per month operating costs for each
additional site.
3. Detailed - site with 03, iWHC, NOX, NO, WS, WD, TEM, on a continuous
basis, with detailed hydrocarbons, oxidants, and aerosols
(with size fractionation and composition) preferably on a
continuous basis.
Cost - $40,000 per site initial costs, $20,000 per month
operating costs for each site (hired service for
one month)
Note: Existing sites can be expanded to these capabilities.
4. Mobile Ground - truck or van instrumented to measure Oj, NMHC, NOX,
NO, aerosols, CO, TEM.
Cost - $50,000 for one mobile station for one month
hired service.
5. Aircraft - airplane or jet instrumented for Os, rBe, NMHC, NOx,
aerosols and TEM, preferably capable of flying up to
tropopause (30,000 to 40,000 feet).
Cost - $75,000 per month (leased aircraft).
6. Tall Building - tall building (at least 500 feet) to be instrumented
on roof to measure Os, UlSIC, ITO , particulate (Hi-Vol) , WS,
WD, TEM preferably on a continuous basis.
Cost - $30,000 for one site initial costs (hired service),
$2,000 per month for one site operating costs (to be
operated in conjunction with other ground stations).
7. Ozonesonde Oa monitor for vertical profile (twice daily) by balloon
also to measure TEM and to be tracked by theodolite to
provide WO, WS.
Cost - $15,000 initial costs for one site, $6,000 per month
operating costs for one site.
51
-------
CONDUCT AN EXTENSIVE OXIDANT/HYDROCARBON STUDY
Much ozone/hydrocarbon data are currently available for the T-GCA. If
hypotheses concerning the nature of these pollutants and their relationship
during periods of high concentration can not be answered during initial
data analysis, additional studies may be warranted. If a study is conducted,
meteorological data should be gathered to support the pollutant data.
Ozone data can be obtained from the regional monitoring network.
Detailed hydrocarbon analysis, because of the nature of the analytical
equipment required would be conducted on a short term basis. Attention
should be given to sampling techniques [and samples should be analyzed in
the field] to insure the integrity of the analytical results.
CHARACTERIZE NATURAL POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
The nature and magitude of natural pollutant emissions should be includ-
ed in a complete emissions inventory for the TGCA. Identification of
specific compounds and their respective emission rates from such natural
area sources as green belts, coastal zones and agricultural plots are
suggested.
Data should be collected during both night and daylight hours and
related to relevant meteorological parameters (wind speed, incident
radiation, etc.).
CONDUCT A PERSONAL MONITORING STUDY OF SELECTED POLLUTANTS.
Currently, ambient levels of pollutants are the only data available from
which to draw conclusions concerning public exposure to harmful pollutants.
A group of subjects could be chosen which would provide exposure information
as a function of geographical location, outdoor activities, work place, etc.
The pollutant levels associated with personal exposure can then be correlated
to ambient levels. This information will be useful in assessing if ambient
pollutant levels reflect public exposure.
Several methods could be employed to investigate these microscale
pollutant variations, such as personal monitors, portable monitors, or
multiple extended air intsck ducts from one centralized monitor (Table 5-4).
Comparisons of pollutant levels inside various closed buildings with simul-
taneous pollutant levels in the open air outside would be useful. Also,
variations of pollutant levels across street canyons, at building tops, with-
in vegetated areas, and along major highways could be investigated. Finally,
pollutant levels should be monitored within various rooms, offices, houses, or
buildings where the general public typically can be exposed to air pol£u-
tion accumulations. Enclosures with cooking, heating, air conditioning, or
cigarette emission accumulations should be considered. Measurement methods
that are compatible with outside ambient air monitoring should be used as
much as possible for microscale monitoring.
52
-------
TABLE 5-4. TYPES OF MICROSCALE MONITORING*
1. Personal - to be worn or carried by one person. Preferably, to be kept
with one person continuously through the study period, and
to provide average concentration of a given pollutant (Ox,
PA, CO) for the entire study period. Recommend method
evaluation prior to use.
2. Portable - set of instruments capable of measuring selected pollutants,
preferably Ox, CO, NOa, which can be easily moved by one or
two people within most buildings.
Cost - $3,000 per instrument initial costs (purchase),
$2,000 per month operating costs.
3. Centralized Microscale - standard array of pollutant instruments for
continuous monitoring, but with added capability to take
samples from several nearby locations (preferably about 4
locations within about 100 feet) with hourly averages for
each location created by alternating sample intake about
every 5 minutes (with 4 locations this would give 4 five-
minute averages per hour for each location).
*Abbreviations are listed at the beginning of the report.
53
-------
CONDUCT AN AIRBORNE PROFILE OF POLLUTANT FLUX INTO AND OUT OF THE TGCA
An important issue in the TGCA air pollution problem is the contri-
bution of pollutant sources outside the area to the total pollutant burden.
Vertical profiling of pollutants at select perimeter locations can help
resolve this issue. An airborne sampling platform would be required (Table
5-3) with extensive supplemental meteorological monitoring support (Table
5-5).
Additional support of such a study could come in the form of synoptic
scale monitoring.
The deployment of monitors on a synoptic scale would probably be
impractical for the TGCA. However, local, state, and federal monitors
already are being operated in most states, and data from such monitors
which may be helpful in synoptic scale studies should be obtained. Ozone,
NMHC, NOX, particulate, and meteorological data from the midwestern and
southeastern states would be most useful.
CONDUCT A PLUME TRACKING STUDY
As a result of a source characterization study and ground level
pollutant monitoring, specific sources can be chosen for a plume tracking
study. Such a study would concentrate on answering hypotheses directed
towards pollutant transformations and source - receptor relationships.
This study would include a variety of sampling platforms (Table 5-3).
Meteorological support would again play a key role in the successful
completion of the study.
Pollutants to be measured should be selected as the result of postulat-
ed hypotheses concerning the identified pollutants emitted at the source and
their role in pollutant transformation during transport. The information
gained can support and/or suggest situations for study in chamber or captive
air studies.
CONDUCT CHAMBER AND/OR CAPTIVE AIR STUDIES
To help establish various emission contributions, a better understanding
of the mechanisms which lead to secondary pollutant formation is necessary.
Studies of chemical reactions, as well as gas-particle and particle-par-
ticle interactions in a Houston-related environment are needed. Chamber
studies and captive air experiments, could be most useful (Table 5-6). How-
ever, care must be taken to insure that the air being studied is truely repre-
sentative of the Houston environment. For chamber studies, ultra violet
radiation, temperature, and humidity should reflect the variations present for
Houston. For captive air studies, experiments with the sampled air should be
conducted immediately after capture to reduce the possibility of significant
chemical interactions occurring before tests are made. Detailed pollutant
54
-------
TABLE 5-5. EXAMPLE METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING PLATFORMS
1. Meteorological Tower - preferably an existing tall tower (at least 500
feet, with an elevator) to be instrumented for continuous
measurement of WD, WS, TEM, DP (or RH) at three levels (pre-
ferably top, middle, and bottom) with TEM at two additional
intermediate levels.
Cost - $25,000 for one site, initial costs, $1,500 per
month operating costs for one site.
Note: Various pollutant monitors may be added.
2. Radiosonde - balloon with transmitter to provide vertical profiles of
WD, WS, TEM, DP (or RH), and pressure up to 10,000 feet, to
be tracked by theodolite (twice daily).
Cost - $10,000 initial costs for one site, $3,000 per month
operating costs for one site, $1,000 per month extra
for one additonal release per day.
Note: National Weather Service releases could be expanded,
$200 per run.
3. Tethered Balloon - balloon tethered to ground by cable, to reach variable
heights up to about 2,000 feet, with instruments for 03, WD,
WS, TEM, DP, and pressure.
Cost - $15,000 initial cost for one site, $6,000 per month
operating cost.
Note: Ozone measurement could be included.
4. Instrumented Tetroon - super pressure balloon designed to remain at
constant pressure level in the atmosphere, to be instrumented
to measure 03, TEM, and pressure (one release per day).
Cost - $30,000 per month (with leased automatic tracking
equipment).
5. Tri-Axis Acoustic Sounder - a vertical acoustic sounder accompanied by
two additional transmitters grouped to provide vertical pro-
files of all three wind direction components (u, v, w) and
temperature structure to at least 300 meters.
Cost - $35,000 per site initial costs (purchase) with $2,500
per month operating costs for one site and $2,000
per month extra for each additional site, $5,000
initial costs (lease) with $5,000 per month per site.
(continued)
55
-------
TABLE 5-5. (continued)
6. FM/CW Radar - frequency modulation/continuous wave radar capable of
measuring vertical profiles of WD, WS up to at least 10,000
feet and to show layers of refractive index changes (asso-
ciated with temperature inversions).
Cost - $30,000 for one month, $45,000 for two month Houston
study by NOAA Wave Propagation Lab personnel.
7. Dual Doppler Radar - doppler radar to measure three-dimensional WD, WS
fields using chaff dropped from aircraft.
Cost - $75,000 for one month Houston study by NOAA Wave
Propagation Lab personnel.
8. Laser - laser with receiver to measure backscatter (would prefer addi-
tional capability to have laser beam reflected and received
to measure pollutant absorptions) to provide mixing height,
turbulence, and temperature verticle profiles.
Cost - $60,000 for one month trial run (one site, hired
service).
56
-------
TABLE 5-6. TYPES OF RESEARCH
1. Chamber studies - closed chamber studies of chemical reactions and
physical interactions which cause secondary pollutant forma-
tion, in air simulating the Houston environment (especially
emissions, temperature, and humidity variations), with emphasis
on photochemical reactions and secondary particulate formation.
Cost - $40,000 per month for one chamber (20 tests for one
month).
2. Captive Air Experiments - closed chamber studies using captured ambient
air mixed with known quantities of reactive gases, preferably
with immediate mixing of test gas and ambient sample to avoid
changes within the ambient sample before the test gas is
introduced.
Cost - $175,000 for one month field study, $50,000 for each
additional month.
57
-------
monitoring, especially for hydrocarbons and aerosols (including continuous
monitoring of size fraction and composition) are needed for these studies.
Results from these studies should also benefit the quality of air pollution
models.
VALIDATION AND/OR DEVELOPMENT OF AIR POLLUTANT MODELS
If a thorough and complete understanding of the air pollution problem
in the TGCA can be realized, a predictive model can be developed (Table 5-7).
Both development and validation of such a model can only be realized if
the data of interest is available in a concise, usable data base. Current
air quality models should first be evaluated using the collected source
inventory and ground level pollutant levels. If unique_jmeteorologi.cal
conditions or pollutant transformations are identified and their effects
substantiated, models will have to be developed to describe them.
CONDUCT LONG TERM MONITORING
Following the completion of an intensive study period, such as described
by the above projects, consideration should be given to monitoring of select
pollutants on a long term basis. Such a project could be at the same level
of effort as current regional monitoring networks, with inclusion of any
other paramters (meteorological) required (Table 5-3 and 5-5).
METEOROLOGICAL SUPPORT TASKS
Meteorological support throughout the projects described above is essen-
tial. In addition, a specific meteorological project(s) may be warranted,
including some of the monitoring platforms described in Table 5-5. Meteorolo-
gical conditions affect chemical reactions and interactions as well as pollu-
tant concentration and distribution. To assess these effects, a better knowledge
of atmospheric conditions in the Houston area is needed. Pollutant concentra-
tion, stability, wind, and humidity below 10,000 feet (or about 3,000 meters)
are the most important parameters to be measured. Present monitors do not
adequately provide vertical profiles of these parameters on even a daily
basis. Vertical profiles of pollutant concentration, stability, wind} and
humidity should ideally be obtained 3 or 4 times daily, and preferably at
two or more sites located along a line perpendicular to the coast, to
obtain adequate information.
"Surface monitors at present provide an adequate network for most meteoro-
logical paramters (except for solar radiation). However, to assist in
upwind-downwind studies and to characterize ambient rural pollutant concentra-
tions, 2 or 3 upwind monitoring sites are needed to cover the most predomi-
nant wind directions. Present monitoring sites may be adequate for downwind
analysis, though an additional 1 or 2 monitors at distances substantially
further downwind than present locations would be helpful. Also, several
pyranometers and/or ultra violet radiometers are needed on a more permanent
basis at several locations.
58
-------
TABLE 5-7 - VALIDATION AND/OR DEVELOPMENT OF AN AIR POLLUTION MODEL
Modeling - to include development and testing of photochemical oxidant
and aerosol models and the use of these models to make
predictions of future air pollution levels, with development
of one single model to describe both oxidants and aerosols
to be considered.
Cost - $200,000 per model.
59
-------
Several types of meteorological studies can be employed. Theoretical
air parcel trajectories, both forward and backward in-time, can be used to
evaluate short-range and long-range pollutant transport. Statistical analy-
sis, gross correlations, and dispersion modeling (for a coastal environment)
can be used to study relations of meteorological parameters to pollutant
concentrations. Mesoscale models of air flow in the TGCA should be evaluated.
QUALITY ASSURANCE DURING DATA COLLECTION
Throughout any project arrangements for quality assurance checks of the
collected data must be made. Guidelines for quality assurance need to be
established to insure that the final data base will contain only good
quality data. Siting of instruments, calibration procedures, and data
validation procedures will all affect the data quality. Guidelines for siting
and calibration that should be adopted for the TGCS have been published by the
EPA. These include the "Ambient Monitoring Guidelines for Prevention of Sig-
nificant Deterioration" (EPA-450/2-78-019, May 1978) and the "Quality
Assurance Handbook for Air Polution Measurement Systems, Volume I, Prin-
ciples" (EPA-600/9-76-005, March 1976).
The PSD monitoroing guidelines are applicable for continuous monitoring
of Os, NOa, CO, S02, and meteorological data, as well as non-continuous TSP
monitoring. In general, the instruments are required to be sited at loca-
tions that are not significantly obstructed from air flow or unduly influenc-
ed by nearby pollutant sources. Continuous analyzers are required to use
EPA-designated Reference or Equivalent Methods, with calibrations performed
during installation, and recalibration whenever:
The control limit is exceeded for the span check,
repairs are made, or
major components are replaced.
Single-point span checks are required at least once per week for
continuous pollutant monitors, with periodic independent multi-point
audits.
The Quality Assurance Handbook provides a more comprehensive view of
quality assurance than the Ambient Monitoring Guidelines for PSD, including
siting, calibration, and validation. Some of the guidelines from both
reports are irrelevant to the TGCS, but both contain many guidelines that
could serve well for the TGCS.
An independent audit program will be needed to assure that monitoring
conducted for specific projects will meet standard guidelines.
60
-------
SECTION 6
RESEARCH PROGRAMS
Previous sections have discussed principal air pollution issues and
experiments to address those issues. The limited financial resources
available to study these problems will not permit all issues to be resolved.
Six options have therefore been developed which emphasize different aspects
of the overall pollution problem.
In each case a total budget of three million dollars is assumed, with
a program duration of thirty-six months or less. This budget includes
health effects studies, the details of which are addressed in a separate
volume of this report.
The various program options are based on the premise that the studies
will be conducted in the Houston area. The large amount of data from
previous studies plus the current existence of nine continuous monitoring
stations provide an overall cost effectiveness not matched by other Gulf
Coast locations. (Seven stations are operated by the City of Houston and
two by the Texas Air Control Board. Numerous industrial monitors also
exist.)
For each of the six program options, certain combinations of studies of
the type discussed in Section 5 are proposed. These individual studies are
summarized in Table 6-1. Estimated cost'and duration is provided for each
type of study. Finally, how each program option addresses the key issues
described in Section 4 (Table 4-1) is discussed.
61
-------
TABLE 6-1. POSSIBLE PROJECTS
A Establish and Maintain a Data Base
B Analysis of Prior TGCA Study Results
C Characterization of Existing Sources
D Aerosol Characterization Study
E Detailed Analysis of Aerosol Samples
F Detailed Oxidant/Hydrocarbon Study
G Characterization of Natural Emissions
H Personal Monitors
I Pollutant Flux Into and Out of the TGCA
J Plume Tracking Study
K Chamber or Captive Air Studies
L Development/Validation of Models
M Long Term Monitoring
N Meteorological Studies
0 Quality Assurance
62
-------
PROGRAM PLAN I - SUPPORT FOR HEALTH EFFECTS STUDIES
This program focuses on the collection of data to support health effects
studies in the Houston area. The studies should be designed to make maximum
use of the data from the existing monitoring stations. Additional data will
be provided by the program described below.
Study Type Funding
A - Establish and Maintain a $50,000.
Data Base
B - Analysis of Prior TGCA $100,000.
Study Results
C - Characterization of $250,000.
Existing Sources
D - Aerosol Characterization $300,000.
Study
E - Detailed Analysis of $300,000.
Aerosol Samples
F - Detailed Oxidant/ $200,000.
Hydrocarbon Study
H - Personal Monitors $200,000.
0 - Quality Assurance $100,000.
Total Cost - $1,500,000.
Time/Duration
(beginning - ending months)
0-4
3-12
12 - 14
12 - 24
12 - 24
12 - 24
12 - 24
0-24
Half of the money will be used for the health effects studies. Since
this support program is providing input data, the analysis and reporting
will be part of the health effects portion. One year has been reserved for
this program.
In project F above, the bulk of the money is intended to be used in
expanding the instrumentation at the existing monitoring stations. The
source characterization in project C is to examine a cross-section of
industries for potentially hazardous emissions. Projects A and B will be
oriented toward health effects - related parameters and studies.
The issue which will be primarily addressed in this program plan include
(see Table 4-1):
Public Exposure vs. Potential Health Hazard (Issue 3)
Issues which will be partially addressed include:
Character and Extent of Air Pollution Levels and Emissions in the
Texas Gulf Coast Area (2) and
63
-------
Uniqueness of the Texas Gulf Coast Area (1).
PROGRAM PLAN II - INTENSIVE SAMPLING PROGRAM COMBINED WITH MODEL DEVELOPMENT/
VALIDATION
In this program the focus is on intensive data collection projects to
support the development of model(s) for the Houston air pollution problem.
Health effects studies are included, but at a decreased level of emphasis.
Specific projects include:
Time/Duration
Study Type Funding (beginning - ending months)
A - Establish and Maintain $75,000. 0-4
a Data Base
B - Analysis of Prior TGCA $200,000. 3-12
Study Results
C - Characterization of $300,000. 12 - 14
Existing Sources
D - Aerosol Characterization $250,000. 12 - 14
Study
E - Detailed Analysis of $200,000. 12 - 14
Aerosol Samples
F - Detailed Oxidant/ $200,000. 12 - 14
Hydrocarbon Study
G - Characterization of $50,000. 12 - 14
Natural Emissions
I - Pollutant Flux Into and $150,000. 12 - 14
Out of the TGCA
J - Plume Tracking Study $150,000. 12 - 14
K - Chamber or Captive Air $250,000. 14 - 18
Study
L - Development/Validation $400,000. 12 - 24
of Models
N - Meteorological Studies $200,000. 12 - 14
0 - Quality Assurance $100,000. 0-24
Total Cost - $2,525,000.
This program leaves slightly less than a half million dollars for
health effects studies. Analysis and reporting costs are included in project
L, model development and validation. Costs for study design are included in
project B.
64
-------
Issues addressed directly by this program plan include:
Primary vs. Secondary Pollutants (5),
Long Range Transport of Pollutants (6), and
Air Quality Model Utility (8),
Issues addressed partially by this program plan include:
Uniqueness of the Texas Gulf- Coast Area (1),
Character and Extent of Air 'Pollution Levels and Emissions in the
Texas Gulf Coast Area (2),
Public Exposure vs. Potential Health Hazard (3),
Natural vs. Anthropogenic Pollutants (7),
Impact of Increased Coal Utilization (9), and
Most Cost-Effective Pollutant Control Strategies (10) .
PROGRAM PLAN III - DETAILED STUDY OF THE OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF
HAZARDOUS POLLUTANTS
This study focuses on the identification of potentially hazardous sub-
stances in Houston's atmosphere, and on their sources and distribution.
Maximum use will be made of existing stations, with significant expansion
of their capabilities.
Specific projects include:
Time/Duration
Study Type Funding (beginning - ending months)
A - Establish and Maintain $75,000. 0-4
a Data Base
B - Analysis of Prior TGCA $250,000. 4-12
Study Results
C - Characterization of $350,000. 12 - 14
Existing Sources '
D - Aerosol Characterization $300,000. 12 - 24
Study
E - Detailed Analysis of $500,000. 12 - 24
Aerosol Samples
F - Detailed Oxidant/ $500,000. 12 - 24
Hydrocarbon Study
G - Characterization of $50,000. 12 - 24
Natural Emissions
65
-------
H - Personal Monitors $150,000.
0 - Quality Assurance $100,000.
Data Analysis and Reporting $100,000.
Total Cost - $2,375,000.
12 - 24
0-36
24 - 36
Chemical analysis costs for detailed analysis of trace organics,
inorganics, and trace metals will consume a major part of projects C, E,
F, G, and H. Relocateable stations will be used extensively in D and F.
Personal samples (H) will be used to characterize human exposure to poten-
tially hazardous species.
Some $625,000. will be available for health effects studies. These
studies should begin after data are available on the occurrence and
distribution of hazardous species.
Issues addressed directly by this program plan include:
Character and Extent of Air Pollution Levels and Emissions in the
Texas Gulf Coast Area (2) and
Public Exposure vs. Potential Health Hazard (3).
Issues addressed partially:
Uniqueness of the Texas Gulf Coast Area (1) and
Natural vs. Anthropogenic Pollutants (7).
PROGRAM PLAN IV - DETAILED AEROSOL STUDY
This program plan focuses on a detailed characterization of aerosols
and their sources. Hydrocarbons and oxidants are studied only as they
pertain to aerosols. Existing monitoring stations will be expanded to
support intermittent sampling and continuous physical characterization of
aerosols. Existing meteorological stations will be used.
Specific projects include:
Study Type
Funding
A - Establish and Maintain a $50,000.
Data Base
B - Analysis of Prior TGCA
Study Results
$150,000.
$325,000.
C - Characterization of
Existing Sources
D - Aerosol Characterization $500,000.
Study
Time/Duration
(beginning - ending months)
0-4
3-12
12 - 15
12 - 18
66
-------
E - Detailed Analysis of $500,000. 12 - 18
Aerosol Samples
F - Detailed Oxidant/ $200,000. 12 - 18
Hydrocarbon Study
G - Characterization of $100,000. 12 - 18
Natural Emissions
I - Pollutant Flux Into and $150,000. 12 - 18
Out of the TGCA
J - Plume Tracking Study $75,000. 12 - 18
0 - Quality Assurance $100,000. 0-18
Analysis and Reporting $100,000. 18 - 30
Total Cost - $2,250,000.
Project D will include a detailed assessment of visibility in Houston's
atmosphere, and its relationship to various types of aerosols. Program
definition is included in project B.
Some $750,000. will be devoted to health effects studies, which should
be oriented toward aerosol - related effects for maximum program effective-
ness. These should be conducted during the last year of the study.
Issues addressed directly by this program plan include:
Character and Extend of Air Pollution Levels and Emissions in the
Texas Gulf Coast Area (2),
Primary vs. Secondary Pollutants (5), and
Natural vs. Anthropogenic Pollutants (7).
Issues addressed partially by this plan include:
Uniqueness of the Texas Gulf Coast Area (1),
Public Exposure vs. Potential Health Hazard (3),
Sampling and Analytical .Methodology Validity (4),
Long Range Transport of Pollutants (6), and
Most Cost-Effective Pollutant Control Strategies (10).
PROGRAM PLAN V - DETAILED OXIDANT/HYDROCARBON STUDY
This program plan focuses on the oxidant/hydrocarbon problem. Aerosol
sampling will be confined to that necessary to support the oxidant/hydro-
carbon study. Existing monitoring stations will be expanded to support
detailed hydrocarbon and oxidant analysis. These will be supplemented with
relocateable monitoring stations.
67
-------
Specific projects include:
Time/Duration
Study Type Funding (beginning - ending months)
A - Establish and Maintain a $75,000. 0-4
Data Base
B - Analysis of Prior TGCA $200,000. 3-12
Study Results
C - Characterization of $250,000. 12 - 14
Existing Sources
D - Aerosol Characterization $100,000. 12 - 18
Study
E - Detailed Analysis of $100,000. 12 - 18
Aerosol Samples
F - Detailed Oxidant/ $500,000. 12 - 18
Hydrocarbon Study
G - Characterization of $100,000. 12 - 18
Natural Emissions
I - Pollutant Flux Into and $150,000. 12 - 18
Out of the TGCA
J - Plume Tracking Study $150,000. 12 - 18
K - Chamber or Captive Air $350,000. 18 - 24
Studies
N - Meteorological Studies $200,000. 12 - 18
0 - Quality Assurance $125,000. 0-36
Analysis and Reporting $125,000. 24 - 36
Total Cost - $2,425,000.
Program definition is included in project B. Project I, J, and N
will be used to define transport into and out of the Houston area. $575,000.
is available for health effects studies.
Issues addressed directly by this program plan include:
Character and Extent of Air Pollution Levels and Emissions in the
Texas Gulf Coast Area (2),
Primary vs. Secondary Pollutants (5),
Long Range Transport of Pollutants (6), and
Natural vs. Anthropogenic Pollutants (7).
68
-------
Issues addressed partially by this program include:
Uniqueness of the Texas Gulf Coast Area (i)}
Public Exposure vs. Potential Health Hazard (3),
Sampling and Analytical Methodology Validity (4), and
Most Cost-Effective Pollutant Control Strategies (10).
PROGRAM PLAN VI - COMBINED AEROSOL-OXIDANT-HYDROCARBON STUDY
This program plan combines the objectives of the two previous program
plans, but with less detailed work in each area. As before, instrumentation
in existing stations will be supplemented extensively.
Specific projects include:
Time/Duration
Study Type Funding (beginning - ending months)
A - Establish and Maintain a $75,000. 0-4
Data Base
B - Analysis of Prior TGCA $200,000. 3-12
Study Results
C - Characterization of $250,000. 12 - 16
Existing Sources
D - Aerosol Characterization $350,000. 12 - 18
Study
E - Detailed Analysis of $350,000. 12 - 18
Aerosol Samples
F - Detailed Oxidant/ $350,000. 12 - 18
Hydrocarbon Study
G - Characterization of $100,000. 12 - 18
Natural Emissions
I - Pollutant Flux Into and $100,000. 12 - 18
Out of the TGCA
J - Plume Tracking Study $100,000. 12 - 18
N - Meteorological Studies $150,000. 12 - 18
0 - Quality Assurance $150,000. 0-30
Analysis and Reporting $200,000.
Total Cost - $2,375,000.
Project B includes costs for program definition. Project N will
support transport and characterization studies. $625,000. will remain for
health effects studies.
69
-------
Issues addressed directly by this program plan include:
Character and Extent of Air Pollution Levels and Emissions in the
Texas Gulf Coast Area (2),
Primary vs. Secondary Pollutants (5),
Long Range Transport of Pollutants (6), and
Natural vs. Anthropogenic Pollutants (7).
Issues addressed partially by this program include:
Uniqueness of the Texas Gulf Coast Area (1),
Public Exposure vs. Potential Health Hazard (2),
Sampling and Analytical Methodology Validity (4), and
Most Cost-Effective Pollutant Control Strategies (10).
70
-------
SECTION 7
AIR POLLUTION RESEARCH CAPABILITIES OF LOCAL PUBLIC AGENCIES
Several local and state public agencies have or currently are conducting
research on the origin, transformation and fate of air contaminants in the
Houston area. This section describes the resources that might be available
through these agencies to assist in the execution of a comprehensive Texas
Gulf Coast Research Plan.
Table 7-1 lists all the agencies surveyed in this study. Other public
agencies which are capable of participating in an air pollution research
study may have inadvertently been omitted from this survey. The resources
identified below for each agency are based solely on verbal interviews.
Additional resources may be available which were not discussed in the inter-
views. Specific resource availability for the Texas Gulf Coast study will
depend on prior commitments and EPA needs.
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
Four state and local governmental agencies that conduct air pollution
monitoring and/or research were surveyed. Tables 7-2, 7-3 and 7-4 summa-
rize the resources that might be available for participation in a Texas Gulf
Coast research study. While the Texas Department of Highways and Public
Transportation has air quality and meteorological monitoring instruments,
their availability is limited due to statewide commitments.
UNIVERSITIES
Eight local universities were surveyed. Tables 7-5, 7-6, 7-7, 7-8, 7-9
and 7-10 summarize available resource.s of those universities surveyed. While
two universities (Prairie View A&M University and Rice University) have en-
vironmental curricula, they do not presently have resources available to
support an air pollution research study in the Houston area.
71
-------
TABLE 7-1. PUBLIC AGENCIES SURVEYED
Agency
Contact
Government
Texas Air Control Board
Texas Department of Highways and
Public Transportation
Harris County Air Pollution
Control Department
City of Houston Health Department
Universities
Baylor University
Prairie View A&M University
Rice University
St. Thomas University
Texas A&M University
University of Houston
University of Texas at Austin
University of Texas at Houston
Steve Spaw, Austin
Rod Moe, Austin
Allison Pierce, Pasadena
Ken MacKenzie, Houston
Dr. Merle Alexander, Waco
Dr. John Williams, Prairie View
Dr. Bedient, Houston
Dr. Freeman, Houston
Dr. A. McFarland, College Station
Dr. Frank Worley, Houston
Dr. Hal Cooper, Austin
Dr. Gazelle, Houston
72
-------
TABLE 7-2. RESOURCES OF THE TEXAS AIR CONTROL BOARD
Type of Research
Resources
Feasibility of
Participation
Air Chemistry
1. Continuous monitoring for Oa, NO,
Meteorology
2.
3.
4.
NO
b
x»
CO THC, CIU, S02, TS, and
(heated and unheated) at
scat
two sites in the Houston area.
Intermittent monitoring (every
sixth day) for TSP, (>25 sites),
RSP (6 sites), heavy metals
(all sites), sulfates, nitrates
and gases, ammonia, (total alde-
hydes, nitrogen dioxide, chlo-
rine) .
Special analytical capabilities
include detailed organic analysis
using temperature programmable
gas chromatographs with FID, EC
or mass spectrometer detectors,
liquid and ion chromatographs,
atomic absorption spectrometer
and optical microscope.
Continuous monitoring of WS, WD,
TEM, RH at two sites, and UV solar
radiation (1 site).
Can voluntarily support research
program in limited way with re-
sources and manpower.
b. EPA grant possible.
c. Major long-term participation
will require negotiation between
agency and EPA.
-------
TABLE 7-3. RESOURCES OF HARRIS COUNTY
Type of Research
Resources
Feasibility of
Participation
Air Chemistry
1. Special analytical capabilities
include four gas chroma tographs,
(one with a mass spectrometer de
tector), fUV, IR fluorescence)
and spectrometers, and a liquid
chromatograph.
a. Limited
b. EPA grant possible.
c. Major long-term participation
will require negotiation be-
tween agency and EPA.
-------
TABLE 7-4. RESOURCES OF THE CITY OF HOUSTON HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Type of Research
Resources
Feasibility of
Participation
Air Chemistry
Ln
Meteorology
1. Continuous monitoring for Oa (6 a.
sites), NO/NOX, CO, THC/CHt,
TS/S02 in the Houston area. b.
2. Intermittent monitoring (every c-
sixth day) for TSP, sulfates, Cu,
Pb, Mn, Cr, Ni, N02, S02, alde-
hydes and ammonia at over 25
sites.
3. Special monitoring of ragweed
pollen at five sites every Fall.
4. Routine analysis of Pb in gasoline
samples from service stations.
5. Special analytical capabilities
include temperature programmable
gas chromatograph with FID and
EC detector.
6. Helicopter and boat for specialized
sampling
7. Some of air quality monitoring
stations are equipped with 10
meter towers with WS, WD and TEM sensors
Limited.
EPA grant possible.
Major long-term participation
will require negotiation be-
tween agency and EPA.
-------
TABLE 7-5. RESOURCES OF BAYLOR UNIVERSITY, INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Resources Feasibility of Participation
1. One twin-engine aircraft (Cessna 336A) a. Actively solicits grants for air pollution
equipped with sampling manifold, air research including EPA funding.
quality monitors for 0$, NOX, and SOX,
nephelometer, ambient temperature, b. Available to participate in Texas Gulf
and total solar radiation. Four wave- Coast research program.
length photometer also available.
Data from continuous instruments
collected by automatic data logger
and reduced by ground-based minicomputer.
2. Ground-based standards laboratory for
calibi
ments.
calibration of Os, NOX and SOX instru-
-------
TABLE 7-6. RESOURCES OF ST. THOMAS UNIVERSITY, INSTITUTE FOR STORM RESEARCH
Resources Feasibility of Participation
1. Real-time weather data and forecasting a. Actively solicits funding for air
for the Texas Gulf Coast and surrounding pollution research from EPA and others.
areas.
2. Meso and microscale models of air b. Available for support of Texas Gulf
movements. Coast research study.
3. Theoretical interpretation of local
meteorological data.
-------
TABLE 7-7. RESOURCES OF TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
Resources Feasibility of Participation
1. Development, testing and calibra- a. Solicit grants for air pollution research
tion of size-fractionating aerosol from EPA and others.
samplers. Chemical analysis of aerosol
samples.
2. Detailed organic analysis of gaseous and b. Potentially available for Texas Gulf Coast
aerosol samples. study depending on timing and scope of work.
3. Estimation of suspended particulate matter
emissions from agricultural processes.
4. Modeling of emissions from mobile
sources.
vl
00
-------
TABLE 7-8. RESOURCES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON
Resources
Feasibility of Participation
-j
vo
1. Special analytical equipment
available include four gas chroma-
tographs (one with mass spectro-
meter detector, three with FID, EC
and TC detectors), scanning electron
microscope, auger x-ray, and casade
aerosol samplers with hi-vols.
2. Mathematical model development and
testing for homo- and heterogeneous
atmospheric reactions. IBM 360 and
other computers available.
3. Special experience in organic analysis
of complex gaseous and aerosol mixtures
using GC/MS.
a- Actively solicits funding for air pollution
research from EPA and others.
b. Available for participation in Texas Gulf
Coast research study.
-------
TABLE 7-9. RESOURCES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
Resources
Feasibility of Participation
oo
o
1. Development, testing and calibration
of aerosol sampling and monitoring
devices. Participates in intensive
aerosol field sampling programs.
2. Monitoring capabilities include Oa,
SOx, acid rainfall, organics using
GC/FID, FPD and EC, mercury,
atomic absorption spectrometry, and
neutron activation analysis.
3. Dispersion modeling of air pollutants
using CDC 6600 and other computing
facilities.
a. Actively solicits funding for air pollution
research from EPA and others.
b. Available for participation in Texas Gulf
Coast research study.
-------
TABLE 7-10. RESOURCES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON
Resources
Feasibility of Participation
Analytical instrumentation include a gas chroma-
tograph with EC, FID and TC detectors, spectro-
photometers (IR, UV, and visible), atomic
absorption spectrometer, cascade impactors and
low-energy X-ray spectrometer.
a. Potentially available for
research-oriented proj ects,
00
2. Analysis and interpretation of air pollution
research data.
-------
REFERENCES
1. Lambeth, Bryan W., Barbara J. Maxey, and William P. Stadig. Plan for
Air Pollution Research in the Texas Gulf Coast Area, Volume III. Summary
of Previous Air Quality Studies and Data. EPA Contract No. 68-02-2955,
Radian Corporation, Austin, Texas, 1978. 293 pp.
2. Texas Air Control Board. 1973 Emissions Inventory Summary, Air Quality
Control Region VII. Austin, Texas. Undated.
3. Texas Air Control Board. Oxidant Attainment Analysis, Emissions Inven-
tory Data. Austin, Texas, 1977.
4. Texas Air Control Board. Summary of Emissions from Area Type Sources,
1975 (with Harris County partially revised to 1976). Austin, Texas.
Undated.
5. Texas Air Control Board. Continuous Air Monitoring Network Data Sum-
maries (Annual). Austin, Texas, 1975, 1976, 1977.
6. City of Houston. Air Pollution Control Program Reports (Annual and
Quarterly). Houston, Texas, 1975, 1976, 1977.
7. Westberg, H., K. Allwine, and E. Robinson. Measurement of Light Hydro-
carbons and Studies of Oxidant Transport Beyond Urban Areas, Houston
Study - 1976. EPA Contract No. 68-02-2298, Washington State University,
Pullman, Washington, 1978.
8. Jorgen, Robert T. Houston Area Oxidants Study Project Ox-1, Final
Report, Ambient Peroxyacetyl Nitrate (PAN) Measurements in the Houston
Area. AMC 54023.11 FR, Rockwell International, Creve Couer, Missouri,
1978.
9. Siddiqi, Azziz A. and Frank L. Worley, Jr. Urban and Industrial
Air Pollution in Houston, Texas - I. Hydrocarbons. Atmospheric En-
vironment, 11(2): 131-143, 1977.
10. McMurry , J. R., R. E. Flannery, L. H. Fowler, D. J. Johnson. Ambient
Sampling for Stationary and Mobile Source Hydrocarbons in Houston, Texas.
Presented at the 68th Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Associa-
tion, June 15-20,,1975. Paper No. 75-45.4, Boston, Massachusetts, 1975.
18 pp.
82
-------
11. Texas Air Control Board. Annual Data Summaries for Noncontinuous Moni-
toring. Austin, Texas, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977.
12. Radian Corporation. HAOS Aldehydes Monitoring Program. DCN #78-100-
169-02, HAOS Contract No. OX-6. Austin, Texas, 1978.
13. National Climatic Center. Local Climatological Data (Houston and Gal-
veston). Asheville, North Carolina, 1977.
14. U. S. Department of Commerce, Environmental Data Service. Climatic
Atlas of the United States. U. S. Government Printing Office, Washing-
ton, D.C., 1968.
15. National Climatic Center. Surface Meteorological Tape for Houston,
Texas, 1970-76 TDF 1440 Data Format. Asheville, North Carolina.
Undated.
16. National Climatic Center. Surface Meteorological Tape for Houston,
Texas, 1958-69 TDF, 1440 Data Format. Asheville, North Carolina.
Undated.
17. National Climatic Center. Wind Distribution by Pasquill Stability
Classes, STAR Program. Asheville, North Carolina, 1968.
18. Hosier, Charles R. Low Level Inversion Frequency in the Contiguous
United States. Monthly Weather Review, 89(9): 319-339, 1961.
19. Holzworth, George C. Mixing Heights, Wind Speeds, and Potential for
Air Pollution Throughout the Contiguous United States. AP-101, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
1972.
20. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Air Quality and Emis-
sions Trends Report, 1976. EPA-450/1-77-002, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, 1977.
21. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Air Quality Data - 1974 Annual
Statistics. EPA-450/2-76-011, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
1976.
83
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before co
NO
EPA-6GO/8-79-008&
J. HkC.PIENT'S Ai.i.T SSION NI i.
Ht.-'OH 1 OAYfc
PLAN FOR AIR POLLUTION RESEARCH IN THE TEXAS GULF COAST
AREA
Volume i . Plan For Air Quality Studies
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
April 1979
AUTHORS, G> Tannahillj B- Lambeth, D. Balfour, D. Jones,
J. Stuart
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Radian Corporation
P.O. Box 9948
8500 Shoal Creek Boulevard
Austin, TX 78758
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1AA603 AH-12 (FY-79)
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-2955
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory - RTP.NC
Office of Research and Development
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/09
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
In response to Congressional mandates, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
will conduct an extensive study of air pollution related problems in the Texas Gulf
Coast Area. As an initial effort, EPA awarded a contract to review the existing
technical information and record the local viewpoint on air pollution problems in the
area, define research needs, and design experimental studies addressed to these needs.
Results are presented in 5 volumes. Volume I describes and discusses a research plan
for air quality studies.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
* Air pollution
* Planning
* Research
Texas Gulf Coast
13B
05A
14F
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
96
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
84
------- |